September/October 1993, Page 12
The Israel Lobby
Changing the Guard at AIPAC to Please the Rabin
Government
By Richard H. Curtiss
"Just as the organization seemed to take a pro-Republican
tilt at home during the 80s, it also seemed to stray from its traditional
non-involvement in Israeli internal politics toward the pro-Likud
tilt that upset Rabin and his labor-led government. "
Former AIPAC legislative director Douglas Bloomfield,
Washington Jewish Week, July 8, 1993 "Some depicted
the contretemps as part of a gap developing between the relatively
dovish Labor Party-led government in Israel and a more hawkish American
Jewish leadership."
Staff writer Larry Cohler, Washington Jewish Week, July
22, 1992 "AIPAC President Steven Grossman says that his
organization is 'as strong and self-confident as it has ever been.
'It's that self-confidence that gives us pause. "
Queens (N.Y.) Jewish Week editorial, July 9-15, 1993
The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), Israel's powerful
U.S. Lobby, is searching for a new executive director. To meet requirements
expressed by various board members, the successful applicant should
be a Democrat who has never said anything critical of Israel's Labor
party, be able to get along with Republicans on his board who lean
toward Israeli hawks, have Capitol Hill experience, and be a Jew
married to the daughter of a Jewish mother. Since the former incumbent
was said to have a half million-dollar salarymore than that
of the president of the United Statesfilling the job should
be easy. It's keeping the job that's difficult.
In less than a year, AIPAC's president and vice president have
been forced to resign, as have its principal editor and executive
director, Thomas Dine. Last fall, AIPAC President David Steiner
was taped bragging about the organization's clout with Bill Clinton.
This summer's victims were 53-year-old Dine, whose reputed salary
of $500,000 per year made him one of the highest paid as well as
most feared lobbyists in Washington, and AIPAC Vice President Harvey
Friedman, one of 26 members of the AIPAC board of directors and
a critic of any land-for-peace settlement with Israel's Arab neighbors.
AIPAC's troubles began during Labor Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin's
first visit to the United States after his June 1992 election victory.
Many attributed Rabin's victory to Israeli voter fears that the
intransigence of Israel's Likud Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir would
provoke then U.S. President George Bush into cutting U.S. aid to
Israel. In Washington, Rabin warned AIPAC to confine its lobbying
to the U.S. Congress, and leave relations with the White House to
him. Rabin made it clear that he believed AIPAC's unwavering support
for Shamir had encouraged the Likud intransigence that angered Bush.
Meanwhile, in an article in the July 1992 Washington Report,
defecting AIPAC staffer Gregory Slabodkin revealed the workings
of AIPAC's secret "opposition research" section, which
was releasing derogatory (and generally false or misleading) information
about American "enemies of Israel" to their rivals in
the media and academia. Such revelations and Rabin's condemnation
led to the demotion of Mitchell Bard, hard-line editor of Near
East Report, the AIPAC newsletter.
Then, last fall, Harry Katz, a Jewish resident of Long Island,
NY, apparently alarmed by AIPAC smear tactics and misuse of power
revealed by Slabodkin, secretly taped AIPAC President David Steiner
boasting about the number of former AIPAC employees who held high
positions in the Clinton presidential campaign and who would receive
influential positions in the Clinton administration. Steiner boasted
that AIPAC was "negotiating" over who would be Clinton's
secretary of state.
Although no newspaper would publish the transcript of the tape
before the Nov. 3 presidential election, the Washington Times
published it immediately afterward and Steiner resigned. He
was replaced as president of AIPAC's board by Steve Grossman, who
was not tarred by the Likud brush. Although some board members were
said to be eager to get rid of Dine as well, he held his ground
by citing his friends in high places (he had been a staff aide to
Sen. Ted Kennedy) and his undeniable accomplishments since assuming
AIPAC's top staff position in 1980.
Dine's AIPAC Achievements
In Dine's 13 years as executive director, AIPAC grew from 24 employees
and a budget of $1.4 million to a staff of 158 and a budget of $15
million. Membership climbed from 8,000 to a claimed 55,000 (although
the Washington Jewish Week reports that declarations to the
post of fice by AIPAC's weekly Near East Report indicate
actual paid membership of no more than 40,000 to 45,000). Most important,
Dine pointed out, are the huge increases in U.S. financial assistance
to Israel brokered by AIPAC.
In 1980, Israel received most of its U.S. military and economic
aid in the form of loans, which would have to be paid back. Today
Israel's $4.3 billion in military and economic assistance is all
in grants, and it is receiving an additional $2 billion in U.S.
loan guarantees annually.
Both Dine's and Friedman's forced resignations stemmed from remarks
that, if uttered by non-Jews or Jewish "enemies of Israel,"
would have been attacked by AIPAC as grossly anti-Semitic. Four
years ago Dine said in an interview with David Landau, author of
Piety and PowerThe World of Jewish Fundamentalism: "I
don't think mainstream Jews feel very comfortable with the ultra-Orthodox.
It's a class thing, I suppose. Their image issmelly. That's
what I'd say now that you've got me thinking about it. Hasids and
New York diamond dealers."
Dine went on to tell Landau that big donors to the United Jewish
Appeal did not like to fly on El Al, Israel's national airline,
because of "those people." When the book was brought out
in the U.S. this year by publishers HiR and Wang, a reporter for
the Baltimore Jewish Times called the comments to the attention
of AIPAC spokeswoman Toby Dershowitz, who in turn informed AIPAC
President Grossman.
In a telephoned 2-1/2 hour conference call with all AIPAC directors,
Dine was given 10 minutes to state his case. He pointed out that
the remarks did not reflect his own thinking but, as he had told
Laudau, the stereotype of Orthodox Jews held by "a lot of people
I mix with." The directors then spent the rest of the time
deciding whether and how to ask Dine to resign. |