海角大神

Are deliberations in Congress on American foreign policy becoming more partisan?

That question arises on the eve of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu鈥檚 speech to Congress Tuesday.

The Israeli leader 鈥� invited by House Speaker John Boehner outside of the traditional channels 鈥� is expected to blast President Obama鈥檚 diplomatic overtures to Iran, as well as the deal the administration and other international powers are negotiating with Iran on its nuclear program.

Democrats and Republicans, national security and foreign policy experts may be divided over the merits of Mr. Netanyahu鈥檚 arguments. But consensus is much stronger over the idea that the prime minister鈥檚 speech and the uproar that has blossomed around it are a sign of how Washington鈥檚 hyper-partisanship has moved into the foreign policy domain.

鈥淎t least since World War II there has been an effort by Congress, the White House, and the political parties to seek a bipartisan foreign policy, even if it doesn鈥檛 always work out that way,鈥� says Mel Levine, a former Democratic congressman from California. 鈥淏ut what we鈥檙e seeing here is another deeply unfortunate by-product of the hyper-partisan atmosphere in Washington.鈥�

In a speech Monday to the Washington conference of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, Mr. Netanyahu sought to play down his discord with Mr. Obama over Iran and the controversy over his speech to Congress, saying the US-Israel 鈥渇riendship will weather the current disagreement.鈥� And Obama Monday said that, while there was 鈥渟ubstantial disagreement鈥� between the two countries, the debate over Iran would not be 鈥減ermanently destructive鈥� to US鈥揑sraeli relations.

The flap over Netanyahu鈥檚 speech is not the only case in recent memory of a foreign-policy debate displaying a hyper-partisan gulf.

Congressional hearings looking into the September 2012 terrorist attacks on US diplomatic facilities in Benghazi, Libya 鈥� and the Obama administration鈥檚 response to those attacks 鈥� revealed Republican suspicions of an administration cover-up and Democratic claims of a political witch hunt.

But the Netanyahu speech represents the first time a foreign leader is being enlisted in a way that drives the partisan foreign-policy wedge deeper, some Democrats say.聽聽

Mr. Levine, who served in Congress from 1983 to 1993, recalls that he and most of his fellow Democrats 鈥渞eally very forcefully disagreed with President Reagan on the Contra war he was conducting in Nicaragua. But the idea,鈥� he adds, 鈥渢hat we would invite the principal international opponent of that war, Costa Rican President Oscar Arias, to speak to a joint session of Congress to explain why he disagreed with President Reagan 鈥� it was inconceivable.鈥�

聽Asking "Is anyone thinking about the future?" Robert Kagan, a foreign policy analyst at the Brookings Institution, wondered in a Washington Post column Saturday what it might mean for foreign-policy debate if the "opposition party" while in control of Congress got in the habit of calling in "a foreign leader to speak to a joint meeting of Congress against a president and his policies."

Speculating what impact it might have had if Democrats in 2003 had summoned then-French President Jacques Chirac to speak on his opposition to President George W. Bush's impending war in Iraq, Mr. Kagan says the Netanyahu speech could presage "another weapon in our bitter partisan struggle."

At the time, like Netanyahu, Mr. Chirac insisted his position was in the best interest not just of his country but the world, the US included.

Republicans maintain there is nothing unusual about Netanyahu鈥檚 speech, saying it is part of an established tradition of foreign leaders speaking to Congress.

鈥淭he tradition of foreign leaders addressing Congress on issues of mutual concern goes back more than half a century,鈥� Rep. Ed Royce (R) of California, chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said in a statement Sunday.聽

Representative Royce said Speaker Boehner 鈥渕ade the right decision鈥� in inviting Netanyahu and encouraged members to attend the speech 鈥� a veiled reference to the three dozen or so Democrats who plan to sit out the address in protest of its partisan genesis.聽

Boehner arranged Netanyahu鈥檚 speech by going through Israel鈥檚 embassy in Washington and the Israeli ambassador, Ron Dermer, instead of following the usual path through the State Department.

It is because of the manner in which Netanyahu was invited 鈥� leaving the White House and the State Department out of the loop 鈥� that Democrats like Levine are calling the speech 鈥渦nprecedented鈥� and a partisan initiative.聽

But Royce also hinted at the partisan storm engulfing the speech, saying he could not 鈥渞ecall there ever being the level of contention that we are unfortunately seeing鈥� surrounding the Netanyahu address, 鈥渘o matter the views of the dozens of leaders who have addressed Congress.鈥�

As if to underscore the sense of Netanyahu鈥檚 speech fitting into a tradition of foreign leaders addressing Congress, Boehner鈥檚 office announced Monday that with tomorrow鈥檚 speech, Netanyahu will become the only foreign leader to tie former British Prime Minister Winston Churchill鈥檚 record of speaking to Congress three times. The speaker plans to present the Israeli leader with a bust of Churchill.

Some members of Congress, apparently alarmed at the deepening partisan tone of the Iran debate, acted Monday to calm tensions 鈥� and to suggest that Congress still intends to address the Iran nuclear issue in a bipartisan manner.

House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Royce and the committee鈥檚 highest-ranking Democrat, Eliot Engel of New York, announced they would soon send a 鈥渂ipartisan letter鈥� to Obama citing 鈥済rave and urgent issues鈥� in the negotiations on Iran鈥檚 nuclear program.

But at the same time, the statement said the letter鈥檚 signers expect to work with Obama to secure a strong deal that prevents an Iranian nuclear weapon through diplomacy.

鈥淲e remain hopeful that a diplomatic solution preventing Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon may yet be reached,鈥� the letter says, 鈥渁nd we want to work with you to ensure such a result.鈥�