Congressman Seth Moulton distanced himself from AIPAC on Thursday, citing the group’s support for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

Moulton is slated to challenge progressive Senator Ed Markey in next year’s Democratic primaries, ahead of the midterm elections.

The move by Moulton, a centrist and strong supporter of Israel, shows that backing from AIPAC is increasingly becoming a political liability for Democrats after the horrors Israel has unleashed on Gaza.

“In recent years, AIPAC has aligned itself too closely with Prime Minister Netanyahu’s government,” Moulton said in a statement.

“I’m a friend of Israel, but not of its current government, and AIPAC’s mission today is to back that government. I don’t support that direction. That’s why I’ve decided to return the donations I’ve received, and I will not be accepting their support.”

For decades, Israel has leveraged its political connections and network of wealthy donors to push for unconditional support for its policies.

In 2022, AIPAC organised a political action committee (PAC) to exert sway in US elections, mostly using its financial might to help defeat progressive candidates critical of Israel in Democratic primaries.

Last year, the group helped oust two vocal critics of Israel in Congress – Jamaal Bowman and Cori Bush – by backing their primary challengers with tens of millions of dollars.

Increased scrutiny
But Israel’s war on Gaza has led to an outpouring of criticisms, with leading rights groups and United Nations investigators calling it a genocide.

In light of that outcry, AIPAC’s role in US politics has come under greater scrutiny, particularly in Democratic circles where support for Israel has slipped to historic lows.

Moreover, AIPAC has endorsed far-right candidates like Congressman Randy Fine – who celebrated the killing of a US citizen by Israel and openly called for starving Palestinians in Gaza – which further alienated some Democrats.

AIPAC’s critics often liken it to the National Rifle Association (NRA), the once-bipartisan gun rights lobby that Democrats now reject nearly universally.

Usamah Andrabi, a spokesperson for the progressive group Justice Democrats, said AIPAC and its affiliates “are transforming from a lobby that establishment Democrats could rely on to buy a seat in Washington into a kiss of death for candidates who have their support”.

“Our movement’s work to demand the Democratic Party reject AIPAC as a toxic pariah is not only working but ensuring that the pro-genocide Israel lobby’s influence in Washington is waning,” Andrabi told Al Jazeera.

Even on the right of the ideological spectrum, some figures in President Donald Trump’s “America First” movement have been critical of AIPAC’s outsized influence.

In August, the lobby group accused right-wing Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene of betraying “American values” over her criticism of Israel.

Greene shot back, saying that AIPAC serves the interests of a foreign government. “I’m as AMERICAN as they come! I can’t be bought and I’m not backing down,” she wrote in a social media post.

AIPAC is expected to target some key races in next year’s midterm elections, including the Democratic Senate primary in Michigan, where progressive candidate Abdul El-Sayed is facing off against staunch Israel supporter Haley Stevens.

In 2022, the lobby group helped Stevens defeat then-Congressman Andy Levin, who hails from a prominent Michigan Jewish family, in a House primary.

While it is one of the better-known lobby groups in the US, AIPAC is among dozens of pro-Israel advocacy organisations across the country, including some that also raise funds for candidates, such as NORPAC.

Throughout the assault on Gaza, AIPAC echoed the falsehood that there is no Israeli-imposed famine in the territory and defended the Israeli military’s genocidal conduct while calling for more US aid to the country.

AIPAC argues that it is a thoroughly American organisation with 100 percent of its funding coming from inside the US. It denies taking direction from Israel.

But the lobby group is almost always in full alignment with the Israeli government.

AIPAC members also often meet with Israeli leaders. The group also organises free trips for US lawmakers to travel to Israel and meet with Israeli officials.

‘It’s interesting’
The pro-Israel group’s unflinching support for Netanyahu’s government puts it at odds with the overwhelming majority of Democrats.

A poll this month from the Pew Research Center showed only 18 percent of Democratic respondents have favourable views of the Israeli government.

Still, Democratic Party leaders have continued to associate with AIPAC and accept its endorsement. In August, House Democratic Caucus Chair Pete Aguilar joined lawmakers on an AIPAC-sponsored trip to Israel.

That same month, AIPAC-endorsed House Minority Whip Katherine Clark earned the group’s praise after walking back comments where she decried the “starvation and genocide and destruction of Gaza”.

California Governor Gavin Newsom – who is widely seen as a potential presidential candidate in 2028 – also skirted a question about AIPAC in an interview this week.

Asked about the organisation on the Higher Learning podcast, Newsom said AIPAC is not relevant to his day-to-day life.

“I haven’t thought about AIPAC, and it’s interesting. You’re like the first to bring up AIPAC in years, which is interesting,” he said.

In response to Moulton’s comments on Thursday, AIPAC issued a defiant statement, accusing the Democrat of “abandoning his friends to grab a headline”.

“His statement comes after years of him repeatedly asking for our endorsement and is a clear message to AIPAC members in Massachusetts, and millions of pro-Israel Democrats nationwide, that he rejects their support and will not stand with them,” the group said in a social media post.

“I made it clear that the 20 points that President (Donald) Trump made public are not ours. Changes were made to our draft. I have the record,” Dar said, speaking to politicians on Friday, according to remarks carried by Dawn news.

His comments come after the White House on Monday released a plan with fanfare that would include a ceasefire, the return of all captives, Hamas disarmament, and a new political architecture for post-war Gaza – one that would exclude the Palestinian group.

Its release came a few minutes before Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu stood next to each other at the White House to announce the plan. There, Trump told Hamas it had 72 hours to accept the proposal. On Tuesday, he gave the Palestinian group three to four days to agree to the plan.

Meanwhile, Hamas political bureau member Mohammad Nazzal told Al Jazeera on Thursday that the group was discussing Trump’s plan and would soon announce its position on the proposal. “We are not dealing [with the plan] under the logic that time is a sword pointed at our neck,” Nazzal said.

The published document was presented as a joint effort between Israel, the US and a number of Arab and Muslim countries. Last week, several leaders from the Arab and Muslim world discussed the plan at a meeting on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly in New York.

But while there are no official records of what was discussed at that mini-summit, Axios reported that the proposal announced by the American and Israeli leaders earlier this week contained “significant changes”, requested by Netanyahu, to the draft that had been agreed on by the Arab leaders and Trump.

The amendments were made during a six-hour meeting between Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner, US Special Envoy Steve Witkoff and Netanyahu, the report said. The revised version ties Israel’s withdrawal to Hamas’s disarmament and allows Israel – after a withdrawal in stages – to remain within a buffer zone inside the enclave until there are no risks of any “terror threat”, it added.

A group of eight Arab and Muslim countries, including Pakistan, Qatar, Turkiye and Saudi Arabia, welcomed Trump’s announcement in a joint statement.

Qatar has said that it agrees with the aims of the plan, and seeks further discussions on its details.

“If we speak of the main objectives, there are objectives that it [the US plan] achieves, such as ending the war, and there are things that need clarification, which certainly need discussions and negotiations,” Qatar’s Prime Minister Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman bin Jassim Al Thani told Al Jazeera.

Egypt’s Foreign Minister Badr Abdelatty also said that more talks were needed. According to the US proposal, an international body chaired by Trump would have oversight, while a Palestinian technocratic committee would handle civilian governance until the Palestinian Authority reforms itself. To take care of security, according to the proposal, a stabilisation force would be deployed.

“There are a lot of holes that need to be filled; we need more discussions on how to implement it, especially on two important issues – governance and security arrangements,” Abdelatty said on Thursday.

Experts pointed out that there are sticking points. There are questions on whether Hamas will agree to disarm since it has repeatedly said it would not, as the main face of Palestinian armed resistance.

The current proposal also nods vaguely at how reforms may open a pathway to Palestinian statehood, which is not recognised as a right but as the “aspiration of the Palestinian people”.

The plan does not mention the forced displacement of Palestinians from Gaza – a significant shift from Trump’s earlier lambasted position when he suggested the relocation of the population outside the enclave to turn it into the “Riviera of the Middle East”, which was heavily criticised as ethnic cleansing.

It also ruled out the occupation of Gaza and the annexation of the occupied West Bank – actions that Netanya’s far-right coalition members are pushing for.

Should Hamas refuse the deal, Trump ominously told Netanyahu, “You will have our full backing to do what you have to do.”