Netanyahu's UN Speech Reveals Hidden Tension, Expert Suggests

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's recent address at the UN General Assembly, while outwardly confident and employing his usual rhetorical strategies, may have contained subtle indicators of underlying tension, according to Liraz Margalit, a researcher of digital age behavior and a columnist for "Maariv." Margalit points to two key elements: an unusually frequent use of possessive language, particularly "my" and "our," and a noticeable increase in sarcasm.

Netanyahu repeatedly used phrases like "my country," "my people," and "our eternal capital" when referring to Jerusalem. He also emphasized the Jewish people's historical connection to Israel, stating, "The history of my people, the Jewish people, begins over 3,000 years ago." Margalit notes that this emphasis on possession and belonging, while not inherently unusual, can psychologically signify a perceived threat to one's identity. This heightened sense of "psychological ownership" can lead individuals, especially politicians deeply invested in their roles, to more frequently assert their claims and belonging.

Margalit also observed a shift in Netanyahu's emotional tone, with a marked increase in sarcastic remarks compared to his previous speeches. While Netanyahu often uses humor, his past addresses typically focused on themes of threat, historical memory, struggle, victory, peace, security, and hope. In this speech, however, sarcasm appeared more prominent. Examples include his comment about Zohran Mamdani's "friends" and his remarks to the Iranian delegation about a Starlink device, suggesting they could use it to spread their version of events once they "switched sides." He also made a pointed remark about Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, suggesting Erdogan held a "world record" for imprisoning journalists and opposition figures.

Margalit interprets this increased sarcasm not just as humor but as a potential psychological function. She suggests it can create distance from the object of criticism and signal that persuasion is no longer the primary goal. This shift from a rhetoric of hope to one of sarcasm, she posits, might indicate a perception that the audience is less receptive to persuasive attempts. While acknowledging that definitive conclusions about Netanyahu's internal state are impossible based solely on speech patterns, Margalit believes the combination of possessive language and increased sarcasm offers a contrasting perspective on his pre-election address.