Tuesday’s primaries in North Carolina and Pennsylvania represented a major test for pro-Israel PACs backed by AIPAC and the Democratic Majority for Israel. While DMFI has been directly funneling large sums of money toward favored candidates for years, they got a huge boost this year when AIPAC launched a PAC and a SuperPAC greatly increasing the money spent on attack ads, virtually all against progressive candidates.
The outcome was mixed. Two of the major AIPAC/DMFI targets—Nida Allam and Erica Smith, both in North Carolina—lost their races. The massive disparity in money between them and their opponents, was generally seen as a major, possibly decisive factor.
But two races in Pennsylvania are particularly instructive for advocates of Palestinian freedom and rights. They were both progressive victories, but they carry different implications for the hopes for more voices in Washington supporting the Palestinian people.
Summer Lee seems to have won a razor-thin victory in Pennsylvania’s 12th district. Although Lee has declared victory, the margin is so narrow, a recount may be necessary. But in all probability, Lee has won the race. By contrast, John Fetterman easily won the nod as the Democratic nominee for the open Senate seat. While he is a progressive candidate in many ways, he didn’t face the AIPAC/DMFI blitz.
A progressive, pro-Palestine victory
Lee’s apparent victory was dramatic. She had been leading in the polls until a flurry of vicious attack ads against her started moving the polls. By Election Day, it seemed she had an uphill fight, a perception strengthened by the early returns, which had her leading opponent, Steve Irwin, ahead by as much as twenty points. But as the count continued, Lee steadily closed the gap.
Her leading opponent, Steve Irwin had outraised Lee by about half a million dollars, and then AIPAC and DMFI poured in $3 million in direct support and attack ads. Lee’s opportunity to become the first Black woman to ever represent Pennsylvania in Congress was imperiled. (It’s worth noting that AIPAC’s and DMFI’s North Carolina targets were also women of color).
But in the end, her grassroots campaigning and strong organizing were able to overcome the big money and convey Lee’s message. The peril is that it gets harder to win that way as races grow from one congressional district to a whole state, and, conceivably, to the entire country. But there is no getting around the reality that organizing for progressive causes, and especially for the rights of Palestinians, will always need to be a grassroots, labor-intensive affair.
The attacks on Lee, unsurprisingly, didn’t reference Israel or Palestine. As is the case in most 2022 races, foreign policy is not on top of the agenda. Instead, AIPAC’s SuperPAC, the United Democracy Project, attacked Lee for criticizing Joe Biden during the 2020 campaign (not a coincidence that Bernie Sanders endorsed her in this race), and for supporting Medicare for All. The sharpest attack was accusing her of “not being a Democrat,” a charge that many observers felt was out of bounds. But Irwin, doubtless concerned about upsetting such high stakes allies as AIPAC, refused to condemn the ad.
Lee is not an anti-Zionist, but she got into trouble because she saw the plight of the Palestinians through the eyes of a Black woman in a white supremacist society. But her on the record support for Israel and her insistence that she would vote for additional armaments if Israel has to deplete its stock somewhat due to an attack on Gaza was enough for liberal groups like J Street to endorse her. For AIPAC and DMFI, that’s not nearly enough fealty to Israel.
Fetterman: Progressive except for Palestine
Lee’s victory again demonstrates that, while money is a huge factor in political campaigns, it is not a guarantee of electoral triumph. John Fetterman’s win teaches different lessons.
Fetterman, a left-wing populist who eschews the progressive label but, with a few exceptions, advocates progressive policies, is even less inclined than most 2022 candidates to delve into foreign policy. The “Issues” page on his web site doesn’t mention foreign policy. The veterans organization, Common Defense endorsed him and here’s what he said to them:
“It is truly an honor to stand beside (Common Defense) in the fight to end Forever Wars, protect human rights abroad and at home, and enact economic justice. I will always fight for compassionate, diplomacy-first foreign policy and for our veterans here at home.”
With such a milquetoast statement, Fetterman reinforced that foreign policy isn’t his focus. But that was not going to satisfy AIPAC and DMFI, so, last month, he gave an interview to the conservative news site, Jewish Insider, and clarified his views on Israel.
“The relationship is a special one that needs to be safeguarded, protected, supported and nurtured through legislation and all available diplomatic efforts in the region,” he told JI. He claimed support for a two-state solution, the Abraham Accords, and unconditional military aid to Israel. He voiced opposition to BDS and support for a Pennsylvania law that bars the state from doing business with companies who participate in any boycotts of Israel.
JI said Fetterman “confirmed that he has also sought counsel from a variety of advocacy groups, including J Street, AIPAC and Democratic Majority for Israel, to ensure he is ‘properly educated’ on such matters.” So, Fetterman made it abundantly clear that not only was his education limited to Jewish sources, he would not even talk to non-Zionist or anti-Zionist Jewish groups such as IfNotNow or Jewish Voice for Peace. Consistent with such limited perspectives, at no time did Fetterman mention or even refer to Palestinians.
Fetterman has never taken a stance on Palestine and Israel, so it’s hard to see this as anything other than a cynical, political decision. But it’s also hard to argue with the cynical logic. Fetterman likely would have won the primary even if AIPAC and DMFI attacked him, but the November election is far less certain in a state that is very much in play for both parties. His fawning statements won him DMFI’s endorsement after he won the primary. All he’ll need to do to keep it is to maintain his focus on domestic issues.
The danger for the Palestinian cause here is especially profound. Fetterman would, by any measure, be one of a handful of the most progressive senators, comfortable fitting in a short list with the likes of Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren. While both of those senators have certainly fallen short at times on Palestine, having someone that progressive on other issues sound as hawkish as Fetterman does on the question of Palestine could be harmful.
That danger has already manifested. DMFI, recognizing that Palestine advocates have been presenting them, accurately, as a reactionary, right-wing group was quick to label Fetterman “a proud pro-Israel progressive.” DMFI will point to their endorsement of Fetterman as “proof” that they are well disposed to the progressive wing of the Democratic party.
But there is also potential. It’s clear that Fetterman doesn’t have a deep or nuanced understanding of Palestine. As support for Palestine deepens in the country, and among African Americans in particular, Fetterman will have to take note. His continued success will depend on a broad and diverse coalition of working- and middle-class Americans.
Once AIPAC abandoned their sham about not getting involved in electoral politics, they quickly supplanted J Street’s PAC as the largest pro-Israel PAC. A Super PAC magnifies their impact. But Fetterman is facing that from many quarters. Virtually every corporate PAC has a lot to lose with his broad, working-class appeal, and they were putting their money up against him in this primary.
But domestic issues are Fetterman’s bread and butter. If he didn’t fight the big money on those, he wouldn’t have a case. It will be important for Fetterman to win in November, even for Palestinians, because his Republican opponent will be much worse, virtually by definition. But if he can be convinced that the broad appeal he needs requires him to stand for Palestinian rights just as he would for anyone else’s, he’ll be able and willing to take on AIPAC as well.
Thanks for this, had planned to vote Fetterman, but not anymore.
The Israeli figured out very early that having discipline behind one authority, a “one gun” policy, was an ingredient for political success. Without it, creating safe political ground for politicians to step onto is much more difficult.
Seems there’s no end to Zionist lapdogs among American politicians. Money buys anything and everything.