The clash between the Obama White House and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu over his address to Congress next month speaks to a larger shift in the Democratic Party over relations with Israel.
Not all that long ago, it would have been unimaginable for Democrats to even consider boycotting a speech by Israel’s head of state.
But with daylight between President Obama and Netanyahu on so many issues, most notably, ongoing nuclear negotiations with Iran — and as White House officials show less interest in downplaying the chronic spats — more Democrats see little reason to provide Israel’s leader a wider audience.
Democrats insist they can air complaints about the conservative Netanyahu’s policies without appearing hostile toward the United States’ greatest ally in the Middle East.
Netanyahu is expected to press for new sanctions on Iran, even in the face of Obama warning American lawmakers not to go down that path. And when given the choice between backing Obama or Netanyahu, some progressives argued that boycotting the speech was a no-brainer.
“What’s the downside?” a House Democratic lawmaker skipping the speech told the Washington Examiner. Netanyahu “is trying to embarrass the president in our backyard. I don’t need to see that. And I don’t anticipate any kind of backlash to last all that long.”
The more than two dozen Democratic lawmakers not attending the Netanyahu speech were given political cover when Obama said he would not meet with the Israeli prime minister and Vice President Joe Biden passed on attending — he’ll travel to Uruguay and Guatemala during the first week of March.
Though the White House has framed the snub as a matter of protocol, pointing to the Israeli election just two weeks later, the standoff is the clearest proof yet of the disdain between the two leaders. Netanyahu openly rooted for Obama’s opponent in the 2012 presidential contest, Republican Mitt Romney, and now the president is returning the favor.
“If Netanyahu wins, I don’t expect the freeze to thaw before the president leaves office,” a former Obama administration official who worked extensively on Middle East issues told the Examiner. “There’s too much distrust there. You can only gloss over it for so long.”
In fact, former Obama campaign hands are now supporting policy groups in Israel aligned with Netanyahu’s opponents.
That reality is why the Democratic boycott list of the Netanyahu speech has grown so long — even a few Jewish lawmakers have already said they’re skipping the speech. Were Obama and Netanyahu in a somewhat conciliatory phase right now, members of the president’s party would not be so quick to dismiss the address, Democrats concede.
Obama sees the finalization of a nuclear deal with Iran as the crown jewel of his foreign policy doctrine, whereas Netanyahu views the development as an existential threat to Israel. In the latest twist, U.S. officials have accused the Netanyahu government of selectively leaking details of the Iran negotiations in an attempt to sabotage the talks.
Picking sides in that debate, while easy for the progressive wing of the party, is difficult for more hawkish members of the Democratic Party who sympathize with Netanyahu’s concerns.
And some Democrats accused Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, of inviting the Israeli prime minister to address Congress purely to put Democrats in an awkward position.
“I think that Boehner saw it as an opportunity to put Democrats in a bind,” said Christopher Hahn, a former aide to Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., a lawmaker who will attend the Netanyahu speech. “I think he’s playing a game. It’s just petty.”
