I. Introduction

Rahm Emanuel’s positioning as a would-be 2028 presidential contender has garnered significant interest in media circles - even as it hasn’t registered with voters. Emanuel has made an effort to pivot from his conservative, corporate-friendly record, with news outlets noting his flirtation with populist rhetoric. As part of this shift, Emanuel has made an effort to distance himself from his longstanding hawkish record. This includes tepid criticisms of unconditional U.S. support for Israel, a stance he holds even as he continues to support arms sales. This stance indeed marks a rhetorical shift from Emanuel’s historic foreign policy record, where he once said he would still have backed the Iraq war, even if he knew there were no weapons of mass destruction.

Emanuel’s record as U.S. Ambassador to Japan under Biden showcases his support for corporate-friendly foreign policy while in office. Alaska’s Republican senators worked closely with Emanuel to push for exporting liquefied natural gas (LNG) to Japan, a measure Emanuel cited as important for Japan to avoid “Europe’s energy mistakes”. Using diplomatic resources, Emanuel worked to promote Alaska LNG exports under the premise that the project was supposedly crucial for security and affordable energy. Buoyed by financial support from the federal government, Emanuel pushed the proposed project in conjunction with interested investors from corporations including BlackRock and Goldman Sachs. In 2022, Emanuel and Sen. Dan Sullivan (R-AK) held an Alaska LNG summit in Tokyo alongside a number of corporate representatives. This included representatives from Mitsubishi, INPEX, and JERA, corporations identified in industry reporting as major LNG buyers. In contrast to both Emanuel and the broader administration’s enthusiasm for the project, observers called attention to the risks it posed to the environment. It’s additionally worth noting that the consumer case for LNG has been disputed, including by the Department of Energy’s own analysis.

By no means is Emanuel’s decision to use the ambassadorship to effectively advocate for industry interests unusual. These choices, just like returning to Wall Street after Biden left office, are the norm in Washington. It does, however, make Emanuel’s populist pivot feel particularly insincere. When asked about poor 2028 polling in May, Emanuel deflected by saying “I'm not worried about my 1% in the polls. I'm worried about the 1% that has turned its back on the rest of America, and that's what my plans and my policy ideas address.” More recently, Emanuel connected the ongoing cost-of-living crisis with rampant corruption. But Emanuel’s record in public office, underscored by his most recent position as an ambassador, reveals a politician who has used his office to further corporate interests. Donald Trump’s aggressive embrace of Alaska LNG exports shows that this approach is a bipartisan one. 

II. Emanuel's Foreign Policy Reinvention

DIPLOMACY IN SERVICE OF GAS EXPORTS

In October 2022, Emanuel convened an Alaska LNG summit in Tokyo alongside Sen. Dan Sullivan (R-AK). The proposed project would move gas from Alaska’s North Slope through an approximately 800-mile pipeline, supplying Alaskans and an export terminal serving Asian markets. Emanuel was using the embassy’s convening power to help cultivate a market for the proposed infrastructure. Sen. Dan Sullivan’s praise for his “tireless advocacy” reflected that concrete commercial role. Attendees of the summit included representatives from corporations including INPEX, Mitsubishi, Tokyo Gas and JERA, all identified in industry reporting as major LNG buyers. Their presence was central to the summit’s purpose: Alaska LNG’s proponents were presenting an export project to companies that could become its customers. As part of this effort, Emanuel and other proponents courted support from Wall Street. In a 2023 article in The American Prospect, Lee Harris noted that Goldman Sachs and BlackRock were among the would-be investors at the summit; a May 2023 presentation before state lawmakers in Alaska also identified Goldman as the firm tapped to raise investment capital.

Corporate influence on policy-making does not stop at campaign contributions or even official lobbying efforts. It is also reflected by officials like Emanuel using their position to advocate for industry interests under the guise of promoting national security. The 2022 effort to push for Alaska LNG exports was buoyed by the fact that high gas prices and a general cost of living crisis dominated the political environment. With the Biden administration said to be ‘fixat[ed] on gas prices’, officials including Emanuel and Department of State energy envoy Amos Hochstein had a clear opportunity to push for LNG exports. The aforementioned reporting by The American Prospect noted that a former chief of staff to Hochstein was tapped to lobby federal agencies on Alaska LNG-related matters.

Emanuel’s embassy statement described Alaska LNG as a source of “stable, sustainable, and affordable” energy. The sustainability claim is, at the very least, questionable given that its detrimental environmental impact has been widely scrutinized. But beyond this, it’s worth noting that the supposed link between the Alaska LNG project and affordable energy for American consumers is highly disputed. The Department of Energy’s own 2024 modeling of LNG exports, albeit focused on Gulf Coast terminals, does not imply a positive outcome for U.S. consumers. Jennifer Granholm, Biden’s Secretary of Energy, noted the study found “that unfettered exports of LNG would increase wholesale domestic natural gas prices by over 30%,” and could come out to over $100 per U.S. household by mid-century.

SELECTIVE REPOSITIONING ON FOREIGN POLICY

As noted previously, Emanuel used an opportunity to speak at Tel Aviv University to speak in opposition to unconditional U.S. support for Israel. In the speech, mischaracterized by some observers as a substantial break from Emanuel’s staunch pro-Israel record, Emanuel decried Benjamin Netanyahu for “isolating” Israel. Even as he indicated support for ending taxpayer subsidies for Israel’s purchases of U.S. military equipment, he clarified he continues to support arms sales. As Ambassador to Japan, Emanuel pushed for the Japanese government to increase arms production in 2024; the Associated Press noted at the time that this urging to produce more weapons came amid conflicts including the ongoing Gaza war. 

Emanuel’s recent effort to create rhetorical distance between himself and the Israeli government’s most egregious actions is not especially brave: newer polling has found a clear majority of Democratic voters agree that Israel has engaged in genocide, and support for an arms embargo and sanctions is popular. More importantly, his rhetoric falls flat given his role in securing funding for the Iron Dome system during his time as White House chief of staff. Even when Emanuel criticized violence by settlers in the occupied West Bank, or humanitarian aid restrictions in Gaza, he did so by centering the risk posed to Israel’s international reputation as opposed to the Palestinians affected. 

As the Trump administration embraces unapologetic militarism as state policy, it’s worth noting that Emanuel’s hawkish record stands out even among the party’s centrist faction. Despite Bush’s reelection the previous November, the War in Iraq was beginning to register as unpopular in opinion polling by January 2005. That same month, Gallup recorded two surveys in which a majority of respondents said the Iraq War was a mistake. Amidst this backdrop, it’s worth noting that in January 2005, Emanuel stated in an interview that he would have still supported the invasion, even if he knew ahead of time that it was a false premise. Emanuel effectively endorsed the Bush administration's justification for the invasion, stating “I still believe that getting rid of Saddam Hussein was the right thing to do.” To be sure, human rights abuses during the war had been documented by this point, with Human Rights Watch noting in a 2005 report that both “U.S. forces and insurgents have been implicated in serious violations of the laws of armed conflict, including war crimes”. Moreover, while he criticized Bush’s execution of the war effort, he nonetheless voted for the final 2007 war-funding bill in Congress.

III. Conclusion

When nominated as Ambassador to Japan in 2021, advocates were concerned that, alongside other alarming aspects of his record, he would leverage further public service to once again return to the private sector to profit. Prior to his nomination by Biden, he had worked at investment bank Centerview Partners, where he leveraged his political connections and experience to assist private-sector clients on matters such as M&A and regulation. Sure enough, these critics would be vindicated just months after Biden left the White House, with Emanuel stepping back into a role at Centerview Partners once again. It is perhaps notable that, unlike other politicians seeking to break from their corporate-friendly image ahead of a presidential campaign by publicly cutting ties with past links, Emanuel has done this while feigning support for a populist agenda.

Emanuel’s pro-LNG diplomacy underscores the obvious: his recent anti-elite positioning is an insincere political tactic. For all of Emanuel’s criticisms of Trump, the current administration has pursued the same Alaska LNG project with more openly coercive tactics. In April 2025, Reuters reported that Trump had pushed Japan to support Alaska LNG while pressing allies to buy American energy and threatening tariffs. It is telling that the record on LNG exports aligns with Trump’s own agenda during his second term, even as he attempts a late-career rebrand as some sort of populist alternative. The next Democratic administration can and must break the cycle of foreign policy being used as a promotional vehicle for specific companies or industries’ own interests.