Ten Ways the Israel Lobby "Moves" America
by Grant F. Smith
Dale Sprusansky: Grant Smith is the director of the Institute for Research: Middle Eastern Policy, one of the organizations that is, again, co-sponsoring this event today. He’s the author of a brand new book, which I think is publically launching today. Is that correct, Grant?
Grant Smith: Yes.
Sprusansky: It’s called Big Israel: How Israel’s Lobby Moves America. It’s his eighth book on the Israel lobby. Grant is every day very hard at work doing FOIA requests with the CIA and the Department of Defense to uncover all sorts of stuff that no one else is. So, with that being said, I will hand it over to Grant.
Smith: Thank you, Dale. I’m going to be drawing some interesting
facts from that book launching today, Big Israel, and really
structuring it into 10 ways that the lobby moves America. Now, I’d
like to start off with some figures from the poll that was conducted
last week in four countries. Statistically significant Google
Consumer research asking a fundamental question vital for
understanding the current situation in the Middle East, and that
question was, which of the following do you believe to be true: A)
Israelis occupy Palestinian land; B) Palestinians occupy Israeli
land. As far as I know, no one has ever asked this question to a
statistically significant audience in four countries.
Our friends across the pond, the Great Brits, 62 percent of them
believe that the Israelis occupy Palestinian land. If you go up to
Canada, a majority of that population, 51 percent, believe that
Israelis occupy Palestinian land. If you go down to Mexico and ask,
¿Cuál de las siguientes crees que sea cierto?, you will find that
some 55 percent of Mexicans also believe—the majority—that Israelis
occupy Palestinian land. There is only one country in North America
that believes the opposite is true, with the majority of us,
Americans, 49 percent, believing that in fact Palestinians are the
ones doing the occupying.
Now why is it we’re so out of sync with these other countries? What
is it that we know or are told that they are not? I’d like to remind
everybody of a statement that Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu made
back in 2001 that was only really circulated in 2011—and that was
that his perception was, as told to West Bank settlers, “America is
something you can move very easily. Move it in the right direction,
they won’t get in our way.” What was he talking about? What moves
America? Why is it, as uncovered by Edward Snowden, that across
federal agencies—perhaps unbeknownst to many Americans—that a policy
doctrine that the survival of the State of Israel is the paramount
goal of Middle East policy?
Well, I would say, many would say, more are saying, it’s because of
the Israel lobby. Note that I’m not saying what was said in
“Valentino’s Ghost,” the Jewish lobby, because that’s not what I’m
talking about. I’m talking about Israel affinity organizations that
are tax-exempt charities that have as a primary objective the
advancement of Israel. Together, 336 of these, which are included in
the Big Israel study—which went through 4,000 tax returns and a
great deal of internal documents obtained by FOIA—336 of them make
up what I’m calling the Israel lobby.
Now there are five false narratives about the Israel lobby that it
promotes. Number one, that Americans who are Jewish are all Israel
affinity organization members who support lobbying from these
groups—false. Number two, Americans who are evangelical Christians
are major forces in building this Israel affinity
infrastructure—false. Number three, Israel affinity organizations
are broad, diverse and with a great deal of member support—false.
Number four, that Israel affinity organizations are representative
bodies—false. And number five, Americans who generally favor Israel
(which is true generally) are also generally favorable toward
massive foreign aid packages—false.
Established news media generally helps amplify these claims and does
generally a great job saying that the major organizations represent
populations unequivocally. You saw reports from the battle over the
Iran nuclear deal. You saw announcements from the Anti-Defamation
League, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, the American
Jewish Committee, the Conference of Presidents of Major American
Jewish Organizations all saying that they were opposed to the deal.
So Americans who were Jewish must have been against the deal as
well, right? Wrong. In fact, American support generally was about 53
percent; whereas, Jewish American support was at 59 percent.
So if we look at the latest Pew Charitable Trusts survey, you find
that 82 percent of the Jewish population in this country does not
belong to such organizations. They’re only somewhat attached to
Israel, 70 percent. Most have never traveled to Israel. Forty-four
percent think settlement building is a bad idea. If you take that
remaining 18 percent and multiply it by the adult Jewish population,
it’s about 774,000, or the population of Charlotte, North Carolina.
The lobby knows and talks about this internally, saying, you know
what, someday we’re going to be challenged on these numbers and all
of these broad claims.
So who does the lobby really represent? Well, the views and concerns
of mega donors, for sure, the views and concerns of a relatively
small group of boards of directors and top officials, and of course
the Israeli government, with which many are in direct and ongoing
consultation. If we look at donor concentration and control of some
of the top organizations, we find that within the Republican Jewish
Coalition, some 143 donors give 76 percent of the funding. At AIPAC,
1,700 donors give 56 percent of the funding, with the top donor
giving 13 percent. Casino mogul Sheldon Adelson donated a million to
ZOA, the Zionist Organization of America. That was 20 percent of
their 2013 funding.
There’s extreme donor concentration at many of these advocacy
organizations within the Israel lobbying ecosystem. And governance,
as reported in some parts of the press, is extremely
unrepresentative. Despite bylaws, despite occasional voice votes,
many Israel affinity organizations are authoritarian. The board
select their own members. They hold pro forma voice votes. And of
course, many of the CEOs have been around for a quarter of a century
or more. If you look at Abraham Foxman at the ADL, he’s been in
place, or was in place, for 28 years. Daniel Pipes at the Middle
East Forum, in place for 26 years; Morton Klein of the Zionist
Organization of America, 23 years. Now, the average tenure of a
corporate CEO is less than ten, a college president less than eight.
I would say that the rotation in governance kind of reflects the
stagnation and lack of representation of many of these
organizations.
Now another false concept is that Christian evangelicals are a major
portion of building the Israel lobby in America. And yes, there are
80 million Christians who are evangelical. They’ve been courted by
the lobby since the 1960s almost constantly. Many of them of course
do vote about their feelings for Israel in American elections. But
when you peel back the layers, you see that organizations like
Christians United for Israel receive their seed funding from large
Israel lobby donors to install their fund-raising software Convio,
as it happens, to pay for massive public relations campaigns at
Burson-Marsteller, as it happens, and that they’re really not very
big. Two million dollars at CUFI in 2007 revenue before it went dark
under some IRS regulations, and then the 2012 revenue at
International Fellowships of Christians and Jews was $113 million.
So there is a false idea that these are major, major forces in the
Israel lobby. What we do know, though, is that Americans generally,
if you ask them, favorability ratings about Israel, they’re
generally favorable. Most are favorable, 59 percent; 41 percent, not
favorable or don’t care. We’ve given over $250 billion of aid to
Israel, far more than any other country, inflation adjusted. And a
large portion of aid is classified. President Obama made a statement
at American University that it’s now unprecedented, but you can’t
get the figure for intelligence aid. If it’s unprecedented, then we
know with military aid it’s either $1.9 billion a year, or $13.2
billion if the president adjusted for inflation. But when you ask
the CIA, which must be handling intelligence aid to Israel, they say
sorry, that’s classified. We’re suing them for that information, by
the way. [Applause]
In a 2014 poll, when you ask Americans something beyond
favorability, when you ask them about the aid and ask this question:
the U.S. gives over $3 billion annually or 9 percent of the foreign
aid budget, more than any other country, this amount is _____, the
statistically significant 2014 survey conducted through Google
Consumer research, 60.7 percent say it’s either much too much or too
much; 25.9 percent say about right; 13.4 percent too little. Well,
this is an old poll. Surely, this is a fluke. Many, many respondents
must have given, I don’t know, there must have been a fluke. Well,
no. In 2016, they conducted again this month, the figure has risen
to almost 62 percent who say it’s too much or much too much. This is
a specific question with information sufficient to make an informed
answer, and the movement is generally against foreign aid. So these
five false narratives that are used to move America can be or should
be challenged.
Now I’d like to move on to five more, about a variety of subjects.
If we look at state and local governments, there’s an absolute
explosion in activities and lobbying on behalf of Israel. A great
deal of this is taking place from the Jewish Community Relations
Councils which are inside large foundations. They’re distributed
across every major population center. They function under the old
American Zionist Council model in which, like AIPAC was back in the
day, it’s just a little committee inside a big organization. That’s
what they do. They lobby as unorganized, unincorporated committees.
Well, that stopped for AIPAC back when the Kennedy administration
told the AZC to register as a foreign agent. Six weeks later AIPAC
broke off and finally incorporated. The Community Relations
Councils, however, lobby the way AIPAC used to lobby, without
disclosing very much, and some top AIPAC lobbyists are
terrified—these slides will be online at the end of the day, by the
way—terrified and quoted saying that he would sure hate to see any
of these reported properly.
So what we have in terms of the prerogative of the presidency to
take away Iran sanctions. It’s hard to unwind all of these
state-level Iran boycotts. When we talk about the president maybe
wanting to be in charge of whether law enforcement is trained in
Israel, nuh-uh. If we talk about changes to state pension funds to
allow the purchase of more Israel bonds, that’s not an executive
prerogative anymore. In fact, California would love, and passed a
resolution saying, that California believes Israel’s border should
be determined by the government of Israel—the State of California
state legislature! This is a type of resolution you see passed in
many state legislatures.
But when you ask Americans, again, in a statistically significant
poll the following question: Congress and state legislators passed
scores of resolutions condemning Palestinians or voicing
unconditional support for Israel every year, do you support this or
not? Almost 70 percent say these resolutions don’t represent my
views. So this is not representative government. One of the JCRCs
which does report—which is a big force in greater Washington—that
for every dollar it raises, it extracts $1.58 in tax dollars for
Israel. It’s very active. It’s building Israel affinity organization
buildings on the taxpayer dime. It’s doing all sorts of trade
developments, and international studies, and scientific endeavors on
the state tax dollar with Israel. So there’s a great deal of
activity going on at the state level.
Another thing that’s very interesting is that Israel affinity
organizations, a few of them, enjoy a high level of criminal
immunity. And this has been going on since the ’40s. The original
organizations involved in conventional weapon smuggling to Jewish
fighters in Palestine, there are only a handful of indictments. The
Zionist Organization of America has received seven foreign agent
registration orders. There have never been any high-level criminal
prosecutions over nuclear smuggling, which Dr. Mattson will be
talking about. There’s no high-level prosecution for espionage.
There have been solid cases against AIPAC in 1985 and 2005, all shut
down by the Justice Department. The ADL holding classified
information in ’90s, shut down by the Justice Department. United
Against Nuclear Iran was conducting a smear campaign against a Greek
shipper. It held classified information. The Greek shipper sued. The
Justice Department waded into the case and shut it down. The Justice
Department is losing a great deal of credibility by never seeming to
be able to uphold the law when it comes to espionage cases.
Finally, number eight, Israel affinity organization activities
inside executive state and federal agencies, we see a wave of
political appointees who are becoming known for lobbying and
advocating on behalf of Israel within federal agencies: Dennis Ross
at the Department of State; Neal Sher at the Justice Department;
Josh Mandel, who bought $80 million of Israel bonds after changing
state pension fund laws and lobbying to buy more for the Ohio State
Treasury; neoconservatives at the Pentagon, which we are hoping Jim
Lobe will cover later today; Stuart Levey and David S. Cohen at
Treasury, conducting economic warfare against Iran, unaccountable to
public inquiries but always seemingly meeting at the Washington
Institute for Near East Policy to give private briefings; the
FBI-ADL liaison, which I go into great depth in my book, which has
been ongoing since the 1950s; and various IRS commissioners whose
scorecard on creating more in transparency for Israel affinity
organizations or ignoring congressional requests to investigate
various groups has been ongoing since the 1960s. And with this level
of what I would call regulatory capture of some key agencies, you of
course have abuse of tax-exempt status.
Now, before many organizations became Israel lobbying organizations,
they were in fact holding clear social welfare purposes—immigrant
aid, life insurance, cultural and educational endeavors, and
charitable hospitals. So this first wave that started in the
mid-1800s tended to reduce government burden, which is the actual
reason that organizations are given tax-exempt status. But as we’ve
moved on, and since 1948, many of the organizations are not really
offsetting any government burden. They’re creating more government
burden, whether it’s lobbying for increased kinetic action against
Israel’s enemies—that’s how they talk—or The Israel Project, which
functions as sort of a PR agency for the Israeli governments and
attempts to leverage that into being able to quash who appears on
certain programs.
So we’ve been moving away as the lobby grows into the largest,
collectively the largest, charitable entity in the United States. In
2012, there was about $3.672 billion, by the end of the decade it
will be at $6.2 billion. The tax burden that this creates directly
means that Americans, just to offset the subsidy, will be paying
about a billion dollars extra in taxes by the end of the year. And
when you look at it on a chart, foreign aid versus the revenue
raised by these 336 organizations, our foreign aid to Israel—the
unclassified, what we know about—looks like a big matching grants
program where as much money as these organizations can raise to
lobby and spend and convince people to move Israel’s way in the
United States is not simply matched by the federal government for
the annual aid program, which will be a big topic, I’m sure, at
AIPAC’s convention next week.
So probably the most costly thing is the constant agitation for
policies and military actions against Israel’s enemies, and we can
see this as well in the United States when we do consumer research
surveys. Right before the final negotiations of the Iran nuclear
program, 58 percent of Americans were so scared. They were already
convinced that Iran had nuclear weapons. That’s how far we’ve been
moved. And so I would argue, in my book I argue, that Americans have
been too easily moved and they were paying the transport bill. That
only through much greater awareness, and particularly focusing on
many of these captured agencies, will we be able to stop this
downward spiral.