The powerful pro-Israel lobby AIPAC has announced it will stop directly funding and endorsing US congressional candidates, marking a major shift in its electoral strategy amid growing public opposition to Israel over its genocidal war in Gaza.
The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) announced the decision on Wednesday, saying it would end formal candidate endorsements and direct contributions through its political action committee while continuing to spend heavily on elections through its super PAC, United Democracy Project (UDP).
The move comes as AIPAC faces growing criticism, particularly among Democratic voters, with a leading Palestinian advocacy figure telling The New Arab that the decision amounts to an admission that the lobby's support has become politically toxic.
"They're admitting themselves that their endorsement is a net negative for anyone that they would endorse," Hamid Bendaas, communications director at the Institute for Middle East Understanding (IMEU) Policy Project said.
The decision marks a significant change for one of Washington's most influential lobbying organisations, which established its political action committee and super PAC in 2021, expanding its electoral involvement.
In a letter to members, AIPAC said it would concentrate on mobilising individual donors and developing new fundraising methods, while insisting its objectives remained unchanged.
"Our mission and strategy remain the same," AIPAC spokesperson Deryn Sousa said.
Federal Election Commission filings show that AIPAC contributed nearly $25 million to candidates and political committees through September, while UDP spent more than $53 million on independent electoral expenditures.
Unlike traditional political action committees, super PACs can spend unlimited amounts supporting or opposing candidates, provided they do not coordinate directly with campaigns.
The announcement comes amid sharply deteriorating American attitudes towards Israel following its genocide in Gaza and wider military actions across the Middle East.
An April 2026 Pew Research Center survey found that 60 percent of Americans held an unfavourable view of Israel, including 80 percent of Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents.
Polling published by the Chicago Council on Global Affairs in October found that American favourability towards Israel had fallen to its lowest level since the organisation began measuring attitudes towards the country in 1978.
The changing political climate has complicated AIPAC's efforts to support candidates, particularly in Democratic primaries.
In Michigan, AIPAC's super PAC spent heavily attempting to defeat Abdul El-Sayed, a critic of Israel, during the Democratic Senate primary.
El-Sayed nevertheless secured the nomination against Congresswoman Haley Stevens, who received substantial backing from pro-Israel interests.
UDP has subsequently intervened against El-Sayed in the Senate election campaign, where he faces Republican Mike Rogers, departing from AIPAC's traditional emphasis on maintaining bipartisan support.
Bendaas said the intervention was particularly significant given AIPAC's longstanding preference for influencing primaries rather than general elections.
"They usually stick to primaries, and they stay out of general elections because they want to stay bipartisan," he said.
Such interventions risk alienating Democratic voters whose overriding priority is defeating Republican candidates, regardless of their views on Israel.
Nevertheless, AIPAC's withdrawal from endorsements does not mean it is abandoning its ability to influence elections.
Its super PAC will continue operating, while supporters will still be encouraged to contribute to candidates backing its policy objectives.
Bendaas described the decision as a survival strategy intended to preserve AIPAC's financial influence while distancing candidates from an increasingly unpopular association.
"This is a move that's going to ensure that AIPAC stays relevant and continues to have an influence because they're going to continue to spend money through their SuperPAC," he said.
He also argued that AIPAC could increasingly rely on less transparent electoral spending, including committees whose financial backers may not become publicly apparent until after voting.
The restructuring comes as growing numbers of Democratic candidates reject AIPAC's support, challenging an organisation that has historically enjoyed considerable influence over both major parties.
For Bendaas, the most consequential aspect of the decision may be the loss of AIPAC's formerly privileged position in American politics.
"AIPAC is now just kind of one of those lobbies. But they're still a powerful one," he said, comparing the organisation to other wealthy lobbying groups seeking to influence elections.
"That kind of sheen and that feeling of no one should try to challenge us I think is gone probably forever."
