Michal Hatuel-Radoshitzky analyses Prime Minister Netanyahu’s mission to the US last week, focusing on his significant meetings, his UNGA address, and the protests that greeted him.
Photo: Courtesy of Forum Dvorah
Dr. Hatuel-Radoshitzky is an adjunct lecturer at Tel Aviv University and a member of Forum Dvorah: Women in Foreign Policy and National Security
The High-Level Week of the 78th UN General Assembly concluded on Friday, September 22, and this was also the day on which Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu delivered his address over this body’s distinguished platform, with its familiar green marble paneling. When analyzing Israel’s participation in this global festival of diplomacy, three elements are worth highlighting: Israel’s message, sideline meetings and the protests that accompanied PM Netnayahu’s participation.
The last time Netanyahu spoke at the UNGA in person was in 2018. The following year, internal political issues led him to send Foreign Minister Israel Katz; in 2020, the UNGA was held as a virtual event, and Netanyahu prerecorded a 10-minute address; in 2021, then prime minister Naftali Bennett represented Israel and last year, it was prime minister Yair Lapid who spoke in New York.
Unlike in earlier messages delivered both by Netanyahu and the abovementioned leaders, Friday’s speech at the UN brought Israel and the world something refreshingly positive and constructively proactive: a potential peace deal between Israel and Saudi Arabia, under the auspices of the US Biden Administration. In one of his most poignant statements, Netanyahu pulled out his infamous red marker (which he reminded the Assembly was used over the very same stage more than a decade earlier to demonstrate Iran’s progress towards a nuclear bomb) – to illustrate the fruits of peace.
In terms of how the speech was received back in Israel, two points are worth noting: first, it was covered with extensive live broadcasts, panels and special shows on all major media outlets (not a permanent feature in previous years). Second, it was predominantly hailed as embodying the visionary spirit set forth by former Israeli President Shimon Peres, who coined the vision of a new Middle East, in which Israel is an integral part. While critics from the opposition, expectedly led by MK Yair Lapid, focused on ignoring Saudi’s nuclear demands; inside the coalition, far-right partners refrained from ruining the festive sentiment and released only a general warning about potential concessions – currently undeclared but certainly needed – to see the deal through.
The second element worth considering, in light of the fact that the actual General Assembly address typically lasts for 10-20 minutes, is the comprehensive diplomatic setting that the UNGA facilitates for meetings between the political echelons of its 193 member states. In this vein, it is worth mentioning the much sought after meeting with President Joe Biden which concluded with Biden expressing hope to see Netanyahu in the white house by the end of the year. Other notable meetings included important face-time with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky (Israel and Hungary appear to be the only two states whose premiers did not visit Ukraine since the beginning of the war); with Paraguay’s President Santiago Peña, who reiterated the commitment to open Paraguay’s embassy in Jerusalem, with Turkey’s President Recep Tayip Erdogan and with German Chancellor Olaf Scholz.
A more controversial encounter was Netanyahu’s one-on-one with billionaire Elon Musk, who is playing an active role in instigating and enabling anti-Semitic comments to be voiced, shared and amplified on his newly Twitter-rebranded platform, X. While meeting with key players who can potentially play a role in mitigating antisemitism is important, such sensitive meetings should be conducted under two conditions: first, in cooperation and coordination with the local Jewish community, whose leaders can shed light on the phenomenon’s nuances and their needs – as frontline victims and fighters of this phenomenon. Second, in a private (non-televised), working setting, that will enable frank, open and honest dialogue about the troubling sharp rise of antisemitism along with actionable asks and concrete follow-up.
A second important meeting, without official diplomats, is the one held on Friday morning with Jewish leaders. The backdrop for such a meeting is the growing gap between American Jews and Israel, not only against recent judicial reforms but as a result of growing differences between the two communities on issues relating to Judaism (US Jewry practices less Orthodox and more open, liberal Judaism); shared values (70% of American Jews vote for Democratic Presidential candidates) and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Importantly, the meeting included representatives who were both supportive, and openly critical of the government. The presence of overtly critical figures was perhaps weighed against the timing of the meeting – slotted for after Netanyahu’s General Assembly address, which undoubtedly appealed to American (Jewish) ears and served to soften any grievances.
The third and final element that characterized Israel’s presence in the UNGA is protests against the Government-led judicial reforms. Some report a vocal, loud, unrelenting tailing and pestering of Netanyahu. Others emphasize the inability of protests to substantially impact Netanyahu’s trip, noting that the disruptive noise failed to penetrate the closed doors of the abovementioned meetings. An oft-cited claim against the legitimacy of such demonstrations is the boost they provide to BDS supporters.
Two points in this regard: first, the BDS campaign benefits far more from Jewish supremacist rhetoric than from protests that call to strengthen Israeli democracy. A poignant example of the former is the recent comment by Israel’s Minister of National Security, Itamar Ben Gvir, who referred to his family’s right to movement in the West Bank as more important than the freedom of movement for the Arabs. Protests actually serve to prove the deep rooting of democracy in the Israeli psyche and in Israel’s founding document, the Declaration of Independence, which protestors perpetually cite.
Second, the American Jewish community, which during the UNGA joined forces with Israeli protestors, did so after a long process during which red flags were quietly raised (particularly, during discussions about overturning decisions of the Supreme Court with a bare majority vote, and after the passing of the reasonableness law). Being on the front lines of the struggle against BDS, American Jews are well aware that internal disputes regarding Israeli democracy is not what interests the BDS campaign. This has been clearly demonstrated by the movement’s most recent Call for Action in #UNGA78 and in rhetoric put out after the UNGA denouncing efforts aimed at Israel-Saudi normalization.
All in all, in looking at Israel’s presence, rhetoric, goals and achievements in the global arena as portrayed in the 78th UN General Assembly – Israelis, of all stripes and colors – should be pleased. Israel put forward visionary, peaceful rhetoric for peace (for the first time in a long time) and successfully advanced important bilateral collaborations. As for the protests, regardless of their impact, they can certainly be viewed as crediting Israel and Israeli society with firm and internationally appraised, liberal, democratic values.
