Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu appeared before a joint session of the US Congress on 3 March, his third such appearance. After praising both Republicans and Democrats in their steadfast support for Israel, as well the incomparable support of the Obama administration for the security of Israel, he warned against not only what he has termed a bad deal with Iran, but also Iranian policies in the Middle East. As usual, he sounded very alarmist about the future, particularly when he referred to the “tentacles of terror on Israel's border.” He spoke of Iran's “goons in Gaza, its lackeys in Lebanon,” and its “Revolutionary Guards on the Golan Heights.” He added that the proposed nuclear deal with Iran would start the countdown to a “nuclear nightmare” in the Middle East. And not to miss such an opportunity, he raised the stakes even higher when he said, “The greatest danger facing our world is the marriage of militant Islam with nuclear weapons.” Netanyahu continued, “We can't let that happen.” He went even further when insisting that the emerging deal “would all but guarantee that Iran gets nuclear weapons lots of them.” The reactions in the United States to the speech were unusually lukewarm for an Israeli prime minister. President Barack Obama adopted a detached position. On 3 March, he said that he didn't have the chance to watch Netanyahu's speech, adding, “I did have a chance to look at the transcript, and as far as I can tell there was nothing new.” Concerning the substance of the talks with Iran, which centre on preventing Iran from manufacturing nuclear weapons, Obama said the “prime minister didn't offer any viable alternatives.” President Obama went on to say that when the interim deal was negotiated with Iran back in November 2013, “Prime Minister Netanyahu made almost the precisely same speech about how dangerous that deal was going to be. And yet, over a year later, even Israeli intelligence officers and, in some cases, members of the Israeli government have to acknowledge that, in fact, it has kept Iran from further pursuing its nuclear programme.” And to assure members of Congress, and other allies and partners of the United States, the US president stressed that the deal being negotiated “would ensure that it did not have what we call a breakout capacity that was shorter than a year's time. And it would subject Iran to the most vigorous inspections and verifications regimes that have ever been put in place.” President Obama emphasised that the alternative offered by the Israeli prime minister “is no deal, in which case Iran will immediately begin once again pursuing its nuclear programme, accelerate its nuclear programme, without us having an insight into what that they are doing.” Probably the harshest reaction on the Democratic side came from Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi of California, the former speaker of the House of Representatives. In a written statement issued after the Israeli prime minister finished his address, Pelosi said, “The unbreakable bonds between the United States and Israel are rooted in our shared values, our common ideals, and mutual interest. “That's why ... I was near tears throughout the prime minister's speech saddened by the insult to the intelligence of the United States as part of the P5+1 nations ... and saddened by the condescension toward our knowledge of the threat posed by Iran and our broader commitment to preventing nuclear proliferation.” In Israel, reactions were not better. The main political opponent facing Netanyahu in the upcoming elections, Haim Hertzog of the Labour Party, who is leading the “Zionist bloc”, said that the “painful truth is that after all the applause, Netanyahu is alone and Israel is isolated, and the negotiations will continue without Israel's input.” Strangely enough, the third appearance of the Israeli prime minister in front of the US Congress didn't better the chances of Likud in the general elections in Israel on 17 March. On the other hand, and despite the overall negative reactions within the United States, a group of 47 Republican senators has written an open letter to Iran's leaders, dated 8 March, warning that any nuclear agreement that would be signed by President Obama won't last after he leaves office. The letter was organised by freshman Senator Tom Cotton and co-signed by the entire Republican Party leadership and potential 2016 presidential contenders Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz and Rand Paul. The letter warned the Iranian government ahead of agreeing to any nuclear deal that any unilateral executive agreement is one that they accept at their own peril. The letter explained that any agreement not approved by the US Congress would be a mere executive order, and thus open to abrogation, if need be, by the next US president. It is doubtful that such a warning will nip in the bud the deal that is being negotiated, but it might encourage the White House to keep the Republicans in both houses of the US Congress abreast of the negotiations with Iran. As far as Israel is concerned, it is better to get prepared for a new political map in the Middle East that could bring to an end 35 years of estrangement between the United States and Iran. This is precisely what is worrying Israeli hawks. In his State of the Union address in January, President Obama threatened to veto any congressional resolution imposing sanctions on Iran before 30 June 2015, the date set by the P5+1 group to reach an agreement with Iran concerning its nuclear programme. The tone of the president was quite firm and the message was not lost on a Republican-dominated Congress following the November mid-term elections. The reason behind this firmness lies in the fact that the Republicans have not been open to a deal with Iran, and have harboured suspicions on the possible content of such an agreement. Some have expressed the fear that such an agreement might only delay Iran going nuclear, or allow Tehran to be in a position to manufacture a nuclear weapon once a political decision is taken. In fact, the Republicans, in this respect, have seen eye to eye with the Israeli government, led by Binyamin Netanyahu Twenty-four hours after the State of the Union address, Congressman John Boehner, the Republican Speaker of the House of Representatives, extended an invitation to the Israeli prime minister to address a joint session of Congress to the complete surprise of almost everyone in Washington DC. This included the White House, which was not consulted. Needless to say, the invitation raised legitimate questions about the propriety of the legislative branch encroaching on the constitutional prerogatives of the executive. It also goes without saying that this invitation was meant to help Netanyahu in the Israeli general elections, scheduled to take place on 17 March, and also support the Republicans as they prepare for the next presidential campaign in the United States in 2016. The US administration had gone to great lengths to smooth over differences with the Republicans, as far as this invitation was concerned, but made it known that the US president would not receive the Israeli premier on the grounds that it was standard policy for the administration not to receive foreign officials who are up for election in their own countries. Meanwhile, negotiations and discussions with Iran went on as scheduled, and Secretary of State John Kerry met his Iranian counterpart to try to bridge gaps in the negotiations between the positions of the P5+1 and the Iranian government. Press reports and editorials in leading American papers have implied that an agreement on a framework accord cannot be ruled out before the end of March, opening the way for a final agreement before the agreed-upon deadline of 30 June. The Israeli prime minister went to Washington in the first week of March to try to delay, if not torpedo, such an agreement. The writer is former assistant to foreign minister.
