Why Netanyahu's Speech Became So Controversial

The tradition of inviting foreign leaders to speak in the U.S. Congress dates back to 1842, but few invitations have generated as much news as the recent one extended to Benjamin Netanyahu. This is the third time the Israeli Prime Minister has spoken in the U.S. Congress. He is the second world leader to hold such a record, but it is not the speech itself that has caused controversy. The opposition from the U.S. government, which is currently negotiating with Iran over its nuclear program, has made this speech even more significant. Netanyahu has stated that he wants to discuss the dangers of an agreement with Iran with American lawmakers. Prior to Netanyahu's speech in Washington, there has been much speculation about it. What is your assessment of Netanyahu's acceptance of this invitation? Yossi Mekelberg: Honestly, I do not recall a speech generating this much noise and analysis before it even took place. I think the reason for this is that a very important international issue is at the center of this speech, namely Iran's nuclear program and the possibility of its militarization. This speech also impacts U.S.-Israel relations and ultimately relates to U.S. domestic politics. As a result, the combination of these issues has made this speech intriguing to see what Mr. Netanyahu exactly wants to address. It seems he wants to talk about the details of an agreement that no one has seen yet, and he claims that no agreement is good because he believes the international community cannot trust Iran to adhere to its commitments. The U.S. justification on this issue is that Iran has shown it adheres to its commitments during the initial Geneva agreement. However, the issue is that the U.S. warned the Israeli Prime Minister on Monday not to speak about the details of the agreement. How much do you think Mr. Netanyahu will delve into the details of this issue? I think about that too, how much he will actually get into the details he knows about. But the point is that the more he addresses the details, the more he aims to target an agreement. The goal is that by doing this, the U.S. Congress will pass more sanctions against Iran, and perhaps this process could lead to a military operation against Iran. This is a possibility. However, it should be noted that the initial Geneva agreement had multiple clauses that Israel should support, meaning that Iran will not produce nuclear weapons and will not enrich uranium at levels that could be used to produce weapons. So far, inspectors say that Iran is committed to what it agreed upon a year ago. Iran wants to reach an agreement to benefit from it. It wants to be a member of the international community again. Not that it wants to abandon its nuclear program, but it needs international sanctions to be lifted. In Iran itself, we see that this process has created disagreements, and not all political factions support this dialogue process. However, it seems that a change has occurred. Israel's intervention, which can be interpreted as the 1+5 negotiating on behalf of Israel, is something that the 1+5 does not currently need. This not only harms Israel itself but also undermines the interests of the international community. Speaking of Israel's interests, one of the articles published about this speech states that since World War II, such speeches by leaders in the U.S. Congress have mostly given them an opportunity to speak to their own people. How do you think the Israeli people, who are on the verge of an election, will react to this speech? There is no doubt that Netanyahu's action has created a diplomatic imbalance. Two weeks before the elections, he draws the U.S. into the internal political scene of Israel. I think the U.S. Congress, which has acted very poorly in this regard, has interfered in a democratic process in Israel and created such an opportunity for a candidate in the elections. Netanyahu wants the Israeli people to see that although he has made mistakes and faces corruption allegations and does not have a stellar record, he is a leader who defends the interests of the Israeli people on the global stage. Meanwhile, senior Israeli security officials have stated that this speech will harm Israel and its relations with the U.S. If the Israeli people see this as an opportunistic move ahead of elections, it could backfire on Netanyahu. However, if this speech helps Mr. Netanyahu to become Prime Minister again, he will have to work with the Barack Obama administration for about two more years. What do you think this relationship will look like? The relationship between Obama and Netanyahu is far from an ideal one. There is a serious rift between the two. Obama has said that if Netanyahu is re-elected, he will work with him. However, I think there is a personal animosity between the two. Even from their mannerisms, one can understand this negative point. This is not only about the issue of Iran. Obama sees Netanyahu as the main obstacle to peace with the Palestinians and the failure of negotiations. I think we should wait for the U.S. government's response to Netanyahu's action regarding the speech, and even events concerning the peace negotiations. Sometimes, in diplomacy, bilateral relations can be influential, and in this specific case, I think there is such a rift that it will impact U.S.-Israel relations for a while.