erations Subcommittee, whieh handled foreign aid, had dividedrn$1.6 million from such groups over the past three elections,rnaccording to FEC data. An equal amount was paid byrnIsrael directly to American lobbyists, according to the Centerrnfor Public Integrity, a nonprofit think-tank in Washington,rnD.C. But more important than the amount of aid to Israel hasrnbeen the impact of these PACs on Middle Eastern peacernprospects. Pro-Israel money has gotten Congress (mostly thernSenate) to oppose almost every White House initiative aimedrnat stopping settlements on Arab land and negotiating peacernwith the Palestinians. Yet these issues are “central” to resolvingrntensions throughout the Middle East, according to GeorgernBall.rnThe record begins in 1962, when Jewish groups proved toornformidable for President Kennedy’s efforts to allow displacedrnArabs to return to Israel. A similar initiative by thernNixon administration was scuttled when AIPAC sent 1,400rnJewish leaders to pressure key members of Congress against thernidea. Lobbyists became particularly adept at using congressionalrnletters and resolutions for their purposes, often withrnlittle notice in the press. In 1975, AIPAC got 73 senators tornblock a move by President Gerald Ford merely to consider arnpeace bid by Egyptian leader Anwar Sadat. Then in 1985,rnAIPAC got 72 senators to back a resolution that killed an effortrnby King Hussein and PI.O Chairman Yasser Arafat to startrnnegotiations.rnPresident Bush also got thoroughly burned for his efforts tornseek a freeze on Israeli settlements in occupied territories, anrnidea overwhelmingly supported by American citizens. Inrn1989, when Secretary of State James Baker began pressing IsraelirnPrime Minister Yitzhak Shamir on that ])oint and others,rn94 senators signed a letter telling Baker to back off. Laterrnthat year, 68 senators sent a letter urging Baker not to issue arnvisa allowing Arafat, who had made some conciliatory gestures,rnto address the United Nations in New York City. InrnOctober 1991, 70 senators sponsored a veto-proof bill to grantrnIsrael’s bid for $10 billion in loan guarantees. But they delayedrnfinal action to give Bush and Baker time to bargain with Israelrnfor a freeze on Jewish settlements in the occupied territories.rnSix months later, facing a tough reelection fight. Bush cavedrnin, and the measure passed the Senate (99 to 0) and later thernHouse without a housing ban. Altogether, Bush and Baker encounteredrnmore than a dozen such roadblocks on their way tornsetting up Mideast peace talks.rnFailure of a legislator to support any measure desired byrnAIPAC often causes pro-Israel groups to funnel money with arnvengeance to his election opponent. One of the few who hasrnspoken out about this is ex-Senator James Abourezk, arnLebanese-American from South Dakota, who quit in despairrnover what he saw as hypocrisy in his liberal colleagues. “Senatorsrnwho criticize Israel,” he said, “do so at their politicalrnperil. The lobby hurls the charge of anti-Semitism againstrnthose who dare to voice opposition to Israel’s occupation ofrncontested territories, to the bombing of Arab refugee camps,rnand to other ghastly practices which, when undertaken by anyrnother country, bring great erics of protest from the same peoplernwho will not allow criticism of Israel.”rnIn a noted case, Republican Senator Charles Percy lost arnpivotal reelection bid in 1984 after being singled out for defeatrnby the lobby because of his vote for President Reagan’s plan tornsell AWC planes to Saudi Arabia and his expression of concernrnfor Palestinian “rights.” Pro-Israel PACs gave $500 tornhim and $301,000 to Paul Simon, his Democratic opponent inrnIllinois. In addition, Michael Goland, a California businessman,rnspent $1.2 million directly on negative advertising againstrnPercy. Goland was later fined $5,000 for concealing his identity.rnHis expenditures were examples of “soft money,” whichrncan legally be spent directly on a candidate’s expenses. Altogether,rnover $3 million went to Simon from pro-Israel groups,rnaccording to Edward Tivnan, author of The Lobby: Jewish PoliticalrnPower and American Foreign Policy. Afterward, says Tivnan,rnAIPAC Director Thomas Dine claimed credit for thernonslaught and said American politicians “got the message.” Itrnwas enough to frighten Congress into almost complete submissionrnto the lobby ever since.rnBy concentrating funds on key congressional races, the networkrnof pro-Israel PACs often exercises its biggest influence atrnthe local level. The largest amounts are reserved for legislatorsrnwith the best pro-Israel records and for challengers of legislatorsrndeemed to have imperfect records. Like Percy, most ofrnthe targets for defeat have been Republicans generally friendlyrnto Israel. Victims include ex-Representative Paul N. Mc-rnCloskey of California; ex-Senator Roger Jepsen of Iowa; ex-rnRepresentative Paul Findley of Illinois; and ex-Senator JamesrnAbdnor, an Arab-American from South Dakota. Survivorsrninclude Senator Jesse Helms, who barely escaped losing reelectionrnto a PAC attack in North Carolina in 1990. Anotherrnnear-victim is Senator John Chafee of Rhode Island, whosernstaff attributed his reelection in 1988 to exposure of thernAIPAC campaign against him on 60 Minutes. Chafee did notrnget a cent from pro-Israel PACs, while his opponent, RichardrnLicht, received $242,000. That is 25 times the legal contributionrnlimit for a single PAC. An earlier victim was formerrnDemocratic Senator William Eulbright of Arkansas. His crimernwas to hold public hearings on foreign lobbying.rnAs the 1992 election neared, the Israeli lobby had gottenrnvirtually everything it wanted from George Bush, includingrnpulverization of Iraq’s military power, stalled peace talks, $10rnbillion over five years in loan guarantees, $3 billion in foreignrnaid, plus, in the words of AIPAC President David Steiner, “arnbillion dollars in other goodies that people don’t even knowrnabout.” But lobby leaders were not satisfied. They steeredrntheir biggest contributors and most of their votes to Clintonrnand Gore, from whom they expected still more. In selectingrnGore as his running mate, Clinton chose one of the most enthusiasticrnIsrael-boosters in the Senate. In his campaign remarks,rnClinton joined the choir. One-upping Bush, he said Israelrnshould not be pressured to stop settling Arab land, addingrnthat “the Arabs are the obstacles to peace.”rnNot all Jewish groups have agreed with hardline AIPACrnstances. Some have sought to encourage talks with the PLOrnand an end to settlements on occupied land. But AIPAC hasrnmanaged to build a virtual monopoly, much to the dismayrnof less conservative Jews and sometimes even to the displeasurernof Israeli government leaders. Last August, the WashingtonrnPost reported that Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabinrnaccused AIPAC of inflaming relations between Israel and thernUnited States by overplaying its hand on the $10 billion loan.rnBut his pique had no visible effect. By then, AIPAC leadersrnhad deeply infiltrated the front-running Clinton camp. Onerneven took to boasting about it. A month before the election,rnAIPAC’s Steiner told a potential contributor: “We have arndozen people in [Clinton] headquarters . .. and they’re all go-rnMAY 1993/27rnrnrn