How does Jewish lobby AIPAC control US politics?

Everyone is aware that the United States maintains a strong alliance with Israel, providing billions of dollars in annual aid, consistently opposing UN Security Council resolutions critical of Israel, and openly supporting its military operations. But the rationale behind this close relationship is complex. In brief, it involves a nuanced interplay of long-standing U.S. Middle East strategy, the dynamics of public opinion and electoral politics in the U.S., and the efficacy of pro-Israel lobbying efforts, which may not be as influential as widely perceived.

The historical context reveals that the U.S. and Israel weren’t always so aligned. For instance, in the 1956 Suez Crisis, the U.S. opposed Israel, urging the invaders (including Israel) to withdraw. The U.S. also actively opposed Israel’s clandestine nuclear program for years. The shift towards a closer relationship occurred after 1967, driven by changing U.S. containment and strategic priorities in countering Soviet influence in the Middle East.

Post-Cold War, despite shifts in global dynamics, U.S. involvement in the Middle East persisted. The U.S. continued to prioritize regional stability, considering it strategically beneficial to support countries like Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and Israel, which aligned with the U.S. vision for the region. Viewing Israel as a “force for stability,” the U.S. perceived its support as essential to maintaining stability in the Middle East, aligning with the interests of both nations.

Additionally, the U.S. assumed the role of a mediator in Israeli-Palestinian peace efforts, a position necessitated by the absence of alternative candidates. U.S. support for Israel during negotiations aimed to assure Israel of the U.S.’s commitment to its interests, encouraging active participation in peace talks.

Despite differences between administrations, a consistent thread in U.S. foreign policy has been support for Israel, both militarily and politically. This continuity persists, even when it clashes with U.S. strategic interests, such as President Bush’s refusal to support an Israeli strike on Iran or President Obama’s disagreements with Israeli leaders on West Bank settlements.

An integral player in this dynamic is the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), the largest pro-Israel lobby in the U.S. While widely recognized for its influence, debates exist on the extent to which AIPAC shapes U.S. foreign policy. Critics, as exemplified by scholars John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt, argue that AIPAC significantly guides U.S. policy.

Jeffrey Goldberg, one of the writers of the New Yorker magazine, gave an example of a meeting with a senior AIPAC official to demonstrate the impact of the group on Congress.

“You see this napkin?” the AIPAC official said. “In twenty-four hours, we could have the signatures of seventy senators on this napkin.”

Saying that AIPAC pushes US foreign policy in a more pro-Israel direction isn’t controversial. The big, and extremely contentious, question is just how much AIPAC actually matters. Is the group actually steering US politics and foreign policy in a direction it wouldn’t go on its own?

The major flashpoint here is John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt’s The Israel Lobby and American Foreign Policy, which began as an 2006 essay and evolved into a book. The two eminent international relations scholars argued that there’s no way to explain the US-Israel relationship, from an IR perspective, other than as AIPAC and its allies pushing the US to act counter to its own interests. They reject that either strategy or shared values fully explain the US support for Israel, so lobbying must. “The unmatched power of the Israel Lobby,” Walt and Mearsheimer write, is “the” explanation for America’s continued strong support for Israel.

Some argued that The Israel Lobby creepily invoked classic anti-Semitic tropes of Jews secretly controlling the government.

In essence, the debate over the influence of the Israel lobby shouldn’t be oversimplified into extremes; AIPAC is undoubtedly influential, but its power is intertwined with broader sources of U.S. support for Israel, and it thrives when aligning with existing public opinion.