In Jordan? Yeck. I'm sorry to hear that CBS and/or Paramount are so interested in profiting off of Star Trek that they'll allow it to be used to help a government that, while not the worst offender in the world, is certainly not a genuine democracy like the United States or Western Europe and has more than its fair share of rights abuses. That flies in the face of everything Star Trek stands for.
Does Star Trek stand for refusing to do business with societies whose values you don't like?
Considering how many stories involved Captain Kirk beaming down to a planet, discovering that it was ruled by a false god or tyrannical government, and then proceeding to overthrow that government or expose the false god, I'd say yes,
Star Trek is, in part, about being willing to say that certain things are
wrong and that you shouldn't do anything to help certain power structures.
The Prime Directive isn't about saying that every culture's values are equally valid; it's about saying you don't get to
impose your values on others. No one's saying that the U.S. should invade Jordan and force them to turn to democracy, or that the U.S. shouldn't engage them diplomatically, or cooperate on mutual national security threats. But that's a far cry from saying that it's okay to do things that actively help them.
Does Starfleet refuse to do anything that might help the Romulan government?
Well, yes, actually. There's a trade embargo that makes goods like Romulan Ale illegal in the Federation.
We can't give Jordan membership in the Federation, but we can still do business with them.
Why? Do business with France, do business with Britain, do business with Argentina, with Brazil, with India, with Japan, with South Korea, with Israel. Do business with a
real democracy, not a hereditary dictatorship with a glossy magazine spread.