Was Kalaeloa / Barbers Point land banked for possible military return?

The U.S. decision to disperse 9000 Marines from Okinawa to various locations around the Pacific, including 2700 to Hawaiʻi is generating much anxiety and opposition from affected communities as well as enthusiasm from some who hope to cash in on this bonanza.  As reported by William Cole of the Honolulu Star Adverstiser, some residents of the ʻEwa district have suggested turning the former Barber’s Point Naval Air Station site back into a base to house the Marines – “Kalaeloa suggested to house incoming Marines” (May 13, 2012):

No sooner had plans been confirmed for 2,500 or more Marines coming to Hawaii from Japan than Honolulu resident Dennis Egge suggested how to accommodate them.

“Wouldn’t it be nice if the Navy moved its planes and personnel back to (Naval Air Station) Barbers Point?” Egge said. “Something important went missing from the Ewa Plain when our naval air squadrons moved from NAS Barbers Point to (Marine Corps Air Station) Kaneohe, leaving the Coast Guard to ‘hold down the fort.’

“Now, the Marines need extra space at MCAS Kaneohe to accommodate Marine Corps personnel and their families and equipment immigrating from Okinawa. Isn’t this a great opportunity for the Navy to return to NAS Barbers Point?”

And politicians seem to be supportive of the idea:

U.S. Rep. Colleen Hanabusa, who serves on the House Armed Services Committee, recently was asked at a town hall meeting in Ewa Beach if she would support Marine housing at Kalaeloa.

“Her response was yes, that sounds like something she would support,” said Hanabusa spokesman Richard Rapoza.

As Cole writes:

The Marines’ preference is to have most of its forces at Kaneohe Bay, but plans already in the works, including proposals for Navy P-8A Poseidon jets, Osprey tilt-rotor aircraft and new attack, utility and heavy transport helicopters — adding up to a 49 percent increase in airfield use by 2018 — might make it impossible to base all the Marines there.

An official said Pearl City Peninsula, where SEAL Delivery Vehicle Team 1 has a compound, is among multiple sites on Oahu that might be looked at to house some of the extra Marines.

The old Barbers Point is another.

Kalaeloa / Barbers Point was the only base in Hawaiʻi that was closed and returned under the Base Realignment And Closure (BRAC) process.   But unlike other closed bases where local communities strategically planned and successfully converted the former military facilities into civilian centers for economic development, civic entrepreneurial initiatives and social programs, the conversion of Barbers Point floundered:

Anthony Ching, executive director of the Hawaii Community Development Authority, which has oversight of the shuttered Barbers Point, said a new Marine Corps family housing project could really help revitalize the old base.

“If the military were to decide that Barbers Point is a good place to locate family housing, for instance, could they do that? Most certainly,” Ching said.

So-far unrealized hopes for major redevelopment of Barbers, closed as a military base in 1999, and the dilapidated state of a lot of the land and facilities since then, have left some West Oahu residents pining for the old well-kept military days.

An HCDA master plan for the 3,709-acre base, now called Kalaeloa, still calls for 6,350 homes, a 7,000-job business district and two rail transit stations, Ching said.

State officials previously estimated that $3.35 billion was needed to realize the plan, including $550 million to improve old roads, water utilities, electrical systems and other infrastructure.

An examination given to basing an aircraft carrier air wing at Kalaeloa — which put some redevelopment plans on hold — ended in 2007 with the Navy deciding to base the USS Carl Vinson in San Diego instead of Pearl Harbor.

Why did the base conversion fail so miserably in Hawaiʻi?   Other successful  base conversions had vision and political will behind it.  They engaged the local community in the planning process.  They created base conversion agencies that had actual planning, implementation and resource development authorities.   In the case of Barbers Point, the closed base was treated first as an unwanted orphan, transferred to an office that had no real authority to plan or redevelop the site. Then, the land was treated as if it were a beef carcass to be carved up with the choicest cuts going to well-connected interest groups or to settle political debts.   The result was a patchwork of different entities claiming turf, no one with the authority to move a plan forward, and deteriorating conditions at the actual site.

But was this just another example of government ineptitude?  Or was the conversion process left to fail by design?   If Barbers Point was successfully converted, it would have inspired people to demand conversion of other military sites.  This would not have been good for the military or those political and economic interests that directly benefit from the military economy.   But if it was neglected, eventually someone in the community would start “pining” for the military to return and restore order to the site.  In a way, the net effect of neglecting the base conversion has been to bank the land for possible future military needs.  Now that the Marines need more housing and facilities, the benefit of this strategy for the military interests become clear.

Feffer: Small Step Forward in Resolving Okinawa Base Impasse

John Feffer, the editor of Foreign Policy In Focus and a leader with the Network for Okinawa has written an excellent article “Small Step Forward in Resolving Okinawa Base Impasse” (May 3, 2012) that analyzes the implications of the U.S.-Japan deal to move 9000 Marines from Okinawa and distribute them to different locations in the Pacific:

It’s a deal that’s been more than 15 years in the making and the unmaking. The United States and Japan have been struggling since the 1990s to transform the U.S. military presence on the island of Okinawa, the southernmost prefecture of Japan.

In preparation for this week’s visit of Japanese Prime Minister Yoshihiko Noda to Washington, the two sides rolled out the latest attempt to resolve what has grown into a major sticking point in alliance relations.

According to the most recent deal, 9,000 U.S. Marines will leave Okinawa, thus fulfilling a longstanding U.S. promise to reduce the overall military footprint on the island. Half of that number will go to expanded facilities on Guam while the remainder will rotate through other bases in the region, including Australia, the Philippines, and Hawaii.

Japan will cover a little more than three billion dollars out of the estimated 8.6-billion-dollar cost of the Guam transfer.

“These adjustments are necessary to realize a U.S. force posture in the Asia-Pacific region that is more geographically distributed, operationally resilient, and politically sustainable,” according to a joint statement issued by Washington and Tokyo.

[…]

Key critics of the process of Pacific realignment – including John McCain, Carl Levin and Jim Webb – remain sceptical of the latest agreement since the review has not yet been completed.

Also skeptical are anti-base activists in the places where the Marine presence will increase.

“Hawaii does not need more military,” says Koohan Paik, a media professor at Kauai Community College.

“There are already 161 military installations in Hawaii, which have resulted in hundreds of sites contaminated with PCBs, trichloroethylene, jet fuel and diesel, mercury, lead, radioactive Cobalt 60, unexploded ordnance, perchlorate, and depleted uranium. And they call this security? The only ‘security’ this brings is economic security to military contractors.”

[…]

The latest U.S.-Japan deal comes at a time of considerable uncertainty regarding military spending. The Pentagon is under pressure to reduce costs in order to meet new spending limits dictated by concerns over rising national debt.

However, the Barack Obama administration’s “Pacific pivot”, announced last year, is difficult to achieve on the cheap. U.S. allies are concerned that they will have to shoulder an increasing amount of the costs of this realignment. Included in this bill will be the cost of upgrading the Futenma facility while Tokyo and Washington debate the base’s future.

Navy renames Hawaii Superferries “USNS Guam” and “USNS Puerto Rico”

Recently, we reported that the two repossessed Hawaii Superferry ships will be deployed to Okinawa as part of the Navy sea lift fleet.  But now it gets wierder.  The Navy just announced that the ships will be renamed the USNS Guam and USNS Puerto Rico!  So after two fast ferry naval ships are pushed out of one occupied island (Hawai’i) by protesters and renamed after two other U.S. colonies (Guam and Puerto Rico), they are reassigned to another military colony (Okinawa).   Is it some cruel joke on four colonies?  Or just an ignorant gesture of inclusion? The Pacific Business News reported “Navy renames former Hawaii Superferry vessels” (May 8, 2012):

The two high-speed ferries built for the shuttered Hawaii Superferry were renamed Tuesday by the vessels’ new owner — the U.S. Navy.

Navy Secretary Ray Mabus announced Tuesday that the Alakai, which sailed between Oahu and Maui from August 2007 until it was shut down in March 2009, and its sister ship, the Huakai, were renamed the USNS Guam and the USNS Puerto Rico.

“High-speed ferries will be used for peacetime operations such as troop transport training, exercise missions and humanitarian and disaster relief,” Mabus said in a statement.

Struggle to Protect Jeju Island from Monstrous Naval Base Intensifies

There has been an intense amount of activity in the struggle to protect Jeju island from destruction due to the building of a naval base in Gangjeong.   The Save Jeju Facebook page is a great source of news with many photos and as-it-happens reports of protests at the site of the naval base.

John Feffer wrote a travel article about visiting Jeju in the Washington Post “South Korea’s Jeju Island, paradise with a dark side”(April 20, 2012) which included a significant amount of information about the anti-base struggle there.

The Los Angeles Times published “In South Korea, a small island town takes on the navy” (May 6, 2012).

Ann Wright also wrote a piece for Op Ed News “64 years later, in Second Massacre on Jeju Island, South Korea: US Missile Defense System Destroys a World Heritage Site” (April 4, 2012).

And an international solidarity team produced an English language newsletter that reports on the deportation of several international supporters from Korea and the denial of entry to a delegation from Veterans for Peace.

One of the issues has been South Korean politicians using Hawai’i as an example of the successful marriage between tourism and the military.  A leading conservative politician has repeatedly made the comparision.  Jeju activists asked us to address her claims. Here’s an email sent by Korean activist Sung Hee Choi on May 1, 2012, which contains my letter to the editor rebutting the claims:

“I would invite Ms. Park to take a swim in Hawai’i’s most famous military-tourist attraction: Pearl Harbor (the true name given by Native Hawaiians is Ke Awalau o Pu’uloa). However, the water is too toxic. And before she could get very far, she would be arrested by the Navy for trespassing in military waters. There is no tourist activity within Pearl Harbor except for those museum sites controlled by the government.” (Kyle Kajihiro)

On May 1, Labor Day, Park Geun-Hye, daughter of deceased ex-President Park Chung-Hee who ruled South Korea for decades with military dictatorship made absurd remarks that, “In case of Hawai’i, tourism income is 24% while military-related income is 20% in its whole finance,” and “If we construct the Jeju naval base as civilian-military dual use port and make it well so that 150,000 ton cruise can enter and exit, it would not likely to be less than Hawai’i” (Headline Jeju, May 1).  On March 30 before General election, Park, supporting the candidates of the Saenuri Party (the ruling conservative Party)-though none were elected in the Jeju Island furious on naval base, has said, “We should make Jeju like Hawai’I famous for global tourism site and naval base.” It was a happening that reminded absurd remark by Kim Tae-Yong, ex-Minister of National Defense on March 20, 2010.  Amidst raining all day, Gangjeong villagers and activists protested against her spreading absurd remarks of so called civilian-military dual use port, from morning to afternoon.  Kyle Kajihiro has sent a below writing refuting her remarks on April 25. Kyle Kajihiro is the program director for the American Friends Service Committee in Hawaii. He works on demilitarization, environmental justice, and Kanaka Maoli human rights issues. He has been involved in immigrant worker organizing, community mural projects, antiracist/antifascist activism, the Central America Solidarity movement, Hawaiian sovereignty solidarity efforts, and community radio and television. He has visited the Jeju and has many times expressed his solidarity on Jeju. Please refer to DMZ Hawai’i / Aloha ‘Aina (http://www.dmzhawaii.org/)

Protest letter to Park Geun-Hye

http://www.parkgeunhye.or.kr/english/01pgh/pgh01.asp

http://www.parkgeunhye.or.kr/english/

The Military Impacts in Hawai’i should be a Warning to Koreans about the threat to Jeju island.

By Kyle Kajihiro

April 25, 2012

Ms. Park Keun-Hye is gravely mistaken to claim that military bases have been good for Hawai’i and therefore would be good for Jeju. The U.S. invaded and occupied the sovereign country of Hawai’i in order to build a military outpost. This included the taking of more than 200,000 acres of land for military bases, training and other activities. The result has been the destruction of the environment with more than 900 military contamination sites identified by the Department of Defense. The military’s toxic cocktail includes PCB, perchloroethylene, jet fuel and diesel, mercury, lead, radioactive Cobalt 60, unexploded ordance, perchlorate, and depleted uranium.

When the U.S. took over, especially during WWII, the military seized thousands of acres of Hawaiian land. Whole communities were evicted, their homes, churches and buildings razed or bombed for target practice, their sacred sites destroyed by bombs or imprisoned behind barbed wire.

Recently, hundreds of landless Native Hawaiian families were evicted from a secluded area of O’ahu where they had been living in cars and makeshift tents. They are the internally displaced native people, evidence of the so-called ‘benefits’ of militarization. Meanwhile the military occupies more than 13,000 acres of Hawaiian land, comprising a third of the land in that part of the island.

The enormous military presence did not bring security. On the contrary, it made Hawai’i the prime target during WWII and the Cold War. Militarization imported the most virulent forms of racism and martial law to the islands and provided the U.S. a launching pad from which to expand its empire. The military interests of the U.S. continue to override the needs and security of local communities as it distorts our development in ways that serve empire.

I would invite Ms. Park to take a swim in Hawai’i’s most famous military-tourist attraction: Pearl Harbor (the true name given by Native Hawaiians is Ke Awalau o Pu’uloa). However, the water is too toxic. And before she could get very far, she would be arrested by the Navy for trespassing in military waters. There is no tourist activity within Pearl Harbor except for those museum sites controlled by the government.

Ke Awalau o Pu’uloa is a perfect example of the dangers of militarization. The U.S. invaded and occupied the Kingdom of Hawai’i in order to take Ke Awalau o Pu’uloa as a strategic port. What was once one of the most productive fisheries for Native Hawaiian people with extensive wetland agriculture and aquaculture complexes that fed many thousands on O’ahu island has become a giant toxic Superfund site. Today there are approximately 749 contaminated sites that the Navy has identified within the Pearl Harbor Naval Complex. The seafood from Ke Awalau o Pu’uloa is no longer safe to eat. The famous pearl oysters are no more.

It is partially true that the military has become a major economic source in Hawai’i, but at a very high price. The military economy is artificial. It is largely a result of the corrupt processes of the military-industrial-political complex that injects money for pet projects in the islands like a drug. Politicians, businesses, and even unions become addicted to the quick high of these federal infusions and then become desperate to chase the next fix, even at the expense of the environment, Hawaiian rights and sovereignty and peace in the Asia-Pacific region. Meanwhile the real source of Hawai’i’s economy – the beauty and health of our natural environment and our cultural richness – deteriorates at an alarming rate.

The questions that we must always ask about the alleged economic benefits of the military in Hawai’i are: “Who gets paid? Who pays the price? What are the real social, cultural and environmental costs of such a dependent economy?” The native people of the land are the ones whose lands are always stolen and destroyed by the military. They and other poor groups live in the toxic shadow of the bases. Other productive capacities wither away as Hawai’i has grown completely dependent on imports (90% of food is imported) and federal spending. Meanwhile those who benefit most from the military economy are the contractors (many who flock to Hawai’i when new military funds are approved) who feed on the destruction wrought by all this so-called ‘prosperity’.

Jeju island is a unique cultural and natural treasure that must be protected from military expansion. The beautiful islands of the Pacific are being targeted because the governments think we are small and insignificant. But islands do not have to be isolated. As the peoples of the Pacific have known for centuries, Ka Moananuiakea (the great ocean) unites us, brings us life, culture, food and solidarity. We must join our efforts and broaden our solidarity beyond our local shores, we can weave a net that is big and strong enough to restrain those monstrous fish that threaten to devour us all.
………………………………………………………………..………………………………………….

Reference

http://www.headlinejeju.co.kr/news/articleView.html?idxno=149257
박근혜 “해군기지로 제주발전 재도약 뒷받침할 것”
해군기지 업무보고…”70년대 감귤이면, 지금은 해군기지가 성장동력”
제주도 “15만톤급 크루즈 안전성 꼭 필요”…박 “좋은 결론 나왔으면”
2012.05.01 14:43:44

http://www.sisajeju.com/news/articleView.html?idxno=146386
[사진]짧은 거리 경호원이 우산 펴자, 박근혜 위원장 손 저으며…
2012.05.01 13:24:46

http://www.headlinejeju.co.kr/news/articleView.html?idxno=149232
박근혜 위원장, “제주해군기지 업무보고 받겠다”
오후 1시 제주도청서 민군복합형 관광미항 업무보고 받기로
제주항 터미널 현장투어…노인복지시설 현장 방문 후 이도
2012.05.01 09:44:34

http://www.pressian.com/article/article.asp?article_num=60120330170329
박근혜 “제주, 해군기지로 ‘동양의 하와이’ 만들어야”
“민간인 사찰, 지위고하 막론하고 철저히 수사해야”
2012-03-30

http://www.jejuall.co.kr/

Several days later, Sung Hee posted news reports that the proposed mixed civilian-military use of the Jeju port was just a ruse; the Korean Navy had plans all along for the port to be an exclusive military port:
[May 3~7] It is a military-exclusive not civilian-military port. As the fakeness of dual use port was confirmed, People will have an emergency protest on May 7.

People will have emergency protest in front of the Island government hall in the morning of May 7, to demand Island governor Woo Keun-Min’s special decision to stop construction (destruction) and to revoke the project on the Jeju naval base which is so-called, “Beautiful Tourism Port for Mixed Civilian-Military Use.’

It is because it was confirmed that the Ministry of National Defense (MND) has secretly promoted military-exclusive port by making a prior legislation notice on the revision of bill on the enforcement of ordinance on harbor and bay law on April 26, even without informing to public. The notice was informed only by a Headline Jeju article on May 5 and 6, 2012.

According to a Headline Jeju on May 6, the item 2 of article 8, enforcement of ordinance, that is newly established reads:

‘Regarding the entry permission in the Beautiful Tourism Port for Mixed Civilian-Military Use among the zones applicable to each item […] of article 9 or military base and facilities […], the JURISDICTION UNIT COMMANDER should acquire the license on the ‘cruise passenger transportation business,’ or complex maritime passenger traffic business according to the maritime traffic law and guarantee maximum of port entry by the ships designated by him, among the approved and registered ships for the purpose of cruise business, following the ‘tourism promotion law.’

The most furious thing is that it is to take double-designation of water area of so called dual use port as both trade port and military protection zone-which means the cruise entry and exit of port would be under military control in reality.

Second, as seen in item 2 of article 8, the MND has no will to hand over the right to official regulations, [regarding cruise] to the MLTM (Jeju Island)

Third, there is no mention on commercial ships but only cruise, bringing confirmation that it would be a trade port only by name.

It is the violation of MOU (* which is dual itself) between the 3 parties of MND. MLTM, and Jeju Island on April 27, 2009, of which primary purpose was for the entry and exit of two 150,000 ton cruises. It is also violation of the recommendation item of sub-committee of Budget and Balance committee of National Assembly last October, which was of independent rights to official regulation for cruise by the MLTM (Jeju island) and for military vessels for NMD respectively.

(# MLTM: Ministry of Land, Transportation and Maritime Affairs)

The headline Jeju May 5 article reported navy’s press release which has not been informed to the public yet. The MND (navy) whole statement titled, “Position related to the establishment on the military facility protection zone on the water area of the Jeju civilian-military complex port,” is like the below:

– Even though some media on the date of May 4, Fri. (* reported in Jeju media on May 3), 2012, has reported that, if water area is designated as a trade port, breakwater, inner port area, and navigation route related to cruise entry and exit of port would be excluded from the military facility protection zone, it is different from the facts.”

– To guarantee cruise’s entry and exit of Jeju civilian-military complex port, the MND has made a prior legislation notice on the revision of bill on the enforcement of ordinance on military base and facility protection law on April 26 and the Ministry of Land, Transportation and Maritime Affairs (MLTM) has made a prior legislation notice on the revision of bill on the enforcement of ordinance on harbor and bay law as of May 4, in which the content is to designate the cruise related area as a trade port system.

– “If related procedure (procedure on the revision of enforcement of ordinance) is finished, the water area of Jeju civilian-military complex harbor would be DOUBLY designated as military protection zone and trade port kind so that the capacities as operation base that can accommodate maneuvering flotilla and as entry -exit port of cruise can be guaranteed.”

-The MND(navy) is in process of negotiation with related institutes to conclude a protocol on common use to effectively operate the Jeju Beautiful Tourism Port for Mixed Civilian-Military Use.”

The sub-committee of the National Assembly has recommended through synthetic opinion of its report last October, that “The MLTM revise the ‘enforcement of ordinance on harbor and bay,’ by this June and change the ‘harbor and bay basic plan,’ so that the cruse harbor and bay water area and its facilities can be designated as a ‘trade port.’

It also ordered that “The MND(navy) revise the enforcement of ordinance on military base and facility protection law by this June and the MND, MTLM, and Jeju Special Self-Governing Island promote the conclusion of ‘common use on the civilian-military harbor and bay,’ by June so that they can wipe out concerns that the base would be operated centered on military vessels.

Following it, it recommended that “Regarding the right to official regulations on harbor and bay, they finish the consultation by June so that the MLTM (Jeju Island) has it on cruise while the MND(navy) on military vessels, while regarding maintenance and repairing costs, the three conclude a protocol by June.”
…………………………………………………………………
Image source:

http://www.headlinejeju.co.kr/news/articleView.html?idxno=149604

Proposal on the establishment of maritime zone in the Gangjeong section of the Seogwipo port

Source: Ministry of Land, Transportation and Maritime Affairs and Headline Jeju

………………………………………………………………………

Reference

http://www.headlinejeju.co.kr/news/articleView.html?idxno=149661
또 ‘뒤통수’?…국방부 입법예고, 왜 쉬쉬 했나
[데스크논단] 몰래 이뤄진 국방부 군사보호법 시행령 입법예고
‘군사보호구역’ 중복 지정, 무늬만 ‘무역항’?…관제권은 부대장이?
2012.05.07 00:12:19

http://www.headlinejeju.co.kr/news/articleView.html?idxno=149604
제주해군기지 ‘무역항’, ‘군사보호구역’ 중복 지정
군사시설보호법 시행령 입법예고…”경계 긋지않고 중복지정”
“무역항 지정되더라도 군사보호구역 제외 안돼”…작전 중에는?
2012.05.05 17:22:26

http://www.headlinejeju.co.kr/news/articleView.html?idxno=149506
“강정해군기지 무역항 지정 시행령 개정은 위법행위”
강정마을회, 국토부 시행령 개정입법예고에 반박
2012.05.04 09:45:42

http://www.headlinejeju.co.kr/news/articleView.html?idxno=149437
정부, 제주해군기지 강정수역 ‘무역항’ 지정
국토부, 항만법 시행령 입법예고…”서귀포항 구역 확대 지정”
군사시설보호법 개정 등 ‘군항과 민항’ 항만공동사용 협정 추진
2012.05.03 11:25:27

 

U.S. military leaders tell troops to behave as Obama signs security pact with Karzai

U.S. military leaders are worried that recent outrageous conduct by U.S. troops in Afghanistan are stoking public anger against the foreign occupation, destabilizing the country and endangering U.S. and NATO troops there.   They responded by telling their troops to behave. The AP reported “Military commanders warned to get troops in line” (May 3, 2012):

Military leaders are telling commanders to get their troops in line and refrain from misconduct such as urinating on enemy corpses, in a sharp response to the tasteless photos and other disturbing examples of bad behavior that have enraged Afghans and complicated war-fighting.

As military leaders gave their troops a refresher on proper occupation etiquette, President Obama made a secret trip to Afghanistan on the anniversary of the killing of Osama bin Laden to sign a security agreement with Afghan President Hamid Karzai:

President Barack Obama and Afghan President Hamid Karzai have signed a strategic partnership accord that charts the future of US-Afghan relations beyond the end of the NATO combat mission in the country in 2014.

[…]

The deal does not commit the United States to any specific troop presence or spending. But it does allow the US to potentially keep troops in Afghanistan after the war ends for two specific purposes: continued training of Afghan forces and targeted operations against al-Qaeda.

So, essentially the President has reneged on his promise to end the war and occupation of Afghanistan.  Democracy Now! ran a show that featured the critical commentary of Tariq Ali and Ann Wright. The U.S. seeks to establish a long term military base presence in Afghanistan, not for anti-terrorism operations, but for surrounding Russia and China.  However, despite modeling the security agreement on the kinds of arrangements in existence in Japan, Afghanistan is not post-war Japan.

A series of public relations disasters by U.S. troops have made it extremely difficult to convince the Afghan people that a continuing U.S. military presence is a good thing for them. In January, 2012, a video appeared on the internet that depicted U.S. troops urinating on Afghan corpses:

The Marine Corps said Wednesday that it is investigating the origins of a video on the Internet that purports to show Marines in combat gear urinating on the corpses of three Taliban insurgents.

The brief video, which runs for less than a minute, began circulating on Web sites early Wednesday. It depicts four Marines laughing as they relieve themselves while standing over three prostrate bodies.

A caption asserts that the Marines are part of a scout sniper team with the 3rd Battalion, 2nd Marines, an infantry unit from Camp Lejeune, N.C. Members of the unit were deployed to Afghanistan last year but returned in September.

The Marine Corps was quick to distance itself from the scandal:

“The actions portrayed are not consistent with our core values and are not indicative of the character of the Marines in our Corps,” she said in a statement.

Then on February 22, 2012, U.S. troops from Bagram Air Base burned Qurans at the nearby detention facility.  The desecration of the Muslim holy book sparked a deadly wave of protests and violence across Afghanistan that resulted in 41 deaths and at least 270 injuries.  As the New York Times reports “Obama Sends Apology as Afghan Koran Protests Rage” (February 23, 2012):

The potential scope of the fallout from the burning of several copies of the Koran by American military personnel this week became chillingly clear on Thursday as a man in an Afghan Army uniform shot and killed two American soldiers, while a crowd nearby protested the desecration of the Muslim holy book.

And all President Obama could do was say “uh, sorry.”

Then in April, photographs emerged of U.S. troops posing with body parts of dead Afghans. As the L.A. Times reported “U.S. troops posed with body parts of Afghan bombers” (April 18, 2012):

The paratroopers had their assignment: Check out reports that Afghan police had recovered the mangled remains of an insurgent suicide bomber. Try to get iris scans and fingerprints for identification.

The 82nd Airborne Division soldiers arrived at the police station in Afghanistan’s Zabol province in February 2010. They inspected the body parts. Then the mission turned macabre: The paratroopers posed for photos next to Afghan police, grinning while some held — and others squatted beside — the corpse’s severed legs.

A few months later, the same platoon was dispatched to investigate the remains of three insurgents who Afghan police said had accidentally blown themselves up. After obtaining a few fingerprints, they posed next to the remains, again grinning and mugging for photographs.


Two soldiers posed holding a dead man’s hand with the middle finger raised. A soldier leaned over the bearded corpse while clutching the man’s hand. Someone placed an unofficial platoon patch reading “Zombie Hunter” next to other remains and took a picture

The inhumane conduct of U.S. troops that has shocked public sensibilities is not an abberation; it is a product of the dehumanizing psychic conditioning of militarization and war.  It is a necessary skill for troops to survive in war.  To get a glimpse of this conditioning, I highly recommend Hell and Back Again, a powerful film about a Marine who is injured in Afghanistan and struggles to readjust to the terrifying normalcy of life back in the U.S.  Like Restrepo, another powerful documentary about the war in Afghanistan, Hell and Back Again immerses the viewer in the “fog of war.”  But unlike Restrepo, which leaves the audience disoriented by the surreal Apocalypse Now!-like meaninglessness and horror of it all, Hell and Back Again pulls the audience back to into the struggles of one Marine and his loved ones trying to piece together his life and make sense of what he has experienced. It forces us to face the mangled humanity that emerges from war, which can be more disquieting and terrifying than the senseless violence of the war itself.   The website describes the film as:

From his embed with US Marines Echo Company in Afghanistan, photojournalist and filmmaker Danfung Dennis reveals the devastating impact a Taliban machine-gun bullet has on the life of 25-year-old Sergeant Nathan Harris. The film seamlessly transitions from stunning war reportage to an intimate, visceral portrait of one man’s personal struggle at home in North Carolina, where Harris confronts the physical and emotional difficulties of re-adjusting to civilian life with the love and support of his wife, Ashley. Masterfully contrasting the intensity of the frontline with the unsettling normalcy of home, HELL AND BACK AGAIN lays bare the true cost of war.

In 2009, U.S. Marines launched a major helicopter assault on a Taliban stronghold in southern Afghanistan. Within hours of being dropped deep behind enemy lines, 25-year-old Sergeant Nathan Harris’s unit (US Marines Echo Company, 2nd Battalion, 8th Marine Regiment) is attacked from all sides. Cut off and surrounded, the Marines fight a ghostlike enemy and experience immense hostility from displaced villagers caught in the middle.

Embedded in Echo Company during the assault, photojournalist and filmmaker Danfung Dennis captures the frontline action with visceral immediacy. When Sergeant Harris returns home to North Carolina after a life-threatening injury in battle, the film evolves from a war exposé to the story of one man’s personal apocalypse. With the love and support of his wife, Ashley, Harris struggles to overcome the difficulties of transitioning back to civilian life.

In immense physical pain, Sergeant Harris grows addicted to his medication. His agony deepens as he attempts to reconcile the gulf between his experience of war and the terrifying normalcy of life at home. The two realities seamlessly intertwine to communicate both the extraordinary drama of war and, for a generation of soldiers, the no less shocking experience of returning home.

An unprecedented exploration of the moving image and a film of uncommon intimacy, HELL AND BACK AGAIN comes full circle as it lays bare the true cost of war.

Filmmaker Danfung Dennis wrote about his personal motivation to make the film:

Oct. 23, 2010 – This morning I learned a photographer friend was severely wounded after stepping on a mine in southern Afghanistan. He lost both his legs and is in critical condition.

I’m flooded by feelings of rage, sadness, helplessness and isolation. I think of my friends and colleagues that have lost their lives while doing their job. It all seems utterly senseless.

Unless you have a personal connection, the war in Afghanistan is an abstraction. After nearly ten years since the initial invasion, the daily bombings and ongoing violence has become mundane, almost ordinary. It is tempting to become indifferent to the horror and pain. It is much easier to look away from the victims. It is much easier to lead a life without rude interruptions from complex insurgencies in distant lands. But it is when we take this easier path, the suffering becomes of no consequence and therefore meaningless. The anguish becomes invisible, an abstraction. It is when society becomes numb to inhumanity; horror is allowed to spread in darkness.

Visual imagery can be a powerful medium for truth. The images of napalmed girls screaming by Nick Ut, the street execution of a Vietcong prisoner by Eddie Adams, the shell-shocked soldier by Don McCullin – these iconic images have burned into our collective consciousness as reminders of war’s consequences.

But, this visual language is dying. The traditional outlets are collapsing. In the midst of this upheaval, we must invent a new language. I am attempting to combine the power of the still image with advanced technology to change the vernacular of photojournalism and filmmaking. Instead of opening a window to glimpse another world, I am attempting to bring the viewer into that world. I believe shared experiences will ultimately build a common humanity.

Through my work I hope to shake people from their indifference to war, and to bridge the disconnect between the realities on the ground and the public consciousness at home. By bearing witness and shedding light on another’s pain and despair, I am trying to invoke our humanity and a response to act. Is it possible that war is an archaic and primitive human behavior that society is capable of advancing past? Is it possible that the combination of photojournalism, filmmaking and technology can plead for peace and contribute to this future?

It is these possibilities that motivate us to risk life and limb.

Military rethinking location of Guam Marine base

With the U.S. changing its distribution of troops moving from Okinawa, Hawai’i is expected to get up to 2700 Marines, while Guam will get less than originally projected.   USA Today Reported that “Military rethinking location of Guam Marine base” (May 2, 2012):

The federal government is rethinking where to put a Marine base on Guam now that fewer Marines will be moving to the U.S. territory from Okinawa, Japan.

With fewer troops and families to house, a local Marine base could be smaller than previously thought, Joe Ludovici, the executive director of the military’s Joint Guam Program Office, said Wednesday.

New environmental impact reviews will have to be done:

New draft and final environmental impact statements will be released in 2014. A decision on where to put the base and firing range would come the following year.

And the ancient Chamorro village site in Pagat may yet dodge the bullet(s):

The changes could also lead to a new proposed location for a firing range.

Under the new plan, 5,000 Marines and 1,300 dependents will move to Guam. The old plan included 8,600 Marines and as many as 12,000 dependents.

The military had been planning to build the Marine base on about 680 acres of civilian land in Dededo, in northern Guam.

The firing range was to go on the site of an ancient village, Pagat, also in northern Guam. The Navy began reevaluating this idea last year after a lawsuit alleged it had failed to adequately consider other locations that would affect the environment and historical sites less.

New Zealand / Aotearoa holds first military combat exercise with US first in 27 years

As part of its Pacific ‘pivot’, the U.S. has been increasing its military presence and activity around the region. The U.S. recently rekindled joint military training with New Zealand / Aotearoa after shunning New Zealand for the passage of anti-nuclear laws.   In April, the New Zealand Herald reported “Military combat exercise with US first for 27 years” (April 11, 2012):

New Zealand’s defence ties with the United States are set to reach a new milestone with the arrival of 76 US military personnel for the first combat-focused joint exercise on New Zealand soil in more than 27 years.

And New Zealand’s defence ties with Nato are also high on the Government’s agenda with talks scheduled at the Beehive today with Nato’s top military man, US Admiral Jim Stavridis, the Supreme Allied Commander, Europe.

The Defence Minister, Jonathan Coleman, last night announced the joint military exercise involving 35 US Marines and 41 US Army personnel to take part in an exercise dubbed Alam Halfa, after a World War II battle in Egypt in 1942.

Since the accelerated friendship between New Zealand and the US was announced in the Wellington Declaration 16 months ago, joint exercises have stepped up. But until now they have had a humanitarian or non-combat focus.

Exercise Alam Halfa marks the first traditional military exercise since the reprisals against New Zealand for its anti-nuclear legislation included a ban on joint exercises, without a special waiver.

The exercise will involve about 1500 Defence Force personnel and begin in Linton the day after Anzac Day, ending in Waiouru 10 days later. The Canterbury will also be involved at Napier.

 

Hawaii Superferries moving to Okinawa

The Hawaii Free Press (a right wing blog that I generally detest) published a press release from Seaward Services “Hawaii Superferry Heading to Okinawa” (March 19, 2012):

Seaward Services (SSI), a HMS Global Maritime (HMSGM) company based in New Albany, Indiana, is pleased to announce that it has been awarded a contract through Military Sealift Command (MSC) to operate and convert the former Hawaii Superferry vessels HSV Alakai and Huakai for MSC.

As anti-Superferry activists predicted, the ships were primarily built to meet military specifications, much larger than could have been supported by Hawaiʻi’s tiny inter-island ferry market.   And while we breathed a collective sigh of relief when Hawaii Superferry went bankrupt, we must now apologize to Okinawans as the ships, retrofitted for military service, will go to Okinawa:

The contract is anticipated to extend to last for one year and will end with the delivery of the vessel to Naha, Okinawa, Japan, where it will provide services to the 3rd Marine Expeditionary Force. Future plans for the HSV Alakai are uncertain, but it is possible the Navy will refit the vessel for military service given its availability.

Perhaps, this was a consolation prize for the Marines, who will be forced to remove up to 9000 troops from Okinawa, with 4600 going to Guam, 2700 to Hawaiʻi and 2500 to Australia.

9000 Marines to move off Okinawa to Hawaiʻi, Guam, Australia, etc.

As reported in the Washington Post, the Obama administration announced that the U.S. will move 9000 Marines off Okinawa to other locations in the Pacific. While this may have sidestepped a politically volatile issue in its relations with Japan, the problem of the Futenma Base still remains, and the expansi0n of troops and bases in other locations in the Pacific may be spreading the seeds of opposition:

The U.S. and Japanese governments said Thursday that they will move about 9,000 Marines off Okinawa to other bases in the Western Pacific, in a bid to remove a persistent irritant in the relationship between the two allies.

The Marine Corps Air Station Futenma on Okinawa has been seen by both sides as essential to deterring Chinese military aggression in the region. But the noisy air base’s location in a crowded urban area has long angered Okinawa residents, and some viewed the Marines as rowdy and potentially violent.

This plan will relocate 2700 Marines from Japan to Hawaiʻi.  The Honolulu Star Advertiser reported “Hawaii must prepare for move of up to 2,700 Marines, Inouye says”:

The U.S. will move as many as 2,700 Marines from Japan to Hawaii as the Pentagon scales back a $21.1 billion blueprint for Guam, U.S. Sen. Daniel K. Inouye confirmed today.

“This troop movement will occur after extensive discussions with the leaders of Japan and it highlights Hawaii’s importance as the focus of our national defense shifts to the Asia-Pacific region,” Inouye said.

The Pentagon is expected to announce as soon as tomorrow that it intends to send about 4,700 U.S. Marines now stationed in Japan to Guam, as previously reported, as well as the contingent going to Hawaii, according to two people familiar with the plan, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the plan hasn’t been made public.

“There is a lot of work that needs to be done (in Hawaii) to prepare for their arrival,” Inouye said. “We must build more housing, secure more training areas and improve and expand infrastructure while working with the counties and the state to make certain the Marines transition easily into their new duty station in Hawaii.”

This decision is being leaked in advance of a formal announcement. However, no environmental/social/cultural impact analysis has been done to address securing “more training areas” and develoment to “improve and expand infrastructure”.  This is typical of the military decisions in Hawaiʻi: plans are made, studies (when they are done) are written to order to justify the decision, and political bosses make pronouncements as if they were commandments from God.  And, just in case anyone had objections or doubts about these plans, Senator Inouye made clear how the people of Hawaiʻi are supposed to respond:

The one thing I am confident of, is that the people of Hawaii will welcome these brave men and women and their families with Aloha,” said Inouye.

In other words, the profoundly sacred Kanaka Maoli concept of “aloha” has been hijacked and turned into a kitsch tourist slogan, whose flip-side is a weapon to silence dissent and suppress political protest.

Jon Letman’s latest article, “Without question: US military expansion in the Asia-Pacific” discussed the U.S. military’s Pacific ‘pivot’:

As Noam Chomsky wrote in this two-part essay, America’s “pivot” toward the Asia-Pacific region is in response to what it calls “classic security dilemmas” posed by the rising influence of China and Russia. Reacting with military programmes and strategies it says are “defensive”, this US “pivot” is perceived as bullying, threats and intrusion – in other words more of the same – by those most impacted by America’s foreign military presence.

The “classic security dilemma makes sense”, Chomsky argues, if one operates under the assumption that the US has “the right to control most of the world, and that US security requires something approaching absolute global control”.

As Letman noted:

Hawaii’s role in all this is enormous. Hawaii represents a fraction of one per cent of the United States’ land area and has just 1.37 million people, but is home to 119 total military sites, making Hawaii effectively a giant floating military garrison from which troops and military hardware are dispatched around the world.

Not a dozen miles from tourist-packed Waikiki Beach is Camp HM Smith, headquarters of the United States Pacific Command (USPACOM) which oversees military operations in roughly half the world from the Bering Sea to the Antarctic and across the entirety of the Pacific Ocean as far west as Central Asia, Pakistan and the southern Indian Ocean. Over half the world lives within USPACOM’s “area of responsibility” including China, India, Indonesia, Japan and 32 other countries.

The military bases in Hawaiʻi and the bloated U.S. defense budget has been justified as a jobs creation program: military Keynesianism.  But it is a myth that military spending is the best way to create jobs. Letman explored this contradiction:

Rather than question an economy based on weapons, violence and control, the American public largely forfeits any protest in favour of the holy four-lettered word, JOBS. But the argument that the military and defence industry is an indispensable source of jobs is deflated when one reads a study by the Political Economy Research Institute at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst which finds that $1 billion spent on military production creates 8,600 direct and indirect jobs. But that same amount of money invested in clean energy, health care or education could produce between 12,000 and 19,000 jobs.

This, however, is not a debate that is being waged by the wider American public. In fact, like the subjects of our foreign bases, drone warfare and the US military’s impact on people in the Asia-Pacific, it’s largely overlooked. In general, Americans spend little or no time considering the plight of people in other nations – especially small islands – whose land, sea, ports and resources are used to test, train and store US military hardware and personnel. Whatever the costs may be to local populations in terms of environmental damage, social disruption, economic coercion and an increased danger simply by hosting US bases goes undiscussed.

Curiously, despite the fact that in 2011 the US defence budget was well over $700 billion – far exceeding the combined defence budgets for China, Russia, India, Brazil, Saudi Arabia, Germany, France, the UK and Japan – a recent Rasmussen telephone survey reveals one in four Americans believe the US is still not spending enough of its military.

But as the Asia-Pacific “pivot” brings more testing, training and deployments to accommodate weapons and warriors fanning out across half the world, Americans would do well to pay closer attention to the vast human and financial resources its government demands. The time is long overdue to consider that what we call “defensive” is to so many around the world seen as offensive.

As Bruce Gagnon said just prior to going to Jeju island, “This has nothing to do with defending the United States or its people against attack. It has everything to do with corporate profits and power.”

Relocating U.S. bases and troops is like BP spraying chemical dispersants on the Deepwater Horizon oil spill: it only makes the problem sink, spread out and persist. As peoples movements of Ka Moana Nui (the Vast Ocean) have demanded, we demand a reduction of U.S. military foces, the removal of bases and the restoration of people to military-occupied lands.

Hawaiʻi premier of “Jam Docu Gangjeong” documentary about Jeju island struggle

Hawai’i Peace and Justice in collaboration with Hawai‘i Women in Filmmaking and DMZ Hawai’i / Aloha ‘Aina invite you to come see Documentary Film Shorts “Jam Docu Gangjeong” premiering for the first time in Hawai‘i will be shown at The ARTS at Marks Garage on March 17, 2012 6:30-8 PM in a free screening Light refreshment will be offered.   (You can download the announcement and press release.)

“Jam Docu Gangjeong” poster 3-17-12

Gangjeong Mar.17,2012 press release

When the South Korean government decided to build a naval base on the site of Gangjeong Village, a notice was sent out in 2007 and a quick vote taken (measured by applause) with a turnout out of a few dozen residents, out of a population of over 1000 and the measure approved. When the villagers realized what they had agreed to, they booted the mayor out of office, elected a new mayor who opposed the base and have been struggling against proposed naval construction ever since.  In a subsequent vote the same year 724 villagers voted against construction of the naval base. Gangjeong Village has been declared a UNESCO World Biosphere reserve, and Jeju island a UNESCO World Natural Heritage. Yet this conflict rages on and its fate may be decided soon. A group of filmmakers created a cluster of shorts that tell the story of the conflict at Gangjeong Village from different perspectives, but also portray the natural unique beauty of the coast of the northernmost semi-tropical island in the world. Banned from theater showings for 40 days by the Korean Film Commission, Jam Docu Gangjeong just recently received approval (January 31st) for showing in South Korea.

An update: Many of you are aware of the crisis on Jeju island at the village of Gangjeong, which was selected as the site for the construction of a South Korean naval base for use by the South Korean and U.S. military.  Most likely within the next 24 hours it will be decided whether 400,000 tons of explosives will be dropped on the islet of Gureombi just off the coast by Gangjeong village.  Please support the villagers struggling to protect their island from destruction!  Here is an action alert that came out today.

Action Alert:

Dear friends,

Thank you for taking action yesterday. Emails made a huge difference.

Today, Governor Woo of Jeju Island demanded postponing the blasting of the sacred Gureombi rocks, but the South Korean Ministry of Defense has refused to comply and is violating Korean law by moving forward in the project without the consent of the governor.

The blast is set for “around March 8,” Korea time. That’s Wednesday for those of us on this side of the Int’l. Dateline.

Several buses carrying dozens of riot police have been shipped in from the Korean mainland to handle protestors anticipated at the blast of Gureombi Rocks. The blast will require 400,000 tons of explosives.

Meanwhile, the S. Korean Ministry of Defense says, “The Jeju naval base is an important national project linked directly to national security. Unnecessary debates and social conflicts should be stopped for the construction to normalize as soon as possible.”

If you have not already done so, please send a letter asap to the following officials to STOP THE BLAST OF GUREOMBI ROCKS! STOP THE NAVAL BASE CONSTRUCTION! Also send your letter to the nearest South Korean embassy. (A list of embassies follows.)

SAMPLE LETTER:

To your Excellency, the President of the Republic of Korea, and to other heads of state, departments and consulates:

People from all over the world are shocked and disturbed that the government of South Korea would consider building a navy base on Jeju Island. It is a moral crime to cover Jeju’s fertile farmlands with concrete, and to destroy its rare, soft-coral reef. The Gangjeong villagers depend on their farms to live, and the planet depends on healthy reefs to live.

Jeju-do is sacred to all the people of the world, not only to the Korean people. Please do not allow Jeju Island to become militarized. If current tensions between China and the U.S. escalate in the South China Sea, if there is a naval base, the first target of attack by China will be Jeju Island. Please stop the militarization of Peace Island.

The South Korean government needs to listen to its people and not build a base to port US Navy Aegis missile destroyers and aircraft carriers. Please protect Peace Island and DO NOT BLAST THE GUREOMBI ROCKS! STOP CONSTRUCTION OF THE NAVY BASE!

Sincerely,

(your name here)

 

 

Mr. Kim Kwan-Jin

Minister, Ministry of National Defense

No. 1, Yongsan-dong 3-ga

Yongsan-gu, Seoul # zip: 140-701

REPUBLIC OF KOREA

Tel: +82 2 748 1111 / +82-02-795-0071 (in the MND website above)

Fax: +82 2 748 6895 / + 82-02-703-3109 (in the MND website above)

E-mail: cyber@mnd.go.kr

http://www.mnd.go.kr/mndEng_2009/main/index.jsp

 

Mr. Lee Myung-Bak

President

1 Sejong-no, Jongno-gu

Seoul, 110-820

REPUBLIC OF KOREA

Fax: +82 2 770 4751

Email: foreign@president.go.kr or president@cwd.go.kr or president@president.go.kr

 

Mr. Woo Keun-Min

Governor

The government of Jeju-do

312-1, Yeon-dong, Jeju-si, Jeju-do

REPUBLIC OF KOREA

Fax: +82 64 710 3009

E-mail: jejumaster@jeju.go.kr

 

EMBASSIES:

Permanent Mission of the Republic of Korea to the UN

New York

korea@un.int

 

Consulate General of the Republic of Korea

Los Angeles

consul-la@mofat.go.kr

 

Consulate General of the Republic of Korea

Seattle

seattle0404@mofat.go.kr

 

Consulate General of the Republic of Korea

New York

info@koreanconsulate.org

 

Consulate General of the Republic of Korea

Houston

con-hu@mofat.go.kr

 

Consulate General of the Republic of Korea

Boston

kcgboston@mofat.go.kr

 

Consulate General of the Republic of Korea

Honolulu

consulatehi@mofat.go.kr

 

Consulate General of the Republic of Korea

Atlanta

koreaconsulate@gmail.com

 

Consulate General of the Republic of Korea

San Francisco

consularsf@mofat.go.kr

 

Consulate Agency of the Republic of Korea

Hagatna, Guam

kconsul@guam.net

 

South Korea Embassy

Washington, DC

information_usa@mofat.go.kr

 

Consulate of the Republic of Korea

Tamuning, Guam

kcongen@kuentos.guam.net