It wrong to say that they have nothing in common. They both are Musilm majorities monarchies and both are majority Arabic speaking countries. There is enough in common between the current GCC states and the invitees. Also, the reality is that they have more in common now then in the past due to the changes happening in the other countries.

Yemen is not a Gulf state. No part of it geographically touches the Persian Gulf.

I'm a bit surprised there aren't any efforts to compare this to the liberal revolutions in 1848. For the most people seem to compare it to 1989 with the rare* mention of earlier Arab/Muslim revolutions.

*Oddly enough

Excellent piece Professor Lynch. Thank you for the post.

Faisal from Kuwait

Dear Mr. Lynch,

I think you haven't really put much thought into the comments you made in your article.

You refer to the 2 prospective nations as having "virtually nothing in common economically, culturally, or (of course) geographically with the GCC states." This comment on its own is false, at least in terms of Jordan. Jordan shares its largest border, of approx. 700km, with Saudi Arabia, which obviously makes it geographically connected to the largest of the GCC states. Jordan also shares cultural ties with Saudi Arabia, same background as the Hijaz province and share similar ancestry. In fact, the Monarchs of Jordan, the Hashemites, were the Monarchs of the Hijaz just a few decades ago (Hijaz is in Saudi Arabia, just incase you didn't know).

I strongly suggest that before you begin poking at foreign policy, which you may not be entirely familiar with, you do some more due diligence and fact finding on the subject.

By KHAIRI JANBEK.

One is ratther surprised, that no one actually sees the huge importance and consequences of the potential expansion of the GCC. I think humbly if it works out, it will be tantamount to a massive tectonic shift in the affairs of the Middle East.

One is not going to sing praises of the obvious; mainly of oil and gas supply, and the virtues of freedom of movement of people, goods and capital, but one wishes to talk about the geostrategic concerns vis a vis Iran, and the solution to the Palestinian problem; albeit both features tend to be inter-related in this context.

Now, you may or may not believe in the existence of a Shi'ite Crescent engulfing the Gulf Arab States. Still if you look at the map of the region, you'll have Iran to the east across the water, and to the west of the Gulf Arab states, a Shi'ite lead Iraq which is connected to the close ally of Iran; Syria, then Hizbullah in Lebanon, and ambivelant hamas in Gaza. These are geographical facts and not sectarian hyperbole on my part; since one has never been and is not sectarian.

If morocco and Jordan join the GCC, not only the latter will be able to break out from this pro-Iranian envelope, but will be able to stretch its geostrategic depth to the shores of the Atlantic, and to the borders of Irsael in the south. Which means that, Jordan is no longer a buffer state between Israel and oil, but actually Israel becoming a stake-holder with the consent of all parties in the security of the Arab oil states.

On the demographic balance, Saudi Arabia has the population of around 29 million people, Morocco around 32million, and Yemen which is incidentally planned to be absorbed into the GCC in 2016 has the population of around 23million. Thenoverwhelming majority of the populatiuon in those countries is Sunni Muslim. An adequate human resources balance to that of Iran's 70-75 million population of which the overwhelming majority are Shi'ia muslims.
This will have a huge positive confidence effect on the all the peoples of the region. Again one has to repeat that one is not sectarian in any way, but one hasn't said that the region doesn't look at the situation from a sectarian perspective.

When it comes to the Palestinian question, what is the thorniest issue between the Palestinians and Israel?. Well, it is the right of return of the Palestinian refugees. So, if Jordan becomes part of the GCC, it will be factually and geographically part of a much larger entity than itself with diverse populations in theis block of GCC, among them Jordanians of palestinain origin. The issue of demographic threat to the Kingdom can be eliminated almost over night.

Moreover, the only logical move would for the PNA then, after it makes its bid for statehood at the UN next September, would be to apply to join the GCC with or without association with Jorda; because then it will not make much difference within the lage entity of the GCC. What about the palestinain refugees in Lebanon and in the diaspora?, I suppose they will be the first transnational citizens, of the first transnational state in history (I think), carrying a Palestinain citizenship and passport, with the choice of living in the countries hosting them currently; with economic and social rights, but no politcial rights, or move to any of the countries of the GCC, and acquire their rights in full in an expanded GCC from the borders of Israel, and all the way to the Atlantic.

As for Israel, it will have less and less reasons to object the creation of a palestinian state, which naturally will lead to peace eventually, which will provide Israel an active role in helping to protect the GCC, as well as a large market of trading partners.

Mr. Lynch misses so many things about the Arab world in this article which also makes me wonder if this is an edited article. What are the basis for accepting this article for publication on FP? The author emphasizes that there is nothing in common between Gulf states and Jordan and Morocco. This could be understandable since the author is clearly pushing for the Sunni-Shi'a rift in a way that shows that Muslims are very different from each other.

In fact, the biggest irony we have in the Arab world is that we have everything in common: the food, rituals, weddings, traditions, language, habits, attitudes, behaviors....with very minor differences. This is an irony because unfortunately Arabs are divided due to political interference and may other economical and social differences (by the latter I mean things like enriching the sense of national identity without caring of others) which prevents any hope for Arab unity. A divided Arab world is at the best interest of the west. For instance, if Arabs were united (I mean really united), I don't think the US would be at ease in invading Iraq, or keep silent in front of the suffering of the Palestinians.

Arabs have the most common values and beliefs in the world compared to other united national like Europe. If I go to Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, I would eat the same or similar food, speak the same language, pray the same five prayers, etc...These are common and basic factors for any unity. Ignoring this reality makes the current article unreliable with fuzzy "facts". Perhaps, this unity with the GCC could be part of resisting a change, but why would anyone want to change the situation in the Gulf! There is a lot of money for people, lots of jobs, excellent infrastructure, and everything anyone would want. I hope this can also spread to Jordan and other Arab countries so that people would have more opportunities.

For me as an Arab, while it feels proud to see young people changing corrupted, strong-minded regime in their most modern revolutions, the real revolution is when the Arab world comes all together with one voice and united strategies. Contrary to Mr. Lynch, such unity has all commonalities that would make it come true. But again, there are sharp political differences due to foreign interference!

This perfect china wholesale shoes store shows you stylish casual shoes, bringing you special feeling: vibram five fingers shoes, makes you touches the world more real; black nike shoes, bring you speed and passion; crown you to be No1 with our nfl football jerseys on match!

In fact, the Monarchs of Jordan, the Monarchs of Jordan, the Hashemites, were the Monarchs of the Hijaz just a few decades ago". What you did not say, or maybe did not know, that the Hashemites and Saudis were fierce enemies; considering that Ibn Saud was the one who overthrew the Hashmite rule in Hejaz. I do not think that sazkove kancelare Marc was saying there is nothing in common between GCC countries and both Jordon and Morocco, but he was saying that there is nothing more common with these Two countries (other than being Conservative, non-democratic, pro-west and anti-Iranian monarchies ) than the excluded Arab countries in the region. I completely agree with the argument that GCC seems to be evolving into a club for Sunni Arab monarchs -- the institutional home of the counter-revolution.

the biggest irony we have in the Arab world is that we have everything in common: the food, rituals, weddings, traditions, language, habits, attitudes, behaviors....with very minor differences. This is an irony because unfortunately Arabs are sazkove kancelare divided due to political interference and may other economical and social differences (by the latter I mean things like enriching the sense of national identity without caring of others) which prevents any hope for Arab unity. A divided Arab world is at the best interest of the west. For instance, if Arabs were united (I mean really united), I don't think the US would be at ease in invading Iraq, or keep silent in front of the suffering of the Palestinians.

The author emphasizes that there is nothing in common between Gulf states and Jordan and Morocco. This could be understandable since the author is clearly pushing for the Sunni-Shi'a rift in a way that shows that Muslims are very different from each other.In fact, the biggest irony we have in the Arab world is that we have everything in common: the food, rituals, weddings, sázkové kancelá?e traditions, language, habits, attitudes, behaviors....with very minor differences. This is an irony because unfortunately Arabs are divided due to political interference and may other economical and social differences (by the latter I mean things like enriching the sense of national identity without caring of others) which prevents any hope for Arab unity. A divided Arab world is at the best interest of the west. For instance, if Arabs were united (I mean really united), I don't think the US would be at ease in invading Iraq, or keep silent in front of the suffering of the Palestinians. Still if you look at the map of the region, sázkové kancelá?e you'll have Iran to the east across the water, and to the west of the Gulf Arab states, a Shi'ite lead Iraq which is connected to the close ally of Iran; Syria, then Hizbullah in Lebanon, and ambivelant hamas in Gaza. These are geographical facts and not sectarian hyperbole on my part; since one has never been and is not sectarian.If morocco and Jordan join the GCC, not only the latter will be able to break out from this pro-Iranian envelope, but will be able to stretch its geostrategic depth to the shores of the Atlantic, and to the borders of Irsael in the south. Which means that, Jordan is no longer a buffer state between Israel and oil, but actually Israel becoming a stake-holder with the consent of all parties in the security of the Arab oil states.