AIPAC Is Hurting Israel, Jews, and Middle-East Peace

At the risk of being called a self-hating Jew I have come to the conclusion that AIPAC is hurting the cause that it was supposed to advance when it was formed in 1953. The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) is an American special interest group that lobbies the United States Congress and White House in favor of maintaining a close U.S.-Israel relationship. Describing itself as "America's Pro-Israel Lobby," it is a mass-membership organization including primarily Jews, but also non-Jews, Democrats, Republicans, and independents. AIPAC was formed during the Eisenhower administration, and since then has helped secure American aid and support to Israel. In 1997, Fortune magazine asked Congressmen to rank the "25 most powerful" lobbying organizations in DC. In 2005, the National Journal did the same. Both times, AIPAC came in 2nd - ahead of, for instance, the AFL-CIO and the NRA, but behind the AARP. In 2001, it came in 4th on the Fortune list.

All the good that they had done for Israel in their early days has now been offset by the power they have established in the D.C. community. As with any powerful lobby, there is a tendency for such groups to bully their way through the Congress to achieve its goal. And AIPAC is no worse or better than the NRA and other such self-interest groups. While AIPAC is primarily a Jewish organization, I am aware that most liberal Jews hate what they are doing and the tactics that they are using. Since over 70% of American Jews are liberal, I believe that AIPAC is not representing the views of most of the Jewish community.

I have talked to many in Congress who are both Jews and non-Jews and they have all told me how difficult it is to deal with AIPAC. Most would vote for aid to Israel without AIPAC. The fact is that the foreign aid that goes primarily to Israel and Egypt has almost unanimous support in Congress. Most of that is military. Unfortunately, AIPAC has blinders as to what constitutes real aid to Israel. And military aid is not the only answer either to Israel or Egypt. The money would be better spent on a more balanced allocation between military and economic development. Unfortunately, AIPAC has completely lost its objectivity about what is good for Israel.

My parents were immigrants from Poland where they suffered greatly do to anti-Semitism. Most of that anti-Semitism was caused by the anti-Jewish preachings of Christianity for nearly 2,000 years. It is only in the last 100 years that Islam has adopted the anti-Jewish position held by Europe as a result of the Zionist movement. And that movement was adopted because of the European oppression of the Jews, which caused Theodore Herzl to come to the conclusion that Jews would never be free in a Christian society. It is widely believed that Herzl was motivated by the Dreyfus Affair, a notorious anti-Semitic incident in France in which a French Jewish army captain was falsely convicted of spying for Germany. Herzl had been covering the trial of Dreyfus for an Austro-Hungarian newspaper. He also witnessed mass rallies in Paris following the Dreyfus trial where many chanted "Death To The Jews!", and in June, 1895, he wrote in his diary: "In Paris, as I have said, I achieved a freer attitude toward anti-Semitism... Above all, I recognized the emptiness and futility of trying to 'combat' anti-Semitism."

Unfortunately, the movement to migrate Jews to Palestine created a geopolitical adversary in the Muslim dominated Middle East, which had also been oppressed by European colonialism. Unfortunately, the Allies after WW II refused to allow free immigration for over 500,000 Jewish survivors of the Holocaust and accordingly these displaced persons had no choice but to immigrate to Palestine. These so-called DP camps were almost as bad as any of the concentration camps that they survived. It is true that Truman did recognize Israel despite the fact that he and his wife were anti-Semites. However, Truman's position regarding Israel was not so altruistic. He did not want or allow free immigration of the DPs of Europe. The Cubans after Castro took power were allowed free immigration into the U.S. for about as many as the Jewish DPs in Europe. That is another example of Western hypocrisy when it comes to the Jews.

The Jewish communities around the world have made wonderful contributions to civil and human rights. In addition, no community has a better record of standing up for and actively being involved in humane causes and opposing racism and intolerance throughout the world. That is why I believe that AIPAC is now advocating the very intolerance and violence that the Jewish communities have fought against for centuries. They have now become what most thoughtful Jews would describe as anti-Jewish bullies who even attack other Jews for having differences with them. It is time for AIPAC to understand that the only real help for Israel comes from the peace process and not fascist type tactics. AIPAC does not represent me or most of the views of the Jewish community.

Comments

[MikeDavis]

Thanks for your article. We do need to change US policy in the Middle East, but aipac is doing all it can to promote a very militaristic and strident policy, despite the dismal failures of the Bush administration. We need to organize public demonstrations whenever aipac gathers to promote their agenda, just as we would with any other group that opposes peace and justice. We need to promote peace, not militarism, and call for an end to occupation, for all the people of the Middle East. www.StopAIPAC.org

[midtown]

For a better understanding of what Herzl was up to, you might be interested in this by historian Gabriel Kolko.

"Israel: Mythologizing a 20th Century Accident"
http://www.antiwar.com/orig/kolko.php?articleid=11058

[montanafats]

Sheldon

AIPAC is 'owned' by the 52 or so major Jewish organizations. Each of these groups hold a seat on AIPAC's executive board. These groups range from the far left to the center and to the far right. Most of them, like all American groups, tend to be centrists. Policy is set by these groups and AIPAC is their lobby. By the way the PAC in AIPAC stands for Public Affairs Committee and it predates the funding organizations called Political Action Committees. To call or accuse this organization of being rabidly right wing makes as much sense as you would if and when you call yourself a conservative! AIPAC is deliberately non partisan, as Democrats, Republicans, Greens, independents and others make up the 85,000 card carrying members of AIPAC.

AIPAC has supporters and members who are not Jewish. Most of these supporters are Christians, from all denominations, who support a friendship between the United States and Israel. I too support that friendship. You seem to disfavor that relationship and that is your concern. Do not bring the religion of your birth into the equation as a justification for attacking Israel and an American Lobby that promotes a good relationship with Israel.

[zasu]

I was delighted to read this article Sheldon. Thank you so much for writing it. I edit an online magazine of Jewish interest, the Gantseh Megillah (http://www.gantsehmegillah.com) and I am sick and tired of receiving letters from people who claim that any criticism of Israel, for any reason whatsoever, is tantamount to being anti-Israel, and even worse, anti-Semitic. It is vitally important that the liberal Jewish tradition continue, and that we do not permit the militaristic march that the United States and Israel are on go unnoticed.

[blev22]

I've added the Gantseh Megillah to my favorites zasu. It looks like an interesting magazine and I'm embarassed to admit that I had not been aware of it.
Bruce

[JonYank]

Constructive criticism of Israel is acceptable and welcome.

However too few realize the hypocrisy of calling out Israel's tragic mistakes during its conflicts and its "human rights" abuses without applying that same fervor to what are YES - MUCH WORSE human rights abuses in Sudan, Tibet and elsewhere.

People freely and dispicably call Israel an "apartheid" state while Saudi Arabia and other Muslim countries get a free pass and treating women like 2nd class citizens and intimidating and discriminating against non-muslims.

Look it up - Israeli Arabs would rather live in Israel than in "palestine" - why would that be if they were so discriminated against in such a horrible apartheid state? It wouldn't.

[blev22]

At the risk of being called a self-hating Jew . . .

Sheldon:

Respectfully, here we go again. I have very little to challenge in terms of the substance of your post. But please tell me why, when you're writing on a left-of-center blog, you think have to insulate yourself by claiming that what you write is so controversial that you will be called a self-hating Jew?
You are not writing this in the Jerusalem Post. People around here know that Israel is not perfect and have heard it before that the Israel Lobby exercises extraordinary influence over American foreign policy. You're not, my friend, a pioneer in posting about this.
Please, I am not saying that what you have written is not important. I just cannot understand how so many folks who write about AIPAC, etc. preface their remarks as you have. The only thing you encourage is commenters who mimic you, who seek to glorify themselves, and claim courage by taking on the Israel Lobby, when courage is not required, and certainly not around these here parts.
Sorry Sheldon, but I don't see anyone calling you a self-hating Jew. I see people agreeing with you and expressing "concern" that they might be considered anti-semitic by some unknown poster, but I don't see any such charges being levied to justify such concerns. I don't see anything of the sort.

I hope the fact that you haven't been called a self-hating Jew doesn't spoil the party for some.

Bruce Levine
New York, New York

[CTPatriot]

I love ya for writing this, Shel. AIPAC may have represented the majority of Jews in this country at one time, but clearly with the neocon policies they endorse today, they now represent a very small, wealthy minority of American Jewry.

AIPAC advocated the attack on and occupation of Iraq, perhaps the most disastrous foreign policy decision in US history. And now they are pressuring congress to bomb Iran. The consequences of such a move would probably make Iraq look good by comparison. It's certainly hard to conclude otherwise than that AIPAC is "hurting Israel, Jews and middle-east peace".

For those wishing to learn more about AIPAC, there is an excellent 2 part series here:

What is AIPAC and Why Does It Matter?

Part 1: http://www.myleftnutmeg.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=7031

Part 2:
http://www.myleftnutmeg.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=7118

Seeing as how I am also Jewish, and I hate AIPAC, I must be a self-hating Jew just like Shel. Perhaps we can start a club.

- CTPatriot (proud founding member of NovaM Radio, the best progressive radio network in America)

[JonYank]

A lot of prominent lawmakers and organizations advocated the attack on Iraq - picking and choosing one over the other for the sake of cheap shots is a waste of time.

[NOMOREWAR FORISRAEL]

Must see Dutch documentary (in English) about AIPAC is linked at the following URL (scroll down to such after arriving):

http://www.itszone.co.uk/zone0/viewtopic.php?t=49800

[Yellowbird]

I am so grateful to see intelligent sensitive Jewish Citizens speaking the truth about AIPAC. We in America have become so TOUCHY that you can not visit issues unless you are part of the group being discussed; lest you be pounced upon. We in America are sick and tired of being held hostage by the PACS of each and every kind, AIPAC included. I think they should all be outlawed. Hillary is certainly WRONG on this one. And I think a CITIZEN should be legally defined as having a heart that beats, a brain that functions and blood coursing through their veins... of the biological kind. A corporate structure is NOT a citizen.

[Skandal]

"That is why I believe that AIPAC is now advocating the very intolerance and violence that the Jewish communities have fought against for centuries."

Of course, at no point does Drobny refer to a single position advocated by AIPAC that supports this claim. He also fails to mention how AIPAC was a supporter of the Oslo Accords and the land-for-peace policy the Accords advocated. He also fails to mention that the current Israeli government, Kadima, also supports land-for-peace as evidenced by its policies over the past 2 years. The temerity to claim that AIPAC does not represent most of the views of the Jewish community is just as arrogant, sans any evidence whatsoever, as AIPAC claiming they do.

[Sheldon Drobny - Huffpost Blogger]

I guess you have not been to an AIPAC meeting.

[JonYank]

Then please inform us as to what goes on there - because your entire post involving Aipac does not mention one issue.

[TitaniumAvatar]

"It is time for AIPAC to understand that the only real help for Israel comes from the peace process and not fascist type tactics. AIPAC does not represent me or most of the views of the Jewish community."

It is time for the Bush Administration to understand that the only real help for the US comes from the peace process and not fascist type tactics.
The Bush Administration does not represent me or most ot the views of the US community.

[Lon]

I'm not sure there are any claims in the post above that I disagree with. That is why it is frustrating that it so dismally failed to make a coherent argument.

Why should the power of AIPAC hurt Israel, jews, and the Middle East? Does the fact that 70% of jews are Liberals show that they don't support AIPAC's policies? Dershowitz would be among those liberals, but if he opposes AIPAC it is from the more blindly supportive of Israel side.

What would making the same aid be more economically based solve? Wouldn't Israel just shift other funds to miliary spending?

How does the long historical digression show that AIPAC is wrong?

AIPAC deserves to be criticized. And I do think that their policies hurt the prospects of peace, and therefore hurt Israel, but even being sympathetic to the conclusion, I can't put together what is above to constitute an argument for that. Criticism of AIPAC needs to be clearer to be effective. Otherwise it is just an opportunity for those who hate Israel to claim allegiance.

[Sheldon Drobny - Huffpost Blogger]

I am not sure of your criticism. Historical prospective is very useful. And I would not call Dershowitz a liberal. Being a liberal is not a part time job.

[Lon]

Historical perspective can be very useful if it is somehow tied into the point you are trying to make. But your article does not tie the historical information into your argument about AIPAC.

There was anti-semitism in Europe. The US shut the doors to many jews trying to escape anti-semitism in Europe. (It isn't clear because of the difference in timing that the Cuba comparison is relevant, but that is largely besides the point). It is true that this resulted in jews coming into conflict with muslims who saw them as interlopers. But what conclusion is supposed to be drawn to this?

People like batguano apparently will put emphasis on the interloper part and applaud your revealing AIPAC for what it is. Supporters of AIPAC will put empasis on the fact that people fleeing anti-semitism in Europe had nowhere else to go to legitimize the positions that AIPAC takes.

There is nothing in your argument to explain why you think this history leads to the conclusion that AIPAC is harmful to Israel, the jews, and the peace process. That is what makes the digression unhelpful in this case.

I think you could make a strong argument from this material. Unfortunately I am loathe to attribute it to you, since there is too little here to tell.

Here is how I would fill in the argument from your history to your conclusions:
The conflict between the arabs and Israel is one that came about while both parties were acting reasonably, but were unfortunately thrown into conflict with each other. This means that any possibility of peace requires that other recognize that the position of the other has some legitimacy. AIPAC has used its power to push policies which only make sense if one ignores the humanity of the palestinian side. And since such a move is incompatible with peace, it hurts the peace process, and so hurts Israel in the long run and jews indirectly.

I don't know if that was the argument you meant to be making. But none of the commentators have taken it to be.

[OrvilleHLarson]

Good, incisive commentary, Mr. Drobny. My compliments.

AIPAC is essentially an everything-for-Israel pressure group. Its suffocating influence on American policy in the Middle East has been well described by John Mearsheimer and Steve Walt.

Truth be told, there's no "American policy" in the Middle East. There's only the Israeli-approved
"American policy" in the Middle East--and that's despicable. As Patrick Buchanan aptly commented, the U.S. Congress is "Israeli-occupied territory."

[batguano]

Thanks for this, Sheldon. You will,no doubt, be attacked for your candor by the rabid right-wing "pro-Israel" AIPAC crowd.
A few comments seem in line however. In the first place, the NRA does not lobby to alter American foreign policy in favor of Israeli (a foreign nation) interests or goals, neither do they advocate, and lobby for, as AIPAC does, the $10 billion dollars (more or less, and that does NOT include the additional just signed $30 BILLION "deal" over 10 years)) annually (when ALL is included) sent as "aid" to Israel......"aid" that allows the expansion of the "settlements", building the "apartheid wall", buying the bulldozers that destroy so much of palestinian property and infrastructure and making possible the odious occupation. AIPAC has a very aggressive program to approach and "educate" every senate or Congressional candidate or elected representative on ME "history" and their preferred policies re Israel.......read high pressure. There are others than AIPAC that actively SUBVERT our foreign policy in Israels supposed favor, and they include the AEI and the FDD. When all is figured, the multiple layers of Pro-Israeli/Zionist subversion of our nations foreign policy is out of hand, and amounts to foreign agents lobbying and strong arming our elected representatives.
As far as "wonderful contributions to civil and human rights", I guess you leave out the brutal occupation and colonization of the West Bank and until recently, Gaza. Also absent is the second class status of Israel's Arab minority. Also the decision to send back refuges from the genocide in Darfur.....I guess Israel is doing lot's of business w/ China and Sudan, eh?. When we add Israel's cowardly attack on Lebanon's civilians and infrastructure, daily killings of Palestinian "militants" and children, use of banned cluster munitions, phosphorus weapons, minefields in Lebanon, massive arms industry and sales/exports to many countries, and the subversive activities of the Mossad, Israels wonderful "civil and human rights record" doesn't really pass the smell test.

[Sheldon Drobny - Huffpost Blogger]

I did not leave this out. Israel and its foreign policy is not synonymous with Judiasm. When you and others do this, you are either showing your ignorance or unconscious anti-Semitism. Judiasm is a religion, not a race or a country.

[batguano]

Sheldon; I did not mean to equate the Jewish people or Judaism with those who I consider to be the Israeli right-wing in power now in Israel, their acts, or the "Israeli/Zionist/Neocon" lobby in America. I have known and have great respect for the progressive/leftist Jewish tradition of past generations whose voice's have been lacking lately in general dialogue. I would like to see the re-emergence of the "progressive" face of judaism both here and in Israel, and an end to actions that I too consider to be detrimental to Jews/Judaism and that lead to actual anti-semitism. I would likewise like to see the end of the right-wing Bush/Neocon regime in America, and their "loyalty" to only "Republican" goals, just as I would like to see an end to "loyalty" to anything the Israeli right deems advantagious to "Jews". The fact remains that the AIPAC and the current "leadership" in Israel, and their actions, are in large degree the face of Jews widely seen. In fact, I would like to see the marginalization of all right-wing and "religious" nutters, whether xtian, Jew, hindu, Muslim, or any other.

[Mortart]

Yes, Judaism is a religion. But Jewishness, which is a better term considering the context of your criticism of AIPAC, is more than a religion. It also contains an element of ethnicity. That's why atheists, secular humanists and even France's late Cardinal Lustiger can be Jews. I am sure your European immigrant parents were ethnically regarded as Jews in their native lands and not as Poles, Russians, etc.

[NOMOREWAR FORISRAEL]

Dear Mr. Drobny,

Just curious if you will read the soon the be released book by Mearsheimer and Walt about the power/influence of the pro-Israel lobby (AIPAC, JINSA, etc.) in its push to get US to attack Iraq as such is happening again with Iran. The Mearsheimer and Walt book can currently be pre-ordered via an author search for 'Mearsheimer' at www.amazon.com (keep in mind that even Colin Powell conveyed - for Washington Post editor Karen DeYoung's new bio book about him - that the 'JINSA crowd' was in control of the Pentagon via JINSA/PNAC/AEI associated Dick Cheney who is pushing hard for the coming war with Iran which will be for Israel as well just as Iraq was..),. Have you read about the 'A Clean Break' agenda in esteemed intelligence author/writer James Bamford's 'A Pretext for War' book (the paperback version includes an additional section on the AIPAC espionage case which the pro-Israel biased US press/media is hardly covering either).

[blev22]

"Thanks for this, Sheldon. You will,no doubt, be attacked for your candor by the rabid right-wing "pro-Israel" AIPAC crowd."

As there have been no such attacks, do you care to withdraw this stereotypical canard, or do you stand by your erroneous prediction for political reasons?

[happytrails]

Bravo! Too many people equate the disgust we feel about Israel's occupation of and settlements in Palestine with being anti-Semitic. NOT SO! We should all be allowed to discuss peaceful means of settling this horror, which has been going on for forty years, without being called names which are not accurate and which hide the real issue: OCCUPATION.
Unfortunately, the tide of approval is turning against Israel and gaining momentum. And the innocent will suffer. AGAIN!

[straightshooter]

Happytrails

Surely, you meant to write: "Fortunately, the tide of approval is turning against Israel and gaining momentum." Why should we finance (about $18 million per day in US taxpayers' aid) and otherwise support a brutal occupier ethnic cleanser state that is undeniably our number one and ever increasing geopolitical liability?
Thankfully, thanks to the courage, scholarship and moral integrity of more and more American notables (e.g. Jimmy Carter), people are now learning the truth.

[Henry]

Is it possible for you to comprehend innocents as Palestinians living in foreign refugee camps for decades? It is time for Israel and the people of the USA to start realizing that everyone counts, everyone.

[midtown]

Bravo and congratulations for writing this.

Just one minor correction. You wrote "Unfortunately, the Allies after WW II refused to allow free immigration for over 500,000 Jewish survivors of the Holocaust and accordingly these displaced persons had no choice but to immigrate to Palestine."

While the Allies did indeed do that, it was at the behest of the Zionist World Congress who made their members tell their respective governments to deny entry. They wanted the survivors to go to Palestine, not be dispersed around the world. This is documented in detail in Edwin Black's 1984 MacMillan version of "The Transfer Agreement," the one with the photos. Hard to find.