resources
Thursday, January 23, 2014 | return to: news & features, national


Share
 

Will Iran sanctions showdown damage AIPAC’S clout?

by ron kampeas, jta

Follow j. on   and 

In previous AIPAC vs. White House dustups, the Israel lobbying group’s strategy was to speak softly and let Congress carry the big stick.

But in the American Israel Public Affairs Committee’s faceoff with the Obama administration over new Iran sanctions, congressional support may not be so readily available, and keeping a low public profile is proving impossible.

According to congressional insiders and some of the lobbying group’s former senior executives, AIPAC may soon face a tough choice: Stick out the battle over sanctions and potentially face a reputation-damaging defeat, or reach out to the White House and find a way for both sides to save face.

“I don’t believe this is sustainable, the confrontational posture,” said Steve Rosen, a former AIPAC foreign policy chief known for his hawkishness on Iran.

Sen. Robert Menendez of New Jersey is the Democratic sponsor of new Iran sanctions legislation.  photo/jta-getty images-mark wilson
Sen. Robert Menendez of New Jersey is the Democratic sponsor of new Iran sanctions legislation. photo/jta-getty images-mark wilson

The Obama administration has taken a firm line against the sanctions bill backed by AIPAC, warning that the legislation would harm prospects for a achieving a diplomatic solution on the Iranian nuclear issue. Meanwhile, the confrontation has landed AIPAC squarely in the media spotlight and drawn pointed criticism from leading liberal commentators.

AIPAC has been stymied by a critical core of Senate Democrats who have sided with the Obama administration in the fight. While AIPAC’s bid to build a veto-busting majority has reached 59 — eight short of the needed 67 — it has stalled there in part because Democrats have more or less stopped signing on.

Sens. Mark Kirk (R-Ill.) and Robert Menendez (D-N.J.), the bill’s sponsors, rounded up 15 Democrats when the bill was introduced on Dec. 19, just before Congress went on its Christmas recess. Since Congress returned this month, however, they have added just one Democrat, Michael Bennet of Colorado.

AIPAC, however, says its bid to pass sanctions is on track.

“Our top priority is stopping Iran’s nuclear program, and consequently we are very engaged in building support for the Menendez-Kirk bill which now has the bipartisan co-sponsorship of 59 senators,” AIPAC’s spokesman, Marshall Wittman, wrote in an email.

But in a recent interview with the New Yorker, President Barack Obama appeared confident that backers of the bill would not reach a veto-proof majority.

“I don’t think a new sanctions bill will reach my desk during this period, but if it did, I would veto it and expect it to be sustained,” Obama said.

A source close to AIPAC said the stall in support for the legislation is due in part to the fact that of 10 committee chairs opposed to the bill, four are Jewish and have a history of closeness to the pro-Israel community.

Non-Jewish lawmakers tend to take their cues on Israel-related issues from their Jewish colleagues — a common template with lawmakers from other communities — and this is no different, the source said.

AIPAC’s efforts have spurred surprisingly blunt criticism from sources more known for caution on such matters. The new director of the National Jewish Democratic Council, Rabbi Jack Moline, earlier this month accused AIPAC activists of using “strong-arm” tactics on uncommitted senators.

AIPAC already is taking some high-profile hits on TV, with liberal commentators accusing the lobby of trying to scuttle a diplomatic settlement with Iran.

“The senators from the great State of Israel are against it,” comedian Jon Stewart said last week on “The Daily Show,” accompanied by a graphic of a map of Israel emblazoned with the AIPAC logo. MSNBC host Chris Hayes said the 16 Democratic senators backing the sanctions bill are “afraid” of AIPAC.

Rosen said that such exposure, while irritating to AIPAC, would not be a factor in getting the lobby to shift course. More serious would be calls from donors to the group who have ties to Democrats. AIPAC’s reputation as having bipartisan support — a critical element of its influence — could be put at risk.

A way out for the group would be to quietly negotiate a compromise behind the scenes with the White House, Rosen said.

AIPAC hardly stands alone in advocating the sanctions, said an official from another Jewish group, noting that support for the bill spanned the breadth of the community, from the right-wing Zionist Organization of America to the consensus-oriented Jewish Council for Public Affairs. None of these groups, including AIPAC, wanted a confrontation, the official said.

“It’s awkward, and the pro-Israel organizations have been looking for a way to climb down from this question,” said the official, who asked not to be identified.

An aide to a Republican senator who backs the sanctions said that in the long run, AIPAC’s better bet was to align itself with Congress rather than the White House.

“Congress holds the foreign policy purse,” the aide said. “The White House will always have a new occupant. It is less important what the White House thinks of any organization and far more important what Congress thinks of any organization."


Comments

Be the first to comment!




Leave a Comment

In order to post a comment, you must first log in.
Are you looking for user registration? Or have you forgotten your password?



Auto-login on future visits