Why I Think Netanyahu Should Speak To The American Congress

Why I Think Netanyahu Should Speak To The American Congress

Opinion by Rabbi Boaz D. Heilman

February 24, 2015

The issue rarely matters.  It’s enough to say the word “Israel,” and opinions immediately emerge, percolate, and boil over.  The latest rage, of course, is over Netanyahu’s speech to the U.S. Congress next week.  As of this moment, the plans have not changed. Israel’s Prime Minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, intends to go on with his speech, regardless of widespread criticism.  

The whole event, from inception on, has been a gambit.  The setup is well known—House Speaker John A. Boehner, possibly to spite President Obama, invites Netanyahu; the White House claims the invitation was not cleared with POTUS first.  And it all gets worse from there.

The antipathy between Obama and Netanyahu is well known and fully documented.  Insults, snubs and all out election interference have been going on for six years now, starting when Netanyahu emerged as the winner of the 2009 Israeli elections, defeating Obama’s pick, Tzippi Livni (now number 2 on the center-left, anti-Netanyahu, Zionist Camp party).

By addressing Congress despite displeasure expressed by the White House, Netanyahu seems to keep the feud going.  Is it ego? Pride? Self-destruction?

With elections in Israel less than three weeks away, this may be a desperate political move.  It’s possible that Netanyahu feels that he has nothing to lose.  Certainly there is immense internal and external pressure to see him defeated.  Within Israel, criticism over his lavish lifestyle at taxpayer’s expense is mixed with frustration over the indecisive conclusion of the 2014 Gaza War.  Frankly, Israelis are responding with deep skepticism to Netanyahu’s promise to restore Israel’s sense of security and confidence. 

And despite the White House’s stated intention not to interfere in Israeli politics, it’s doing exactly the exact opposite.  It’s been doing that for six years now.

But IS Netanyahu overstepping protocol by insisting on addressing Congress next week?

The story that made the rounds—and is still widely accepted as true—is that the White House was not informed in advance of Boehner’s invitation.  Partially responsible for this is the New York Times.  Yet that is not true.  The White House WAS informed.  On January 30, the Times had to publish a retraction of its original story, stating, “[Netanyahu] accepted after the administration had been informed of the invitation, not before.” 

Yet somehow, the retraction never quite managed to change the widely held perception In fact, the White House has been cultivating it, when what actually happened is that the President showed his displeasure by not responding to the message sent by the Speaker. 

The same thing happened in 2011, shortly before the 2012 election.  Only then, POTUS simply abstained, not wanting to lose any crucial votes.  Now, Obama has nothing to lose, and so he calls foul. It isn’t uncommon in sports or in politics.  So what we have is a standoff from which no party is willing to back down.  Too much pride is involved, too much ego, too much politics.

But what is really at stake here?

Only Israel’s safety and security.

Iran has stated over and over again its hope of seeing Israel destroyed.  It is also developing nuclear capacity.  Maybe it’s for peaceful purposes, maybe it isn’t.  Either way, by going nuclear Iran will be changing the balance of power in the Middle East and possibly the rest of the world.

What does Iran’s dominance mean to the Middle East?

Iran is the major supplier of weapons and training to both Hamas and Hezbollah, sworn warring enemies of Israel.  Iran is behind the 1983 bombings of the U.S. Marine barracks and embassy, which together killed more than 300 people.  Iran is behind the 1994 bombing of the Jewish Community Center in Buenos Aires, Argentina.  Iran is implicated in terror bombings in India, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Bulgaria and other places around the world.

Would Iran show restraint once armed with nuclear weapons?

Maybe, maybe not. 

Certainly negotiations are preferable to warfare.  But in any negotiations, if one party hides key facts and pretends that no one sees, then it is simply not acting in good faith.  And any agreement to such a process could never be seen as anything short of appeasement.

For Israel, this is not acceptable.  Israel was created to stop violence against its people and to protect Jews around the world.

By insisting on addressing Congress, Netanyahu could be making a political pitch, but from this most public stage in the world, he also could be trying yet one more time to tell the world that Jews and Israel will never again agree to be the sacrificial lamb at the altar of appeasement.

How will this standoff end? I am not sure, but here is what I’m thinking:

Obama and all members of Congress should attend the speech.  At this time, more than ever, politics and pride need to be put aside. This is a time to show support to a trusted friend.

Disagreement between friends and allies is not rare.  The US and Israel have disagreed on any number of issues in the past, and without a doubt will continue to do so in the future.  But not showing up for this speech is more than active interference in Israel’s politics.  It's interference in Israel’s survival.

Netanyahu has said many times that he will never stop defending Israel.  He will not do so on this occasion either, no matter what the consequence might be to his own career.

And what after?  Will US-Israel relations continue to suffer?  Not at all.  The friendship is deep; the alliance stands on firm ground. No matter who wins in the March election, Israel will remain strong. 

This is a time for all Americans—Jews and non-Jews—to show resolve and determination, to support Israel and not show deference to an ever more aggressive Iran.

Netanyahu speaks for me.  He speaks for us all, and we must listen.