America
AIPAC super PAC pours millions into key Democratic primary races
The United Democracy Project (UDP), the super PAC of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), has directed nearly $2.5 million into a special election for the California seat formerly held by Representative Eric Swalwell, marking one of the group’s final targeted contests ahead of November.
The UDP spent approximately $2.5 million to campaign against state Senator Aisha Wahab, the favourite in the race, and to promote Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) Board President Melissa Hernandez. The expenditure attracted significant attention, given that Wahab finished well ahead of Hernandez in the June special primary.
AIPAC links have also emerged as a central issue in two Democratic contests in Florida and New Hampshire, among the final states on the 2026 primary calendar. Intra-party friction over the role of money in politics and questions regarding the extent to which US support for Israel should continue remain heavyweight concerns ahead of the November elections.
“I wish that AIPAC would realise that, for better or worse, it has become a lightning rod, and that is helping less, unfortunately, not just themselves, but the cause they advocate for,” said a national Democratic strategist who has previously worked with the UDP.
An AIPAC spokesperson disputed this assessment, pointing out that more than 250 candidates backed by the group have won their primaries.
“Our community of 7 million Americans is focused on helping pro-Israel Democratic and Republican candidates win in November,” the spokesperson added.
UDP spends millions in California’s 14th District
AIPAC’s super PAC is making a multi-million-dollar expenditure in California’s 14th Congressional District, previously represented by Swalwell, who resigned following sexual assault allegations that he denied.
Wahab and Hernandez are facing off in two separate races this year. The first, taking place on Tuesday, will select a representative to complete the remainder of Swalwell’s term. The second race will be held in November for a full two-year term.
Wahab finished 26 percentage points ahead of Hernandez in the special primary. The margin in the primary for the full term was 21 percentage points in Wahab’s favour.
Despite these margins, the UDP has spent roughly $2.5 million to date to boost Hernandez and campaign against Wahab. A separate group called Bold America, which received funds from the UDP and was established by former members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, has also spent approximately $1.8 million.
Wahab opposes unconditional aid to Israel. Last year, she introduced a resolution in the California legislature calling for an end to the Israel-Hamas war.
Wahab has also described the war in Gaza as a “genocide”. Hernandez, speaking at a candidate forum this spring, declined to use the same term, though she condemned “the destruction in Gaza”.
Wahab asserted that she has been targeted due to racism and bias.
“Power brokers in Washington also have a need to control every voice on highly critical votes,” Wahab told The Hill. “I have been very clear about my stance on human rights and doing what is best for the American people.”
UDP spokesperson Patrick Dorton, in a statement to The Hill, described Wahab’s assertions as “100% absurd”. Dorton stated that the group supports members of both the Congressional Black Caucus and the Congressional Hispanic Caucus.
Bold America did not respond to a request for comment from The Hill.
Hernandez, in a statement to The Hill, pointed to her campaign’s “thousands of supporters” and said that “no single supporter dictates her agenda”.
“My opponent wants to turn this race into a national issue, whereas the race should actually be about how best to serve the voters in the East Bay and Tri-Valley,” Hernandez said.
The spending in the race attracted particular notice after the UDP spent tens of millions of dollars earlier this month in the Michigan Senate primary to support Representative Haley Stevens, who narrowly lost to progressive candidate Abdul El-Sayed.
“In many cases, as a political operative, my advice was that we shouldn’t get into this specific race, because we would become the issue itself and… we would harm the candidate we were trying to help,” said Garry South, a veteran California strategist who has worked on independent expenditure campaigns in the real estate sector.
“Frankly, I think AIPAC has reached that point,” South added.
FEC complaints surface in California race
The race has intensified in recent days. A supporter of Hernandez filed a complaint against Wahab with the Federal Election Commission (FEC).
According to the complaint, Wahab’s state Senate committee gave money to a county party organisation, which then used a portion of those funds to support Wahab’s congressional campaign. The complaint alleged that external activities supporting Wahab constituted an “illegal and unreported in-kind contribution”.
Wahab told The Hill that her campaign had not received any notice from the FEC. The Alameda County Democratic Central Committee said in a statement that it was aware of the complaint but maintained that its activities complied with “federal election laws”.
“Until the FEC actually takes action, this is nothing more than a political allegation floated by our opponents,” Wahab said.
According to a report by KQED, Wahab’s campaign also plans to file a complaint with the FEC regarding a series of social media posts targeting the candidate, which Wahab characterized as defamatory.
The report stated that the complaint will request an investigation into whether the online activity was conducted in a coordinated manner to influence the election outcome and whether the activity ought to have been officially reported.
AIPAC influence debated in Florida race
The California contest is not the only election on Tuesday where AIPAC’s influence has surfaced as an issue.
Oliver Larkin, an activist and democratic socialist who is an outspoken critic of AIPAC and unconditional US aid to Israel, is running against Representative Jared Moskowitz in Florida’s redrawn 25th Congressional District.
The district, which covers parts of Miami-Dade, Palm Beach, and Broward counties, is viewed as a swing territory that could be won by either party. AIPAC is supporting Moskowitz in the race.
In an interview with The Hill, Larkin pointed to the war in Gaza and AIPAC’s support for “this deeply disastrous foreign policy”. Larkin said the group had also “supported 109 Republican insurrectionists in the 2022 midterms”.
Larkin further noted that the Israel-Hamas war, particularly its disproportionate influence on the 2024 presidential race, sits “at the centre of many struggles within the Democratic Party over the influence of money in politics”.
Halie Soifer, CEO of the Jewish Democratic Council of America, described AIPAC as an “easy target for the far left, especially since the targeting is mutual”.
In an interview with The Hill, Soifer said that some candidates have turned debates over military aid to Israel into “politically convenient talking points”, but added that these do not resonate “everywhere”.
Moskowitz declined an invitation from the Sun Sentinel Editorial Board to participate in a joint interview with Larkin.
“I do not believe it is appropriate to share a platform with a candidate who has repeatedly embraced the support of individuals and organisations that circulate antisemitic rhetoric and hostility toward the Jewish community,” Moskowitz wrote.
Larkin, who has engaged with figures including the controversial leftist Twitch streamer Hasan Piker, acknowledged that such individuals “do not always use the most politically correct language”.
However, Larkin added: “Cherry-picking these statements to equate anti-Zionism with antisemitism does a disservice to the nuanced critique articulated by individuals like Hasan Piker.”
AIPAC backing creates new divide in New Hampshire
Next month’s Senate primary in New Hampshire has also highlighted differing stances within the Democratic Party regarding AIPAC and its allies.
Karishma Manzur, a Democratic scientist, criticized Representative Chris Pappas—the favourite running to replace Democratic Senator Jeanne Shaheen—for taking money from special interest groups, including AIPAC.
Pappas is listed among the supported candidates on AIPAC’s website.
Manzur, who opposes unconditional aid to Israel and has described the war in Gaza as a “genocide”, said: “Any candidate or lawmaker who takes even $1 from corporations or corporate PACs is no longer a public servant; they are merely a contractor for their client.”
Pappas’s campaign maintained that Manzur exaggerated the amount of support the candidate received from AIPAC’s PAC. The campaign also stated that Pappas does not accept donations from corporate PACs and noted that he introduced a bill aimed at limiting election spending by foreign nationals.
America
Milei hardens Falklands stance with oil sanctions and defence push
Argentine President Javier Milei has said he will tighten sanctions on companies involved in oil projects around the Falkland/Malvinas Islands.
Milei also said he would increase defence resources in the south of the country and submit a bill to Congress aimed at strengthening Argentina’s response to what he described as violations of sovereignty.
In a televised address, Milei said he would sign a decree to accelerate sanctions under Argentine law against companies participating in oil and gas extraction activities in the territory, which Argentina considers its own but which remains under British control.
Speaking in an address to the nation early on Friday morning, Milei said the United Kingdom was facing a migration and economic crisis, adding that this meant Argentina would prevail in its claim over the Falkland Islands:
“If we look at the structural crisis in the United Kingdom, it is clear that the country is facing multiple crises on many fronts, including migration, demographics, and a difficult economic situation. It is clear that Argentina’s future is extremely promising and that Argentina will prevail.”
Milei said Argentina would intensify efforts to sanction not only the companies involved, but also their shareholders, executives, and suppliers.
“We will continue to prevent companies that are directly or indirectly involved in projects (on the islands) without Argentina’s permission from operating on Argentine territory,” the Argentine leader said.
He also stated that the government would issue an emergency decree to expand defence resources, under which a naval base would be built in the nearby province of Tierra del Fuego and telecommunications capabilities would be strengthened.
Milei added that he would submit an urgent “national defence of sovereignty” bill to Congress in order to stiffen penalties for unauthorised activities around the islands, extend sanctions to suppliers, and broaden the legal framework to cover other activities affecting Argentina’s natural resources.
Milei noted that Argentina had determined that the Sea Lion offshore project, operated by Navitas Petroleum and Rockhopper Exploration, could begin oil exploration work in the coming months, presenting an imminent threat to Argentine interests.
The remarks mark a harder line from Milei, who had previously called for the Falkland Islands dispute to be resolved through diplomacy even while seeking warmer ties with Britain.
A British overseas territory located roughly 500 km east of the Argentine mainland, the Falkland Islands have long been claimed by Argentina.
Britain has controlled the islands since 1833, and the two countries fought a brief war over them in 1982.
London maintains that residents of the Falkland Islands voted on their political status and right to self-determination in a referendum held in March 2013. An overwhelming majority of 99.8% voted to remain an overseas territory of the United Kingdom.
In his speech, Milei stated that residents of the Falkland Islands do not possess the right to self-determination and called on the country to unite around its claim to the islands.
Arguing that the global wind is currently “blowing in favour of Argentina’s demands”, Milei said: “A short time ago, President [Donald] Trump announced that the US is reconsidering its historic stance on the Malvinas islands.”
The British conservative newspaper The Telegraph wrote that the move would appease the US president, who intervened in the dispute and implied he would not assist the United Kingdom in fighting off an invasion of the Falkland Islands.
Asked whether the US would “come to the aid” of Britain, Trump referred to his confrontation with Iran, saying: “Your country was not there to help me.”
Trump then questioned whether Britain would have the capacity to defend the islands, telling GB News:
“Look, I was there when the first war broke out. That was a very long time ago, and I watched it very closely. You handled yourselves very well. You took the islands back quite decisively, but it is very far away.”
Speculation is mounting that Buenos Aires and Washington are discussing an agreement granting the US access to oil extracted off the Malvinas.
On the eve of Milei’s speech, Argentine Minister of Energy and Mining Daniel Gonzalez Casartelli was in Washington to discuss energy investments with American oil companies and members of the Trump administration.
Meanwhile, Benjamin Netanyahu’s son Yair clashed with the British right by demanding that the Falkland Islands be placed under Argentine sovereignty.
According to Bloomberg, Argentina is currently in the midst of an oil boom. Drilling activity is accelerating in the Vaca Muerta shale formation in Patagonia, which already produces more than 1 million barrels of oil and gas per day.
The country also has some offshore production operations, and exploration activities have been carried out in South Atlantic waters in recent years.
Meanwhile, Milei met Sarah Rogers, a senior US State Department official, at a conservative political forum held in Chile.
Reiterating Argentina’s claim to the islands, Milei said: “We must take back these islands, which are negligible in national terms. There is no other way forward. This is the best way to pay tribute to those who sacrificed their lives for this cause.”
America
US House passes bill to strip federal aid over Israel boycotts
The US House of Representatives has passed a controversial bill to strip federal financial aid from colleges and universities that participate in boycotts against Israel.
The Republican-led measure targets calls for accountability directed at the Tel Aviv government over its military campaign in the Gaza Strip, as well as expressions of solidarity with Palestine on university campuses.
Entitled the “Protecting Economic and Academic Freedom Act of 2026”, the legislation was approved on Thursday in a 237–169 vote.
Only two Republican lawmakers voted against the measure, while 33 Democrats broke party lines to vote in favour. The bill will now proceed to the Senate.
Designated as H.R. 4795, the proposal bars colleges and universities that benefit from federal student aid programmes from engaging in commercial boycotts against Israel.
Institutions receiving Title VI funding for international studies and foreign language programmes are also required to certify that they do not prevent students or faculty from participating in academic programmes in the occupied territories, nor restrict Israeli students and academics from accessing their campuses.
The bill was co-sponsored by Representative Virginia Foxx, a North Carolina Republican, and Representative Josh Gottheimer, a New Jersey Democrat.
Representative Tim Walberg, chairman of the House Education Committee, argued that taxpayer money should under no circumstances flow to institutions that “discriminate against Israel”.
Gottheimer, a staunch supporter of the Israeli government, stated that the BDS (Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions) movement is a campaign “targeting a single country and a single religion”.
Opponents of the bill emphasised that the measure seeks to solve a non-existent problem and constitutes an attack on constitutionally protected free speech.
The ranking Democrat on the committee, Representative Bobby Scott, pointed out that not a single US college or university has actually joined the global BDS movement. Scott recalled that while student and faculty bodies have announced support for BDS, university administrations have refused to implement those demands.
During the floor debate, Scott said: “We must fight antisemitism wherever it appears, but we should not do so by penalising protected free speech or conflating a student’s view with university policy.”
Representative Jerrold Nadler, a New York Democrat who opposes the BDS movement, also voted against the bill. Nadler noted that the only way to protect opinions one agrees with is to defend the right to express opinions one does not agree with.
The liberal Jewish organisation J Street was also among the actors opposing the bill. The group warned that the measure conflates boycotts of the Israeli government with those directed at companies linked to illegal settlements in the occupied West Bank.
J Street stated that the bill places Israel in an exceptional position, does nothing to protect Jewish students, and risks inflaming antisemitism rather than countering it. By contrast, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) openly backed the legislation.
The vote follows nearly three years of sustained protests by students and faculty against Israel’s war in Gaza.
According to data from the Ministry of Health in Gaza, attacks carried out following the 7 October 2023 operation and the subsequent military campaign launched by Israel have killed more than 73,000 Palestinians, while flattening the vast majority of the region’s universities, schools, and civilian infrastructure.
Encampments erected on university campuses demanded an end to the carnage and called on universities to divest financial holdings from companies profiting from the occupation and the war.
The Washington administration and its allies frequently characterised these protests as antisemitic. The Trump administration, meanwhile, targeted universities with various investigations and threats to freeze federal funds.
Aiming to protect their congressional majority in the November midterm elections and during the final two years of Trump’s term, House Republicans are keeping the issue on the agenda to deepen divisions among Democrats, who have grown increasingly critical of Israel as mass casualties in Gaza mount.
In July, amid accusations that the campaign in Gaza had reached genocidal proportions, more than 100 House Democrats supported an initiative to cut certain military aid to Israel, a US ally.
Critics argue that the latest bill is an extension of anti-BDS legislation previously enacted across more than 30 US states, which compels public contractors and public institutions to pledge not to boycott Israel.
Free speech advocates have long maintained that these state laws conflict with the First Amendment of the Constitution.
The measure passed by the House of Representatives aims to expand this pressure to the entire federal student financial aid system.
Although no US university has formally adopted a BDS decision, the bill makes even limited commercial or academic distancing from the Israeli government—including entities operating in the occupied Palestinian territories—grounds for terminating federal funding.
America
Pentagon office takes 35% stake in Venezuela oil venture
The Trump administration’s oil agreement with Venezuela represents the riskiest venture to date for a Pentagon unit originally established for an entirely different purpose.
The White House announced this week that the Office of Strategic Capital (OSC), an entity operating under the Department of Defence, will acquire a 35% stake “at no cost to American taxpayers” in North American Blue Energy Partners, a firm headed by politically connected Venezuelan investor Alejandro Betancourt.
The objective is to make Venezuelan oilfields more attractive to US investors, thereby increasing revenue for Caracas whilst simultaneously squeezing out Chinese and Russian firms.
According to the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), the OSC has already facilitated equity acquisitions in at least five other companies during President Donald Trump’s second term. The OSC was created to provide loans for the development of critical technologies.
However, because the Venezuelan agreement involves petroleum rather than conventional critical technology, it stretches the agency’s statutory boundaries even further and has already prompted Democrats to pledge congressional investigations.
Should Democrats regain power in Washington this November, any oversight drive could place the office’s efforts to secure state equity positions in private corporations under intense scrutiny.
In an interview with Semafor, a former OSC official stated:
“Acquiring equity was never intended when the OSC was founded; that circumstance alone does not necessarily constitute a problem. Nevertheless, it raises some legitimate legal and ethical questions.”
Jon Hillman, who directs the council’s tracking system, noted in an interview that the Venezuelan oil deal “appears to be uncharted territory”, adding that the office’s “mission is to catalyze private investment into specific, critical supply chain technologies necessary for national security.”
The statute that established the OSC defines its authority to provide “capital support” as extending and guaranteeing loans and offering technical assistance.
A Pentagon spokesperson initially told Reuters that the office was “not acquiring equity” in private enterprises due to this constrained remit.
On Tuesday, however, a US official offered a contrasting account to journalists, stating that the authority to acquire a stake in Betancourt’s company via “penny warrants” was “granted to the OSC when it was enacted into law under the Biden administration.”
A “penny warrant” is a financial contract that confers upon its holder the right to purchase corporate shares at a negligible, nominal price.
The US official added:
“This is an entirely standard arrangement in terms of the OSC’s capacity to maintain the financial position it holds under this agreement, and all financial positions granted to the OSC comply fully with the law.”
Peter Harrell, a visiting scholar at Georgetown University Law Center, said in an interview that it was “impossible to render a definitive legal opinion” because officials had “not advanced a precise legal theory.”
Harrell added that the Trump administration may be banking on no party possessing either the legal standing or the inclination to bring a lawsuit over the transaction.
That calculation encompasses oil corporations hoping to profit from the newly reopened Venezuelan petroleum sector.
Cari Stinebower, an attorney at the law firm Steptoe who advises petroleum firms seeking to conduct business in Venezuela, said: “I suspect everyone may be quietly perplexed. Yet I do not believe anyone will speak out, because virtually everyone wants to participate in the investment opportunities in Venezuela.”
Jack Reed, the senior Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee, is among those already demanding further particulars regarding the agency’s statutory authority to conclude the agreement.
Certain Republicans are likewise keen to obtain additional information concerning the Venezuelan deal.
The Biden administration formed the OSC in 2022 to provide loans to businesses developing technologies deemed “vital” to national security.
Recent legislative initiatives aimed at formally expanding its authority to encompass equity investments have so far foundered.
Yet under the direction of Deputy Secretary of Defence Steve Feinberg, the administration pressed forward regardless, enlisting bankers to help deploy a lending authority that surged from $1 billion to $200 billion courtesy of recent party-line Republican tax legislation.
The current director of the OSC, David Lorch, previously served as a managing director at Cerberus Capital Management, the private equity firm founded by Feinberg.
-
Diplomacy2 weeks agoUS strikes fail to break Iran as regional anchors rise, Dr. Moeini says
-
Diplomacy2 weeks agoBlackwater founder Erik Prince creates air defence venture with Kyiv
-
Diplomacy2 weeks agoSouth Korea begins first commercial voyage via Northern Sea Route
-
Europe2 weeks agoUK and Russia edge closer to conflict over long-range drone supply
-
Opinion2 weeks agoWhat did the Israeli attack in Syria reveal?
-
Asia2 weeks agoChina and Arab states launch 5-year anti-desertification plan
-
Asia2 weeks agoIndia intel push on China risks dangerous miscalculation, study says
-
Russia1 week agoPutin circle weighs tactical nuclear risk as Ukraine talks stall
