Robert Kagan, "At what price Netanyahu?": Who Cares If Obama Gives an Atomic Bomb to a Maniacal Regime Intent Upon Israel's Destruction?

In a Washington Post opinion piece entitled "At what price Netanyahu?," Robert Kagan, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, again lashes out at Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu's upcoming speech before Congress. Telling us that enough contrary opinion has already been expressed in America's media, Kagan declares:

"Even the most eloquent speech by Netanyahu will not add more than marginally to what has already been said and heard. But even if the drama of the situation and the prime minister’s eloquence were to highlight the already well-articulated case against a bad deal, the question is: at what price?"

An "already well-articulated case against a bad deal"? Netanyahu has no information concerning the Iranian nuclear development program that has yet to be revealed by the media? If so, why is the Obama administration attempting to orchestrate a boycott of Netanyahu's speech, and why is it so busy attacking his so-called interference with the conduct of American foreign affairs? More to the point, why are Obama and friends so afraid of this speech?

Arguing that Netanyahu's speech is a bad precedent which is apt to damage Israel's relationship with the US, Kagan concludes:

"Those who favor having Netanyahu speak may imagine this is an extraordinary situation requiring extraordinary measures, that one side is so clearly right, the other so clearly wrong. Yet that is often how people feel about the crisis of their time. We can be sure that in the future the urgency will seem just as great. The only difference between then and now is that today, bringing a foreign leader before Congress to challenge a U.S. president’s policies is unprecedented. After next week, it will be just another weapon in our bitter partisan struggle."

Next week, Netanyahu's speech will "be just another weapon in our bitter partisan struggle"? Maybe for Kagan, but not for those who live in Israel. Iran's Supreme Leader Khamenei repeatedly threatens to annihilate Israel, and Obama is about to allow Iran to build its first nuclear weapon - perhaps not during what remains of Obama's second term as president, but certainly during the next decade, when all of the restrictions are removed pursuant to Iran's draft agreement with the P5+1.

Israelis should ignore Iranian threats of annihilation in order to avoiding establishing a bad precedent involving a foreign leader making the case in Washington for his/her country's very existence?
Netanyahu must deliver the speech, and if "progressives" from the Democratic Party such as Betty McCollum decide that they do not wish to learn about a decision that imperils Israel's life, so be it.

[Yesterday, The New York Times published an op-ed written by Robert Einhorn, also a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, which makes the case for a deal with Khamenei. Interesting . . .]