LETTER TO THE EDITOR:
As a Muslim-American, I am deeply offended by Arnaud de Borchgrave’s long rambling piece (“Jordan’s king warns of war,” Commentary, Wednesday), which takes the stereotypical pro-Arab line. In his largely irrelevant piece, only toward the end does the Belgian oracle expose something conclusive: his anti-Israel tone about how things are essentially hopeless because of Israel. So The Washington Times runs yet another piece with a clearly anti-Israeli tenor and, again, it’s Mr. de Borchgrave’s handiwork.
Not only does he write in the 12th paragraph that “words alone won’t change Israel,” he suggests in the following paragraph a “thunderclap heard around the world” to compel change: He proposes that the Obama administration manipulate U.S. aid to Israel. Yes, pulling the rug out from under an ally on the front lines is, at least, a thunderclap the world will note - especially in the caves where al Qaeda’s executive offices are located.
Of course, Mr. de Borchgrave doesn’t have any similarly clever suggestions to compel the Palestinians to do anything differently. Not only has the writer saddled Israel solely with the need to change - but with his silence, he ratifies Palestinian behavior.
The piece implies Iran is a threat only to Israel. Incredibly, the writer doesn’t even acknowledge the threat nuclear mullahs pose to civilization. That’s disingenuous and designed to deflate any real move to oppose Iran’s nuclear program.
Mr. de Borchgrave also omits key facts, such as Jordan’s vast majority Palestinian population. Inclusion of this fact would put the Jordanian king’s words into perspective for your readers.
Most shocking of all, the author echoes in his conclusion paragraph an Arab journalist’s call that the only way to “defeat them [Israel]” is if Arabs, Christian and Muslims unite.
There are many other unfair or outright wrong statements in the piece, but I think the inaccurate title is the biggest disservice to your readers. The author probably ought to have called it “Death to Israel,” based on the only conclusion in the piece.
Mr. de Borchgrave rightly points out that bad habits are difficult to break, so I suggest that he start with his own anti-Israel habit.