The leftist/Arabist myth that Israel and the plight of the "Palestinians" is the cause of all ills in the Middle East is a lie and a nonsense, and stories and editorials pointing it out aren't new. What is new is that even Time magazine seems to have figured it out:

Yes, it was a great disturbance in the Arab world in the 1940s when a Jewish state was born through a U.N. vote and a war that made refugees of many Palestinians. Then the 1967 war left Israel in control of the West Bank and Gaza Strip, and thus the Palestinians who lived there. But the pan-Arabism that once made the Palestinian cause the region's cause is long dead, and the Arab countries have their own worries aplenty. In a decade of reporting in the region, I found it rarely took more than the arching of an eyebrow to get the most candid of Arab thinkers to acknowledge that the tears shed for the Palestinians today outside the West Bank and Gaza are of the crocodile variety. Palestinians know this best of all.

To promote the canard that the troubles of the Arab world are rooted in the Palestinians' misfortune does great harm. It encourages the Arabs to continue to avoid addressing their colossal societal and political ills by hiding behind their Great Excuse: it's all Israel's fault. Certainly, Israel has at times been an obnoxious neighbor, but God help the Arab leaders, propagandists and apologists if a day ever comes when the Arab-Israeli mess is unraveled. One wonders how they would then explain why in Egypt 4 of every 10 people are illiterate; Saudi Arabian Shi'ites (not to mention women) are second-class citizens; 11% of Syrians live below subsistence level; and Jordan's King can unilaterally dissolve Parliament, as he did in 2001. Or why no Middle Eastern government but Israel's and to some extent Lebanon's tolerates freedom of assembly or speech, or democratic institutions like a robust press or civic organizations with independence and clout--let alone unfettered competitive elections.

>>Or why no Middle Eastern government but Israel's and to some extent Lebanon's tolerates freedom of assembly or speech, or democratic institutions like a robust press or civic organizations with independence and clout--let alone unfettered competitive elections.
Umm, Iraq's does.

That remains to be seen. We'll see what happens after American troops are gone...

If the Arab nations ever do succeed in driving Israel into the sea then the different factions will turn on each other in a very bloody "civil war" for want of a better term. The only thing that allows them some cohesiveness right now is the existence of Israel.

Which sort of begs the question of whether the Arab governments would really want Israel gone or are they talking a good game just to keep their populations from turing on each other. I am by no means a Middle East expert, I just know what I have read, but I always wondered about that.

If the Arab nations ever do succeed in driving Israel into the sea then the different factions will turn on each other in a very bloody "civil war" for want of a better term.

As if they're not doing that now? What do you think is going on in Gaza as we speak?

"What do you think is going on in Gaza as we speak?"

Not enough? ;-p