CHICAGO — The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) is placing a high-stakes bet in Illinois' Democratic primaries, investing nearly $22 million to influence outcomes in favor of candidates who align with its pro-Israel stance. However, the approach has sparked controversy and strategic shifts as the group faces backlash within the Democratic Party.

In a notable departure from its usual tactics, AIPAC has channeled funds through lesser-known PACs rather than its primary super PAC, United Democracy Project, aiming to mask the origin of the funds. This move comes amidst growing scrutiny and declining support for Israel among Democrats, as highlighted by a recent Quinnipiac University poll showing that 62 percent of Democrats believe the U.S. is too supportive of Israel.

The controversy intensified in the race to replace retiring Rep. Jan Schakowsky. Initially, AIPAC funded attacks against Evanston Mayor Daniel Biss, a critic of Israel and grandson of a Holocaust survivor. This strategy inadvertently boosted the prospects of Kat Abughazaleh, a Palestinian-American and vocal critic of Israel. Recognizing the misstep, AIPAC has since redirected its efforts towards undermining Abughazaleh, attempting to split the progressive vote by bolstering another candidate, Bushra Amiwala.

David Axelrod, a former senior adviser to President Barack Obama, expressed concerns about AIPAC's covert operations, noting that their ads are deliberately not branded as AIPAC to avoid further controversy. "These ads are not branded as AIPAC for a reason, so there’s a recognition that they are a controversial presence in Democratic primaries,” Axelrod explained.

The organization's interventions have not been without consequence. Their aggressive campaigning against former Rep. Tom Malinowski in New Jersey, who opposed unconditional aid to Israel, resulted in his defeat and further alienated centrist Democrats. The fear of repeating such a scenario looms large as Illinois' primary approaches.

Local strategists and Democratic officials are closely watching the unfolding events, wary of the broader implications of AIPAC’s involvement. "It looks like they’re changing their tactics after the New Jersey backfire," commented an anonymous Illinois Democratic lawmaker.

AIPAC's spokesperson, Deryn Sousa, defended their strategy, emphasizing the group's commitment to fostering strong U.S.-Israel relations. However, the tactical pivot has not silenced critics like Jeremy Ben-Ami, president of the progressive J Street group, who argues that AIPAC's secretive funding strategies reveal the group's toxicity in Democratic circles.

As Illinois prepares for the upcoming primaries, the effectiveness of AIPAC’s revised strategies and the broader impact of its heavy financial involvement remain to be seen, setting the stage for a potentially transformative election cycle.