The bigger the stage, goes an old saying, the greater the expectations.
That being the case, expectations are high for some dramatic announcement when Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu addresses a special joint session of Congress in Washington on Wednesday, since there are few political stages in the world bigger than this one.
When Netanyahu addresses Congress – regardless of how many Democratic lawmakers absent themselves to show their disdain for Israel’s elected leader – he will be making history as the only world leader to have been given this honor four times, surpassing even Winston Churchill. That adds even more drama to the moment.
Will Netanyahu use this occasion merely to put forth Israel’s case regarding the war in Gaza – something he can do and has done in a television interview? Will he, as he did in 2015, focus on Iran and its malign designs in the region? Will the prime minister express appreciation for American moral, diplomatic, and military support during the war? Or will he discuss expanding the Abraham Accords to Saudi Arabia and beyond?
Netanyahu, an artful speechwriter and orator, will likely touch on all of the above. But that’s to be expected. The true drama would come if he used this platform to announce an agreement on a deal to release the hostages in Hamas’s captivity. That is something that would move this speech into a different category altogether; it would make it forever memorable.
This is something obviously not lost on Netanyahu, a politician who, in his long career, has demonstrated an understanding of political theater and grand gestures – just think back to his 2012 UN speech with the bomb cartoon to illustrate the Iranian nuclear threat or his dramatic unveiling of Iran’s nuclear archives in 2018.
BUT A hostage agreement announcement is not entirely for Netanyahu to make. Hamas, too, needs to agree – a small fact often overlooked in the debate swirling around the hostage deal in Israel – and it is not completely clear to the public what Hamas has or has not agreed to.
There is endless speculation. There are brief statements from Hamas spokesmen. There are leaks from senior officials involved in the negotiations and senior defense officials and representatives of the hostage families. Negotiations are ongoing, but the details of what precisely the sticking points are – and details here are essential – remain largely speculation. This is a case of more being hidden than revealed.
More than nine months into the Gaza War, and – somewhat remarkably – the internal Israeli debate still rages around what will compel Hamas to free the hostages: more military might or a deal. Israelis were debating this at the end of October, before the ground incursion into Gaza; at the end of November, after the first hostage deal broke down; and in early spring, when the country’s leaders debated – and argued publicly with the US – over whether the IDF should go into Rafah to apply greater military pressure on Hamas.
Some believe Netanyahu doesn't want deal
Critics of Netanyahu, and they are legion, say that he doesn’t really want to finalize a deal, because of political expedience. They say that the recent nonnegotiable conditions he added just as positive signs emerged in the negotiations are little more than an attempt to torpedo any possible deal. They say he doesn’t want a deal, because if he agrees to the agreement on the table, he will lose his government since the far-right parties of Otzma Yehudit and the Religious Zionist Party will leave his coalition.
What these critics disregard is the real possibility that Netanyahu – and even far-right ministers Bezalel Smotrich and Itamar Ben-Gvir, yes, even they – may actually care about the hostages but are worried about the precedent that will be set and the dangers that will be posed for the Israeli collective in the future if a deal is reached that leaves Hamas still standing and able to declare “victory” by merely surviving.
Netanyahu’s critics say that adding new conditions now – that Israel will not withdraw from the Philadelphi Corridor with Egypt, or barring armed terrorists from returning to the northern part of the Gaza Strip – is meant to force Hamas to reject the deal.
His fiercest critics say that he doesn’t care about the hostages, that he is pursuing an unachievable goal of “absolute victory” over Hamas because he wants the war to continue on and on, as a means of remaining in power.
Might it be, however, that Netanyahu does care for the hostages but thinks that with the pressure now on Hamas, this is not the time to reduce the heat but instead increase it and in that way get the maximum hostages released in the minimal amount of time?
A significant swath of the public does not entertain this possibility, revealing the degree to which Netanyahu’s motives are suspect. With the country facing a monumental crisis, that a significant part of the public does not trust the leader’s motives is not the strongest place for the country to be at the moment.
Political motivations
INTERESTINGLY, OVER the last few weeks, the security establishment has signaled to the Israeli public that it is in favor of reaching a deal now, even at the expense of stopping the war, with various anonymous security officials hinting that it is the cynical political establishment that is holding things up.
In this argument, it is in Netanyahu’s interest to keep the war going – if only on a low burner – to deflect calls for new elections and for the establishment of a state commission of inquiry. Whenever asked about either matter, Netanyahu responds that neither can occur while the war wages. His critics, attributing to him the worst and most cynical motives, conclude that is why he wants the war to continue – to delay the elections and/or the commission of inquiry.
His supporters, however, counter that the security establishment – including Defense Minister Yoav Gallant and Chief of Staff Herzi Halevi – also have ulterior motives.
October 7 was a colossal catastrophe, and the army did not do what it was entrusted to do: protect the country’s citizens. Therefore, they argue, the security establishment wants to rectify that wrong – and the only way to do so entirely is to return the hostages. Only in this way will the stain of October 7 be removed somewhat from its conscience.
The position of the security establishment is that a deal could be accepted now and that Israel could learn to cope with the various security problems that would arise – such as leaving the Philadelphi Corridor. One idea being discussed is an underground wall with hi-tech sensors that would be constructed along the Gaza-Egypt border maintained by Egyptian and perhaps UAE troops, with Israel monitoring from afar.
The Philadelphi Corridor is critical – soldiers have died and are currently risking their lives there to secure it. Should Israel again leave such a security asset to hi-tech wizardry or a third party? Is making that argument abandoning hostages, or is it a sober appraisal that to do this would lead to the rebuilding of Hamas and more hostages in the future?
If Netanyahu is indeed delaying agreement on the deal, is it because he doesn’t care about the hostages, or perhaps because he feels – as he said in the Knesset debate on Wednesday – that Hamas is starting to crack, and that more pressure will bring better conditions?
AS THIS debate swirls, Netanyahu’s date with Congress approaches. Given the high profile of this visit, the question arises: Could there be negative consequences if, during the visit – which is scheduled to include a meeting with US President Joe Biden on Monday – no announcement is made on the hostage issue?
Biden, whose political fortunes have flipped and whose political future is now seriously in doubt, needs a dramatic achievement. If he doesn’t get it, could this further strain relations between Washington and Jerusalem? The White House has expressed frustration with Netanyahu’s approach to the hostage negotiations, though it has not blamed him for its lack of success.
A failure to make headway in Washington would also likely lead to increased domestic pressure on Netanyahu in Israel, intensifying protests and demands for him to make the deal happen, weakening him further politically. Conversely, this could lead to greater calls for Israel to intensify the military activities in Gaza to get Hamas to bend.
For various reasons, Netanyahu’s speech to Congress is shaping up as a watershed moment in the hostage deal negotiations, mainly because it coincides with a critical phase in the hostage deal talks. One assumes that Gallant knew what he was talking about when he urged some families of hostages this week to meet with Netanyahu before the prime minister goes to Washington. Furthermore, the timing of the visit amplifies the stakes, since any statement the prime minister makes in Washington about the talks could significantly affect their outcome.
Netanyahu relishes high-profile moments on the international stage. With the hostage issue as the focus of attention, the world and Israel will expect to hear some message, and the tenor of that message may either catalyze progress or further complicate an already intricate and delicate situation.