The American Jewish leadership's downward spiral has accelerated. This can be traced back to its cowardly silence when then-President Barack Obama began treating Israel as a rogue state and applied moral equivalence to Israeli defenders and Palestinian terrorists.
The leaders of the Reform and Conservative movements and the Anti-Defamation League have become adjuncts of the Democratic Party's liberal wing. Many have an obsessive hatred of U.S. President Donald Trump that supersedes their support for Israel.
Despite the turmoil, until now, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee had remained a jewel in an otherwise crumbling Jewish establishment.
One of AIPAC's greatest challenges is to maintain bipartisan support for Israel. Unfortunately, its proposed solution could prove disastrous.
AIPAC has determined that, come what may, it must seduce liberals into its ranks. To do so, it has embarked on a policy of appeasement to progressives. It seeks to entice liberals by giving equal status to Jews committed to Israel and estranged liberals and the disengaged, many of whom consider Israel's security a low priority.
Such an approach will find AIPAC supporting policies that run counter to the positions of Israel's democratically elected government and opposition parties Labor and Yesh Atid.
This new approach was proclaimed at the recent AIPAC conference by Executive Director Howard Kohr, who unambiguously committed AIPAC to a two-state solution.
This was endorsed by AIPAC President Mort Fridman, who added: "The progressive narrative for Israel is just as compelling and critical as the conservative one."
American Jews, like Israelis, are entitled to have varying views on the two-state solution. But in the face of the intensified Palestinian Authority campaign of terror and incitement, most Israelis, like myself, who once supported a two-state solution, now realize that it is impossible.
The Palestinians have one goal – Israel's destruction. A nascent terrorist state in Judea and Samaria would be opposed by a clear majority of Israelis across the political spectrum. For diplomatic reasons, the government has not explicitly stated this but it has assiduously avoided endorsing a two-state solution. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu states that he supports a "state minus," i.e., a framework separating Israelis from Palestinians, with Israel retaining security but providing the Palestinians a form of autonomy.
Israel seeks negotiations without preconditions. The Palestinians will not contemplate this unless the Americans are marginalized and anti-Israeli elements become arbitrators – which Israel would never accept.
Even the Trump administration has repeatedly announced that it would support any decision both parties endorsed and did not call for a two-state solution.
Thus, it is with incredible chutzpah that an organization purporting to act with Israel's and America's best interests in mind has formally adopted a two-state policy.
AIPAC is, in effect, pressuring Israel to move beyond what Trump himself has demanded, and is encouraging the administration and Congress to pressure Israel in this direction.
This outrageous behavior will not induce liberals to support AIPAC but may encourage our American supporters to view Israel as intransigent and press it to make further concessions.
If the price of bipartisanship is adopting lowest-common-denominator policies on Israel, AIPAC will be betraying its original mandate to support Israel's democratically elected government and will alienate the bulk of its supporters, who loyally back Israel.
The conference's 18,000 participants gave repeated, enthusiastic standing ovations when Netanyahu addressed them. If put to a vote, the overwhelming majority would resolutely reject any policy that contradicted the objectives of the Israeli government or the preferences of most Israelis.
To avoid further upheavals, AIPAC leaders should not take a position for or against a two-state solution. Individual members can make up their own minds.
The only way to strengthen Israel's support among Democrats and liberals is to painstakingly explain the case for Israel, which is not difficult – if they are willing to listen.
AIPAC should follow the lead of Democratic Sen. Chuck Schumer, who, while expressing his own support for a two-state solution, concentrated on the fact that the Palestinians were responsible for the deadlock, condemned false moral equivalence and insisted that Jewish settlement building was not an obstacle to peace. He clearly stated that the problem lay in the Palestinian refusal to accept the existence of a Jewish state.
AIPAC should face the reality that Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas and his Fatah gang are an evil group of terrorists promoting a culture of death. The PA has just announced an increase in its payments to terrorists and their families. AIPAC would do well to lobby for halting payments to the PA while it pursues such monstrous policies.
If AIPAC leaders continue promoting a Palestinian state, members should protest and condemn their action. If the organization stands to lose its hardcore supporters to appease liberals – very few of whom are likely to change their attitudes – it will be obliged to review its policy or face the likelihood of vast numbers of people resigning from its ranks. This could bring about AIPAC's collapse – the tragic undoing of one of American Jewry's finest institutions.
