Misplaced Pages

AIPAC: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from[REDACTED] with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 12:38, 25 March 2006 view source149.99.116.2 (talk)No edit summary← Previous edit Revision as of 12:43, 25 March 2006 view source Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users12,202 edits RevertNext edit →
Line 4: Line 4:


== History == == History ==
Founded in 1953 by ], AIPAC's original name was the American Zionist Committee for Public Affairs. According to UCLA political science professor and author, Steven Siegel, "the tension between the ] administration and Israeli supporters was so acute that there were rumors (unfounded as it turned out) that the administration would investigate the ]. Therefore, an independent lobbying committee was formed, which years later was renamed ." . Today, AIPAC has 65,000 members across 50 states. Founded in ] by ], AIPAC's original name was the American Zionist Committee for Public Affairs. According to UCLA political science professor and author, Steven Siegel, "the tension between the ] administration and Israeli supporters was so acute that there were rumors (unfounded as it turned out) that the administration would investigate the ]. Therefore, an independent lobbying committee was formed, which years later was renamed ." . Today, AIPAC has 65,000 members across 50 states.


== Activities and stated goals == == Activities and stated goals ==
AIPAC's stated purpose is to lobby the ] on issues and legislation that are in the best interests of ] and the ]. It regularly meets with members of Congress and holds events where it can share it views. It also provides analysis of the voting records of ] and ] with regard to how they voted on legislation related to Israel. AIPAC has been effective in gaining support for Israel among members of Congress and ] administrations. AIPAC's stated purpose is to lobby the ] on issues and legislation that are in the best interests of ] and the ]. It regularly meets with members of Congress and holds events where it can share its views. It also provides analysis of the voting records of ] and ] with regard to how they voted on legislation related to Israel. AIPAC has been effective in gaining support for Israel among members of Congress and ] administrations.


The '']'' described AIPAC on ], ] as "a major force in shaping United States policy in the ]" The article also stated that: "The organization has gained power to influence a presidential candidate's choice of staff, to block practically any arms sale to an ] country and to serve as a catalyst for intimate military relations between ] and the ]. Its leading officials are consulted by ] and White House policy makers, by senators and generals." <!--this quote should be checked with the NYT because it's quoted on a lot of dodgy websites--> The '']'' described AIPAC on ], ] as "a major force in shaping United States policy in the ]." The article also stated that: "The organization has gained power to influence a presidential candidate's choice of staff, to block practically any arms sale to an ] country, and to serve as a catalyst for intimate military relations between ] and the ]. Its leading officials are consulted by ] and White House policy makers, by senators and generals." <!--this quote should be checked with the NYT because it's quoted on a lot of dodgy websites-->


== AIPAC's views of its strengths and achievements == == AIPAC's views of its strengths and achievements ==
Line 28: Line 28:
AIPAC has been connected to several controversial events. AIPAC has been connected to several controversial events.


In ], AIPAC was able to convince the ] and President ] to veto a ]-supported ] resolution condemning the ], which called for the immediate withdrawal of Israeli soldiers from ] to allow for the safe evacuation of ]. This caused some critics in the media to argue that the "Reagan administration could not commit itself to concrete action to stop the killing in Lebanon". The United States defended its vote stating that the proposed resolution would allow the PLO to retain its weapons during the evacuation, thus allowing it to potentially carry out attacks throughout the evacuation. In ], AIPAC was able to convince the ] and President ] to veto a ]-supported ] resolution condemning the ], which called for the immediate withdrawal of Israeli soldiers from ] to allow for the safe evacuation of ]. This caused some critics in the media to argue that the "Reagan administration could not commit itself to concrete action to stop the killing in Lebanon". The United States defended its vote stating that the proposed resolution would allow the PLO to retain its weapons during the evacuation, thus allowing it to potentially carry out attacks throughout the evacuation.


In ], AIPAC president David Steiner had to resign when he was tape recorded boasting about his political influence, saying he had "cut a deal" with the ] administration to give more aid to Israel. He had arranged for "almost a billion dollars in other goodies," he added and was "negotiating" with the incoming ] administration over appointing a pro-Israeli ]. "We have a dozen people in his headquarters," Steiner bragged, "and they are all going to get big jobs." In ], AIPAC president David Steiner had to resign when he was tape recorded boasting about his political influence, saying he had "cut a deal" with the ] administration to give more aid to Israel. He had arranged for "almost a billion dollars in other goodies," he added and was "negotiating" with the incoming ] administration over appointing a pro-Israeli ]. "We have a dozen people in his headquarters," Steiner bragged, "and they are all going to get big jobs."
Line 34: Line 34:
In ] prominent Congressman ] generated some criticism when it was disclosed that his wife accepted a position, while her husband was still in office, as the vice president for business development for the Israeli Export Company. She had visited Israel in 1993 under the auspices of AIPAC. Mrs. Gingrich was "hired at an undisclosed salary to help recruit business for a free-trade zone in Israel." In ] prominent Congressman ] generated some criticism when it was disclosed that his wife accepted a position, while her husband was still in office, as the vice president for business development for the Israeli Export Company. She had visited Israel in 1993 under the auspices of AIPAC. Mrs. Gingrich was "hired at an undisclosed salary to help recruit business for a free-trade zone in Israel."


===Franklin, Rosen, Weissman===
In August 2004, it was revealed that the ] had been conducting an investigation of ], a U.S. Defense Department employee, on suspicion of espionage; specifically, misdirecting classified information about Iran's military through AIPAC to Israel. Both Israel and AIPAC have denied allegations of improper spying on the United States. See ].
*In August ], it was revealed that the ] had been conducting an investigation of ], a ] employee, on suspicion of espionage.
⚫ *In May ], the ] announced that Franklin had been arrested and charged with providing classified information about potential attacks on U.S. forces in Iraq. The one-count criminal complaint did not identify AIPAC by name, but described a luncheon meeting in which, allegedly, Franklin disclosed top-secret information to two AIPAC officials.
*In August 2005, former AIPAC policy director ] and AIPAC senior Iran analyst ] were indicted for illegally conspiring to gather and disclose classified national security information to Israel.
*On ], ], Judge T. S. Ellis III sentenced Franklin to 151 months (almost 13 years) in ] and fined him $10,000.


For full details, see <i>]</i>.
⚫ In May 2005 the Justice Department announced that Franklin was arrested and charged with providing classified information about potential attacks on U.S. forces in Iraq. The one-count criminal complaint did not identify the pro-Israel group AIPAC by name, but described a luncheon meeting in which Franklin allegedly disclosed top-secret information to two AIPAC officials. Both men were dismissed by the organization about a month before Franklin's indictment after their relationship with Franklin became the subject of federal investigation.

In August 2005, Rosen and Weissman were indicted for illegally conspiring to gather and disclose classified national security information to Israel. The indictment accused them of relaying secret information from Franklin to several Israeli agents, including Naor Gilon, a political officer at the Israeli Embassy. The secret information reportedly involved US strategy options for confronting the ] and military information about attacks on US forces in Iraq.


== Supporters == == Supporters ==
AIPAC has a wide base of supporters both in and outside of congress. Support among congressional members includes a majority of members of both the ] and ] Parties. One supporter, state Rep. Mark B. Cohen of ] who was a delegate to the 2004 AIPAC national convention in ], ] , said: "AIPAC plays valuable roles in expanding the pro-Israel communities in the United States, and in putting them in touch with those who influence the direction of American foreign policy. AIPAC is a diverse, broad-based organization which seeks to synthesize the views of its backers with objective information to pursue the advocacy of policies that benefit both the United States and Israel. No organization can better articulate the American interests in a strong U.S.-Israel military alliance than AIPAC can." AIPAC has a wide base of supporters both in and outside of congress. Support among congressional members includes a majority of members of both the ] and ] Parties. One supporter, state Rep. Mark B. Cohen of ] (a delegate to the 2004 AIPAC national convention in ]) said: "AIPAC plays valuable roles in expanding the pro-Israel communities in the United States, and in putting them in touch with those who influence the direction of American foreign policy. AIPAC is a diverse, broad-based organization which seeks to synthesize the views of its backers with objective information to pursue the advocacy of policies that benefit both the United States and Israel. No organization can better articulate the American interests in a strong U.S.-Israel military alliance than AIPAC can."


President ], while addressing AIPAC members in Washington, May 18, 2004 stated "AIPAC is doing important work. In Washington and beyond, AIPAC is calling attention to the great security challenges of our time. You've always understood and warned against the evil ambition of terrorism and their networks. In a dangerous new century, your work is more vital than ever.". President ], addressing AIPAC members in Washington on May 18, 2004, stated: "AIPAC is doing important work. In Washington and beyond, AIPAC is calling attention to the great security challenges of our time. You've always understood and warned against the evil ambition of terrorism and their networks. In a dangerous new century, your work is more vital than ever."


==Critics== ==Critics==
AIPAC also has critics, such as ] journalist ] of ]. Critics say that often AIPAC uses propaganda and other tactics to silence and discredit critics of its views on Israel. They also say that AIPAC wields undue influence over Congress and pushes for policies that, contrary to their claims, more often than not solely benefit Israel and are not in the best interests of the United States. (See also ]) AIPAC also has critics, such as ] journalist ] of ]. Critics say that AIPAC uses propaganda and other tactics to silence and discredit critics of its views on Israel.{{fact}} They also say that AIPAC wields undue influence over Congress and pushes for policies that, contrary to their claims, more often than not solely benefit Israel and are not in the best interests of the United States. (See also ]){{fact}}


These critics believe that a combination of propaganda and large financial donations to congressional campaigns from AIPAC members (AIPAC does not contribute directly to political campaigns) are the underlying reasons for the strong support of its views in Congress. Critics such as Cockburn have also examined AIPAC's role in helping to defeat Congressional candidates AIPAC deems unfriendly to Israel, such as former Rep. ], of ] (after her first term as a representative) and former Rep. ] of ]. They claim that donors from outside the region, led by AIPAC, meddled in a local congressional race and used accusations of anti-Semitism against McKinney to help defeat her, while Hilliard angered Israel's supporters when he traveled to ] and when he voted against a House resolution that pledged support for Israel and condemned Palestinian suicide bombings. He was defeated by current Rep. ], who has been subjected to accusations of donors from outside the region, led by AIPAC. These critics believe that a combination of propaganda and large financial donations to congressional campaigns from AIPAC members (AIPAC does not contribute directly to political campaigns) are the underlying reasons for the strong support of its views in Congress.{{fact}} Critics such as Cockburn have also examined AIPAC's role in helping to defeat Congressional candidates that AIPAC deems unfriendly to Israel, such as former Rep. ], of ] (after her first term as a representative) and former Rep. ] of ].{{fact}} They claim that donors from outside the region, led by AIPAC, meddled in a local congressional race and used accusations of anti-Semitism against McKinney to help defeat her, {{fact}}


Hedrick Smith noted in his book ''Power Game'' that AIPAC had become a "superlobby ... gained so much political muscle that by 1985 AIPAC and its allies could force ] to renege on an arms deal he had promised to ]. By 1986, the pro-Israel lobby could stop Reagan from making another jet fighter deal with ]; and Secretary of State ] had to sit down with AIPAC's executive director -- not Congressional leaders -- to find out what level of arms sales to the Saudis AIPAC would tolerate". Hedrick Smith claimed in his book ''Power Game'' that AIPAC had become a superlobby: " gained so much political muscle that by ] AIPAC and its allies could force ] to renege on an arms deal he had promised to ]. By 1986, the pro-Israel lobby could stop Reagan from making another jet fighter deal with ], and Secretary of State ] had to sit down with AIPAC's executive director -- not Congressional leaders -- to find out what level of arms sales to the Saudis AIPAC would tolerate".


], of the University of Chicago, and ], of the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University, published a working paper in March, 2006 claiming that U.S. Middle East policy is not in America's national interest and is motivated primarily by AIPAC. According to their paper, "No lobby has managed to divert U.S. foreign policy as far from what the American national interest would otherwise suggest, while simultaneously convincing Americans that U.S. and Israeli interests are essentially identical".<ref>] and ]. , '']'', Volume 28 Number 6, March 22, 2006. Accessed March 24, 2006.</ref> Mearsheimer and Walt also argue that AIPAC is a source of serious concern for the United States' national security.<ref>] and ]. , ] Working Paper Number:RWP06-011, March 13, 2006.</ref>
==Mearsheimer-Walt Study==
John J. Mearsheimer from the ]'s political science department and Stephen M. Walt from Harvard's ], published a lengthy study in March 2006, claiming the U.S. Middle East policy is not in America's national interest and is motivated primarily by the country's Israeli lobby, the AIPAC.


Though praised by ],<ref>Clyne, Meghan. , '']'', March 21, 2006. Accessed March 24, 2006.</ref> the paper was criticized by ] faculty and others; ] insisted it failed to meet basic quality standards for academic research, while ] ] described the authors as "dishonest so-called intellectuals" - he insisted they were "entitled to their stupidity", and had a right to publish it, but also supported "the right of the rest of us to expose them for being the anti-Semites they are."<ref>Clyne, Meghan. , '']'', March 22, 2006. Accessed March 24, 2006.</ref> The ], published a detailed study of the paper, alleging it was "riddled with errors of fact, logic and omission, has inaccurate citations, displays extremely poor judgement regarding sources, and, contrary to basic scholarly standards, ignores previous serious work on the subject".<ref>Safian, Alex. , ], March 20, 2006. Accessed March 24, 2006.</ref> Harvard's ] distanced itself from the paper, removing its logo, more strongly wording its disclaimer and making it more prominent, and insisting the paper reflected only the views of its authors.<ref>Clyne, Meghan. , '']'', March 22, 2006. Accessed March 24, 2006.</ref><ref>Rosner, Shmuel. , '']'', March 23, 2006. Accessed March 24, 2006.</ref><ref>Safian, Alex. , ], March 22, 2006. Accessed March 24, 2006.</ref> In response to recent criticisms, Mearsheimer states, "e fully recognised that the lobby would retaliate against us" and "e expected the story we told in the piece would apply to us after it was published. We are not surprised that we've come under attack by the lobby."
:"No lobby has managed to divert U.S. foreign policy as far from what the American national interest would otherwise suggest, while simultaneously convincing Americans that U.S. and Israeli interests are essentially identical". ,


==References==
Mearsheimer and Walt also document that American supporters of Israel pushed the United States into war with Iraq. They list senior Bush administration officials who supported the war and are also supporter of Israel, such as ], ], ], ], ], and ]. Many other influential individuals are also named such as, ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], and ].
<references/>

:"Washington would not be nearly as worried about ], or ] were it not so closely tied to ]".

:"The core of the Lobby is comprised of American Jews who make a significant effort in their daily lives to bend U.S. foreign policy so that it advances Israel’s interests".

:"American Jewish leaders often consult with Israeli officials, so that the former can maximize their influence in the United States".

:"In addition to influencing government policy directly, the Lobby strives to shape public perceptions about Israel and the Middle East. It does not want an open debate on issues involving Israel, because an open debate might cause Americans to question the level of support that they currently provide. Accordingly, pro-Israel organizations work hard to influence the media, think tanks, and academia, because these institutions are critical in shaping popular opinion".

:"This pro-Israel bias is reflected in the editorials of major newspapers. ], the late editor of ], once remarked that, '], ], ] – whatever those guys want is pretty much fine by me'. Not surprisingly, the Journal, along with other prominent newspapers like the ] and ] regularly run editorials that are strongly pro-Israel. Magazines like the ], ], and ] also zealously defend Israel at every turn".

:"Editorial bias is also found in papers like the ]. The Times occasionally criticizes Israeli policies and sometimes concedes that the Palestinians have legitimate grievances, but it is not even-handed. In his memoirs, for example, former Times executive editor ] acknowledged the impact his own pro-Israel attitude had on his editorial choices. In his words: 'I was much more deeply devoted to Israel than I dared to assert'. He goes on: 'Fortified by my knowledge of Israel and my friendships there, I myself wrote most of our Middle East commentaries. As more Arab than Jewish readers recognized, I wrote them from a pro-Israel perspective' ".

Mearsheimer and Walt warn that the influence of the Israeli lobby is a source of serious concern for the United States' national security.


==See also== ==See also==
Line 89: Line 77:
{{wikiquote}} {{wikiquote}}


==External links== == External links ==
* *
** **
Line 98: Line 86:
* *
* *
* in the ''Frontline'' (India's National Magazine) Volume 20 - Issue 20, September 27 - October 10, 2003. * in the ''Frontline'' (India's National Magazine) Volume 20 - Issue 20, September 27 - October 10, 2003.
*Arnaud de Borchgrave. , ], June 12, 2005. *Arnaud de Borchgrave. , ''Washington Times'', June 12, 2005.


===Critical or Questioning=== === Critical or questioning ===
⚫ *Barakat, Matthew. , Associated Press, January 21, 2006
* at ]
⚫ *Dreyfuss, Robert. , ''The Nation'', ], ]
⚫ *Edsall, Thomas B. & Moore, Molly. , ''The Washington Post'', ], ]
⚫ *Frank, Joshua. , ''Dissident Voice'', January 3, 2006.
⚫ *Goldberg, Jeffrey. , ''New Yorker'', July 4, 2005
⚫ *Kampeas, Ron. , The ] (JTA), December 8, 2005.
⚫ *Massing, Michael. , '']'', ], ]
⚫ *Mearsheimer & Walt. , ''John F. Kennedy School of Government Faculty Research Working Paper Series'', March 13, 2006.
⚫ *Mearsheimer & Walt. , ] (LRB), March 23, 2006.
⚫ *Ori Nir, , ''Forward'', April 29, 2005.
⚫ *Ori Nir, , ''Forward'', December 23, 2005.
* *
*.
* *
* *
* *
⚫ *
⚫ *Massing, Michael. , '']'', ], ]
*]. , ], August 30, 2004.
⚫ *Robert Dreyfuss. , ], ], ]
⚫ *Thomas Edsall. , The ], ], ]
*]. , ], April 22, 2005.
⚫ *Ori Nir, , ], April 29, 2005.
*Francisco Gil-White. , ''Historical and Investigative Research'', May 5, 2005.
⚫ *Goldberg, Jeffrey. , ], July 4, 2005.
⚫ *Ori Nir, , ], December 23, 2005.
*]. , ], May 6, 2005.
*]. , ], August 5, 2005.
⚫ *Robert Dreyfuss. , ''TomPaine.com'', August 9, 2005.
*Jeffrey Steinberg. , ], August 12, 2005.
⚫ *Ron Kampeas. , The ] (JTA), December 8, 2005.
⚫ *Joshua Frank. , ''Dissident Voice'', January 3, 2006.
⚫ *Matthew Barakat. , ], January 21, 2006.
*]. , ], January 25, 2006.
*]. , ], February 3, 2006.
*, TBRnews, February 11, 2006. *, TBRnews, February 11, 2006.
* Rosner's Blog, ], March 22, 2006
*]. , ], February 17, 2006.
⚫ *Mearsheimer & Walt. , ''John F. Kennedy School of Government Faculty Research Working Paper Series'', March 13, 2006.
*]. , ], March 20, 2006.
⚫ *Mearsheimer & Walt. , ] (LRB), March 23, 2006.
*Shmuel Rosner. , ] Israel, ], 2006.


] ]
]
] ]
] ]
Line 141: Line 116:
] ]
] ]
]
] ]

Revision as of 12:43, 25 March 2006

File:GWBush speech to AIPAC May 2004.jpg
U.S. President George W. Bush addresses AIPAC members in Washington on May 18, 2004. To his right is AIPAC's executive director Howard Kohr and to his left is AIPAC president Bernice Manocherian.

The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) is a special interest group that lobbies the United States Government on behalf of a strong U.S. - Israel relationship. It describes itself as "America's Pro-Israel Lobby". AIPAC is a mass-membership organization including both Jews and non-Jews. It is considered one of the most powerful political lobbies in the United States.

History

Founded in 1953 by I.L. "Si" Kenen, AIPAC's original name was the American Zionist Committee for Public Affairs. According to UCLA political science professor and author, Steven Siegel, "the tension between the Eisenhower administration and Israeli supporters was so acute that there were rumors (unfounded as it turned out) that the administration would investigate the American Zionist Council. Therefore, an independent lobbying committee was formed, which years later was renamed ." . Today, AIPAC has 65,000 members across 50 states.

Activities and stated goals

AIPAC's stated purpose is to lobby the Congress of the United States on issues and legislation that are in the best interests of Israel and the United States. It regularly meets with members of Congress and holds events where it can share its views. It also provides analysis of the voting records of U.S. federal representatives and senators with regard to how they voted on legislation related to Israel. AIPAC has been effective in gaining support for Israel among members of Congress and White House administrations.

The New York Times described AIPAC on July 6, 1987 as "a major force in shaping United States policy in the Middle East." The article also stated that: "The organization has gained power to influence a presidential candidate's choice of staff, to block practically any arms sale to an Arab country, and to serve as a catalyst for intimate military relations between The Pentagon and the Israeli army. Its leading officials are consulted by State Department and White House policy makers, by senators and generals."

AIPAC's views of its strengths and achievements

AIPAC claims its strengths lie in its national membership base and great research capacity to understand both Israel's interest and the interests of other countries affecting US-Israel relationship around the world. Some of the achievements it claims include:

  • Isolating Hamas, Hezbollah, and Palestinian Islamic Jihad by advocating that the Administration place the terrorist groups on a more restrictive terrorist list, allowing the United States to sanction foreign financial institutions if they fail to block the organizations’ assets.
  • Disrupting Hamas financing by urging the Administration to freeze the assets of the U.S.-based Holy Land Foundation, which has been accused of funneling money to the terrorist organization.
  • Defending Israel from terrorist bomb attacks by securing $28 million for Israel to purchase American technology, including robots and scanners, designed to detect and neutralize bombs.

Successes

AIPAC was early to recognize the dangers that extremist groups and rhetoric in the Middle East pose to American citizens and interests. AIPAC has played a key role in educating members of Congress about the issues that face today's Middle East. AIPAC was an early supporter of Counter-Terrorism Act of 1995. The Act resulted in increased FBI resources being committed to fight terrorism as well as expanded Federal jurisdiction in prosecuting criminal activities related to terrorism.

AIPAC also supported the funding of a number of Israeli military projects that have resulted in many new additions to the arsenal of America's Armed Services. The Arrow anti-missile system is now the most advanced working anti-ballistic missile system in the world.

Martin Indyk research director at the AIPAC, founded the Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP) think-tank in 1985.

Controversies

AIPAC has been connected to several controversial events.

In 1982, AIPAC was able to convince the US Congress and President Reagan to veto a French-supported UN resolution condemning the Israeli Invasion of Lebanon, which called for the immediate withdrawal of Israeli soldiers from Lebanon to allow for the safe evacuation of Palestinians. This caused some critics in the media to argue that the "Reagan administration could not commit itself to concrete action to stop the killing in Lebanon". The United States defended its vote stating that the proposed resolution would allow the PLO to retain its weapons during the evacuation, thus allowing it to potentially carry out attacks throughout the evacuation.

In 1992, AIPAC president David Steiner had to resign when he was tape recorded boasting about his political influence, saying he had "cut a deal" with the Bush administration to give more aid to Israel. He had arranged for "almost a billion dollars in other goodies," he added and was "negotiating" with the incoming Clinton administration over appointing a pro-Israeli Secretary of State. "We have a dozen people in his headquarters," Steiner bragged, "and they are all going to get big jobs."

In 1995 prominent Congressman Newt Gingrich generated some criticism when it was disclosed that his wife accepted a position, while her husband was still in office, as the vice president for business development for the Israeli Export Company. She had visited Israel in 1993 under the auspices of AIPAC. Mrs. Gingrich was "hired at an undisclosed salary to help recruit business for a free-trade zone in Israel."

Franklin, Rosen, Weissman

  • In August 2004, it was revealed that the FBI had been conducting an investigation of Larry Franklin, a United States Department of Defense employee, on suspicion of espionage.
  • In May 2005, the Justice Department announced that Franklin had been arrested and charged with providing classified information about potential attacks on U.S. forces in Iraq. The one-count criminal complaint did not identify AIPAC by name, but described a luncheon meeting in which, allegedly, Franklin disclosed top-secret information to two AIPAC officials.
  • In August 2005, former AIPAC policy director Steven Rosen and AIPAC senior Iran analyst Keith Weissman were indicted for illegally conspiring to gather and disclose classified national security information to Israel.
  • On January 20, 2006, Judge T. S. Ellis III sentenced Franklin to 151 months (almost 13 years) in prison and fined him $10,000.

For full details, see AIPAC espionage scandal.

Supporters

AIPAC has a wide base of supporters both in and outside of congress. Support among congressional members includes a majority of members of both the Democratic and Republican Parties. One supporter, state Rep. Mark B. Cohen of Philadelphia (a delegate to the 2004 AIPAC national convention in Washington, D.C.) said: "AIPAC plays valuable roles in expanding the pro-Israel communities in the United States, and in putting them in touch with those who influence the direction of American foreign policy. AIPAC is a diverse, broad-based organization which seeks to synthesize the views of its backers with objective information to pursue the advocacy of policies that benefit both the United States and Israel. No organization can better articulate the American interests in a strong U.S.-Israel military alliance than AIPAC can."

President George W. Bush, addressing AIPAC members in Washington on May 18, 2004, stated: "AIPAC is doing important work. In Washington and beyond, AIPAC is calling attention to the great security challenges of our time. You've always understood and warned against the evil ambition of terrorism and their networks. In a dangerous new century, your work is more vital than ever."

Critics

AIPAC also has critics, such as left-wing journalist Alexander Cockburn of CounterPunch. Critics say that AIPAC uses propaganda and other tactics to silence and discredit critics of its views on Israel. They also say that AIPAC wields undue influence over Congress and pushes for policies that, contrary to their claims, more often than not solely benefit Israel and are not in the best interests of the United States. (See also Dual loyalty)

These critics believe that a combination of propaganda and large financial donations to congressional campaigns from AIPAC members (AIPAC does not contribute directly to political campaigns) are the underlying reasons for the strong support of its views in Congress. Critics such as Cockburn have also examined AIPAC's role in helping to defeat Congressional candidates that AIPAC deems unfriendly to Israel, such as former Rep. Cynthia McKinney, of Georgia (after her first term as a representative) and former Rep. Earl Hilliard of Alabama. They claim that donors from outside the region, led by AIPAC, meddled in a local congressional race and used accusations of anti-Semitism against McKinney to help defeat her,

Hedrick Smith claimed in his book Power Game that AIPAC had become a superlobby: " gained so much political muscle that by 1985 AIPAC and its allies could force President Reagan to renege on an arms deal he had promised to King Hussein. By 1986, the pro-Israel lobby could stop Reagan from making another jet fighter deal with Saudi Arabia, and Secretary of State George Shultz had to sit down with AIPAC's executive director -- not Congressional leaders -- to find out what level of arms sales to the Saudis AIPAC would tolerate".

John Mearsheimer, of the University of Chicago, and Stephen Walt, of the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University, published a working paper in March, 2006 claiming that U.S. Middle East policy is not in America's national interest and is motivated primarily by AIPAC. According to their paper, "No lobby has managed to divert U.S. foreign policy as far from what the American national interest would otherwise suggest, while simultaneously convincing Americans that U.S. and Israeli interests are essentially identical". Mearsheimer and Walt also argue that AIPAC is a source of serious concern for the United States' national security.

Though praised by David Duke, the paper was criticized by Harvard University faculty and others; Marvin Kalb insisted it failed to meet basic quality standards for academic research, while Congressman Eliot L. Engel described the authors as "dishonest so-called intellectuals" - he insisted they were "entitled to their stupidity", and had a right to publish it, but also supported "the right of the rest of us to expose them for being the anti-Semites they are." The Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America, published a detailed study of the paper, alleging it was "riddled with errors of fact, logic and omission, has inaccurate citations, displays extremely poor judgement regarding sources, and, contrary to basic scholarly standards, ignores previous serious work on the subject". Harvard's Kennedy School of Government distanced itself from the paper, removing its logo, more strongly wording its disclaimer and making it more prominent, and insisting the paper reflected only the views of its authors. In response to recent criticisms, Mearsheimer states, "e fully recognised that the lobby would retaliate against us" and "e expected the story we told in the piece would apply to us after it was published. We are not surprised that we've come under attack by the lobby."

References

  1. Mearsheimer, John J. and Walt, Stephen. The Israel Lobby, London Review of Books, Volume 28 Number 6, March 22, 2006. Accessed March 24, 2006.
  2. Mearsheimer, John J. and Walt, Stephen. The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy, Kennedy School of Government Working Paper Number:RWP06-011, March 13, 2006.
  3. Clyne, Meghan. Kalb Upbraids Harvard Dean Over Israel, New York Sun, March 21, 2006. Accessed March 24, 2006.
  4. Clyne, Meghan. Harvard's Paper on Israel Called 'Trash' By Solon, New York Sun, March 22, 2006. Accessed March 24, 2006.
  5. Safian, Alex. Study Decrying “Israel Lobby” Marred by Numerous Errors, Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America, March 20, 2006. Accessed March 24, 2006.
  6. Clyne, Meghan. A Harvard School Distances Itself from Dean's Paper, New York Sun, March 22, 2006. Accessed March 24, 2006.
  7. Rosner, Shmuel. Harvard to remove official seal from anti-AIPAC 'working paper', Haaretz, March 23, 2006. Accessed March 24, 2006.
  8. Safian, Alex. Harvard Backs Away from "Israel Lobby" Professors; Removes Logo from Controversial Paper, Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America, March 22, 2006. Accessed March 24, 2006.

See also

External links

Critical or questioning

Categories:
AIPAC: Difference between revisions Add topic