Israel’s prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, travelled to Washington this week for a series of high-level meetings. At the invitation of the Republican majority in the House of Representatives, he addressed a joint session of the US Congress.
More than 90 Democratic Party politicians did not attend, including the vice-president – and likely Democratic Party presidential nominee – Kamala Harris, who would normally preside over the session, but pleaded a prior engagement.
The Conversation asked John Strawson, an expert in Israeli politics at the University of East London, about key issues arising from the speech, as well as his views on the situation in Gaza.
What were your principal takeaways from Benjamin Netanyahu’s speech to the US Congress last night?
This was vintage Netanyahu. It was a speech full of bluster and empty rhetoric which went through his favourite buzzwords. He invoked terrorism, Iran, good versus evil, the Hebrew Prophets and Winston Churchill, while using the pain of the hostage families and heroism of the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) for his own glory.
Netanyahu offered nothing concrete on a ceasefire or a post-war Gaza. His defence of democracy felt particularly hollow given his government’s policy to weaken the rule of law and press freedom in Israel. Ultimately, his day in Congress was upstaged by President Biden’s valedictory broadcast in the evening.
While in Washington, Netanyahu is due to have meetings with both Biden and Harris, as well as the Republican presidential nominee, Donald Trump. Which meeting will he consider the most important?
Netanyahu as always will be hedging his bets with all three. With Biden, he will be pressing for the US to allow delivery of the 2,000-pound bombs it has been withholding for fear of the disproportionate effect their use would have on civilians in Gaza.
Kamala Harris will be a very difficult encounter, as they have no history and Harris has made quite forthright public statements on the humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza – which wasn’t mentioned in Netanyahu’s speech. Given the current momentum behind her, the Israeli prime minister will be conscious he could be dealing with a potential president.
Read more: Kamala Harris has a different view on Gaza to Joe Biden – it could win her votes in November
Trump has been critical of Netanyahu since October 7, and their meeting will no doubt attempt a new beginning – certainly, Netanyahu took pains in his speech to lavishly praise Trump. But both men are so egotistical that it could prove a delicate process.
Harris did not attend Netanyahu’s speech to Congress, and nor did many of her Democratic colleagues. Depending on the result of the election in November, could this mark a major change in US attitudes towards the “blank cheque” traditionally enjoyed by Israel?
The days of blank cheques for Israel are certainly over. The fact Harris did not preside over the joint session of Congress due to a longstanding engagement may play well for her in the election campaign, as she tries to win over critics of Biden’s perceived pro-Israel stance on the Gaza war.
Netanyahu tried to play the “we are the frontline” of the west’s security concerns card yet again. But with the war in Ukraine and rising military power of China, most US politicians will be not be convinced.
Netanyahu has been accompanied by a recently released hostage, as well as the families of other Israelis still held by Hamas. At home, the level of protest against him is rising. How dangerous is that situation for him, and how does he suppose this visit will benefit him?
The US Republicans initiated the invitation to Netanyahu as an intervention in the US elections. But as it turns out, this may prove more of an intervention into a future Israeli election. The optics of Netanyahu amid a series of standing ovations will become clips in campaign ads back in Israel. But his words on the hostages were made to seem empty by the fact that, while he was speaking, the IDF were recovering the bodies of five more dead hostages from Gaza.
The ceasefire deal has been on the table for months and during that time, 41 of the remaining 120 hostages are known to have died. Netanyahu’s refusal to agree to the ceasefire means this number will grow.
At the end of the day, I suspect the cheers from US lawmakers will be irrelevant compared with the Israeli public’s anger over the way the hostages have been abandoned.
While the US state department and international media are reporting that a ceasefire deal is close, reports in the Israeli press are less sanguine. Former war cabinet member Benny Gantz says Netanyahu is the main obstacle to a deal, and has blamed the deaths of ‘a quarter of the hostages’ on Israel’s prime minister. But how much of that is just political game-playing?
The framework for the ceasefire and hostage release has been around since March. Making optimistic noises at the end of July is tragic.
I think Gantz is right about the fate of the hostages – Netanyahu always puts his interests above anything else. We were told by the prime minister that once the IDF dealt with the last Hamas battalions in Rafah, the intense fighting would be over. Well, we have had weeks of fighting in Rafah, but also intense fighting in and around Gaza city that Netanyahu did not explain this in his speech.
Because the continuation of the war suits his political calculations, I suspect we are going to see the deaths of more Israeli hostages, more Palestinian civilians, and more Israeli soldiers.
What will the US be saying to Netanyahu about the International Court of Justice’s (ICJ) opinion on Israeli occupation of Palestinian territory in Jerusalem, the West Bank and Gaza? How does this change the dynamics of the region?
The ICJ’s opinion on the unlawful nature of Israel’s 57-year-old occupation reflects the international legal consensus (and for transparency, that includes me). While the US position has wavered on this, it is worth remembering that President George H.W. Bush effectively imposed sanctions on Israel over settlement activity in 1991.
Later, his son, George W. Bush, and then Trump both softened considerably on the issue. But as Biden looks to his legacy, the one foreign policy achievement he craves is the new security and technology pact with Saudi Arabia. Part of that agreement could be Saudi recognition of Israel – if concrete steps are taken towards a Palestinian state.
Whether Biden thinks bringing up the July 19 ICJ opinion will help that argument with Netanyahu is another matter. Netanyahu reacted furiously to the ICJ’s opinion, calling it “absurd” that “the Jewish people” could be considered “occupiers in their own land”.
As Netanyahu made clear in his speech to Congress, he has no plan for a two-state solution at the heart of a new Middle East. This means he has no credible plan for the day after the war – just more of the same, with no end in sight to the catastrophe in Gaza.
This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.
