Benjamin Netanyahu, Israeli Prime Minister

AIPAC in Decline

Oct 9, 2015 Shlomo Ben-Ami

Though the American Israel Public Affairs Committee is undeniably a powerful lobby, the claim that it controls US policy decisions is a Potemkin village myth. In fact, thanks to Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, its influence has declined dramatically – though Netanyahu himself will be just fine.

MADRID – The American Israel Public Affairs Committee’s lobbying power in the United States is undeniable. But AIPAC’s supposed ability to control US policy decisions is a Potemkin village myth, cultivated by friends and rivals alike. In fact, thanks to Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, AIPAC’s influence is under threat – though Netanyahu himself will be just fine.

Claims about AIPAC’s clout have long shaped analysis of US foreign policy. For example, Steve Walt and John Mearsheimer, in their notorious essay “The Israel Lobby,” asserted that AIPAC manufactured the Iraq War. But the reality is far less sinister: in that case, AIPAC merely surfed on the pro-invasion wave unleashed by President George W. Bush, with his Messianic urges, and Vice President Dick Cheney, a one-man war lobby.

The truth about AIPAC – that it is influential, but far from invulnerable – has recently been revealed, both to the public and to the group itself. Having been pushed by Netanyahu into an unwinnable fight against US President Barack Obama’s administration over its nuclear deal with Iran, AIPAC is now crumbling under the weight of its own hubris.

We hope you're enjoying Project Syndicate.

To continue reading, subscribe now.

Already have an account? Log in

Support High-Quality Commentary

US President-elect Joe Biden may have promised a “return to normalcy,” but the truth is that there is no going back. The world is changing in fundamental ways, and the actions the world takes in the next few years will be critical to lay the groundwork for a sustainable, secure, and prosperous future.

For more than 25 years, Project Syndicate has been guided by a simple credo: All people deserve access to a broad range of views by the world’s foremost leaders and thinkers on the issues, events, and forces shaping their lives. At a time of unprecedented uncertainty, that mission is more important than ever – and we remain committed to fulfilling it.

But there is no doubt that we, like so many other media organizations nowadays, are under growing strain. If you are in a position to support us, please subscribe now.

As a subscriber, you will enjoy unlimited access to our On Point suite of long reads and book reviews, Say More contributor interviews, The Year Ahead magazine, the full PS archive, and much more. You will also directly support our mission of delivering the highest-quality commentary on the world's most pressing issues to as wide an audience as possible.

By helping us to build a truly open world of ideas, every PS subscriber makes a real difference. Thank you.

Subscribe Now

new comment has been posted. new comments have been posted.

0 Comments on this paragraph, 14 in all 14 Comments on this article

Jaap Bosma Oct 26, 2015

AIPAC = EVIL
AIPAC is not interested in peace, not in an open society, not in human rights, not in free expression, not in fighting racism. It is just interested in further zionist colonisation of Palestine and crushing Palestinian rights.
It is a very good thing that it loses power.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Christopher Goodwin Oct 12, 2015

Disingenuous. Israel. the Zionists, some Jewish Americans, some American Jews, with either one nationality or the other, or both, and corporate bodies with Jewish control, as in Hollywood, the MSM, the Universities, &etc. - the usual gang, are like a hydra, with many heads that work more or less well co-ordinated to yoke the muscle of the American government to Israeli interests. "Battles" or "disagreements" or "conflicts of interest" are the real Potemkin villages - they are orchestrated to give the appearance of a healthy tension between US and Zionist goals, interests and policies - as here. "Look," we are told, "there was disagreement about arms sales for Saudi Arabia in 1978, and again in 1981. And then, oh yes, - a 1991 battle (? very dramatic: discussion ? row? disagreement ?) with POTUS Bush I over the linkage (?) of US loan guarantees (?) for Israel (?) with PM Yitzak Shamir (?) and his support of (for?) the 1991 Madrid peace conference - one of Bush's key (?) legacies (?) (which one was that ? Did it achieve anything ? was it even signed ? who has it helped ? It was all clear in my mind when I read about it in the New York Times back in 1991, but that was, what 26 years ago. " One sentence, ill constructed, (not because he cannot write plain English, but because he wants to confuse the reader;) with six references, all marked "(?)" by me, where a professional, journalist or politico, probably does recall the events, and their interlocking significance and ultimate total irrelevance; (who cares what Bush senior's "legacy" is to be? We are more likely to remember the idiocy of his disgusting son:) - but the ordinary reader will not recall these selected elements of a continuing "debate" - tissue of lies, spin, smoke and mirrors, posing, false falg waving, that constitutes Middle Eastern politix. "AIPAC in decline." It's never been stronger. Cut off one head, another grows. And in the up coming presidential election, some arguably "neutral" jounalist will ask each candidate, very early in the process, "Will you undertake to ALWAYS support Israel ? and the candidate will have to say, "That I can promise you," or else he will be treated like, e.g. Ron Paul - and effectively excluded from the process.AIPAC controls all the MSM. "in Decline" my eye!
- m r Oct 16, 2015
  
  Thank you- this is known as occupying all sides of an argument and Jewish mindset is an expert at it- by far; blinding all of us- the rest. AKA the story of Camel and the poor tent
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
- hari naidu Oct 15, 2015
  
  @ Goodwin
  
  I'd to chuckle at your bio - fantastic Dane! The problem with non-Jews is simply that they have not bothered to study history of Zionism. And what's going on in their own cultural context today.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Rik Rijs Oct 12, 2015

Facts: Israel is an occupier; Israel violates UN resolutions; Israëli laws and society have a racist character; the USA is supporting the occupation. Europeans know what occupiers do, they lived twice under German occupation. By supporting zionism the USA has lost a lot of support in Europe. Europeans realize that the USA is an unreliable partner and all European support for the USA build up at the end of WW II is gone. For Europeans it's better to look at the 'new' nations like China and drop the USA as well as Israel. After 50 years of brutal occupation it's simply to difficult and even criminal to support Israel.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Cary Fraser Oct 11, 2015

The reality is that other members of the Security Council have recognized that the Israeli failure, abetted by the wider failures of American strategy, to resolve the Palestinian issue within the terms of the Oslo Accord has been a contributory factor to the evolving crisis in the Middle East.
Like Netanyahu, AIPAC was unable to recognize that the American war in Iraq confirmed the skepticism in the Islamic world that the USA was capable of negotiating an even-handed resolution of the Palestinian problem. As the Iran negotiations have shown, the major stakeholders in the international order were prepared to neutralize Israel, AIPAC, and the Republican obstructionists.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
David Neunuebel Oct 11, 2015

The author suggests, "Much of the blame for the damage that has been done ... even the U.S. political process..." But gee, it seems that the U.S. political process worked just fine, what damage?

One can only hope, however, that the author is correct when he writes, "AIPAC is now crumbling under the weight of its own hubris."

Finally, it seems only healthy for the Jewish community to be diverse in its views, opinions, and actions and not to be considered to believe all the same thing, like all being Zionists or all supporting Israel or all being anything. That would be the height of anti-Semitism, like "all Jews have big noses," or "all Jews ..." fill in the blank, because all Jews do not think alike and this is healthy.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Curt Doolittle Oct 11, 2015

Conservatives tend to view Israel as a colonial possession rather than a chip at play in a voting block. The next president is looking likely to be conservative. And if so the Jewish lobby can cintinue to count on support for Israel.
- m r Oct 11, 2015
  
  No, no, no- the other way round!! USA is the colony as a handful of Jews hold and wield ALL positions of power in US society. It always used to gall mighty Viceroy of India having to take instructions from a piddly British Prime Minister. The author of this article is being manifestly disingenuous to suggest that AIPAC is not an influential part of this colonial stranglehold.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
j. von Hettlingen Oct 9, 2015

Shlomo Ben-Ami points out that the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) doesn't seem to be the juggernaut it once was, saying its "ability to control US policy decisions" may just be "a Potemkin village myth". He blames Binyamin Netanyahu for alienating the American public with his infamous speech to Congress on March 3 earlier this year, urging the US to reject the nuclear deal with Iran. He made a political speech as a foreign leader, but without the blessing of the White House.
Historically AIPAC has been able to wield huge legislative influence with its hundred thousand members, a network of seventeen regional offices, and a wealthy, well-connected donor base. The lobby does not raise funds directly, but its members do. There is little transparency regarding the amount of money channelled to political candidates. But everybody in Congress acknowledges its influence in election campaigns. For this reason AIPAC "has traditionally relied on a broad coalition of social and political forces in the US that view Israel’s security as both a moral cause and a vital national interest." During the 2014 Israel-Gaza conflict, the Obama Administration was not happy with the scale of Israel's aggression, despite its repeated assurance of supporting Israel. AIPAC did not share this unease, which led to a Senate resolution endorsing Israel’s “right to defend its citizens”.
The waning clout stems from AIPAC's supporting Netanyahu, who shares the same hawkish objectives as the neo-cons, prompting the group to marginalise itself. Today the GOP is its only source of lockstep support. AIPAC spent $20 million on lobbying against the deal, and the public watched how the GOP led a "crusade against a key agreement negotiated by a Democratic president," who finally garnered "overwhelming support" from his party. The lobby's adamance ended up working against its stated interests, as Congressional Democrats lined up against the Republican/Netanyahu alliance, posing a threat to "the bipartisan foundations of Israel’s cause in America."
As a result of "an unwinnable fight against US President Barack Obama’s administration", AIPAC has crumbled "under the weight of its own hubris," and there were no tears shed for its humiliation. Although Netanyahu was to blame for this mess, "he is unlikely to face retribution for any of it." Given the political turmoil in the Middle East, its ramifications for the West, and Israel's role as "a stable regional partner for the US," the Administration will translate words into action by "upgrading Israel’s strategic capabilities."
Ben-Ami sees another danger Netanyahu poses - to prevent "a strategic détente between the US and Iran that would enable cooperation in resolving major regional conflicts, from Yemen to Syria." There are players ranging from Israel, Sunni Arab states, the US and oddly Iran, who may compel Obama "to promise additional sanctions on Iran for its sponsorship of terrorism. As a result, America’s cold war with Iran is likely to persist."
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Auke K Boerema Helmholdt Oct 9, 2015

Why are we Airways stalking about American Jews.
I thought they are Jewish American.
For the rest - the article is OK.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Karl Eysenbach Oct 9, 2015

I find your last paragraph most interesting. It is a curious zoo of strange animals in close proximity. As to the Russian cruise missle, I'm sure it was spoofed by our Navy to land where it did.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
hari naidu Oct 9, 2015

Ben-Ami, if you're reading the tea leaves of GOP meltdown...the chances of preventing a strategic détente with Iran may be achieved by none other than Kameni - not Bibi and his cabal on the Hill.
AIPAC has it role on the Hill to lobby on behalf of state of Israel. However Bibi's arrogant political intervention/speech to Congress joint-session was a dum idea.
Likud Party propagated in public media idea of Obama as a PLA spokesman by using his middle name *Hussein* - which was derogatory and simply racist, methinks.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Michael Public Oct 9, 2015

I have never heard of AIPAC before this article.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.

https://prosyn.org/szWfXqt

Cookies and Privacy

AIPAC in Decline

To continue reading, subscribe now.

Support High-Quality Commentary

New Comment

Email this piece to a friend

Contact us

Log in/Register

Cookies and Privacy

AIPAC in Decline

To continue reading, subscribe now.

Support High-Quality Commentary

Edit Newsletter Preferences

Set up Notification