Thank You, AIPAC
Judith Levy, Ed. ·
March 11, 2012 at 10:21pm
I had the privilege -- along with 13,000 other delegates -- of attending the AIPAC Policy Conference in Washington last week. It was an extraordinarily stimulating and interesting two-and-a-half days -- indeed, it was so jam-packed with speeches, panel discussions, breakout seminar discussions, luncheons, dinners, and galas that my mind is still reeling. The level of planning involved was somewhere between a Hollywood feature, a party convention, and a military operation.
You have probably heard that President Obama, in his address to AIPAC, assured the crowd that he has Israel's back. That may or may not be true. What is undeniable is that AIPAC has Israel's back, and that's extremely reassuring -- particularly as we're more than likely to be facing another four years of an Obama administration, four years in which he will no longer require the support of the Jewish electorate.
Here are some of the main impressions I had of the speakers at the conference.
- President Obama spoke compellingly and with dignity, but was visibly ill at ease. He was very much on the defensive, which is, after all, only to be expected (AIPAC is hardly his home crowd, and I imagine he was glad when the speech was over). He was certainly correct to point out that it is easy for contenders not yet in office to beat the drums of war, and much harder for a sitting president to send young men and women into harm's way. He did reference Iranian nuclear capability, rather than an Iranian bomb, as the end that must be avoided, and stated explicitly that containment is not an option. He alluded to a military option as a last resort but did not elaborate on what that might entail.
- Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky) projected a powerful combination of the charmingly avuncular Southern gentleman and the butt-kicking, name-taking quiet man whom you cross at your peril. He dismissed Obama's Iran policy as flawed because of its refusal to delineate clear military consequences to Iranian provocation, and stated that if sufficient intelligence were gleaned indicating that Iran was pursuing the bomb, he would personally introduce authorization to Congress for the use of "overwhelming" military force to prevent Iran from enriching uranium to weapons-grade level. The crowd ate it up, and I confess that I'm an avid new fan.
- Bibi Netanyahu was greeted like a rock star. Coming from Israel, I couldn't help but smile at this -- and he couldn't either, joking, "Wow, it's like in the Knesset!" to the cheering crowd. (Honestly, it must be hard for Bibi and Sara to fly home after they come to Washington.) Bibi is a gifted public speaker: he has a way of leaning on the podium with one elbow and lowering his voice conspiratorially that makes you feel as though he's schmoozing directly with you, even though there are 13,000 other people in the room. He also has a talent for weaving that schmoozy intimacy with the deeply (and controversially) serious, as when he held up the letter from FDR's State Department refusing to bomb Auschwitz in 1944 on the grounds that it might prompt "even more vindictive action by the Germans". That is an extremely fraught analogy, and Bibi was quick to deny the obvious implication of a correlation between FDR and Obama ("the American government today is different"). Still, as Haaretz has pointed out, Bibi's invoking the Holocaust was all but announcing his intention to preempt Iran. This is verbal hardball, and Bibi's taking heat for it at home. I wonder, though, having heard some Iran experts speak (see below), whether the tough talk is itself a tactic, and an effective one, in a greater deterrence strategy. The current regime in Iran won't back off until it's frightened. But I'm getting ahead of myself.
- The ex-Sports Illustrated swimsuit pin-up turned mega-mogul Kathy Ireland, who delivered a moving speech proclaiming her support for Israel as a Christian American, is a terrific speaker and won the hearts of the whole crowd. She is also absolutely flipping gorgeous in person. Wow. (Just saying.)
- Mitt Romney, who spoke to us via satellite, spoke much more passionately and impressively than I think anybody was expecting him to (at least anyone I spoke to). He invoked a personal friendship of long standing with Bibi, which was news to me (they apparently worked together years ago at Boston Consulting Group). He used the Iran issue to make the point that he plans to expand the US military rather than reduce it, and explicitly referenced his disapproval of Obama's granting of the 1967 borders to the Palestinians as a basis for negotiation with us. This was striking, as it underlined the irrelevance of the Palestinians at the conference (I think Romney was the first person to bring them up, and he spoke on the last day). He also said outright that "talking about a peace process right now is a bit like setting up a tent in the middle of a hurricane," which was quite bracingly direct. And he pointedly stated that if he becomes president, his first trip will be to Jerusalem, not "to Cairo or Riyadh or Ankara."
- Rick Santorum spoke in person even though it was Super Tuesday -- the only one of the three major Republican contenders to do so. The substance of his speech was in line with the overall theme -- Iran has to be stopped -- but I was surprised that he didn't take greater advantage of the opportunity to press home his affiliation with the evangelical Christian community, which has a healthy relationship with AIPAC and whose support of Israel is deeply appreciated by many members of the organization. It would have been an easy way to score some points and to differentiate himself from his Republican opponents.
- Gingrich phoned it in, literally. He spoke the expected sound bytes via satellite -- whizzing through them in a couple of minutes -- and didn't bother to try to appear particularly engaged. It was a strange turn and easily one of the most disappointing of the conference (the other clunker was Leon Panetta, whose speech was as long as those of Obama and Bibi but was padded, tedious and unenlightening). The weirdness of Gingrich's performance suggested (possibly) some irritation at having to spend time talking to us on Super Tuesday, a sentiment Romney and Santorum might well have shared but were at pains to conceal.
- Liz Cheney is a stalwart friend of Israel and an attack dog toward Barack Obama. Yikes! She and Jane Harman (a former Democratic US Representative for the 36th Californian Congressional district and currently head of the Woodrow Wilson International Center) went at it tooth and nail on a panel before the full crowd (Israeli commentator Ehud Yaari was there too, but couldn't compete with the entertainment value of the animus between the two women). Cheney cannonballed straight into the deep end of partisan politics, turning the Iran question into a referendum on Obama. She said, essentially, that the Israelis would be fools to rely either on him or on American intelligence gathering, and said that Obama has done more to "undermine and delegitimize Israel" than any other president and is more concerned with containing Israel than protecting her. The assembly was bipartisan -- I met some very committed Democrats at the conference -- but the overall response to Cheney was much more enthusiastic than not.
- Mike Murphy, Donna Brazile, Bill Kristol and Paul Begala had a rapid-fire wonk-fest before the capacity crowd at which they traded predictions about Super Tuesday and the presidential race in general. The numbers flew so fast it was hard to keep up, but the takeaways were that Kristol finds the Republican field depressing, Begala is quite entertaining in a cheerful, borderline crude way and gets a West Wing-y high out of mixing it up with his colleagues, Brazile is a class act, and Murphy is some kind of political gaming savant. (I knew this already from the Ricochet podcasts, but it was really something to hear live. How does he keep all that in his head?) I walked out of that one a little bewildered, but liked the fly-on-the-wall aspect of listening to four pros -- particularly four pros who come from different political traditions but seem to enjoy and respect one another -- hammer it out.
- I had the great good fortune to attend a fascinating seminar offered by Ali Alfoneh, an Iranian expert on Iran at the American Enterprise Institute, and Emanuele Ottolenghi, an Italian expert on Iran at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies. Mr. Alfoneh made an interesting and important point, and this is what I was alluding to above with reference to Netanyahu's rather extreme posturing about Iran. He reminded the group that when George Bush was asked why he decided to invade Iraq and take down Saddam, his reply was, "That man tried to kill my Dad." Bush subsequently took all kinds of abuse in the West and in the US for being unsophisticated, reckless and infantile. In the Middle East, however, among the more radical regimes, a different kind of notice was taken. In this region, as Alfoneh put it to laughter, "if somebody tries to kill your Dad, invading their country and starting a war is the most lenient reaction you can show." Alfoneh said the more radical regimes, Iran in particular, were equally alarmed by Bush's candid statement that God's instruction was part of his motivation, another assertion that brought heaps of ridicule down on Bush's head. Bush's unpredictable nature "planted fear into the hearts of the Republican Guard officers," who were sufficiently concerned that Bush was ready to use force against them that they were held in check. Obama's verbal style, by contrast, is highly sophisticated in a way that impresses the daylights out of Western observers but does nothing but reassure the Republican Guard, which "[does] not believe, unfortunately, that President Obama is ready to use force against them in order to prevent Iran from becoming a nuclear power."
- I attended a tent gathering of the Republican Jewish Coalition, which was a hoot. I learned there that Lindsey Graham (R-SC) is hilarious off the cuff, and that Michele Bachmann (R-MN) is an effortlessly terrific speaker -- she addressed the group with no notes (and no TelePrompter -- it was a small room), and delivered a wonderful, rousing address full of rhetorical flourishes. She's also a knockout. She conveys a very attractive aura of sensible calm in person -- a persona that could not contrast more strongly with the general depiction of her in the mainstream media during the campaign for the Republican nomination as an out-of-her-depth, jumped-up wannabe who might also be half off her rocker. I hope we haven't seen the last of her on the national stage.
The conference was amazing not only for this astonishing line-up of speakers and panelists but for the opportunity to meet so many other Americans who are so passionately engaged. I met people from all over the country, and everyone -- no matter where they fell on the political spectrum -- was friendly, excited, and eager to talk. We got up at 5:30 am every morning to get through security checks and collapsed every evening, but it was a wonderful exhaustion. I thank AIPAC for putting together such a remarkable gathering -- and for existing at all. These are dangerous times, and Israel needs friends like these in the US.
- Comment (32)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (2)
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
Comments:
Jun '10
Re: Thank You, AIPAC
The best evidence that Israelis are forgiving and merciful, by nature, is that so many of their violent terrorist neighbors, that fully deserve to be dead, aren't. God counsels mercy and forbearance, and unlike their enemies, Israel complies.
Re: Thank You, AIPAC
"[Romney] also said outright that "talking about a peace process right now is a bit like setting up a tent in the middle of a hurricane,"
Wow. Mitt, double the salary of whoever put this line together for you and fire everyone else on the writing staff.
Sep '10
Re: Thank You, AIPAC
Sounds like a fascinating event. Its interesting that Kathy Ireland is also on the cover of Fortune. Fabulous story for a woman I remember fondly from SI many years ago. Maybe she's becoming active politically. Sounds like a good thing to me.
Jun '10
Re: Thank You, AIPAC
Wow Judith, that was incredibly enlightening. I must say that there are several areas where my views might be misconceptions. For several years it has seemed to me that a great many Jews were more enamored with their leftist political views than the survival of our Jewish State, Israel. By extension, my feelings about AIPAC have been less than enthusiastic. I need to tone it back. AIPAC must appeal to both sides of the aisle in D.C.
to keep support for Israel consistant no matter who is in charge...not an easy task. Have a safe flight home.
Feb '11
Re: Thank You, AIPAC
Thank you, Judith, for the fantastic roundup. I'd been looking online for some video of the conference and seen Netanyahu's speech, which I thought was impressive, and read a bit about Obama's. I was also impressed with the steely-faced Israeli bodyguards/commandos who preceeded Netanyahu on stage and clearly were ready to throw themselves between him and any harm.
The idea that the American President has Israel's back disturbs me, given that I think he only wants to be there to plant a shiv in it... I know I am being less than charitable, but the man is so dishonest that I cannot bring myself to believe anything he says, including the words "and" and "the."
Edited on March 12, 2012 at 2:50amJun '10
Re: Thank You, AIPAC
Great report. Writing style: A. Informative: A. Passion: A+.
Go to the head of the class.
Jul '10
Re: Thank You, AIPAC
An excellent fix for Us junkies out Here.
Love it.
Re: Thank You, AIPAC
Judith thanks AIPAC--and I thank Judith. Just fascinating. And speaking as someone who interviewed Mitch McConnell not quite ten days ago, Judith, your one sentence on the man is the most vivid and accurate description I've ever come across: "a powerful combination of the charmingly avuncular Southern gentleman and the butt-kicking, name-taking quiet man whom you cross at your peril." Beautiful.
Dec '10
Re: Thank You, AIPAC
President Obama said: "And as I’ve made clear time and again during the course of my presidency, I will not hesitate to use force when it is necessary to defend the United States and its interests."
Note well: he did NOT say, "I will not hesitate to use force when it is necessary to defend the Unites States and its allies."
My model for how well President Obama will have the back of Israel's citizens is how well he's protecting the lives of Syrian civilians.
Jun '10
Re: Thank You, AIPAC
Judith Levy:
he will no longer require the support of the Jewish electorate.
Oh.... I don't think he has ever needed to worry about that...
May '10
Re: Thank You, AIPAC
http://www.aipac.org/get-involved/attend-policy-conference/follow-pc/sunday-morning-plenary/foreign-policy-roundtable
Liz Cheney and Jane Harman
Re: Thank You, AIPAC
Thank you, Judith, for this outstanding distillation of the conference. I felt like I was sitting there with you, taking it all in.
If I may use cdor's statement above as a launching point for a question, he wrote: "For several years it has seemed to me that a great many Jews were more enamored with their leftist political views than the survival of our Jewish State, Israel." Do you have a sense for how that dynamic is changing, if at all? Or was this the proper crowd to gauge something like that?
Dec '10
Re: Thank You, AIPAC
Judith,
I'm going to be the lone dissenting voice here.
Considering the fact that Obama's entire foriegn policy has undermined the security of Israel. Considering the fact that that Obama has repeatedly sent emissaries to Israel to do direct damage to the Jewish State. (Biden, Clinton, Panetta...) Not to mention Obama has personally attempted to directly damage the Prime Minister of Israel. Considering the fact that Obama's psuedo pro-Israel rhetoric is already wearing off. Considering the fact that once he is free of the need to worry about re-election his deep inner prejudices will come out in full. (Dinesh D'Souza's "The Roots of Obama's Rage")
Considering all of this, don't you think that the concentrated Jewish effort of AIPAC would have been better spent attempting to defeat Obama in the 2012 election?
As I said to many AIPAC attendees. I'm sure the hotel room was comfy, the kosher prime rib was great and the intro music really over the top. Now I can add the fact that Kathy Ireland was just as 'hot' as in her old S.I. days.
I'm so glad I wasn't there.
Regards,
Jim
Dec '10
Re: Thank You, AIPAC
Dave Carter:
If I may use cdor's statement above as a launching point for a question, he wrote: "For several years it has seemed to me that a great many Jews were more enamored with their leftist political views than the survival of our Jewish State, Israel." Do you have a sense for how that dynamic is changing, if at all? Or was this the proper crowd to gauge something like that?
Something to consider: The leftist political views of American Jews are inherited from ancestors like my great-grandparents, who immigrated from a Russian shtetl in the time of the Tsar and believed that the Russian Revolution had to be the start of a new age of freedom for Russian Jews. Their children and grandchildren sought out people with like politics to live with, so many American Jews live in neighborhoods steeped in liberalism.
In the old days - before 1967 - Israel was a source of Leftist pride, promising to be the Socialist state that worked. After 1967, and especially after the Likud's ascendancy, suddenly Israel became a neo-colonial anti-Marxist bogeyman. Many Leftist American Jews find Israel a painful point of contention with their Leftist neighbors.
Re: Thank You, AIPAC
Stuart Creque
Something to consider: The leftist political views of American Jews are inherited from ancestors like my great-grandparents, who immigrated from a Russianshtetlin the time of the Tsar and believed that the Russian Revolution had to be the start of a new age of freedom for Russian Jews. Their children and grandchildren sought out people with like politics to live with, so many American Jews live in neighborhoods steeped in liberalism.
In the old days - before 1967 - Israel was a source of Leftist pride, promising to be the Socialist state that worked. After 1967, and especially after the Likud's ascendancy, suddenly Israel became a neo-colonial anti-Marxist bogeyman. Many Leftist American Jews find Israel a painful point of contention with their Leftist neighbors. · 6 minutes ago
Stuart, thank you for giving me some context here. I appreciate it. At what point does the empirical data and the existential challenge over rule generational leftism, I wonder?
Dec '10
Re: Thank You, AIPAC
Dave Carter
Stuart, thank you for giving me some context here. I appreciate it. At what point does the empirical data and the existential challenge over rule generational leftism, I wonder?
Unfortunately, I've seen that American Jews are as a group capable of fooling ourselves into believing whatever makes us feel safest. We think that if our names don't sound Jewish, we can get along easier in a Gentile country. And we engage in the magical thinking that tells us that if Israel just stopped being so pushy and started making nice with its neighbors, they'd stop making those obviously empty threats to wipe her out.
American Jews as a group are extremely reluctant to acknowledge that there are a huge number of people, many of them their friends and neighbors, who want to see Israel erased from the face of the Earth. Look at J Street, which thinks Israel is the obstruction to a two-state solution. They don't understand that what is on the table today is the one-state solution: that the Palestinian side doesn't want its own country in the pre-1967 borders, but rather in the pre-1947 borders.
Re: Thank You, AIPAC
"American Jews as a group are extremely reluctant to acknowledge that there are a huge number of people, many of them their friends and neighbors, who want to see Israel erased from the face of the Earth." In light of the history of just the 20th Century, that is a jaw-dropping statement.
Feb '11
Re: Thank You, AIPAC
But entirely true. My mother-in-law's parents fled Berlin in the late 1930s for the US, on a locked train via Portugal. Relatives were killed in the Holocaust. And yet, when we discuss Israel, of which they consider themselves supporters, it is as if we are speaking two different languages. I had difficulty convincing my father-in-law that the Jewish populations of many Middle Eastern countries had been sizable at the beginning of the 20th century but had fled their countries due to hatred and fear for their lives. This from a very intelligent, well-educated man, who believes himself to be fairly well read with regard to history. Cognitive dissonance is alive and well in American Jewry.
Dec '11
Re: Thank You, AIPAC
Bibi Netanyahu was greeted like a rock star.
Because he is one, Judith!
Jul '11
Re: Thank You, AIPAC
Troy Senik, Ed.: "[Romney] also said outright that "talking about a peace process right now is a bit like setting up a tent in the middle of a hurricane,"
Wow. Mitt, double the salary of whoever put this line together for you and fire everyone else on the writing staff. · 3 hours ago
Agreed. And whoever lit the fire underneath the normally staid and plastic Romney, please move ahead 3 spaces. You've earned it.