An item from the May 22 issue of The Israel Project (TIP) proved interesting, but left me with a "Why Morocco" question.
The item:
Agence France-Presse (AFP) on Tuesday conveyed a statement from a joint committee established by Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates committing to confronting "regional challenges," the latest in what increasingly appear to be systematic moves by Riyadh to bolster its regional position opposite Iran. The Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) had already in late April formally invited Jordan and Morocco to integrate themselves into a conventional military alliance under which the Gulf states would trade aid and the new members would potentially provide 300,000 troops to collective efforts. Meanwhile Saudi prince Turki al-Faisal - a top figure in the country’s royal family and its former intelligence chief - went further, speculating that Gulf states would have to acquire "nuclear know-how" to offset Iran. AFP also read a new Saudi-UAE "supreme committee" against the backdrop of tensions between most Arab states, on the one hand, and Qatar, on the other. The wire bluntly assessed that "Qatar is accused of supporting the Muslim Brotherhood, to which Saudi Arabia and other Gulf monarchies have long been hostile." Tensions have recently been dampened by Qatari moves to return to the GCC fold, but many analysts take it as a given that the region remains divided between three overarching blocs: the Iranian camp that includes Syria and Hezbollah, the camp of America's traditional Arab allies plus Israel, and an axis composed of Turkey, Qatar, and various country-by-country Brotherhood groups. The Obama administration has faced sustained criticism for being insufficiently supportive of its traditional allies.
I can understand why the GCC would want to include Jordan in its military pact. Saudia and Jordan are neighbors, albeit Jordon is hardly more than a spot on the map when comparing land mass. (Jordon still is bigger than Israel, even with the "disputed territories.")
The distance between Rabat, Morocco and Riyadh Saudia Arabia is roughly 3300 miles or a little less than seven (7) hours flight time (at commercial jet speeds).
The Gulf Corporation Council is composed of six nations, alphabetically:
- Bahrain
- Kuwait
- Sultanate of Oman
- Qatar
- Saudi Arabia (GCC Hq in Riyadh)
- United Arab Emirates (UAE)
Population and wealth information at http://useconomy.about.com/od/worldeconomy/p/gcc.htm
All of the GCC members, and Jordan, are distant from Morocco. While all are politically similar in their distrust of Iran and its proxies, including the Muslim Brotherhood, it seems strange - if the GCC is looking for troops to come to its rescue, that it would ignore closer, more or less moderate, Arab states including Egypt, Libya, Tunis, and Algeria. The GCC also is ignoring perhaps potential, but questionable, allies Sudan and Yemen - which sits next to Oman.
Saudia, along with Jordan, must be concerned not only with Iran and its visions of nuclear domination of the area, but also of Syria and Hezbollah.
In truth, the best friend the GCC would wish for would be Israel, but if Israeli politicians are smart - and THAT IS HIGHLY QUESTIONABLE - they won't agree to any "boots on the ground" arrangements with the GCC or any other Arab state (including Egypt and Jordan). After all, Israel is alleged to "have the bomb" - something Saudi ever more desperately wants for its own protection.
What the GCC needs, and perhaps what it is seeking by courting Morocco, et al, is a "second strike" option. Given the Iranian crazies, the ayatollahs will strike without warning (or perhaps in conjunction with a North Korean attack on South Korea and maybe Japan); all the GCC can do is hope for retaliation to come from a distant state, e.g., Morocco.
The question the GCC states need to ask: will any of their Arab citizens want to defend "their" country that, after all, is only tribal land with artificial borders.
