Should Netanyahu Have Addressed the U.S. Congress?

Short Answer: After objectively examining the the Prime Minister of Israel’s visit to Congress, the answer is no.


The first problem is the context of his visit. The United State’s government is significantly divided and polarized. This rift has negatively impacted the country and its population who are more than likely not benefitting from a relationship with Israel. The party that is most benefitting from that relationship is Israel themselves, but given their socioeconomic conditions, they do not need the United States. Israel is a developed nation with a democracy and a thriving and extremely entrepreneurial private sector. Therefore, they are innovative and can survive on their own. In understanding this, it becomes somewhat confusing as to why much of the American population welcome this individual at the expense of disrespecting their president.

Any individual who has followed Middle Eastern politics to some degree has a general understanding of how the current Israeli government has an unwavering disdain towards Iran. This can be attributed to many reasons such as their support of Hezbollah, a Lebanese political party and militia. In the speech given by “Bibi”, in which he warned that in establishing an agreement with Iran would only aid their efforts in creating nuclear weapons. President Obama’s did not make the effort to watch, but read the script later. His response to the Prime Minister is that he proposed no reasonable alternatives and is not entirely wrong.


The only evidence necessary in this particular situation is history itself. President Obama’s assertion that no valuable suggestions were made is not without truth as the Prime Minister only insisted that the United States continue their efforts to restrict Iran’s nuclear ambitions. In looking to historical instances where sanctions and similar practices were unsuccessful, a couple significant instances can be examined. One of these instances includes sanctions against Japan in the pre-WWII period, which resulted in the bombing of Peal Harbor. The second instance, which is significantly more relevant as it is a more current example is that of North Korea. This is the perfect comparison as it has sanctions imposed on it by many nations, including the United States, yet it has been able to acquire nuclear arms. Therefore, it becomes evident that placing restrictions on Iran, is not a reliable option for ending or postponing their nuclear ambitions.

In conclusion, the long answer to the question is also no. Benjamin Netanyahu should not have been invited or accepted the invitation to address the United States congress. The speech will probably not change how Obama Administration will proceed and it should not, as the United States is a nation that should act in the manner it perceives will be the most effective. Furthermore, it may be within reason for the international community to question why other nations have nuclear arms, such as Israel itself.


4 thoughts on “Should Netanyahu Have Addressed the U.S. Congress?

  1. I found Benjamin Netanyahu intervention at the U.S Congress dangerous for the current talks between the P5+1 and Iran, which are already complicated. It is true that there is a risk if the UN decides to lift their economical sanctions but at the same time how can we obtain the transparency of the nuclear program? Negotiations need compromises, no? I think that what needs to be on the table for this nuclear agreement is the political, economical and military positions of Iran concerning the rest of the Middle East. I would like to have your opinion. In my last article on I discuss this matter. In your opinion, What needs to be included in this deal to ensure more security in the Middle East?

    Thank you !


    1. Thanks for the question. A general view of the region reveals one very disturbing fact, which is that Israel already possesses an arsenal of nuclear weapons. Given their existing military power, this is unnecessary. The international community must act fairly and without prejudice, which would mean Israel be held to the same standard as Iran. When approaching Middle East politics in this sense, it would be illogical to ask anything else of Iran besides their cooperation. In alienating this nation, the region is split into to axis and further destabilized. Agree? Disagree? Always open to conversation and debate.


  2. That’s true! I think that Netanyahu is criticising Iran’s behaviour in the Middle East but he should look at his own backyard first. In my opinion, his speech in the U.S congress was just a strategy for his political campaign in Israel and he really doesn’t care about the international community, even if he says so by scaring everyone. I also think, as you’ve said, that demonising and isolating Iran would only aggravate the situation in the Middle East.
    Concerning the nuclear deal, what do you think the U.S should negotiate to ensure that Iran would not worsen the current situation in the region?

    Thanks !


    1. The only truly important thing the U.S. can negotiate would be to stop funding groups such as Hezbollah. While I am not against the organization, it will help put an end to the Cold War-like polarity and spheres of influence in the region. Other than that, there isn’t much else that can be done.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s