In the unlikely event that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his speechwriters encounter writer’s block while preparing for his planned speech to a joint session of the US Congress, they could always simply copy and paste what he said the last time he addressed that august body.
“But I can guarantee you this, the days when the Jewish people remained passive in the face of genocidal enemies – those days are over,” he said on March 3, 2015.
“We are no longer scattered among the nations, powerless to defend ourselves. We restored our sovereignty in our ancient home. And the soldiers who defend our home have boundless courage. For the first time in 100 generations, we, the Jewish people, can defend ourselves. This is why, as prime minister of Israel, I can promise you one more thing: Even if Israel has to stand alone, Israel will stand.”
Back then, those words were said in the context of dealing with a nuclear Iran. Today, those exact words could be delivered as is, with only the focus shifted to Hamas and the war in Gaza rather than Iran.
On Saturday, Netanyahu received an invitation from the Republican and Democratic leadership of the Senate and House to address a joint session of Congress yet again, an honor reserved for America’s staunchest allies.
Though the final date still has to be worked out — the proposed June 13 date was nixed because it fell on the second day of Shavuot, celebrated in the Diaspora — Netanyahu immediately accepted, noting that this will be his fourth time addressing this body, more than any other leader in history (up until now, he was tied with Winston Churchill at three such speeches).
But given the lingering controversy over his last address to Congress and given the divisions inside the Democratic Party today over support for Israel, some are asking whether a trip to Washington at this time to make this speech is the wise thing to do.
Even strong pro-Israel representatives, such as former House Majority leader Rep. Steny Hoyer from Maryland, question whether this is the right move.
Calling the address an “ill-timed visit,” Hoyer told Politico that “there will be a lot of disruption, and it will not be helpful for Israel or its supporters.”
Netanyahu thinks differently, saying in a statement on Saturday night that he is “excited about the privilege to represent Israel before both houses of Congress and present the truth about our just war against those seeking our destruction before representatives of the American people and the entire world.”
Drawing comparisons between past addresses
INEVITABLE COMPARISONS between this proposed speech and Netanyahu’s controversial address in 2015 will be drawn.
That address was contentious because Netanyahu used the moment to come out against then-US president Barack Obama’s Iranian nuclear policy, and because his address to Congress, just a couple of weeks before elections in Israel, came despite the Obama administration’s opposition to the very idea.
Some critics, and there were many, viewed that speech as blatant interference in American domestic politics, while other critics saw it as a slight of the president.
Netanyahu supporters, however, said that it was incumbent upon the prime minister to come out forcefully against an emerging nuclear deal that he viewed as an existential threat to the Jewish state.
To this day, this speech remains a point of contention.
Netanyahu’s detractors see it as a watershed mark in turning Israel into a partisan issue in the US and as the cause of a break with many congressional Democrats, while his supporters see it as an act of diplomatic courage that – by showing a willingness to stand up to the US president on the Iranian issue – paved the way for accords with Arab countries equally fearful of Iran and distrustful of Obama’s Iranian policies.
Some 58 Democrats, out of the 535 House and Senate members, boycotted Netanyahu’s 2015 speech, and no one from the Obama administration attended.
Among those who did not attend was then vice president Joe Biden, whose job description then included the title “president of the Senate.”
This time, however, the situation is much different.
Although there are significant differences between Netanyahu and Biden regarding the war and the way it is being waged, the Biden administration – unlike the Obama administration in 2015 – is not opposed to the speech. The invitation was extended both by Republican Speaker of the House Mike Johnson and Democratic Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, as well as Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell and House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries.
It is inconceivable that Schumer, who just two months ago called on Netanyahu to resign in a speech for which he has received a great deal of political blowback, would have signed off on an invitation if it did not get the okay from the Biden administration.
So the pre-speech tension that existed last time – how dare Netanyahu address Congress when the president is opposed to him doing so! – does not exist today.
Still, some sensitive issues need to be worked out. The first is whether Netanyahu will get an invitation to meet with Biden in the White House, something he has not merited since returning to power in 2023.
With Biden facing a close election against Donald Trump, and Netanyahu a lightning rod for many left-wing Democrats, it is not clear that the president relishes a photo op with the prime minister at this moment. On the other hand, such a photo op would certainly not hurt Netanyahu politically and would help him fend off opposition claims that he is destroying relations with the US.
Then there is the question of whether Netanyahu should meet with Trump during this visit.
If Biden is in town and a Biden-Netanyahu meeting takes place, Netanyahu would almost certainly meet with Trump as well, something prime ministers typically do during election year visits to the US – meeting with both candidates.
However, if no Biden meeting is arranged, the question arises whether he should meet with Trump, something that would open Netanyahu up to accusations of favoring the Republican candidate, accusations that are likely to emerge in any case.
NEVERTHELESS, THE central issue remains: is delivering this address at this particular time a wise decision?Not everyone believes that it is. Among the arguments against this fourth appearance before the US Congress is that no matter what the prime minister says, his speech will be overshadowed by representatives and senators who will loudly and demonstratively boycott it.
The US airwaves are already full of progressive Democrats bewailing that the invitation was issued, with Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders leading the charge.
“I think I speak not just for myself but for a number of other senators who think that that decision is a very, very bad one. You do not honor a foreign leader by addressing a joint session of Congress who is currently engaged in creating the worst humanitarian disaster in the modern history of this country,” he said in an MSNBC interview on Tuesday, with the claim that this is the worst humanitarian disaster in modern history standing out for its outlandishness.
He also said, without any basis in fact, that what Netanyahu is “doing now is going to war against the entire Palestinian people.... The architect of that policy is not somebody you honor by bringing to the United States Congress.”
And Sanders has fellow travelers. Missouri Congresswoman Cori Bush, a “Squad member” fighting for her political life in a primary battle against Wesley Bell, was quoted as saying, “We should not platform more war criminals, period. He should not come to this house.”
If 58 Democrats boycotted Netanyahu’s speech in 2015, the same amount or even more are expected to demonstratively do the same this time as well, creating the damaging perception that American support for Israel is waning – a perception harmful to Israel’s strategic interests.
Another argument against Netanyahu going at this time is that the visit will highlight partisan divisions over Israel, since nearly all of the opposition to Netanyahu will come from Democrats, something that Republicans will then use to cast the opposing party as an anti-Israel party.
Some argue that the invitation to Netanyahu, which originated in the mind of Johnson, was intended to highlight the contrasts between the parties on Israel just a few months before the November election, and that this speech will further cement Israel as a partisan issue, something inimical to the country’s long-term interests.
But then there is the other side of the coin: those who say that while anti-Netanyahu voices will be feted in the media, those same media will not be able to avoid covering what will surely be a warm welcome by the vast majority of those attending the speech.
In 2015, in a speech negatively hyped for weeks beforehand, Netanyahu was interrupted by applause 36 times during the 45-minute address, including 23 standing ovations. A similar reception can be expected this time as well.
That reception, too, will be broadcast and more than counter Bush’s or Sanders’s negative comments. Furthermore, the very invitation serves as a stinging rebuke to International Criminal Court Prosecutor Karim Khan, who is seeking an arrest warrant for Netanyahu as a war criminal. “Arrest warrant?” some will wonder. “The man is being honored by the US Congress.”
Some argue that Netanyahu needs to come to Washington with a concrete plan, some kind of initiative or dramatic announcement to present to the US legislators rather than just giving a strong speech explaining Israel’s position – something he could do in an NBC or Fox News studio.
However, Netanyahu has shown over his long career that he deeply believes in the power and efficacy of a well-crafted speech, and how the right words, at the right time, delivered in the right way, can impact history.
His critics fault him for this, saying he is a man of too many speeches and not enough action.
But one thing is certain: Netanyahu won’t let the opportunity to once again address the US Congress slip by, even if – along with the upside of doing so at this time – there are some significant drawbacks as well.