For decades, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) has been regarded as one of the most influential lobbying organizations in Washington. Its ability to shape U.S. foreign policy toward Israel, mobilize campaign funding, and exert pressure across party lines made it a political force few lawmakers were willing to challenge.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!But according to Josh Paul, a former senior official at the U.S. State Department and co-founder of the political organization A New Policy, that era of unquestioned dominance may be coming to an end.
In recent interviews and public commentary, Paul has argued that AIPAC is “on a losing track,” pointing to growing disconnects between the lobby’s positions and the rapidly changing political, generational, and moral landscape of American politics.
A Shifting Political Environment
Josh Paul is not a fringe critic. He resigned from the State Department in 2023 in protest of U.S. arms policy amid the Gaza war, a move that drew national attention and underscored internal dissent within Washington’s foreign policy establishment.
From his perspective, AIPAC’s traditional strategy—relying on bipartisan loyalty, aggressive campaign spending, and unwavering support for Israeli government policies—is becoming less effective.
“Younger voters, progressive Democrats, and even some moderates are no longer accepting a blank-check approach to foreign policy,” Paul has suggested. “That shift fundamentally weakens AIPAC’s leverage.”
Polling data supports this assessment. Surveys over the past several years show declining unconditional support for Israeli government actions among younger Americans, particularly Democrats and independents. The rise of social media has also changed how information circulates, making it harder for any single organization to control the narrative.
The Cost of Hardline Politics
AIPAC’s decision to more openly intervene in Democratic primaries—often funding candidates aligned with hardline pro-Israel policies—has sparked backlash within the party itself. Critics argue that the organization is no longer simply advocating for U.S.–Israel relations, but actively undermining lawmakers who support human rights accountability or a ceasefire in Gaza.
Paul argues that this approach may deliver short-term wins but causes long-term damage.
“When a lobbying group positions itself against the values of a growing share of voters, it risks isolating itself,” he explains. “Influence in Washington ultimately depends on legitimacy, not just money.”
This shift is particularly visible among progressive lawmakers, many of whom now openly challenge AIPAC—something that would have been politically unthinkable just a decade ago.
A New Generation of Advocacy
Paul’s organization, A New Policy, represents what he sees as an alternative future for U.S. foreign policy advocacy: one grounded in diplomacy, international law, and accountability rather than ideological loyalty.
The growing visibility of such groups suggests that AIPAC no longer operates in an uncontested space. Instead, it faces competition from movements that frame U.S.–Middle East policy through the lens of human rights and global stability.
While AIPAC still wields significant power, Paul believes its influence is increasingly defensive rather than commanding.
“They’re spending more energy trying to preserve old ground than shaping new consensus,” he notes.
What This Means for U.S. Policy
The implications extend far beyond one lobbying organization. If AIPAC’s influence continues to erode, U.S. policymakers may feel freer to question military aid, arms transfers, and diplomatic positions that have long been treated as untouchable.
That does not mean a collapse of U.S.–Israel relations, Paul emphasizes—but it could signal a recalibration.
“Support for Israel does not have to mean support for every policy of any given government,” he says. “That distinction is finally entering the mainstream.”
An Inflection Point
Whether AIPAC is truly “on a losing track” remains to be seen. The organization still commands vast resources and maintains deep ties across Congress. However, as Josh Paul and others point out, political influence is not static.
In an era defined by generational change, global transparency, and rising demands for accountability, even the most powerful institutions must adapt—or risk being left behind.
Sources & Credit
-
A New Policy – Official Website
https://www.anewpolicy.org -
Josh Paul resignation and policy commentary (coverage by major U.S. outlets)
https://www.nytimes.com
https://www.washingtonpost.com -
Public opinion polling on U.S.–Israel relations
https://www.pewresearch.org
