The last time Netanyahu let a deputy address the UN, he regretted it immediately
In 2010, PM sent then-foreign minister Avigdor Liberman to speak to the world body, had to distance himself from a number of the Yisrael Beytenu leader’s ideas
Raphael Ahren is a former diplomatic correspondent at The Times of Israel.
Given his political quandaries at home, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu this year was forced to skip the United Nations General Assembly. Instead, he sent his foreign minister, Israel Katz, to address the world body. What could go wrong?
A lot, actually, if precedent is any indication.
The last time Netanyahu, a former ambassador to the UN, missed the annual circus at Turtle Bay was nearly a decade ago. Then, too, he asked his foreign minister to deliver a speech in his stead — which he was later forced to disavow. Ironically, the same person who replaced (and embarrassed) Netanyahu nine years ago today is one of his most potent political rivals, preventing him from establishing a right-wing government.
On September 28, 2010, then-deputy prime minister and foreign minister Avigdor Liberman started his speech with what he called “an old joke” about five Jews who changed the way we see the world: “Moses: Law is everything. Jesus: Love is everything. Marx: Money is everything. Freud: Sex is everything. Einstein: Everything is relative.”
For Netanyahu, the groaning had only begun, as Liberman would go on to reject the possibility of a quick peace deal with the Palestinians and espouse the idea of population transfer, both contrary to the prime minister’s positions.
Liberman, whose hawkish Yisrael Beytenu party had 15 Knesset seats at the time, argued from the UN podium that there are both “emotional problems and practical problems” standing in the way of an Israeli-Palestinian peace deal, which was why the world should focus not on final-status talks but rather a “long-term intermediate agreement, something that could take a few decades.”
“We need to raise an entire new generation that will have mutual trust and will not be influenced by incitement and extremist messages,” he said.
The New York Times identified in this statement “sharp differences” with Netanyahu.
Lieberman’s position “contradicted” with that of Netanyahu, who had adopted the view of the US administration, the paper reported. Then-US president Barack Obama had expressed hope that the main sticking points between Israelis and Palestinians could be resolved within a year.
This is not a controversial political policy. It is an empirical truth
More controversial still was the lengthy segment that followed, during which Liberman promoted his controversial plan to redraw Israel’s border to exclude major Arab population centers in the country’s north.
To reach a final status agreement between Israelis and Palestinians, one must first understand that the “primary practical obstacle is the friction between the two nations,” he declared.
“As is true everywhere, where there are two nations, two religions and two languages with competing claims to the same land, there is friction and conflict… Where effective separation has been achieved, conflict has either been avoided, or has been dramatically reduced or resolved.”
Therefore, Israel’s foreign minister told the gathered world leaders, “the guiding principle for a final status agreement must not be land-for-peace but rather, exchange of populated territory.”
Liberman clarified that he did not intend to transfer populations but merely to move borders “to better reflect demographic realities.”
This idea is “far less controversial” than many people think, he asserted, noting that top researchers had long “accepted as a virtual truism” that a “mismatch between borders and nationalities is a recipe for conflict… This is not a controversial political policy. It is an empirical truth.”
Palestinian delegates walked out during the speech, telling reporters later that Liberman’s remarks “were so offensive that one cannot tolerate them.”
Netanyahu, too, quickly denounced his deputy.
“The content of the foreign minister’s speech at the United Nations was not coordinated with the prime minister. Prime Minister Netanyahu is the one who is managing the political negotiations of the state of Israel,” his office said in a statement.
Liberman, who continued to serve as foreign minister for another five years after the incident (with a short break to fend off corruption charges), and who later became defense minister, has turned from Netanyahu’s deputy to his arch-nemesis, refusing to support his bid to assemble a right-wing coalition after last week’s elections — as was also the case after April’s elections — and so complicating Netanyahu’s political future that the prime minister was unable to fly to New York to speak to the UN himself.
Nine years after Liberman’s appearance, Israel Katz is filling in for Netanyahu this week. Word is that Katz’s speech, too, was written by the foreign minister and his team, without input from or coordination with the Prime Minister’s Office.
But unlike Liberman, who hailed from a different party, Katz is seen as a Likud apparatchik who is loyal and close to Netanyahu.
As foreign minister, Katz has mostly taken up the mantle of Netanyahu’s drive to forge ties with friendly Arab states and combat Iranian aggression in the region, two subjects which he is expected to address from the rostrum when he gets up to speak Thursday. Unlike Liberman’s in 2010, his address is not expected to necessitate a hurried prime ministerial disavowal.
The Times of Israel Community.