AIPAC’s power, which is real, is a bit like the power of the National Rifle Association.
The NRA has a lot of influence over American gun legislation,
and few politicians want to take it on.
It spends plenty of money and mounts plenty of PR campaigns,
but if large numbers of Americans didn’t care about gun rights,
the NRA would be a much less important and relevant organization.
The NRA mobilizes an existing public consensus, and it increases the impact
of the public support of individual gun rights, but its power flows from the public’s belief
that gun rights are good – and that the NRA is a reliable watchdog.
Politicians quake in their boots and obey because they know that
if the NRA labels them ‘anti-gun’, the voters will believe the NRA on an issue
that matters to them – and in most races the politicians who cross the gun lobby
will pay a heavy political price.
AIPAC’s power works the same way, but it needs to be stressed that the politicians who fear it
aren’t thinking much about the Jewish votes it allegedly commands.
Less than two percent of the US population is Jewish, and Jews aren’t exactly swing voters.
Next to African-Americans, Jews are the most reliable (and most liberal) bloc of voters
in the Democratic Party.
AIPAC’s political power ultimately comes from its ability to influence non-Jewish voters.
If AIPAC and related groups call politicians anti-Israel, the tens of millions of non-Jewish voters who connect Israel’s security with American values and interests will believe them.
(A recent poll found that 53% of voters were more likely
to vote for a candidate who was ‘pro-Israel’.)
AIPAC is powerful because it is the accredited watchdog on an issue
the non-Jewish public cares about; if the dog barks, something is wrong.
Many Americans think that both AIPAC and the NRA sometimes go too far,
but they tolerate that (within limits) because they think that in general,
these organizations are on the right side of the issue. If either of these organizations
went too far ahead of public sentiment too often, the lobby would lose influence.
They can push the envelope of public sentiment, but they can’t lead the public
where it fundamentally does not want to go.