The Arab League is infamous for its fractious gatherings, but even its most experienced bureaucrats described the cancellation as extraordinary. Some commentators thought the collapse inevitable from the start. The very idea of reform remains too divisive, and many nations' governments have yet to decide how to deal themselves with issues like elections. Elections, while being a divisive issue for the Arab League nations, is not the most divisive issue. Elections may even be a bad idea right now in such a place as Saudi Arabia -- not that the NY Times would agree with that.
Anyway, the most divisive issue in the Arab League remains that a few members are still aligned with the terrorists. For instance Lebanon, "Palestine" and Syria are still are on the wrong hump.
This is why the meeting was canceled and this is what the NY Times hides.
IMO.
One thing I can't figure out is why the legendary Mossad hasn't been able to deal the terror states a blow. Hamas has kept a constant terror war on Israel for years, and the Mossad still hasnt infiltrated them sufficiently to stamp them out. Whats up with that?