The annual conference of the pro-Israel lobby had lost some of its previous luster. It had been years since a serving president had delivered the keynote speech, and even a cabinet-level secretary was getting hard to schedule. Not all the main power-players in Congress, particularly from the Democratic side of the aisle, felt an obligation to put in an appearance.

Things had started to go downhill eight years earlier, when the 2017 conference had been tied into the 50th anniversary of the Six-Day War and for the first time, some senior figures had tactfully found themselves otherwise engaged. Not everyone in Washington wanted to be identified with a celebration of what was also the date seen by many as commemorating 50 years of occupation. A more somber, competing event organized by pro-peace organizations attracted some of the big names.

The banquet hall was still packed of course, but most of those attending annually tended to be of two very distinct demographics: aging legislators and grandees still clinging to the old myth of bipartisan support, and much younger Jewish delegates, nearly all religious and right-wing.

At least Bibi could still be relied upon to make the trip. This year, at 75, the grand old man of Israel was fighting another campaign for reelection under the slogan “A leader we have always believed in.” Pundits and pollsters were predicting an all but assured seventh term in office. The only democracy in the Middle East seemed incapable of producing another leader with the ability to almost magically form coalitions from the hectic patchwork of special-interest parties. No one else could be trusted to manage the eternal conflict, maintain relationships with the corrupt Palestinian potentates in the West Bank, and keep the increasingly fractured boat of Israeli society afloat.

No one questioned the incongruity of inviting Netanyahu on the eve of elections. He was Israel and his name was synonymous with the AIPAC brand. Not having him address the annual conference would have been a breach of protocol. As MK Yair Netanyahu, chairman of the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee, took the stage to introduce his father, the organizers began to realize something was amiss. Late registration for AIPAC 2025 had been surprisingly heavy, with a lot of new names of young Jewish activists appearing on the lists.

They had thought it meant the conference was coming back in fashion with the young generation. But as small groups coalesced in the wings of the hall, holding signs and booing, it slowly dawned on them. The dissidents were holding hundreds of signs, in blue-and-white Likud campaign colors but with an alternative slogan in Hebrew and English: “A DIFFERENT Israel we have always believed in.” There were too many of them for the stewards, usually ready to eject a tiny group of far-left pro-Palestinian types, to handle. It was too late to delay the prime minister’s entourage, which was already mounting the stage.

Most of the friendly media averted their camera lenses away from the thousands of protesters to focus on the great man instead. It didn’t help. As the booing gradually drowned out the applause and celebratory background music, for the first time on the AIPAC stage delegates were treated to the sight of a discomfited and fumbling Benjamin Netanyahu, struggling to make himself heard above the racket. Finally he gave up. Israeli television channels cut to their studios, but those viewing on the handful of still independent websites watched spellbound through those long excruciating minutes. The tame channels and free sheets tried to spin the narrative with descriptions of “radical-left anarchists” who had “hijacked” the conference. But the free media captured the moment with the headline that dominated the coverage: “Netanyahu loses Diaspora vote.” Twenty-four hours later the first polls indicated Likud had gone into free-fall.

Now, returning to reality, which part of this scenario seems least likely to you? That Netanyahu will still be in power 10 years from now, or that one day an Israeli prime minister could be booed at AIPAC?

No serious challenger on horizon

He could lose and be kicked out of office in less than two weeks, but another three terms of Netanyahu at the helm are perfectly plausible. There still isn’t a serious challenger on the horizon (Isaac Herzog may win, but he if he does, he will be the lucky beneficiary of a referendum on Netanyahu, not the victor of a face-to-face showdown). Likud does not depose its leaders and there doesn’t seem to be a shortage of parties willing to sit in Netanyahu’s next coalition. If you had to put money on who will be Israel’s prime minister in 2025, odds would still be on Bibi.

On the other hand, what’s the chance an AIPAC audience would ever boo him? Unthinkable, isn’t it?

The stated mission of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee is “to strengthen, protect and promote the U.S.-Israel relationship in ways that enhance the security of Israel and the United States.” It is regarded as one of the most powerful organizations in the Jewish world and many smaller Jewish communities in the Diaspora seek to emulate it by having “our own AIPAC.” But in their eagerness to establish these mini-AIPACs, community leaders fail to recognize that they are relinquishing their prerogative to have an independent view, not only on what enhances the security of Israel, but also on how best to strengthen, protect and promote the relationship between their own country and Israel. The only way an AIPAC allows its supporters to do all those things is in the way prescribed by Israel’s elected government. And while there is a certain justification for that – after all, Jews in America will not suffer the adverse effects of Israeli decisions – it also means that when an AIPAC member believes Israel’s leadership is jeopardizing its country’s own security and the relationship with the United States, they have to go on cheering.

While nearly all the criticism of Netanyahu’s visit this week to Washington focused on the way he was sticking a finger in Barack Obama’s eye with his speech to Congress, few if any thought to ask whether there was anything wrong with his speech at the AIPAC conference the previous day. Aside from the inherent damage to relations between Washington and Jerusalem, did anyone from the assembled great and good of American Jewry stop and think what message they were sending to the Israeli public?

The great majority of American Jews are well to the left of Netanyahu and his “natural coalition” on nearly every issue – the conflict with the Palestinians, economics and social services, state and religion, and the relationship between Israel and the Diaspora. Somehow they fail to realize that a rapturous reception of Netanyahu when he takes the podium does not signify their support of Israel, but an endorsement of Netanyahu and his policies. It strengthens his claim to be the representative of all Jews, not just of Israel. It gives him an electoral boost back home and lessens the chances that Israel will evolve into the kind of society that those very American Jews deeply desire it to be.

AIPACers may believe that they remain above politics by supporting whichever prime minister is elected. But by suspending judgment and cheering Netanyahu on no matter what they actually think of his policies, they are making an extremely political statement and helping to perpetuate his hold on power. Netanyahu has sought successfully to use the seeming adulation in which he is held by American Jews for political profit. The message of “Netanyahu speaks and the world listens” has featured repeatedly in his election campaigns. You may not have a vote in Israel, you may tell yourself that if you were an Israeli you certainly wouldn’t support Netanyahu, but anyone who cheers him at AIPAC is directly supporting his vision of Israel’s future. Many seem happy to be extras in The Bibi Show, but the day Israel’s prime minister gets booed at AIPAC will be the day Israelis, for the first time, take serious notice of what the Jews of the world are thinking.