The Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will be received with red carpet treatment on Wednesday in Washington, DC, as he prepares to take center stage in Congress in what has been a highly expected visit. Reception was greatly at odds with the controversial figure he had come to be, especially considering far-right extremist allies are under investigation by international bodies such as the ICC. Despite these violations, Netanyahu is set to have a major platform in the United States, while another figure—model Bella Hadid—seems to be facing extreme criticism.
Bad timing for Netanyahu: his leadership has been coming under immense scrutiny back at home. His far-right, extremist-backed government has continued to be much of a concern on the domestic and international fronts. His regime, according to critics, has been seen tearing the dictates of running a democratic state and thus a threat to the region’s stability. But his repute on the global stage was really dented by his actions over the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, which the ICC has brought to light.
Yet Netanyahu’s speech to Congress is a strong indication of the way international politics plays out. Certain alliances and relationships in the corridors of diplomacy could outweigh some controversy. The red-carpet treatment of Netanyahu obviously underlines how at times geopolitics can overshadow many a human rights and international law controversy. America needs Israel for its defense, which is a strategic necessity, and this visit is all about that.
While Netanyahu was showered with the usual pomp common to high-level diplomatic visits, celebrity model and activist Bella Hadid became the target of public rebuke. As an advocate who doesn’t stand silent on social issues like the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, she recently began to take some backlash for having outspoken opinions. Her activism drew the ire of some quarters, turning her into a controversial figure across the media landscape.
Hadid’s activism, particularly on Palestinian rights and against Israeli policies, has sharply divided opinion. While some people, mainly those related to or touched by the conflict, have stood up for her concerns, her stance also provokes furious reactions from critics. Indeed, such a wide gulf between the reception of Netanyahu and Hadid underlines an uncomfortable trend brewing: high-profile platforms that are too often given to influential political figures, while individuals who blow the whistle for marginalized communities face huge backlash.
The pompous reception of Netanyahu contrasts so much with the barrage of criticism against Hadid that it begs questions of far greater problems of power and influence within global politics and the media. As a national leader and of strategic importance to the United States, his position has bestowed upon Netanyahu great diplomatic privileges in many respects, even when his policies and affiliations earn international condemnation. In contrast, Hadid’s makeup of public figure and activism is influential, but it does not afford her the same protection or respect from critics.
This disparity raises important questions about political power and the treatment accorded to dissenting voices. Considering the controversial record of Netanyahu in being able to conduct diplomacy and stay upright on the international scene, this, in sharp contrast, comes to the challenges activists like Hadid face in trying to make any change within complex, often contentious issues. It was particularly a comparison of the media focusing on Hadid’s activism with the fanfare of Netanyahu’s visit that exposed a selective lens through which the world viewed political and social issues.
More Read
The Hadid criticism reflects broader social attitudes toward activism and celebrity. Any public figure raising sensitive issues within their platform faces scrutiny, ridicule, or other forms of backlash. In many instances, this might discredit and undermine important human rights and justice conversations. The focus on Hadid’s controversies rather than on the substantive issues she is raising illustrates a situation where the activism discourse could have been oriented by other factors, not by the issues.
This case has further underlined the role of media in shaping public perception. The way media has chosen to frame the visit by Netanyahu and activism by Hadid offers a view into greater narratives that concern power, influence, and legitimacy. Such differential treatment meted out to the two figures shows how media coverage might go on to shape public opinion and add to the polarization of political and social debates.
In short, this red carpet rolled out for Benjamin Netanyahu in Washington, DC, is a marked contrast to the backlash that met Bella Hadid in a similar move—a sure illustration of the intrigue of international politics and media. If Netanyahu’s visit underscores strategic interests in geopolitical alliances, Hadid’s activism points to challenges hitting those seeking social change. It’s this difference in treatment that speaks to wider questions of power, privilege, and the role of the media in setting the public discourse. Amid international controversy over Netanyahu’s speech to Congress and continued resistance against Hadid’s advocacy, the contrast reminds us that global politics and activism are fraught with nuance and contestation.
