A few of our stories and columns are now in front of the paywall. We at The Chief remain committed to independent reporting on labor and civil service. It's been our mission since 1897. You can have a hand in ensuring that our reporting remains relevant in the decades to come. Consider supporting The Chief, which you can do for as little as $3.20 a month.
To the editor:
In February, Christian Turner, British ambassador to Washington, told students that Israel is the lone country that had a special relationship with the U.S. Since Oct. 7, 2023, when Hamas carried out a genocidal attack on Israel and it responded with a brutal slaughter of Palestinians, the U.S. has been paying an enormous price for this “exception."
Both the Biden and Trump administration violated military aid restrictions to other countries. The Leahy Laws, the Foreign Assistance Act, and the Arms Export Control Act prohibit military aid to countries that carry out gross human rights violations.
There’s ample documentation that Israel’s military actions in the occupied territories Lebanon and Syria have grossly violated human rights.
Furthermore, the disastrous U.S.-Israeli war against Iran, urged by Prime Minister Netanyahu who convinced a foolish and gullible Trump that it would be a cake walk, violates international law, as does Washington’s naval blockade of the Strait of Hormuz. The decision to send $8.6 billion dollars in arms deals to Gulf nations, as well as Israel, is the third time the Trump administration has used an emergency authorization to bypass Congress on arms sales.
Trump has also ignored the 1973 War Powers Act, which after 60 days requires that the President halt all military actions, unless Congress votes to declare war or authorize use of force against Iran.
The misbegotten war on Iran and the horrific military actions of Israel in the occupied territories and other Middle Eastern countries have not been lost on the American people. A recent Pew Research Center survey found 6 in 10 Americans said they had a negative view of Israel.
Among Democrats, the number was 8 in 10. In April, 40 out of 47 Democrats in the Senate voted to block further arms sales to Israel. This overwhelming majority did not include our two senators from New York: Chuck Schumer and Kirsten Gillibrand.
Howard Elterman
10 comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here
Valete
I’ll share my perspective on the Iran war.
On May 6th, Netanyahu announced that the United States-Israel alliance was designed to eliminate Iran’s pursuit of enriched nuclear material and nuclear weapons.
Trump believes he can achieve this.
To my surprise, CNN reported that Trump claimed the US had “very good talks” with Iran in the past 24 hours and believes a deal is possible with Tehran without setting a deadline for Tehran to respond to the US proposal.
President Trump’s approach to the Iran war, which emphasizes patience and strategic planning, deserves commendation. It’s crucial to exercise restraint in military action to prevent significant damage to Iran’s infrastructure and to support the Iranian people who have endured immense hardships under the Ayatollah’s rule.
Thursday, May 7 Report this
namrogm
Thanks, Howard, excellent analysis of the US support of genocidal actions by Israel under Netanyahu. Shame on Schumer and Gillibrand for not voting to block arms sales to Israel.
Thursday, May 7 Report this
Valete
I’d like to digress from the main topic and explore the benefits of dedicating 10% of the world’s resources to promoting peace rather than perpetuating conflict.
Nations often prioritize war over peace, which could have catastrophic future implications.
Every year, billions of dollars are spent on military expenditures globally. Nations buy fighter jets, missiles, air-defense systems, cyber capabilities, and other military assets.
In contrast, investment in peace and regional stability remains minimal.
Demanding investment in peace does not imply abandoning defense. No state can neglect the protection of its citizens.
Investment in peace should complement, not replace, investment in war. A strong nation can pursue peace while taking calculated diplomatic risks. Strength and peace are complementary concepts with numerous benefits. Maybe I’m just a dreamer, but think of the innumerable possibilities.
Thursday, May 7 Report this
fcannisi
The last US President to tell Israel to withdraw from stolen territory was Eisenhower in 1956 during the Suez Canal crisis.
In 1967, Israel began a territorial expansion campaign, occupying Palestine (Gaza, the West Bank and Jerusalem) and now southern Lebanon. I fully expect Israel to build settlements in Lebanon just as they did in the West Bank.
Friday, May 8 Report this
Valete
renege
This post contains inaccurate information.
The last US President to tell Israel to withdraw from stolen territory was Eisenhower in 1956 during the Suez Canal crisis.
In 1967, Israel began a territorial expansion campaign, occupying Palestine (Gaza, the West Bank and Jerusalem) and now southern Lebanon. I fully expect Israel to build settlements in Lebanon just as they did in the West Bank.
This post contains verifiable and accurate information.
George W. Bush is often cited as the last U.S. President to explicitly call for an end to the occupation that began in 1967 and for Israel to withdraw from Palestinian land as part of a final peace settlement
While President Barack Obama in 2011 explicitly endorsed the 1967 lines (with agreed land swaps) as the basis for negotiations, Bush was more explicit in his public language regarding the "end of occupation” ( This post contains correct information. )
Point of information:
No president has ever used the offensive term “stolen land.”
Friday, May 8 Report this
fcannisi
Many presidents may have requested that Israel withdraw from occupied territory, but only Eisenhower successfully used US leverage to compel Israel to do so.
As for the term "stolen", it is an entirely accurate description of the lands Israel has occupied since 1967. There's nothing offensive about calling illegal annexation of territory, stealing. That's just a statement of fact.
Friday, May 8 Report this
Valete
You have no idea what you’re talking about.
In your first post you say: "The last US President to tell Israel to withdraw from stolen territory was Eisenhower in 1956 during the Suez Canal crisis.”
In your second post you say: "many presidents may have requested that Israel withdraw from occupied territory, but only Eisenhower successfully used US leverage to compel Israel to do so."
Which is it?
The term “stolen territory” is offensive to Jewish people.
Interestingly, President Harry S. Truman recognized the State of Israel just 11 minutes after its founding.
Monday, May 11 Report this
fcannisi
British ambassador Christian Turner is correct in saying that the country the US has a "special relationship" with is Israel. Since 1972, the US has vetoed 53 UN resolutions critical of Israel, more than half of all UN resolutions vetoed by the US.
Of those vetoes, 33 involved Israel's illegal occupation of Palestinian territory following the 1967 war.
I reiterate, no president since Eisenhower has had the political will to reign in Israeli aggression against its neighbors.
Monday, May 11 Report this
Valete
Persistently attempting to conceal your misinformation is evident to all who engage with your posts. It is clear that you lack a comprehensive understanding of the subject matter, particularly concerning Israel (or other topics of discussion).
Tuesday, May 12 Report this
fcannisi
How do you spell projection? W-O-R-D-M-A-N!
Wednesday, May 13 Report this