51st: Authentic and original chutzpah and more of it
Ha’aretz reports what the U.S. media dare not speak: “Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will give a Mideast peace policy speech in front of U.S. Congress in late May, Haaretz learned on Thursday, in an attempt to counter a speech expected to deal with U.S. Mideast policy by President Barack Obama.” Does this make Netanyahu co-president? or co-secretary of state?
UPDATE on the invitation to speak from MJ Rosenberg at Media Matters: “Leave it to House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA). With President Barack Obama expected to deliver a major speech outlining a new (or, at least, revised) Middle East peace strategy soon, Cantor decided it was time to invite Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu to deliver a speech before a joint session of Congress.
“This is one of the benefits of having a Republican House at the same time that a Likud prime minister is in office in Israel. The two right-wing parties can work together to thwart any Democratic president’s attempt to advance U.S. national security by brokering Middle East peace.”
Are you implying that no other foreign heads of state have ever addressed Congress? If so, did you mock their appearance similarly?
Co-campaign manager for the GOP, I suspect. With the parade of conservative Christian Republican candidates to the Holy Land of late, Israel is being called the new Iowa.
Ah the inimitable PF again.
The point being there is little hope for real peace in theNetanyahu settlement approach, not dignitaries talking t oCongress.
I think this thread has even some reach to the Pakistan thread below, because not only is peace in the Middle East both a desieratum but highly difficult to reach in itself, given history, but further complexified(is that word OK, A.O.?) by the decsions and obfuscations of rulers in the area, some of whom are under the gun in more ways than one.
Of course we should welcome foreign heads of state and if they want to address Congress and Congress issues an invitation more power to them. How many come to deliver a critique and counter-proposal to the foreign policy proposals of the president? This is insulting to the president and to the U.S.
“. . . but further complexified(is that word OK, A.O.?) by . . . ”
Love it, Bob N. :-)
I once heard Prime Minister Harold Macmillan of England deliver a speech to a joint session of Congress. He expressed a lot of disagreement with the U. S., even criticizing us strongly, but without snarkiness. By the end of his speech he had the Congress literally cheering him loudly. Amazing diplomat.
I just checked him out at Wikipedia. Looks like he was a particularly good PM. I hadn’t remembered that. He was a Tory, though a pragmatist. Hmm.
Too bad PM Netanyahu does not share the virtues of PM Macmillan.
Ms. S. –
Too true. But I fear that some in the Congress might be too willing to be persuaded by him.
In trying to think of solutions to the problem of the current Israeli government, I keep returning to the money Congressmen need to run for office every two years, and the role that the Israel lobby plays in raising funds for them. Solution (?): change the Constitution so that representatives will run only every three years. That might cut the problem in half. They’ll still need money, but not nearly so much.