Come to israels aid if survival at risk, but use american leverage to get a twostate solution, and we suggest a powerful proisrael lobby would be a good thing if its supporting smarter policies that were in americas and israels interest. We were not saying anything other countrier had not said before. People like george ball, michael, and what we wrote was also exon knowledge inside the beltway. Bill clinton said apack was, quote, better than anyone else lobbying in this town. Politicians as diverse as lee hamilton, chris clollings, barry goldwater, and Newt Gingrich had written or spoken about the power in the past. Even passionate defenders of israel like Jeffrey Goldberg had written proudly about clout. We provoked an extreme reaction, partly because we provided more depails about the lobbys influence, and partly because we were both rather middle of the road boring figures from wellknown universities, partly because we were not left wing, we were not muslim, not arab, not married to palestinians, and partly because it was obvious in the wake of 9 11 and the iraq war that something had gone badly awry in u. S. Middle east policy. Now issue turning to what we didnt say. The rather hysterical reaction to the work confirmed our point. It was difficult to have a calm reasoned fact based discussion on the topic because most of our critics could not fine fault with our logic or fault with our elfed. They accused us of saying things we have not said, and in most cases, things that were the exact opposite of what we had written. Im not going to bore you with false accusations, but just for the record, heres what we did not say. We did not say that the israel lobby was a conspiracy part of a deep plot to control the world, and, informs, we said over and over it was nothing of the sort, but an Interest Group like so many others here. We did not question the legit legitimacy or right to exist, but defended it. We didnt blame israel for all the problems that troubled the middle east, and with didnt say that a northerly relationship with israel and a twostate solution would immediately solve all of them. We said it would help, but it was not a magic bullet or anything like that. We did not say the lobby controlled every aspect of u. S. Middle east policy or argued that it was the only reason the United States invaded iraq or has a bad relationship with iran. We did not accuse members of the lobby of disloyalty or either argued or hinted that some students should be done to limit the lobbys political power or marginalize supporters. Finally, we did not connect israel or the lobby to the 9 11 attacks themselves. We didnt say these things because we didnt think they were true; right . Thats important. We were accused of saying all of the things, of course, and people in the lobby made repeated and sometimes successful efforts to silence us, virtually every plaices we were invited to speak said they were pressuredded to cancel appearances, and a number of places, the chicago counsel on global affairs, google headqawrpts, the City University of new york, succumbed to the pressure, and campaign to silence us fail, book sold well, translated to over 20 languages, and john and i remained active participants in the debate on this and other Foreign Policy issues. The real question is what impact did this have . That whainged . What hasnt . I think the most dray maltic and obvious change since 2006 has been an opening up of discourse on the general topic. Discussions of middle east policy and u. S. Israeli relations are open, wider range of views expressed. Some evidence behind the claim. Tom friedman, roger cohen, and Andrew Sullivan write openly, and at times, critically about israeli policy, about american support for that policy, and the lobbys role in promoting it. Theres pieces that sound like us, although i doubt hed admit it. Articles about americas middle east policy in general mention apacks influence, its just no longer a big secret or stuck in the background of the peace. John stuart, you watch comedy central, hes done a number of segments that is making fun of apack as well. Looks like peter bineharts crisis of zionism, transforming the israel lobby, the recent genesis followed in our footsteps documented the role of the lobby in u. S. Policy. Other people like mj rosenberg emerged as articulate critics, and Max Bloomenthal published,s of israel eu9s. Websites now provide alternative per perspectives, and groups like jewish for peace and peace now and many others have become more visible and effective in presenting a view to the traditional lobby organization. Now, note, these groups are not homogeneous, they do in the all agree on every single issue. My point is simply theres a much wider range of views out there now, and they are getting notice. This development is, of course, not entirely our doing because a number of events in the real worlds have made the lobbys power hard to miss. The complete failure of Barack Obamas push for the two half state solution in the first term, crazen american response to operation led including the american trashing of the goldstone report. The spectacle of the 2012 election when the g. O. P. Candidates looked like fools trying to out pander each other in the g. O. P. Primary season and where adelson spent a hundred Million Dollars trying to buy the election, first for Newt Gingrich and then mitt romney. Because discourse was open and people were not aware of the lobby, people noticed them and put two an two together. The accusation of semitism is losing power to intimidate, and let me be clear about this, like all forms of bigotry, antisemitism is a dispickble practice, and everyone of us should condemn it when it appears. At the same time, using false charges of antisemitism to stifle debate and destroy reputations is a tactic that has no place in the democracy and people who use it in that way should be called into account. I think [applause] fortunately, this tactic has been so overused and used against so many people who are obviously not antisemitism, its no longer able to stifle discussion, and thats going to make it easier to have an honest conversation going forwards. The third change is that some of the policies, the lobby promoted, are increasingly hard to defend. Instead of a weak israeli surrounded by hostile arab goliath, theres a powerful israel maintaining a brutal occupation for more than four decades using its military power to dominate the palestinian population denied Political Rights. Apac and other groups lost several important fights in recent years. They could not convince the Bush Administration to use force against iran or support on Israeli Attack on iran. They could not derail the nomination of chuck hagel to be secretary of defense, yet groups tried to do so in ugly ways. Earlier this year, they could not convince obama to bomb syria, and more recently, apac could not get the senate to pass a resolution threatening greater economic sanctions on iran because it was widely recognized this would immediately derail possibility of a diplomatic deal. These episodes remind us that the lobby does not control u. S. Middle east policy, does not get every single thing it wants, especially when what it wants might push the United States closer to war. Thats a lot for any lobby to ask for, and it takes very special circumstances to hold Something Like that off. The events, i think, tell us that apac and company are not invincible. Now, those setbacks have let a number of observers to conclude apac in deep trouble, lobby influence broken, and let me say why its premature because theres a number of things that have not changed. First of all, special relationship is still in tact. We still give generous assistance even though israels a wealthy country and has clear military superiority over the neighbors, and we give aid unconditionally, theres no hint we might reduce our existence to get israel to stop building settlements to a viable state. Second, thats, of course, why the Peace Process continues to go nowhere. Remember, obama came into office promising a twostate solution in his first term and called for a settlement freeze in his famous cairo speech in june 2009. Hes been in steadfast retreat ever since, and he basically gave up on this in the first term handing the problem over to john kerry. But theres little evidence that kerrys efforts succeed,s settlements expanding all the while. It was noticed, by the way, a twostate solution may well be impossible at this point, but politicians in the District Of Columbia tonight to pretend it is the only american goal. Im a twostate person nyce, but im also a realist, and at some appointment, when one acknowledges the possibility were not going to gets a solution. Third, the lobby still gets enormous deference from american politicians. A few weeks ago, the left wing progressive mayor of new york city, bill deblasio was recorded telling an apac group that defending israel was part of the Job Description as mayor of new york city. If you were paying attention, earlier this week, a number of prominent american politicians, incoming secretary of state kerry, they gave usual flower speeches at the apac policy conference, and even today, theres no other groups to get to this kind of deference and attention here in washington. Discourse is more open now, it is still, i think, extremely risky for young, ambitious, Foreign Policy wanttobees to question key elements of middle east policy and especially the special relationships. You can did you have tenure at university. If you dont have your heart set on working in the u. S. Government, or if you are retired, but its hazard hard to find people inside the Foreign Policy establishment willing to say what you say on the issue out loud, and look at how chuck infamous power contorts themselves during the con confirmation hearing, and you see lobbies continued influence. Were a long way from a deal with iran or a twostate solution, and the lobby is working 24 7 to make sure that the United States doesnt do anything israel doesnt want. In short, reports smiezed reports were exaggerated, and given the fact and what to do about it. Lets give you four basic lessons here. Theres all the features that make an Interest Group powerful, and it yewses all the tools availability in a democracy, direct lobbying, financial contributions, grassroots organizing, pressure oned media, ect. There is nothing magical, nothing conspirator yal about this. They are all too influn enissue because they have not faced strong and well organized oppositions, and if they face greater head winds today, say on iran, its because others are starting to play that political game more effectively. Lesson two, its going to get worse before it gets better. The lobbys main goal is protecting the special relationship, and thats going to be harder to do as israel moves right where and as it becomes obvious is this is not a twostate solution. The control over the west bank is recognized more and more as a par tide, and pressure to give the palestinians Political Rights is going to grow, and one person, one vote is easy for americans to understand, and if you saw the poll, they favor a two state solution no longer favorable, and they favor onestate democracy. Getting the United States to back up states privileges one ethnic or religious group over others is a hard sell over time, and to try to make that sell, groups like apac have to do more to try to influence discourse, discredit critics, but the more strient, the more turned off over time. Lesson three, be realistic and build a big tempt. Reversing policies that have been in place for decades does not happen overnight, and you dont do it by writing a single article or book. What one needs is a big tent for people who want a normal relationship with israel and a middle east policy that conforms to a broad conception of the American National interests. That does not mine that every in the room has to agree on everything. Israel lobby is a loose Coalition United by a couple shared goals, and we should take a page from their play book while making sure our ranks are not filled with those who sow hatred or discredited conspiracy theories. If we write the book today, how might it be different . Well, it would have to be a lot longer. [laughter] a lot of information came to light since 2007 and argue the entire Obama Administration is case study of the lobbys continued influence, so, you know, we have to do volume ii, just as long as the First Edition was. To be honest, john or i would not change our central arguments at all because events since 20062007 have vindicated almost all of what we wrote. To repeat, we wrote the book to encourage an open discussion of the issues because we thought a more open debate brings a lot of additional truth to light and would be better for everybody in the ends. I think so thats precisely what has happened we do not take credit for it. I want to close thanks those of you who worked for many years long before we got into this to counter the lobbys argument and hasten the day when the relationship is guided primarily by interests and moral principles and not by domestic politics. When that day arrives, its better for us, but also better for israel and also neighbors as well. Thank you very much. [applause] wars, terrorism, oil, and with regards to the u. S. Israeli relationship, i charted the process using british and u. S. Archives becoming engaged and alive with israel from the declaration until the obama presidency. The book was published in 2010. Well, in the beginning, there was woodrow wilson. He had the declaration under political pressure from Supreme Court justice who was the american born son of chuck jews and president of the American Committee for zionist affairs. Wilson initially opposed the declaration because it contravenedded his own 14 points, particularly his emphasis on national selfdetermination, and, of course, roving around the middle east in the Crane Commission surveying 260 communities in palestine, none of whichmented jewish settlers or european powers defining their affairs, but be an american mandate because the u. S. Would never let anybody else run our affairs, but just let the majority rule. They showed wilson he gained politically supporting a jewish state. Between 1900 and 1914, a hundred thousand European Jewish immigrants came into the u. S. Every year, settled in compacts and in crucial cities like new york, chicago, cleveland, st. Louis, and senatety, and anyone who wanted to dominate the Electoral College needed these places. As the Second World War wound down, fdr struggle with the question of palestine. Theres the jewish settlers, refugees, and increasing the Jewish Population from a small amount to 30 of the total by 1945. Now, fdr did not worry about palestine that much because he had bigger things to worry about at the time, but he worry the about palestine because the king of saudi arabia worried and planned to make the oil reserve after the war, and he met with the king on the u. S. And the s org ez canal, attorney, one of the things that fdr said afterwards, i cant understand why he keeps going back to the subject of pal palestine. At the same time, reminded by a new york paper in 1945, and they would be in the review, and entitled to votes while only 266 elected for president. Whether its one party or the other will make a difference in 94 votes. Now, the same dynamic provailed in the other key battleground states of the time which were new york, ohio, new jersey, and massachusetts. They may swing to one party or another by a few thousand votes, and they are concentrated in doubtful states, end quote. They got the message loud and clear. Secretary of state, burns and marshall, and secretary of state, monitored and chabled by jacobson and max who they called the back room boys in the white house, and George Marshall trying to build a big cold War Coalition around the world saying this would weaken the coalition, rude, as he put it, the political purposes of the back room, and for their part, niles scorned the stripe participant boys in the state department and the Defense Department and showed them the mess. There are 5 million jews in america, 20fold increase since the 1880s and organized in pressure groups like the pressure groups of american zionist and Jewish Committee and vote. The back room boys demanded a House Cleaning and an appointment of somebody trustworthy on palestine matters. People at state are really pitching things up. He agreed saying critics, im sorry, gentlemen, but i have to answer to the hundreds of thousands anxious for zionism, and i dont have hundreds of thousands arabs amongst my con stitch wents, take k the portfolio away, and gave it to clark clifford, and niles, and it would be managed for domestic, political Dividend Strategy be damned. Lloyd henderson dismissed two arabists by the zionist lobby and sent off to be the am ambassador to india. Marshall told the president he was weakening the u. S. Globally by the support for zionist and marshall and he understanderson were for arab states in palestine. Truman in the back room boys wanted partition with the best areas, 55 of the total plan that to the jews. Which would, of course, explain arabs in any cold Car Coalition against the soviets. U. S. Policy marshall scolded the president , has to be based on u. S. National inter