Moderate Alternative to AIPAC Turns One; What Impact Has J-Street Had?

It seems safe to say that the first year of existence for J Street, the self-described "pro-Israel, pro-peace" lobbying organisation, was more eventful than anticipated.

The group, which was founded one year ago today, quickly became a lightning rod for criticism from hardliners affiliated with right-wing groups like the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) - particularly after it took the lead in questioning the wisdom of Israel’s recent military offensive in Gaza.

But as a growing number of normally hawkish commentators have come forward to argue that the Gaza war was a mistake both morally and pragmatically, and as the Barack Obama administration appears set to clash with Israel’s far-right new Netanyahu-Lieberman government, many feel that J Street’s more critical stance toward Israeli policies has been vindicated by events.

As the organisation heads into its second year, supporters are optimistic that J Street can break the stranglehold on U.S. Israel-Palestine policy traditionally exerted by AIPAC and other right-wing groups.

"I’ve been floored by the response we’ve gotten," says Isaac Luria, J Street’s campaigns director. "It feels like J Street needed to be here and that there’s a real constituency for what we’re up to".

Headed by Jeremy Ben-Ami, a former advisor to President Bill Clinton, the group was founded last April to promote a two-state solution, diplomatic engagement between Israel and its neighbours, and "honest discussion" of U.S. and Israeli policies.

Through its associated political action committee (PAC), J Street has taken an active role in supporting congressional candidates, giving out more money in the 2007-8 election cycle than any other pro-Israel PAC, and on Wednesday it announced a new university outreach programme to build support on campuses.

Predictably, the group quickly came under fire from neoconservatives at publications like the New Republic and Commentary, which have traditionally been aligned with AIPAC and with Israel’s Likud party.

But it was the group’s public statements about the Gaza war that attracted the most controversy. While staffers for many U.S. Jewish organisations privately expressed doubts about the morality and wisdom of the campaign, J Street was virtually alone in voicing these doubts publicly.

One statement soon after the offensive began, which argued that "neither Israelis nor Palestinians have a monopoly on right or wrong" and that "there is nothing ‘right’ in punishing a million and a half already-suffering Gazans for the actions of the extremists among them", attracted particularly intense criticism.

Rabbi Eric Yoffie, head of the Union for Reform Judaism with a reputation as a "moderate" voice, quickly published an op-ed in the Forward slamming J Street for being "morally deficient, profoundly out of touch with Jewish sentiment, and also appallingly naïve".

Neoconservatives and other hardliners quickly seized on Yoffie’s criticisms to argue that J Street was beyond the pale of acceptable "dovish" Jewish opinion, and even supporters privately expressed frustration that the group’s position was imprudent, even if correct.

But if the Gaza war seemed in January to have marginalised J Street, events of the past three months have made the group’s position appear increasingly farsighted. A growing consensus in both Israel and the U.S. holds that the Gaza offensive failed to achieve any worthwhile military objective, and reports of war crimes published in the Israeli newspaper Ha’aretz have spurred a furious debate over the morality of the campaign.