David Brooks is one of the few moderate columnists that the NYT has in its roster. Today, he makes the startling observation ($link) that the work of Walt and Mearsheimer (covered extensively by AT) and other foes of the "Israel lobby" has served to reinforce the worst instincts of Arab elites:
I just attended a conference that was both illuminating and depressing. It was co-sponsored by the Center for Strategic Studies at the University of Jordan and the American Enterprise Institute....
Arab speakers mainly wanted to talk about the Israel lobby. One described a book edited in the mid-1990s by the Jewish policy analyst David Wurmser as the secret blueprint for American foreign policy over the past decade. A pollster showed that large majorities in Arab countries believe that the Israel lobby has more influence over American policy than the Bush administration. Speaker after speaker triumphantly cited the work of Stephen Walt, John Mearsheimer and Jimmy Carter as proof that even Americans were coming to admit that the Israel lobby controls their government.
The problems between America and the Arab world have nothing to do with religious fundamentalism or ideological extremism, several Arab speakers argued. They have to do with American policies toward Israel, and the forces controlling those policies.
As for problems in the Middle East itself, these speakers added, they have a common source, Israel.
The delusions that all of their problems have a common source in Israel does serve as a very convenient excuse for the oligarchs and thugs who control most of the Arab states. By reinforcing this delusion, the work of Walt and Mearsheimer has borne fruit for some of the worst rulers in the world.
As for the colleagues of Brooks at the Times: Krugman worked for the anti-Semitic former leader of Malaysia, Maureen Dowd fawned over the former Saudi Ambassador (who headed up the Saudi equivalent of the internal police forces and was partly responsible for the rise of AL Qaeda) calling him "charming", Nicholas Kristof attacks the "Israel Lobby" and supporters of Israel in America, and while a wide variety of media outlets across the nation have condemned the prosecution of two former AIPAC lobbyists, the NYT has remained silent. Instead, the paper runs articles from the likes of Tony Judt who called the creation of Israel a "catastrophe" and uses the Arabic translation of that term when he does so. Judt has also peddled anti-Semitic conspiracy theories-claiming the Jewish lobby has prevented him from airing his views-absurd. The Times has also run some of the most anti-Semitic full-page advertisements I have yet seen: (see http://www.cnionline.org/) from an organization that is one of the most anti-Israel groups in America and that routinely uses anti-Semitic imagery to castigate the "Israel" Lobby.
Now ask yourselves: Brooks has pointed out that the Arabs have blamed AIPAC and Israel as the source of their problems. They have an anti-Semitic view that Jews are all-powerful-a cabal.
Now how do you think they view the NYT article that was on the front-page last week (and ran nowhere else except in the media that buys NYT syndicated stories) that Israel and its supporters were preventing the Arab nations from buying arms.
To Arabs, the Jews are preventing them from buying top of the line armaments to defend themselves from Iran.
Now ask yourself-as Scott Heyman does, "Why do Jews read the New York Times"?