Judging by recent polls, the slings and arrows from US officials at Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on the issue of his congressional speech set for March 3 will not wipe out his political career. A Channel 10 poll shows that 38% of the Israeli public supports the controversial speech — a percentage similar to those opposing the move. It’s important to note that the survey was conducted even before Netanyahu demonstrated his rhetorical skills in articulate American English, generating bursts of applause from the congressional floor and gallery. Obviously, he is also expected to pull a rabbit out of his hat, which will make an impression on audiences at home. Even the optimistic members of the Zionist Camp are not counting on the noisy crisis Netanyahu has caused in Israeli-US relations to pave the way for its leader, Isaac Herzog, to the prime minister’s office.

More than 22 years ago, a similar crisis in the relationship between an American administration and an Israeli prime minister actually contributed to a change of government in Jerusalem. On the eve of the elections for the 13th Knesset, a stormy dispute broke out between Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir and Republican President George Bush, Sr. over a freeze of West Bank settlement construction as a condition for US financial aid. Bush was furious at Shamir, who tried to enlist the Democratic majority in Congress to force the administration to acquiesce to Israel’s request for $10 billion in US guarantees to help absorb the massive wave of immigration from the former Soviet Union. Shamir claimed at the time that the US pressure constituted interference in the Israeli election campaign. Bush’s decision to no longer make do with recriminations and protests and to wave the weapon of aid was apparently one of the elements that tipped the scales in favor of the Labor Party, headed by Yitzhak Rabin.

Unlike Bush in 1992, President Barack Obama is now unfettered by electoral considerations and the need to please Jewish backers and donors. It is therefore hard to understand why the president does not translate Netanyahu's criticism from words into deeds. Why does he holster the most effective weapon he has at his disposal for dealing with the confrontation over Iran's nuclear activities and in the battle over Israel’s future government? A senior Israeli official told Al-Monitor on condition of anonymity that according to estimates, if Obama were even to hint at an intention to make use of this weapon, Netanyahu would not have dared provoke him.

This is no secret weapon. Its elements are detailed in the president’s speeches and in speeches at the UN and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). All Obama has to do is to make good on his public commitments and to honor the decisions of these august international institutions regarding global nuclear disarmament. This issue has been at the top of his agenda ever since his first days in the White House. In September 2009, he initiated a historic resolution in the UN Security Council to curb global nuclear arsenals and to prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons. For the first time since the UNSC was established in 1946, an American president chaired the session with the participation of the heads of all the member states.