It’s the right-wing politics, not religion, that fills evangelical American Christians with zeal for the Israeli security state. Christians United for Israel, in conference this week, aims to lead the Republican fight against Obama. Unlike AIPAC, Nathan Guttman points out, CUFI does not pretend to be bipartisan.

In this essay Mitchell Plitnick surveys the post-war history of US policy towards Israel and concludes the Administration’s unflinching support for Israel is more to do with its assessment of national geo-strategic interests – Israel is a reliable military partner and anti-communist bulwark – than the over-rated power of the Israel lobby.

There has been more reaction in the US to John Kerry’s use of the word ‘apartheid’, and his apology for that use, than there has been to the failure of the peace talks. Josh Rogin says he was ‘damn right’ to have taped the speech. John Cassidy (Kerry was wrong), and Ben White (he was right to defy the thought police), comment.

There’s nothing like war or the threat of war to engage the public in otherwise remote policy issues. The clear public decision in the UK and the USA that most people do not want to launch a war against either Syria or Iran has put a spoke in AIPAC’s normally smoothly rotating wheel. Finally, congresspersons and Obama have recognised that AIPAC is willing to harm American interests in the name of Israel.

Talk of AIPAC’s weakening clout in Washington is based on its failure to block Obama’s diplomatic approach to Iran and the expected ‘framework agreement’ from John Kerry. AIPAC’s demise has been predicted before (its power defies rational analysis) and there are other ‘Israel right or wrong’ lobby groups, notably NORPAC as well as the ADL. But tactically Kerry is in the winning position, not Jewish spoilers, hence their retreat.

The mayor of New York City is a powerful political figure, elected to promote the well-being of the city and its residents. No. The job of the mayor is to promote the interests of a foreign country – Israel. The first words of the US Oath of Allegiance are “I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty”. Is Bill de Blasio guilty of treason? It is a trick of the mind that some Americans cannot see the difference between American and Israeli interests.

Tikkun’s Rabbi Lerner introduces two very different pieces on the current standing of Israel (MJ Rosenberg) and its demand that Palestinians recognise it as ‘the Jewish state’ (Uri Avnery). The new spin on these old arguments is Rosenberg’s argument that old American Jews have given up involvement in Israel’s suicidal behaviour and young Jews have far more important things to care about.

America’s pro-Israel lobbies are notorious for their wealth and influence amongst the elite. Their blunt demand for more money and weapons for Israel has provoked growing, and organised, opposition which the Jewish establishment is trying to crush. Stanley Kutler looks at a new Senate bill for more sanctions against Iran and why this nonsensical proposal gets Jewish establishment backing – despite the views of most American Jews.

If the Gulf states did not control such a high proportion of the world’s oil Israelis would not have been able to present Iran as an ‘existential threat’. But as the Gulf states control such a high proportion of the world’s oil only a maniac would drop bombs on Iran – which could close the Gulf of Hormuz without difficulty. Uri Avnery suggests ways in which Israel could break out of its isolation. Reuven Kaminer says the hawks screech to drown out the counsel of security chiefs.

If AIPAC can be said to have a technique it is to finesse a deal so that serving the Israeli government appears as serving the interests of the American people. This was a sleight of hand it could not pull off when American government and people both saw the Iran deal as a Good Thing while Netanyahu loudly fulminated against it as a very bad thing. What to do? Richard Silverstein examines their tactics.

Last month, 113 American Jews holding office in synagogues signed a public statement calling on the American and Iranians to show repentance for past hostilities and to take steps towards mutual welcome, peace and justice. The public atmosphere into which this statement is delivered is described by M.J.Rosenberg – a bellicosity that is almost entirely being whipped up by AIPAC and their servile Congressmen – and which tramples on American interests. A survey by the American Jewish Committee shows Jewish support for a strike against Iran has fallen to just over half.

AIPAC basks in the image of being the most powerful lobby in the USA. It possibly has more Christian members than Jews who are, in the USA, a largely pro-peace body. It is lobbying against any diplomatic rapprochement with Iran. It has come up against the growing view that, in the Middle East, the US must pursue its own interests – which may not coincide with Israel’s (which may not be to bomb Iran). MJ Rosenberg in Tikkun.

The arguments for a punitive strike against Syria often slide seamlessly into arguments about displaying American power to Iran – or not. The main propellers of this slide are, not surprisingly, AIPAC – whom Obama needs to get Congressional approval – and the Israeli government.

Where is AIPAC when Netanyahu needs it? Not backing him in the peace talks says Roi Bachmutsky. He raises the question of how AIPAC became so powerful in US politics – which involves a trip to the past when JJ Goldberg noted that Jewish power is not constant but is greatest under right-wing presidents – which explains a lot, but not, as he also notes, the weird mismatch between the actual material and political security of US Jews and their self-image as weak and at constant risk.

The motto on the seal of the US senate means “Out of many, one”. It is never so true as in votes for AIPAC’s resolutions; despite significant indifference , ignorance or different opinions among Senators and, even more, voters, the Senators vote as one for the bills AIPAC wants. Jeff Klein explains how this conjuring trick is brought about. This is nothing to do with the size of the Jewish electorate which is tiny, as statistics show.

Britain’s Chief Rabbi addresses the AIPAC policy conference with a mix of ingratiation, odd bits of misinformation, and the cry that, yet again, the Jews are hated all over Europe. For this ‘spiritual leader’, being Jewish means seeing the US and Israel as guiding lights, exaggerating Muslim power and insisting on eternal victimhood.

AIPAC, the American-Israel Political Action Committee, has presented itself as THE voice of Jews (Israel, at all costs) and exerts a curious influence over members of Congress especially – as with the NRA – when it comes to missiles. American Jews have been fighting back, this year with a mass advert campaign at the time of AIPAC’s annual conference. AIPAC R NOT Us (or US) Americans are asked tell their Congress reps. JVP and news reports.

When Pres. Obama nominated Chuck Hagel as his next Defense Secretary, neo-cons led a charge against him waving the flag of ‘antisemitism’. Even right-wing Jews were embarrassed by this abuse of the term. The Senate Armed Services Committee hearing for Hagel’s appointment is set for January 31, but as AIPAC’s support is confined to Congress, observers think they will not lobby publicly to block the appointment.

The apparent clout of AIPAC – in an otherwise leaderless space in American political life – has been challenged by the Union for Reform Judaism. AIPAC is urging Congress to take retaliatory measures against Palestinian bodies for the temerity of gaining UN observer status; the URJ has made a public appeal to Obama to do no such thing.

The imprint of AIPAC on American legislation which channels money and military equipment to Israel is well-known. Here Grant Smith explains how they achieve this. Less well-known is the work of other agencies in smuggling out American nuclear material, allowing Israel to become the only nuclear-armed state in the Middle East (presumably known by the CIA, hence the distrust noted by Jonathan Cook).