Robert Naimann: Guam: Self-Determination, or More U.S. Troops?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-naiman/guam-self-determination-o_b_614688.html?view=print

June 17, 2010

Guam: Self-Determination, or More U.S. Troops?

Robert Naimann

Policy Director, Just Foreign Policy

Posted: June 16, 2010 03:22 PM

Usually, when someone refers to a place as a “U.S. colony,” they are making an analogy, suggesting that U.S. influence somewhere is so strong, and the indigenous residents of the place have so little effective say over key decisions, that it’s as if the place were a formal U.S. colony.

But, remarkably, and perhaps predictably, for a country whose leaders, editorialists and pundits constantly pontificate about how we are an indispensable force for freedom in the world, we rarely discuss the fact that there are places in the world that are actual U.S. colonies. Still less do we consider whether we are complying with our international obligations to respect the right of self-determination for colonized peoples, and if we are not, what we could do to change that.

A small corrective is being offered as part of Asian Pacific Heritage Month by PBS, which is webcasting Vanessa Warheit’s documentary, The Insular Empire: America in the Mariana Islands until next Sunday, June 20.

The Mariana Islands comprise two political entities, the territory of Guam and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands. Guam was ceded to the U.S. by Spain in 1898 after Spain’s defeat in the Spanish-American war, while the Northern Mariana Islands were conquered by the U.S. from Japan in World War II. As political entities, the two have several features in common: while they are ruled by Washington, and their residents are U.S. citizens, many of whom serve in the U.S. military, they have no vote in Presidential elections, nor do they have a representative in Congress who can vote on the passage of legislation.

In other words: they are U.S. colonies.

Guam, in particular, is facing a major decision about its destiny, a decision made in Washington about which its indigenous population has not yet had any effective say. The United States is currently planning to relocate 8,000 Marines and 9,000 dependents to Guam by 2014. With an expected influx of foreign workers recruited for military construction projects, Guam’s population is expected to increase by some 80,000 people by 2014, a 45% increase from its current estimated population of 180,000.

More than a quarter of the island is already owned by the U.S. military, the Washington Post noted in March, while a quarter of the island’s population lives below the U.S. poverty level.

As the Post noted, Guam was not consulted in the decision to move 8,000 Marines to the island and has no legal means to block it. Yet an Environmental Protection Agency analysis said the U.S. military buildup could trigger island-wide water shortages.

The possibility that Guam’s indigenous residents may suffer irreparable harm from this planned military buildup without ever having had any effective say about it heightens the responsibility of Americans who do have voting representation in Washington to know something about the military buildup and its historical background. Thanks to PBS, until Sunday we have the opportunity to catch up a little on the history they didn’t teach us in school.

Follow Robert Naiman on Twitter: www.twitter.com/naiman

Senate committee slashes Guam buildup funds by 70%

This is interesting.  Two articles here and here report that the U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee cut the Guam military build up funds by 70% because it was requested “ahead of need”.  This may help the anti-buildup resistance movement on Guam.  But these guys are optimistic that the funds are going to be there.  Maybe they know something everyone else doesn’t know.

>><<

http://www.stripes.com/news/senate-committee-cuts-300m-slated-for-guam-buildup-from-proposed-budget-1.105647?localLinksEnabled=false

Senate committee cuts $300M slated for Guam buildup from proposed budget

By Teri Weaver

Stars and Stripes

Published: June 3, 2010

TOKYO — The U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee last week slashed $300 million earmarked for a U.S. military buildup on Guam because the money was requested “ahead of need,” according to a news release from the committee.

The cut more than halves the $567 million approved last week by the House for the massive military buildup planned for Guam.

The money, part of the Pentagon’s proposed budget for 2011, is meant to jump-start construction required for the move of 8,600 Marines from Okinawa, expand Guam’s port for long-term aircraft carrier stays, and install an Army air defense unit on the island.

“I am concerned by the cuts in the Senate’s version of the defense authorization bill for fiscal year 2011,” U.S. Rep. Madeleine Z. Bordallo, Guam’s non-voting delegate to Congress, said Thursday in a statement.

But she also said the Senate committee’s changes were similar to cuts it made last year involving the Guam buildup that the full Congress later restored.

It was unclear Thursday what Guam-related projects the Senate committee cut. In the House version of the bill, the construction included a readiness center for Guam’s Army National Guard, wharf improvements at Apra Harbor, and site work on the proposed site for the Marines’ new base.

The statement from the Senate committee said only that the money was requested ahead of schedule.

The buildup on Guam is slated to be completed by 2014. Local officials have questioned the ambitious timetable, saying the estimated influx of nearly 80,000 people, including temporary workers, to the island of 178,000 would overwhelm the island.

As of this week, the project remains on the 2014 schedule, according to Marine Corps Maj. Neil Ruggiero, spokesman for the Joint Guam Program Office.

weavert@pstripes.osd.mil

+++

http://www.kuam.com/Global/story.asp?S=12585228

Senate cuts Guam buildup funds by 70%

Posted: Jun 02, 2010 2:14 PM Updated: Jun 09, 2010 3:51 PM

by Sabrina Salas Matanane

Guam – It’s been said time and again that if the debate surrounding the Futenma Relocation Facility is not settled, the relocation of U.S. Marines from Okinawa to Guam will not occur.

Today in the nation’s capitol the Senate Armed Services Committee reduced the outlays by some $320 million (or 70%) in funding for the military buildup on Guam.

America’s Identity Crisis: Coming to Terms with Imperial Decline

https://www.adbusters.org/magazine/90/americas-identity-crisis.ht

Adbusters

Is the rigid US position on military build-up in the A-P really about fragile national/military ego?

America’s Identity Crisis: Coming to Terms with Imperial Decline

Blake Sifton

11 Jun 2010

In the aftermath of the trauma suffered by the American psyche on 9/11, the United States lashed out blindly and irrationally in fear and anger, deploying its military to the corners of the world and weakening itself in the process. Now, over eight years later, with the economy in shambles and the military overstretched, the sun is setting on the American empire and experts say it’s time for the US public to accept their country’s declining prowess, pressure their government to reduce its global military footprint and prepare for a looming national identity crisis.

Political psychologists believe that the shock and horror of the 9/11 attacks damaged the collective American consciousness, causing the country to stumble forward with a misguided and self-destructive foreign policy intended to destroy an exaggerated enemy.

Dr. Deborah Larson, a political psychologist at UCLA, explains, “9/11 removed a sense of invulnerability that Americans had felt, and fear sprang from the uncertainty. We overreacted and tried to gain control of the world to eliminate even a small probability of being attacked. It was totally irrational.”

Dr. Richard Hermann, Director of the Mershon Center for International Security Studies at Ohio State University, says, “A weird combination of fear, panic, anger and crude patriotism made us obsessed with an exaggerated threat. The administration’s leadership watched this with excitement and believed it was their chance to shape the world.”

Though the United States has maintained a massive military presence around the world since the end of World War II, the reach of US forces expanded quickly after 9/11. Besides the huge undertakings in Iraq and Afghanistan, the military also established US Africa Command, expanded its presence in Latin America, began launching constant drone attacks in Pakistan, recently approved the sale of over 13 billion dollars in arms to Taiwan and is currently setting up missile defense systems in Romania, Poland, the Czech Republic, Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Kuwait among other countries.

With upwards of 800 bases in 120 countries, the United States continues to spend almost as much on its military as the rest of the world combined at a time when the economy is plummeting and many Americans are struggling.

Wayne Madsen, an investigative journalist and former Navy intelligence officer, believes that military overreach is eroding American power rather than projecting it: “The extension of US influence abroad is unsustainable and unaffordable and it weakens us politically, militarily and financially. We’re trying to be the Roman Empire and we’re going the way of them.”

Dr. Hermann worries that the money spent on military engagements will hurt America’s competitiveness in the future: “We’re spending 100 billion a year in Iraq alone. You could take the top 20 universities in America and fund them, make them free for everybody every year we’ve been there. It’s a terrible opportunity cost that we’ve paid.”

A psychological shift is underway in the United States as the evidence mounts and there is growing public awareness of the detrimental costs of maintaining such a large military. Dr. Hermann explains that a public suffering through the recession is more concerned about its financial well-being than its physical safety: “If you’re unemployed and you’re getting foreclosed on, you’re a lot less worried about al Qaeda.”

Nevertheless, political psychologists believe that guilt keeps the average person from speaking out against the economic effects of imperial overreach. “Only a small fraction of the public is willing to serve in the military and I think the rest of the people feel guilty that they aren’t enlisted and essentially get a free pass. They might not like it but they feel if they have to pay tax dollars its okay,” explains Dr. Hermann.

It is perhaps ironic that the American public still fears terrorism despite being bled dry maintaining the strongest military in human history. “It’s absolutely ridiculous,” says Madsen, “These are ragtag people living in caves.” Hermann is frustrated by the contradiction in military spending and the threat faced: “There is a big disconnect here. There is huge spending on the military but at the same time an understanding that the military can’t protect us against the most likely attacks.”

Guardian columnist and London School of Economics professor Martin Jacques is an expert on the rise of China. He feels that many Americans hold on to delusions of grandeur to keep their pride afloat, denying the reality of waning US power.

“The decline of American power will entail the progressive reduction of American overseas military commitments,” he says. “But a nation in decline finds it extremely difficult to let go. It’s a reluctant process and a form of retreat.”

Jacques watched his own country go through the painful ordeal. “Britain was very reluctant to let go, not just the political elite but also the people. They lived an imperial role and didn’t like losing it. It gave them status, it gave them power and the knowledge that it was our role and responsibility in the world.”

“The military enjoys a very privileged position in the American mind, and the same experience will be had in the United States.”

Military superiority is very closely tied to the American identity and many believe that continued public support for imperial overreach stems from a desire to maintain prestige rather than from pragmatic security concerns.

“It’s very disorienting to lose your national identity. Part of being an American means knowing that you are part of the most powerful military state,” explains Dr. Larson, “If the US were to withdraw from various parts of the world, people would fear that we were declining and were no longer a hegemon. We would lose a lot of our national pride and prestige.”

It is time for the US public to accept that the military cannot maintain a global monopoly on violence and that rather than protecting and enriching them, imperial endeavors invariably become costly, never-ending counterinsurgency campaigns against dedicated, dug-in enemies.

In order for the American psyche to forge a new identity in the face of shifting realities, the US public must demand the change that their president promised, must urge leaders to scale back overseas military commitments, focus on education, technology and innovation and embrace a global leadership role rooted in soft power and diplomacy.

–Blake Sifton

Gates describes U.S. military strategy in Asia

http://www.defense.gov/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=59503

Gates Describes U.S. Approach to Deterrence in Asia

By John D. Banusiewicz

American Forces Press Service

SINGAPORE, June 5, 2010 – A U.S. defense posture in Asia that is more geographically distributed, operationally resilient and politically sustainable is necessary in deterring conflict in today’s world, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates said here today.

Gates addressed the first plenary session of the ninth annual “Shangri-La Dialogue,” an Asia security summit organized by the International Institute for Strategic Studies.

Conventional military bases, Gates said, are not the sole yardstick for measuring the U.S. presence in the region and its associated impact and influence. “Rather,” he said, “we must think about U.S. ‘presence’ in the broader sense of what we achieve in the region: the connections made, the results accomplished.”

This, he explained, includes the work of medical teams and engineers, as well as partner militaries that are more professional and capable of contributing to international efforts to deal with the most vexing challenges the United States and its Asian partners face.

“These kinds of activities reflect a priority of the overall United States security strategy: to prevent and deter conflict by better [employing] and integrating all elements of our national power and international cooperation,” the secretary said. “As we have learned, military capabilities are critically important, but by themselves, [they] do not deter conflict. Sustained diplomatic, economic and cultural ties also play vital roles in maintaining stability and improving relationships.

“The history of the past 60 years in this part of the world,” he continued, “has proven that historic tensions can be overcome, instability can be avoided, and strategic rivalries are not inevitable.”

The U.S. approach to its policy in Asia and its overall defense posture has been shaped by a series of strategy reviews over the past year, Gates said. “These reviews were shaped by a bracing dose of realism, and in a very sober and clear-eyed way assessed risks, set priorities, made tradeoffs, and identified requirements based on plausible real-world threats, scenarios and potential adversaries.”

An effective and affordable U.S. defense posture, the secretary explained, requires a broad and versatile portfolio of military capabilities across the widest possible spectrum of conflict. With regard to Asia, he said, the United States is increasing its deterrent capabilities in the region.

“First, we are taking serious steps to enhance our missile defenses with the intent to develop capabilities in Asia that are flexible and deployable – tailored to the unique needs of our allies and partners and able to counter the clear and growing ballistic missile threats in the region,” he said.

The United States is renewing its commitment to a strong and effective deterrence that guarantees the safety of the American people and the defense of its allies and partners, Gates said. President Barack Obama is committed to reducing the role of nuclear weapons in the quest for a world without them, he noted. “But as long as these weapons exist,” he added, “we will maintain a safe, secure and effective nuclear arsenal.”

The forward presence of substantial U.S. forces is another example of the strong U.S. commitment and deterrent power in the region, as has been the case for six decades, Gates said, though a global posture review scheduled to be completed by the year’s end already has made one general trend clear.

“The U.S. defense posture in Asia is shifting to one that is more geographically distributed, operationally resilient and politically sustainable,” he said. “The buildup on Guam is part of this shift, as well as the agreement reached on basing with Japan – an agreement that fittingly comes during the 50th anniversary of our mutual security alliance and transcends any individual policymaker.” Plans call for more than 8,000 U.S. Marines to move to Guam from the Japanese island of Okinawa by 2014, and for a U.S. Marine air base on Okinawa to relocate on the island.

Gates noted that the economic growth and political development the Asia-Pacific region has enjoyed over the last several decades was not a foregone conclusion.

“Rather,” he said, “it was enabled by clear choices about the enduring principles that we all believe are essential to peace, prosperity and stability.” Those principles, he said, include:

— Free and open commerce;

— A just international order that emphasizes rights and responsibilities of nations and fidelity to the rule of law;

— Open access by all to the global commons of sea, air, space, and now, cyberspace; and

— The principle of resolving conflict without the use of force.

“Simply put,” he said, “pursuing our common interests has increased our common security. Today, the Asia-Pacific region is contending with new and evolving challenges, from rising powers and failing states to the proliferation of nuclear and ballistic missiles, extremist violence and new technologies that have the ability to disrupt the foundations of trade and commerce on which Asia’s economic stability depends.”

Confronting those threats, he told the delegates, is not the responsibility of a single nation acting alone.

“Rather,” he said, “our collective response will test our commitments to the principles I just mentioned – principles that are key to the region’s continued prosperity. In this, all of us have responsibilities we must fulfill, since all will bear the costs of instability as well as the rewards of international cooperation.”

Pimp My Contract: New Hawai’i consulting firm exploits military expansion in Guam

http://pacific.bizjournals.com/pacific/stories/2010/06/07/story4.html

Friday, June 4, 2010

CommPac execs’ new firm will focus on military

Pacific Business News (Honolulu) – by Linda Chiem Pacific Business News

The top executives at Hawaii’s largest public relations firm have joined with three retired senior military officers to start a consulting firm that will connect Hawaii businesses with the military in the Asia-Pacific region.

Communications Pacific Chairman and CEO Kitty Lagareta and President Christina Kemmer have joined with Eric and Victoria Olson and Crissy Gayagas to form First Canoe Strategies & Consulting.

The idea behind establishing First Canoe — a name the partners chose to symbolize navigation, teamwork and wayfinding — is to help prepare local civilian businesses to take advantage of “game-changing” initiatives already in play, such as Hawaii’s role as host of the 2011 Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation conference and the relocation of U.S. military forces to Guam.

The partners, who have worked together on a number of different projects over the past eight years, say they’re looking to fill a relatively untapped niche by acting as a liaison for companies looking for business opportunities with the military — lucrative contracts and grants, for example, that they might not know are even available, let alone apply for.

Join DMZ-Hawai’i/ Aloha ‘Aina at the USSF: ‘American Lake’ or Ka Moana Nui?: Demilitarization movements in the Asia-Pacific

‘American Lake’ or Ka Moana Nui?: Demilitarization movements in the Asia-Pacific

Since the 1890s, the US has treated the Pacific ocean as an ‘American Lake’. Today, it seeks a drastic expansion of military bases in the region, primarily to contain a rising China. But movements against US bases in the Asia-Pacific are rising up and declaring a different vision of Ka Moana Nui (the great ocean) as a zone of peace and security through peoples’ solidarity. The voices of peoples of the Pacific are rarely heard in the US. Find out about demilitarization efforts in the Asia-Pacific and how people in the U.S. can be in solidarity. Participants will gain a better understanding of: 1) the crucial role of Pacific islands to the maintenance and expansion of American Empire; 2) the disastrous impacts this network of bases has on the countries and peoples of the Asia-Pacific; and 3) the movements that are resisting U.S. militarization in the Pacific. This will be a panel discussion with representatives from Asia-Pacific nations who are knowledgeable and active in anti-bases struggles. The format will be a panel discussion with some multimedia aids. Activists working on anti-bases movements in Hawai’i, Guahan/Guam, and Korea will be on a panel.

Thu, 06/24/2010 – 3:30pm5:30pm
Event Location: Cobo Hall: D2-10

Hawaii Woman Held By Israelis

http://www.kitv.com/news/23762985/detail.html

Hawaii Woman Held By Israelis

Activist Was On Aid Mission Attacked By Commandos

Dick Allgire KITV 4 News Reporter

POSTED: 3:54 pm HST June 1, 2010

HONOLULU — Retired Army Col. Ann Wright, a Honolulu resident, is reportedly being held by the Israeli government after commandos stormed a flotilla of ships taking aid to Palestinians in Gaza, killing 9 and wounding dozens of others.

Wright is a former state department official who resigned in protest over the Iraq war. She was on one of the ships attempting to take supplies to Palestinians cut off by the Israelis in Gaza.

Wright has been highly critical of Israel.

“They’ve been able to get away with any criminal act and violation of international law, and America protects them,” Wright said in an interview conducted aboard one of the ships just before the attack.

A YouTube video shows a person who appears to be Wright being escorted off one of the boats that had been diverted to Israel.

“It appears from the video that she was walking OK, but people who were deported have reported beatings after they were arrested. They’ve been reporting harsh interrogation techniques, so of course you worry about her,” said Carolyn Hadfield, a friend of Wright.

Protestors gathered at the Federal Building in downtown Honolulu on Tuesday to show support for Wright and criticism of the Israel.

“We’re all worried about getting our people back home, and a little alarmed that the U.S. government seems unconcerned. If you look at all the other nations involved, they’re very angry and demanding Israel return their people. The U.S. is protecting Israel in the United Nations,” said Michael Rivero at the demonstration.

The Israel government said those who are being detained will be released and deported within 48 hours. Friends of Wright hope she comes home safe

“She was a Colonel in the military. She had a very sober understanding of the stakes and knew what was happening to Palestinian people,” Hadfield said.

New website highlights Guam’s marine biodiversity: guamreeflife.com

The proposed U.S. military expansion in Guam will destroy 71 acres of coral reef in the Apra Harbor to create room for nuclear aircraft carriers.  This new website will give people a sense of the incredible marine treasure that is threatened by this expansion. Raise your voices to stop the military destruction of Guam!

>><<

From: David Burdick

Date: Fri, May 28, 2010 at 4:26 PM

Subject: announcing guamreeflife.com

Hafa adai friends, colleagues!

First of all, apologies for the mass email – it’s not something I do that often. But I’m finally ready to unveil my little labor of love, guamreeflife.com (http://www.guamreeflife.com), and this seems to be the best to way to get the word out. Guamreeflife.com is a website dedicated to raising awareness of Guam’s marine biodiversity through the distribution of thousands of images of marine life from Guam and lots of information about Guam’s coral reefs. I’ve told quite a few people about it already, and it’s been getting a fair number of hits in recent months, but now that I’ve completed (or at least nearly completed) some important sections of the site I thought I’d make it official.

Filling the void

I developed the site after realizing how few images of Guam’s reefs are freely available for outreach/education and other non-commercial uses. I’ve taken thousands of photos of Guam’s reefs over the last several years, so all I needed was a vehicle to deliver the photos to end-users.

It’s been quite an undertaking, as it’s required processing and organizing thousands of images, not to mention trying to identify species of many different taxa. It also required a lot of tinkering with HTML code to figure out how to build the site. Which reminds, me…I apologize for how bulky and slow the site is. Any design suggestions are welcome. I’m hoping to streamline it in the near future so that those with slower internet connections can access it more easily. I’m also hoping to throw together a DVD so it can be distributed to places with really slow internet connections. And FYI…the site seems to work best with Mozilla Firefox and Google Chrome. 95% of the site works with Internet Explorer, but for some reason the slideshows in the reef tour section don’t work with that browser.

Content

The meat and potatoes of the site is the images section, with images arranged two ways: 1) my favorite images arranged by general category (e.g., coral, fishes, etc.) for those who are interested simply in decent quality pictures of marine life, reefscapes, and reef stress and 2) by taxa for those interested in identifying marine species. In the “organism ID” section, you’ll notice that it’s heavy on corals and opistobranchs (i.e., nudibranchs and sea slugs), but I’m continuously beefing up the pages for other taxa. Also note that a list of recently added species will be added to the “organism ID” front page (http://www.guamreeflife.com/htm/identification.htm) so you can quickly see what new additions there have been since you’re last visit.

Another big part of the site is the “reef tour” section, where you can click on a map or browse a list of reef sites around Guam to view reefscapes from these sites. The idea is to give people a sense of what each of these sites looks like from a diver’s/snorkeler’s perspective, including the good, the bad, and the ugly. Some of you may be particularly interested in the photos from marine resource surveys of the reef area in Apra Harbor planned for dredging (http://www.guamreeflife.com/htm/reeftour/cvn_survey_sites.htm).

Here are a few of the site’s highlights:

– Over 9200 photos of more than 1500 marine species from Guam

– Over 3200 photos of more than 130 reef sites around Guam

– Lots of information about reef management and conservation on Guam

– Links to dozens of helpful websites

I’d also like to mention that while I haven’t yet incorporated Chamorro names for various reef life into the site, that is definitely is high on my list of things to do.

Photo use

For those interesting in using photos for more than just home use (e.g., desktop wallpaper, screensaver, etc.), all I ask is that you send me an email with a list of photos and what you intend to use them for. The intent is that they be used primarily for non-commercial use, mainly outreach and education activities, but I won’t rule out using photos for commercial activities. These images are copyrighted, so please do not use them without my express permission. I don’t want to have to say this, but I need to: I reserve the right to refuse requests.

Spread the word

I hope you all enjoy the site and pass word to anyone who you think might be interested. I’m particularly keen on getting this site into the hands of educators and students, so any help with that would be greatly appreciated. Also, please check back regularly, as I will be posting new images and new information – probably on a weekly or bi-weekly basis.

Help out

I appreciate any input people can provide on the site, from design recommendations, help with species identification, and help to make the reef conservation section more informative and more accurate.

Along those lines, I have a special favor to ask of the professional and amateur taxonomists and naturalists: could you assist me in correctly identifying marine species with which you are most familiar? I did my best to take a first stab at identification, but I came up short on quite a few and am probably wrong on many others.

Thanks and enjoy!

Dave

David R. Burdick

Biologist/Coastal GIS Specialist

Guam Coastal Management Program

Ampo’s Troubled 50th: Hatoyama’s Abortive Rebellion, Okinawa’s Mounting Resistance and the US-Japan Relationship

Gavan McCormack of Japan Focus has posted an excellent three-part paper on the history of the U.S.-Japan alliance and the Okinawan resistance to the U.S. military bases.

>><<

Ampo’s Troubled 50th: Hatoyama’s Abortive Rebellion, Okinawa’s Mounting Resistance and the US-Japan Relationship

Gavan McCormack

This is the first of a three part comprehensive survey of the US-Japan relationship defined by the Ampo Treaty of 1960, and refined subsequently in ways that have deepened Japanese and Okinawan subordination to American global power and ambitions. The article focuses on questions pertaining to the legacy of Article Nine of the Constitution, and to Okinawa and base relations as a template for exploring the troubled Ampo relationship, including the powerful and sustained Okinawan resistance to US base expansion.

Read Part 1

Read Part 2

Read Part 3

“Priorities and Concerns of Civil Society Relating to the Decolonization of Guam as a UN Non Self-Governing Territory”

http://overseasreview.blogspot.com/2010/05/perspectives-on-decolonisation-of-guam.html

STATEMENT OF GUAHAN COALITION FOR PEACE AND JUSTICE and THE CHAMORRO STUDIES ASSOCIATION

By HOPE A. CRISTOBAL

THE UNITED NATIONS SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON DECOLONISATION

Pacific Regional Seminar

Noumea, New Caledonia

18 – 20 May 2010

“Priorities and Concerns of Civil Society Relating to the Decolonization of Guam as a UN Non Self-Governing Territory”

CHAMORU SELF-DETERMINATION PA’GO

I. INTRODUCTION

Hafa Adai! (Greetings) Your Excellency Mr. Chairman and distinguished members of the Special Committee on Decolonization.

Dangkolu na si Yu’os ma’ase (sincere thank you) for your invitation to participate at this revolving seminar to assess the progress of decolonization and to discuss priorities regarding the Question of Guam on the final year of the Second International Decade for the Eradication of Colonialism in the 21st century.

Also, I bring warm Hafa Adei greetings from our indigenous Chamorro people to our fellow Kanaky people of New Caledonia. We thank you for graciously hosting this United Nations Pacific Seminar. We extend a heartfelt “Dangkolu na si Yu’os ma’ase” (sincere thank you) for the opportunity to join Your Excellency, the Special Committee and my esteemed fellow delegates today.

As you may know, the Chamorro people of the Mariana Islands have cultural and linguistic ties to the Kanaky people of New Caledonia through our common Austronesian heritage that spans Oceania. As peace loving peoples of the great Pacific, we hope one day to be able to share in a history of freedom from colonial dominance espoused by this Special Committee and the rest of the UN body.

I am Hope Alvarez Cristobal, a Chamorro former Senator of Guam. I am here as a representative of Guåhan Coalition for Peace and Justice, a Guam based coalition made up of grassroots organizations advocating for the political, cultural, social, environmental and human rights of the people of Guam. We formed in September 2006 as a result of the announcement of the United States-Japan Realignment Initiatives signed in May 2006 in our awareness and desire (consistent with our traditionally matrilineal social order) to organize and give voice to concerns of women and female children in a highly militarized environment.

Our focus on peace and justice is central in light of the ongoing issue of the denial of our Chamorro people’s inalienable human right of self-determination and decolonization of Guam as a modern-day colony of the United States. Particular emphasis is made on keeping Guam, our island home, safe and sustainable for our children and generations to come. The Guåhan Coalition for Peace and Justice is comprised of the following member organizations: Chamorro Studies Association; National Association of Social Workers, Guam Chapter; Conscious Living; Guam’s Alternative Lifestyle Association; and Nasion Chamoru.

II. THE LAND AND THE PEOPLE OF THE LAND

Guam’s unincorporated (permanent colony) status designation under the 1950 Organic Act of Guam legitimized US military land takings with rights of eminent domain of the only 147,000 acres of land—with only 116.5 miles of natural shoreline available to it for all purposes. Of this 147,000 acres, the military currently possesses 40,000 acres constituting 27.21% of the island’s landmass with the US National Park Service possessing 695 acres for 0.47% and the US Fish & Wildlife Service currently possessing 385 acres for 0.26% of the island. The local government possesses 37,673.36 acres for 25.6% of that total and with private lands consisting of only 68,246 acres for 46.43% of Guam’s land mass. [Ref. legislative Resolution 258-30 (COR)].

With a history of US land takings and the possibility of more land condemnation through the current US militarization plans, the 29th Guam Legislature passed public law 29-113 which clarifies that the disposition of public lands is exclusively the purview of the Guam Legislature and not the US military. This law stipulates that duly enacted legislation by the Guam Legislature is needed to authorize “the acquisition by condemnation or otherwise of private property” by means of Congressional appropriation to acquire property for public use.

The current 30th Guam Legislature also passed another law which tasks the local government’s Guam First Commission to determine which land the Federal Government may intend to lease or sublease, exchange for other land, or purchase, and to report their findings to the Guam Legislature and the Governor of Guam. This law also requires the Legislature’s approval of any federal acquisition of Government of Guam property, whether by lease, sub-lease, exchange or sale.

Guam’s colonial status continues to pave the way for US application of federal laws over our air space and sea lanes; our 200-mile Exclusive Economic Zone; all our resources, control of exit and entry of our borders, control of our land, the environment and whatever can be defined as “a possession of but not a part of the United States.” It is clear that the Guam Legislature is now struggling as it finds itself with little power to protect local government assets under the laws of the administering power. For a small colonial people, the alienation of property by laws of the colonial power is one of the fundamental tenets of colonialism. In Guam, so much of the alienation has occurred through military seizure—but other forms of alienation have the same effect.

III. SECOND INTERNATIONAL DECADE FOR THE ERADICATION OF COLONIALISM

Mr. Chairman, people of the 16 remaining NSGTs still under the yoke of colonialism have been denied the benefits of decolonization as provided by the UN Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples [UN Resolution 1514 (XV)] and that despite the Special Committee’s diligent work emphasized in the proclamation of the two International Decades for the Eradication of Colonialism the world’s political map have not had any major transformation. We can honestly say that in the case of Guam, rather than the eradication of colonialism, the US administering Power has deepened its colonial roots.

What we find unacceptable, Mr. Chairman, is that the administering power’s WWII adversary, Guam’s brutal occupier of WWII, Japan, is now complicit in Guam’s modern day colonization and militarization through its joint Bi-lateral Agreement with the U.S. With respect to Guam, the Special Committee’s work was not only stymied; rather, it has been made to fail in its mission to make colonialism a fact of the past—in not having developed a programme of work for the decolonization of the NSGT of Guam in view of the US’s active, massive militarization plans. Included is the failure in dispatching a UN visiting mission at the time Guam was actively negotiating its political status over two decades ago; and today, with US plans for our militarization.

For 21st century Guam, it is déjà vu old-style colonialism again. This time it is not 17th C. Spain but the US administering Power utilizing its military forces in a kind of “reduccion” process of “subduing, converting and gathering the natives through the establishment of missions and stationing of soldiers to protect those missions.” (Ref. Rob Wilson, 21st Annual Conference, “Crosscurrents: New Directions in Pacific and Asian Studies,” University of Hawaii, Manoa, March 10, 2010.) The exploitation of our colonial status as a people, U.S. militarization, assimilationist immigration policies, the rising tide of cultural genocide, environmental degradation and contamination, the dispossession of our lands, etc., are direct violations of our rights as NSG people under:

a. The UN Charter, in particular, Articles 1, 55 and 73e which addresses the rights of peoples in non self-governing territories who have not yet attained a full measure of self-government, and commands states administering them to “recognize the principle that the interests of the inhabitants are paramount.” Furthermore, that administering powers, accept as a “sacred trust” the obligation to develop self-government in the territories, taking due account of the political aspirations of the people.

b. UN Resolutions 1514 that states, the subjection of peoples to alien subjugation, domination, and exploitation constitutes a denial of fundamental human rights, is contrary to the Charter of the UN and is an impediment to the promotion of world peace and cooperation.

c. UN Resolution 1541 affirming three ways NSGTs could attain a full measure of self-government that must be the result of the freely expressed wishes of the peoples of NSGTs.

d. UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples—the latest UN international human rights instrument to explicitly expand the universe of the holders of the right of self-determination with its Article 3 that specifically recognizes, using the classic formulation of the right of self-determination enshrined in the 1966 Human Rights Covenants, that indigenous peoples hold the right.

e. International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, (known collectively as the 1966 Human Rights Covenants) that enshrine self-determination as a right.

f. And, other relevant UN documents on decolonization.

Clearly, the US continues to behave contrary to its concrete UN obligations as the administering Power over Guam. There is no mistaking that US dominance and subordination of Guam is a consequence of US military power dynamics over the Asia-Pacific region. And, without the United Nations assertion of its moral authority and oversight of its non self-governing territory of Guam, our home island and our people will continue to be treated as inferior having no sovereignty or agency in relation to US foreign policy and security interests. Gone unchallenged, the possibility of a free, decolonized and self-governing Guam will be sealed and buried under by our own administering Power.

At his opening statement of the House Armed Services Committee hearing on March 25, 2010, Congressman Ike Skelton spoke about the rebasing of U.S. Marines from Japan to Guam as “one of the largest movements of military assets in decades”—estimated to cost over ten billion dollars. He further stated that the changes being planned as part of that move will not only affect U.S. bilateral relationship with Japan; they will shape U.S. strategic posture throughout the critical Asia-Pacific region for 50 years or more. Congressman Skelton stated that the US “must be proactively engaged in the Asia-Pacific region on multiple fronts,” and that U.S. actions may well influence the choices and actions of others.”

For Guam, our exclusion from the decision made about the massive militarization of our island home through US military expansion and restructuring of its bases and military operations is unconscionable. Moreover, we have had no choice and no options offered vis-à-vis our colonial status or US actions having political implications on our colonial status. Guam is a colony and remains a colony until the Chamorro people is allowed to exercise our human right of self-determination and is allowed to decolonize.

IV. OUR HUMAN ENVIRONMENT

Mr. Chairman, the U.S. military’s militarization plans bodes great harm for the people and our island home environment. These plans include the construction of facilities and structure to support the full spectrum of warfare training for some 8,600 marines (and their dependants) being relocated from Okinawa to Guam; the construction of a deep-draft wharf in Guam’s only harbor to provide for nuclear-powered aircraft carriers, destroying over 287,000 sqm (71 acres) of healthy and endangered coral reef; the construction of an Army Missile Defense Task Force modeled on the Marshall Islands-based Ronald Reagan Ballistic Missile Defense Test Site, for the practice by US military personnel of intercepting intercontinental ballistic missiles; the forcible land-grabbing of an additional 2,200 acres of indigenous Chamorro land; the desecration of Pagat, one of Guam’s oldest ancient villages dating back to 2,000 B.C.; the dangerous over-tapping of Guam’s water system to include the drilling of 22 additional wells; and the denial of the most fundamental human right of the Chamorro people of Guam to self-determination.

The militarization plan calls for an alarming 80,000 new residents within the next five years. These new residents include the 8,600 Marines and 1,000 Army troops with 9,000 of their dependents and large numbers of construction workers that will add to our current 180,000 residents. This is obviously not about demographics alone as we see US hegemony flourish and cultural genocide work for the administering power. As non-US citizens after WWII, we were over 95% of the population. As United States citizens 50 years later, our population is reduced to 42% (2000 Census). Five years ago, we comprised some 35% of our home population. But with the new US plan, the Chamorro population can be expected to drop to around 24%! This is perhaps the most plausible reason why all information impacting our people’s lives were kept secret until the official release of the draft environmental impact study last November 20, 2009.

This Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)/Overseas Environmental Impact Statement (OEIS) was intended to, “assess the potential environmental effects associated with the proposed military activities” (DEIS, Executive Summary, Abstract) for the relocation of US marines to Guam, enhancement of infrastructure and logistic capabilities, improvement of pier/waterfront infrastructure for transient US Navy nuclear aircraft carrier (CVN) and placement of US Army ballistic missile defense (BMD) task force. It is supposed to report the overall impacts that the military’s plans will have on Guam’s environment. It was a document of 11,000 pages and we were given a 90-day window to comment (ending Feb. 17, 2010) with a Final EIS to be completed in July and a Record of Decision to be released in 30 days.

The selective and exclusive sharing of information on the military’s plans prevented our full participation and served to silence our voices in this critical process. The community scrambled to respond to the 11,000-page report within the rigid schedule. The “record speed” of a two-year environmental impact study for such unprecedented militarization of a non self-governing territory was obviously suspect. We were not told about the 80,000 people or that the US had planned to go outside their existing footprint. At the public outreach meetings, hundreds spoke resoundingly against the military’s plans. At the close of the public comment window, the military received over 10,000 comments from various indigenous Chamorro groups, community members and stakeholders and other external stakeholders.

The fear of being overwhelmed by the construction of a new US Marine base has permeated the community. In reference to the local government’s costs grossly underfunded in the plan, Lt. Governor Michael Cruz, M.D. who himself is a Colonel in the Army National Guard, stated “Our nation knows how to find us when it comes to war and fighting for war, but when it comes to war preparations—which is what the military buildup essentially is—nobody seems to know where Guam is.” Government officials put the total direct and indirect costs of coping with the military buildup at about $3 billion, including $1.7 billion to improve roads and $100 million to expand the already overburdened public hospital.

Last January 22, the 30th Guam Legislature adopted a resolution expressing the “strong and abiding opposition of the Guam Legislature and the People of Guam to any use of eminent domain [condemnation] for the purpose of obtaining Guam lands for either the currently planned military buildup or other U.S. Federal Government purposes, or both.” Copies were transmitted to the President of the United States, the Speaker of the House of Representatives of the United States, the President Pro-Tem of the U.S. Senate, to UN Secretary General, Ban Ki-moon, and other officials. Another resolution (No. 275-30 (LS)) was introduced and adopted relative to presenting to President Obama and the US Congress, the sentiments expressed by the people of Guam regarding the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Guam military build-up; to enumerating the findings of the Legislature that have led to the conclusion that the DEIS is grossly flawed; to providing a list of essential elements which must be favorably resolved; to restate Guam’s agenda of priority concerns relative to federal-territorial issues that must be addressed concurrently with the buildup; and to asserting additional findings on actionable items relative to the DEIS.

Of grave concern is the fact that Chamorro self-determination and decolonization was not even addressed by the military in the DEIS and the fact that decisions have been made in the context of a huge power imbalance in which the US has the ultimate decision-making power with the social, cultural and political implications to the Chamorro community being grossly understated. It is no secret that the US and its military representatives are fully cognizant of the irreversible and significant consequences that their decision will have on its colonial people. Broad concerns relating to local infrastructure, environmental, labor and workforce, socio-economic and health and human services are being discussed among government and military officials. But the difference is: The US has completely ignored the negative implications to its colonial people’s human, political and legal right to self-determination. Just as select private businesses collectively predict positive gain by Guam’s militarization, the Chamorro people alone have historically and will predictably bear the unequal proportion of the burden.

On the last day of the public comment period, the federal Environmental Protection Agency issued the lowest possible rating of the DEIS of “environmentally unsatisfactory” and providing “inadequate information.” In its strongly worded six-page letter, the US EPA stated that “The impacts are of sufficient magnitude that..…action should not proceed as proposed and improved analyses are necessary to ensure the information in the EIS is adequate to fully inform decision makers.” Specifically, the EPA stated that the military’s plan would lead to:

a. A shortfall in Guam’s water supply, resulting in low water pressure that would expose people to water borne diseases from sewage.

b. Increased sewage flows to wastewater plants already failing to comply with the Clean Water Act regulations.

c. More raw sewage spills that would contaminate the water supply and the ocean.

d. “Unacceptable impacts” to the 287,000 sqm (71 acres) of a high quality coral reef.

But even with this indictment of its draft EIS, the military continues with its military expansion and restructuring plans today.

In Congress, Guam’s delegate introduced a bill that would provide for public education on Guam’s political status options. This bill was amended in the House of Representatives and now includes the other two NSGT’s: American Samoa and the US Virgin Islands and would “include but not (be) limited to the 3 internationally recognized options.

The implication is that the educational program could also include other options, albeit not defined in the bill. There is no reference to any referendums nor provision of a specific budget although Congressional estimate of the costs is some $2 million in the next 5 years for all the territories. It remains to be seen what will happen in the US Senate.

If the draft Guam Commonwealth bill or the Guam War Reparations bill or the bill to amend the US Radiation Exposure Compensation Act (to give compensation to the “down winders” (Guam included)) are any example, it will end up taking many forms over many years without resolution or action. Only time will tell. And, time, Mr. Chairman is not on our side.

V. OBSTACLES/OPPORTUNITIES/RECOMMENDATIONS

The Question of Guam shall remain a question of Chamorro self-determination and decolonization for Guam. As a process of decolonization, the exercise of Chamorro self-determination must necessarily occur outside the influences of the administering Power and with the cooperation of the United Nations.

We make the following recommendations to this seminar:

1. That the inalienable right of the Chamorro people of Guam to self-determination in conformity with all relevant UN documents be given utmost priority by the Special Committee on Decolonization in view of the administering power’s massive militarization planned from 2010 to 2014.

2. That a customized process of decolonization for the Chamorro people of Guam be immediately adopted in view of the severe irreversible impacts on Guam by the US administering power.

3. That an investigation be conducted as to the compliance of the administering power with its treaty obligations under the Charter of the United Nations to promote the economic and social development and to preserve the cultural identity of the Territories as related earlier in this text.

4. That a study must be conducted on the implications of US militarization plans on Guam’s decolonization and that UN funding be allocated immediately.

5. That the UN denounce the militarization of the non-self-governing territory of Guam without the consent of the people of Guam due to irreparable harm to the inalienable human rights of the Chamorro people and interests of the people of Guam.

6. That a work programme be adopted by the Special Committee to carry out its objectives for the decolonization of Guam.

VI. CLOSING

Thank you, Mr. Chairman and delegations for the opportunity to make this presentation. My people’s journey towards decolonization is at a very critical juncture. We can only rely on the United Nations to assure that the US live up to its obligations under the United Nations Charter and to its promise of self-determination and decolonization for the people of Guam.