Much has been said and written about the power and influence of AIPAC in the Congress .
There is no doubt that AIPAC is a powerful organization.
But to say that when it comes to US policy in the Middle East, they can set the course and tune is highly dubious.
Case in point: recent discussions in the US regarding an attack against Syria.
AIPAC was for it, but as we saw, there were great doubts as to whether the Congress would allow such an attack. So what happened? If all those who claim that AIPAC is large and in charge on the Hill, why were so many people against an attack against Syria in the Congress?
I also don’t buy the Walt and Meashimer theory that AIPAC was instrumental in the Iraq invasion. First and foremost, many of the Neo Conservatives they list were not members of the organization at that time. Furthermore, as former Israeli Brigadier General Shlomo Brom has stated, when the Israeli government was talking to the Americans (he was part of the delegation), the Israelis were saying that focus should be placed on Iran, while the Bush administration was adamant that Iraq should be attacked. Something which Shlom Brom has likened to a “conversation of the deaf”.
AIPAC is powerful? yes it is. But does it control and set US Middle East policy in the Congress? not from where I am standing.