Before we begin with our main topic in this book which is the study of politics and pertinent contemporary systems of governance, I feel it is appropriate here to point out in a passing way to the social sciences, since politics is one of the most ancient branches of the social sciences. The social sciences may look, for the non-scrutiniser,  less significant than the natural sciences especially in application.  The fact however is right the opposite.  Application, indeed, of the various branches of the social sciences has proved their efficacy that has in most cases surpassed natural sciences in steering even changing the life and behaviour of contemporary man.

It is easy for the careful student, even for the non so careful, to notice the effects of propaganda in totalitarian societies and the effects of sloganeering in the capitalist ones.  Invented by the social sciences, these media of propaganda have the power to transform the lives of men to an extent that exceeds the power needed to break up an atom.

The status of theory and application in the social sciences differs from that in the natural sciences.  The advancement in the theory in natural sciences is measured by the success of its practical application.  With the social sciences, however, the opposite is true as practical application seems much more advanced than the theory.  Hence emerges a conspicuous discrepancy between the efficiency of application of the social sciences and the chaotic state its theory is undergoing.  There is for example no unanimous agreement among sociologists about the basic definitions and concepts pertaining to sociology.  Every sociologist is using his own jargon and is talking about his own concepts, which would make it difficult for sociologist to communicate and agree.  This is so clear that it can be noticed by any student of the heritages of the social and natural scientists.  A bird’s eye’s view on social sciences shows that these sciences are less developed, notwithstanding.

Social sciences, from the first glance, are defined as these sciences which give to man or the individual living in a group a central position round which revolve all the group’s concerns.  In other words, the social sciences examine the “political animal” to quote Aristotle, and thus they care to analyse the human groups, communities and societies. The difference among students of sociology however leads us to say that the notion or concept “human group” is not that easy to define.  We could for instance say that it is “a gathering of individuals”, but this definition is too broad that it would, for instance, include viewers watching a motion picture in the cinema, which, though not a gathering in the proper sense, can still be considered as a gathering in one way or another.

Likewise will be inadequate to define the social sciences as the “analysis of human groups”, where focus is mainly laid first on the group members then on the society, leading to inescapable disturbing and confusing inconsistency and mixing when using terminologies in this field, as McKenzie says. It follows therefore that this terminological problematique does apply to our main topic, politics being one of the most important and significant branches of the social sciences.  This would call us to wonder: what is politics?  What does this word we utter refer to?

On first consideration, the word “politics” seems to be easily definable.  We can say, for instance, that it is a topic which tackles political power, which looks into the legitimacy of authority, or which searches for the harmony and conflict of interests, or may be we can say it is the quest of an individual or individuals of a way that entitles them to the legitimacy of coercion within the limits of a given society.

Surprisingly and paradoxically, the word or term “politics” is commonly used every day and night in all communities by all classes of people from the elite and the educated to common people, yet one cannot find for this word an all-inclusive definition, while we can see that it is much more feasible to define a term like “sociology”, a science dealt with by specialists only, than to define the word “politics”, despite the fact that politics is a very old social science compared with sociology which relatively new.

“Human socialising is a must”, says Ibn Khaldooun, a statement reiterated by wise men saying “Man is civil by nature” meaning man must “societise” for being civil, they say, means construction, since God has created man in such a way that he cannot live without food, and has instilled in him the natural desire to pursue his food within the limits of powers he has, but, still, individual powers are incapable alone of pursuing the food he needs for survival.

Ibn Khaldoun further explains, in a nutshell, the need of man to his peer in order to fulfill his bread and butter necessities especially food.  “Man, as we know, cannot be self-sufficient if he lives alone away from his fellows, thus necessitating man’s seek of help from those who are able to fulfill his pressing needs.”

Along the lines of the consistent and clear approach drawn by the Hashemites upon the foundation of the Jordanian state, King Abdullah II demonstrated that he was a truthful bearer of the Nation's Message when addressing the Doha Summit.   Not only was his speech straightforward, clear and insightful, but it also showed awareness of current developments putting record straight in a faithful endeavor to face up the challenges and changes that are threatening the national security on the basis of "building a unified (Pan-Arab) strategic vision to address present and future developments and our ability to be effective players on the world arena."

But one main requirement of this strategy, as His Majesty envisages, is to pursue the clearing up of the Arab atmosphere, settle all differences, take up a unified stand, and boost Arab solidarity, a principle that needs be not held as a hollow slogan but turned into action based on institutional relations.

This manifests the very attitude of His Majesty who has always been keen to give precedence to Pan-Arab concerns over narrow national interests.  He thrives to improve brotherly ties and cooperation among Arab states, but in a manner that would serve common goals and interests that must be well governed by rationalized agreements and rules that make these ties sustainable and neutral from any marginal differences particularly in the economic domain and joint projects.  And, this is what paves the way to unity.