The extensive coverage and analysis of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s recent visit to the United States mostly focused on optics and domestic politics, rather than on policy. To a large extent, this was because of the visit’s unique timing. Netanyahu came to Washington just as a surprising political drama was unfolding in the US; in the midst of a long war in Gaza that has polarized public debate; and at a political moment in Israel when the prime minister has sought to boost his declining popularity at home.
The fact that the major components of the visit were charged with symbolism and were used for political positioning also played a role as well. That was the case with Netanyahu’s speech to Congress; his meetings with President Joe Biden, Vice President and presumptive Democratic Party nominee Kamala Harris, and Republican Party nominee Donald Trump; and the engagement, such as it was, with Israeli hostage families — including those who were part of Netanyahu’s delegation, those who arrived in the US to protest his policies, and those who were invited by the administration due to their dual Israeli-US citizenship.
Nevertheless, although they may not have made headlines, policy issues were very much present throughout the course of the visit, with Biden and his team trying to push for a hostage and cease-fire deal between Israel and Hamas. Such a deal has been in the works for months, but has not been sealed. Netanyahu’s visit to Washington was an opportunity for the administration to drive the process forward, although this has yet to produce tangible results.
Deciphering policy dimensions and pre-visit goals
The longer-than-usual six-day visit by the Israeli prime minister, and its loose schedule, meant there was plenty of time for sensational aspects to make the rounds and gain traction. But now that the dust has settled and Netanyahu is back in Israel, it is worth assessing what the visit was all about policy-wise.
The policy component of official visits and heads-of-state meetings often remains hidden from the public eye. Sensitive diplomatic issues are usually dealt with behind closed doors, with only an occasional glimpse becoming visible to broader audiences. Nevertheless, visits like Netanyahu’s to Washington do provide an opportunity for issues to surface, even if it is in a far-from-comprehensive way.
Pre-visit, these include statements by officials that provide framing, indicate a possible agenda, and help manage expectations between the sides. During the visit, these include public statements, press conferences, background briefings, meeting readouts, media interviews and leaks, and social media posts. Post-visit, they also include concrete policy steps that are taken, reflecting what was agreed upon.
Statements made prior to Netanyahu’s visit already highlighted that the two sides were looking to get different things out of it. From the US side, it was National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan who shared, speaking at the Aspen Security Forum, the administration’s focus on the Israel-Hamas hostage release and cease-fire deal. The US has been mediating toward such a deal, together with Egypt and Qatar, for half a year now, without success, despite Biden’s personal involvement.
“We have our best opportunity now that we have had since the last brief hostage deal in November to get to an outcome,” said Sullivan, specifying that Netanyahu’s visit could be used to clear the remaining obstacles and get to a deal. Sullivan also expressed the administration’s expectation that Netanyahu’s speech to Congress would not be a polarizing one, like his previous speech in 2015 attacking the Iran nuclear deal, but rather focus on “how we can work together to fight terrorism and get a cease-fire.”
For Netanyahu, a main goal of the visit was to highlight that Israel is the US’s “most indispensable and strongest ally in the Middle East” and to showcase a united front with it on issues related to Israel’s national security. Before embarking on his flight to Washington, Netanyahu also stated that his visit would create an opportunity for Israel and the US to work together toward achieving “the release of all our hostages, defeating Hamas, confronting the terror axis of Iran, and ensuring that all of Israel’s citizens can return safely to their homes in the north and the south.” Unlike Sullivan, he did not mention advancing the cease-fire deal as a goal, but rather highlighted his intention to thank Biden for everything he has done to support Israel.
Prospects for a hostage and cease-fire deal take center stage
The hostage and cease-fire deal took center stage during Netanyahu’s visit to the US, although mostly from the American side. Early on in his visit, Netanyahu met with hostage families and conveyed an optimistic message that conditions are becoming ripe (although they are not yet ripe) for a hostage deal. However, as in other instances during the visit, Netanyahu indicated that more pressure on Hamas and a firm Israeli stance are the keys to expediting this process, rather than making compromises at the negotiating table, as US officials were calling for.
Hostage families were also present during Netanyahu’s speech to Congress, in which he presented his narrative about what happened on and since Oct. 7, and asked for more US weapons deliveries, but did not speak about a possible deal, to the families’ disappointment. “There wasn’t anything in Prime Minister Netanyahu’s speech yesterday that made us any more or less concerned about our chances to reach a cease-fire deal,” said State Department Spokesperson Matthew Miller.
Hostage families were represented during the Netanyahu-Biden meeting as well, which also produced some optimistic messaging on the prospects for hostage release. “We feel more optimistic than we have at any point since the previous hostage deal last November,” said a statement by hostage families who attended the meeting.
Both Biden and Harris emphasized the need to seal the deal in their meetings with Netanyahu, as was evident in the readouts. “President Biden expressed the need to close the remaining gaps, finalize the deal as soon as possible, bring the hostages home, and reach a durable end to the war in Gaza,” stated the respective readout. Biden also referenced the issue in his statement to the American people upon stepping down from the presidential campaign, saying that, “I’m going to keep working to end the war in Gaza, bring home all the hostages, and bring peace and security to the Middle East and end this war.”
Throughout the visit, other US officials — such as Miller and White House National Security Spokesperson John Kirby — made the case that the two sides are closer than ever to reaching a deal, and that bridging the remaining gaps is feasible and could be done quickly. Nevertheless, they refrained from spelling out a specific timeline, perhaps having learned a lesson from Biden’s decisive statement in late February, in which he shared hopes for a deal “by next Monday.” It may also have been due to the repeated stalling maneuvers employed by both Netanyahu and Hamas. Still, US officials did indicate the timeline was pressing.
“There are some things we need from Hamas, and there are some things we need from the Israeli side, and I think you’ll see that play out here over the course of the coming week,” stated an unnamed senior official, also claiming that within a month or so, the US could better assess whether Netanyahu is purposely dragging his feet and prolonging the negotiation process. “If we draw that conclusion [that Netanyahu is “just playing for time”], we’ll say it very clearly,” he told journalists.
While US officials were still willing to give Netanyahu the benefit of the doubt, Israelis were losing patience. In the joint meeting with Biden, hostage families asked Netanyahu why he was slow-walking the negotiations on the deal. Netanyahu denied doing so and committed to sending an updated proposal for Hamas within days.
The conveying of the proposal and the dispatchment of the Israeli team to another round of negotiations — both expected during the visit — were eventually postponed by Netanyahu. The reasoning was his desire to agree on the details with Biden first. But amid reports published in the Israel press about additional conditions the prime minister wanted his negotiators to present, a senior figure within the Israeli negotiating team, speaking anonymously, claimed that Netanyahu was knowingly creating a crisis in the talks and was “gambling with hostages’ lives.”
Eventually, after Netanyahu’s visit concluded, a revised Israeli position was sent to the mediators, with new conditions that Hamas is likely to refuse. The head of Mossad attended a short meeting in Rome with American, Qatari, and Egyptian mediators, to present the Israeli position, toward a possible resumption of talks in the days ahead. Despite strong public support in Israel for a hostage deal, even if it includes an end to the war, and despite all that Netanyahu heard from Biden and other officials in Washington, there has been no breakthrough in the talks yet, and there is no evidence that Netanyahu shares the sense of urgency for reaching a deal that is widespread both in Israel and within the US administration.
Where did all the other policy issues go?
The focus put by the administration on the hostage and cease-fire deal as the policy focal point of the visit pushed aside other pressing issues. While both Biden and Harris reaffirmed to Netanyahu that the US has an “ironclad commitment to Israel’s security against all threats from Iran and its proxies, including Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Houthis,” the risk of broader regional escalation received only limited attention.
The deadly Hezbollah attack on the Arab Druze village of Majdal Shams in the Golan Heights on July 27, which took place during the final hours of Netanyahu’s visit, underscored just how risky the situation is. The US has been mediating for months with the goal of de-escalating Israel-Hezbollah tensions, but so far has not succeeded in putting an end to hostilities and enabling displaced Israelis and Lebanese to return home. Netanyahu’s visit was a missed opportunity to seek new policy pathways to deal with this issue, despite an American statement made during the visit about the US interest in preventing an Israel-Hezbollah war, not merely postponing it.
Similarly absent from the visit’s agenda was the topic of Israel-Saudi Arabia normalization. After talk and speculation about whether progress could be made prior to the US presidential elections in November, and whether Netanyahu would make a statement in Washington that could support the process, it was almost as if the issue never existed. Netanyahu made a brief remark in his speech about his wish for a regional “Abraham Alliance” against Iran, but did not mention Saudi Arabia by name.
Nevertheless, an Israeli official told reporters that normalization is still possible in the coming months. However, Biden and other US officials refrained from speaking much about the two-state solution during the visit, in line with the president’s decision not to mention it in the plan he spelled out in late May. They did mention the need to alleviate the humanitarian situation in Gaza and protect civilian lives though. But, for the sake of possibly convincing Netanyahu to advance a cease-fire deal, the administration was apparently willing to marginalize a major policy end-goal that Netanyahu opposes.
Concluding and competing Israeli assessments of the visit
In Israel, there were two major lines of thinking about Netanyahu’s visit to Washington, although they were not necessarily mutually exclusive. Some mostly wanted the prime minister to make the case for Israel’s narrative about everything that has happened since Oct. 7. They expected Netanyahu to call on the US to enhance its security, political, and legal support for Israel, in the face of possible further escalation and pressure. Generally speaking, those in this group were content with what they saw Netanyahu do in Washington, even in the face of pushback by dozens of Democratic Party lawmakers who boycotted his speech to Congress.
For others, the key goal for Netanyahu’s visit was to seal a deal that would bring back home the Israeli hostages held by Hamas. In recent months, this segment of Israeli society was encouraged by Biden’s plan to leverage an end of fighting in Gaza to diffuse Israel-Hezbollah tensions and advance Israeli-Saudi normalization. They were baffled that Netanyahu was invited to Washington before agreeing to a deal, and they were frustrated by the multiple standing ovations he received in Congress, while dodging the issue of a deal altogether. As the visit concluded, the sense among these Israelis is that American diplomacy did not move the needle on these issues and needs to do better next time.
Dr. Nimrod Goren is the Senior Fellow for Israeli Affairs at the Middle East Institute, President of Mitvim – The Israeli Institute for Regional Foreign Policies, and Co-Founder of Diplomeds – The Council for Mediterranean Diplomacy.
Photo by Andrew Harnik/Getty Images
The Middle East Institute (MEI) is an independent, non-partisan, non-for-profit, educational organization. It does not engage in advocacy and its scholars’ opinions are their own. MEI welcomes financial donations, but retains sole editorial control over its work and its publications reflect only the authors’ views. For a listing of MEI donors, please click here.
