Why Netanyahu's speech to Congress is backfiring, in two tweets

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu released a statement on Tuesday reaffirming his commitment to speak to a joint session of Congress. The planned March 3 speech is infuriating Democrats on the Hill, who want him to cancel or postpone, making Netanyahu's statement news in its own right.

But Netanyahu's specific words are really telling. When his Twitter account sent out two sentences from the statement, it ended up unintentionally pointing out exactly why the speech has become such a political problem for him, and created such controversy:

I intend to speak in the U.S. Congress because Congress might have an important role on a nuclear deal with Iran.

— בנימין נתניהו (@netanyahu) February 10, 2015

I am going to the United States not because I seek a confrontation with the President, but to speak up for very survival of my country.

— בנימין נתניהו (@netanyahu) February 10, 2015

These two statements are more than a little contradictory. The "important role" he will encourage Congress to play is to pass Iran sanctions. But those sanctions, championed in no small part by Republicans, would undermine one of Obama's chief foreign policy goals: an Iran nuclear deal. So when Netanyahu says he does not "seek a confrontation with the President," maybe that's true, but the stated goal of his trip is clearly and predictably putting him into exactly the sort of confrontation he denies seeking.

Netanyahu does appear earnestly and deeply concerned that any nuclear deal with Iran would be a sham, and would leave his country less safe. But that means his whole visit is designed in such a way as to necessarily antagonize the president. Netanyahu is coming on the invitation of House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH). The speech is designed to whip up support for a bill Obama opposes. Of course Netanyahu is picking a fight with the president, even if that's not actually his principal goal.

Incidentally, that confrontation is also why Netanyahu's strategy so far appears to be blowing up in his face — and why he clearly feels the need to downplay any tension with the White House.

Netanyahu's goal is to prevent what he sees as a bad Iran deal. If he wants Congress to do that, then he needs Democratic votes to support sanctions and to override a certain Obama veto.

But the effect of that has been to make Democrats furious that Netanyahu is embarrassing Obama so publicly, and in their view politicizing Israel (the overwhelming bulk of Democrats see support for Israel as a bipartisan position). While they might be willing to vote against their president occasionally, they're very hesitant to take sides with Republicans when a Democratic president is being so openly insulted.

Vice President Joe Biden, who would normally be on camera in a joint session, has said he won't attend Netanyahu's speech. Neither will at least 15 congressional Democrats. Key Dems have already agreed to move the vote back on the Iran sanctions vote to March 24 — well after the March 1 deadline for a framework nuclear agreement with Iran. The Democratic sponsor of the sanctions bill, Sen. Robert Menendez, insists this has nothing to do with the speech, but that's very hard to believe.

So Netanyahu is in an impossible position. On the one hand, he's publicly committed to giving this speech, and doesn't want to back down. But on the other hand, he needs to somehow convince Dems that this speech isn't a finger stuck straight in the president's eye. Judging by this jumbled statement, that's going to be a very difficult needle to thread.

WATCH: President Obama discusses his foreign policy goals

Will you support Vox’s explanatory journalism?

Most news outlets make their money through advertising or subscriptions. But when it comes to what we’re trying to do at Vox, there are a couple of big issues with relying on ads and subscriptions to keep the lights on:

First, advertising dollars go up and down with the economy. We often only know a few months out what our advertising revenue will be, which makes it hard to plan ahead.

Second, we’re not in the subscriptions business. Vox is here to help everyone understand the complex issues shaping the world — not just the people who can afford to pay for a subscription. We believe that’s an important part of building a more equal society. And we can’t do that if we have a paywall.

So even though advertising is still our biggest source of revenue, we also seek grants and reader support. (And no matter how our work is funded, we have strict guidelines on editorial independence.)

If you also believe that everyone deserves access to trusted high-quality information, will you make a gift to Vox today? Any amount helps.

One-Time Monthly Annual

$5/month

$10/month

$25/month

$50/month

Other

$

Yes, I'll give $5/month

Yes, I'll give $5/month

We accept credit card, Apple Pay, and Google Pay. You can also contribute via