Arabs do not care much about the borders between other Arab states. The Arab revolt was never about Iraq, Syria, Saudi Arabia or the UAE. It was about the
Arab revolt. The aim and expectation was a united Arab state, this is why pan-Arabism as an ideology grew strongly after the formation of all these states.
Jordan might just as well be part of Syria, or Iraq (which it was for 1 year) or Saudi Arabia. Iraq's borders with Syria make no sense as the people in Deir al Zour speak the Iraqi dialect and are the same people as the people in Anbar. The borders between Saudi Arabia and Iraq are artificial, they are drawn and agreed upon. That makes the border artificial, not the nation which remains Arab.
Arab regions all have their differences in dialect, people's looks and sub cultures, that doesn't take away the general culture and linguistic traits that bind them together as Arab peoples.
There never was a reason for 22 Arab states other than to ensure division, small countries that do not grow too powerful and it makes it easier to intervene. People here like to call the countries fake, as if we belong to non-Arab neighbors whilst we are Arabs.
An example is the Saudi-Iraq neutral zone dispute. Disputes between all these states were mainly about political ideologies, the people do not differ that much from one another from right across the border.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saudi_Arabian–Iraqi_neutral_zone
When people dispute the 'realness' of these countries, they always tend to suggest for division based on sectarian or ethnic lines which would not make the nation any more 'real'. They never suggest for unification based on the Arab identity as that is a very negative development for neighboring countries.