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.

New Japan Prime Minister said Okinawa should become independent

A new book by Okinawan member of Parliament and peace activist Shoukichi Kina quotes the Japanese Prime Minister Naoto Kan as saying Okinawa “should just become independent”.  The article below makes this seem like a ridiculous idea, but it is not far off. Okinawa was an independent Kingdom, much like Hawai’i. It was invaded and occupied by Japan and later by the U.S.  After the U.S. occupation, Okinawa ‘reverted’ to Japan., but retained most of the U.S. military bases in Japan.   Apparently, Kan believed that the U.S. bases issue was so difficult that the solution would be for Okinawa to become independent again.  Hmm. I wonder if Obama would say the same about Hawai’i…

>><<

http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/nn20100616x2.html

Wednesday, June 16, 2010

Kan said Okinawa should become independent state?

By JUN HONGO

Staff writer

Remarks last year by Naoto Kan on Okinawa made waves Wednesday after a book by an Upper House member from the prefecture said the new prime minister recently recommended it should become independent from Japan.

In “Okinawa no Jikoketteiken” (“Okinawa’s Right to Autonomy”), written by Democratic Party of Japan member Shokichi Kina and published May 31, Kan is quoted as saying in a conversation with Kina that issues surrounding Okinawa “are too heavy” and he would “rather not touch it.”

Kina, who heads up the Okinawa chapter of the DPJ, also claimed that Kan told him Okinawa ” should just become independent” and that negotiations to remove the U.S. bases in the prefecture “aren’t resolvable.”

Chief Cabinet Secretary Yoshito Sengoku refused Wednesday to comment on the matter, saying he hadn’t read the passages in question. He added that he couldn’t immediately confirm the circumstances in which Kan made the comments or how accurate they might have been recorded.

Relocation of U.S. Marine Corps Air Station Futenma has been a cause of distress since the DPJ took power, with locals criticizing the ruling coalition for backpedaling on its pledge to move the base out of Okinawa.

Kan, who met with Okinawa Gov. Hirokazu Nakaima on Tuesday, promised to alleviate the military burden on the prefecture. But he also reiterated his intention to follow through on the deal reached with Washington last month to keep the Futenma base in Okinawa.

According to the book, Kina and Kan exchanged their opinions shortly after the DPJ came to power last September. The Okinawa native wrote in the book that such comments by the party’s key figure carries great weight, “whether he made it half-jokingly or not.”

Sengoku said he has no intention of discussing the topic with Kan, who is scheduled to make his first visit to the prefecture as prime minister on June 23 to attend a ceremony marking the 65th anniversary of the Battle of Okinawa.

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

Consumers Union of Japan: Remove all U.S. bases, scrap Japan-U.S. Security Treaty

CUJ: Annul and Scrap the Japan-U.S. Security Treaty and the Japan-U.S. Status-of-Forces Agreement

Resolution to make the best use of Japan’s war-renouncing Constitution, and to request the removal of military bases

On May 28, 2010 the governments of Japan and the United States issued a joint statement outlining the relocation of the Futenma base in Ginowan City to Cape Henoko and the adjoining waters near Camp Schwab in Nago City, Okinawa.

Strong anger was the response to the Democratic Party breaking its election campaign pledge. We also note that it amounted to crushing the will of the people as expressed by the 90,000 that gathered in the prefectural rally on April 25, 2010 in Yomitan Village, Okinawa. The strong reaction to the decision drove Prime Minister Hatoyama to resign from his post.

We strongly request the withdrawal of this joint statement confirming the mutual agreement between Japan and the United States. The Futenma base is located on land that was illegally looted, and should not only be returned, but all installations should be removed.

The Relocation of Futenma is an issue that emerged after the abduction and rape of a 12 year old schoolgirl by 3 U.S. Marines in September 1995. After news of this surfaced, some 85,000 people gathered in a massive protest in October 1995 stating that the base in the city could no longer be endured. At that point, both the Japanese and the U.S. governments were frightened by the anger in Okinawa. In December 1996, they issued a report claiming that the Futenma base would be returned, and the Henoko coastal area of Nago City was chosen as a “replacement facility” were a new military installation would be constructed. This location was already under consideration by the U.S. Navy in 1960. It is now again seen as part of the U.S. military reorganization.

This year marks the 50th anniversary of the Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security between Japan and the U.S. We take this opportunity to request that the Japanese government should annul and scrap the Japan-U.S. Security Treaty and the Japan-U.S. Status-of-Forces Agreement. The reason is that military bases are no longer necessary anywhere.

We thus resolve to make the best use of Japan’s war-renouncing Constitution, and build true peace with all the people in the world, to remove and dismantle the military bases.

Resolution adopted by the participants at the 37th general meeting of Consumers Union of Japan

June 6, 2010

Japanese ex-Marine strives to debunk ‘myth of deterrent’

http://home.kyodo.co.jp/modules/fstStory/index.php?storyid=506930

FOCUS: Japanese ex-Marine strives to debunk ‘myth of deterrent’

NAHA, Japan, June 16 KYODO

A Japanese man with the unusual background of having served in the U.S. Marine Corps is using his experience to vigorously campaign against the U.S. military presence in Okinawa Prefecture.

Kimitoshi Takanashi, 38, joined the U.S. Marine Corps in his 20s and once served in Okinawa during his four-year career in the U.S. military.

The sharp-eyed man, sporting a Mohican hairdo, has a muscular build that hardly looks like the body of a man nearing 40. On his right arm are tattooed the words, “KILL ‘EM ALL.”

After he began publicly speaking on the issue of U.S. forces in Okinawa, the fearless-looking ex-Marine gained a following among activists and members of university faculties in Okinawa. At their request, he is giving talks about what he perceives to be the injustices of keeping U.S. military installations in Okinawa.

He delivered his first speech as a former Marine at Okinawa University in the prefectural capital of Naha on May 23, the very day former Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama paid a visit to the southern island prefecture.

Hatoyama traveled to Okinawa to report on his decision to strike a deal with the United States by agreeing to move the heliport at the Futenma air base from the residential area of the island’s Ginowan to shallow waters adjacent to the Henoko district at the Marines’ Camp Schwab in Nago in the same prefecture.

Okinawa residents were predictably outraged, due to Hatoyama having initially promised to move the Futenma facility out of the island prefecture, which houses about 75 percent of the land area used for U.S. military facilities in Japan and half of the roughly 50,000 U.S. service personnel in the country, including well over 10,000 Marines.

After failing to find any other prefectures that were willing to host a replacement facility for Futenma and bowing to pressure from the United States, Hatoyama gave up and chose Henoko as the relocation site, as demanded by Washington.

In defending his decision, Hatoyama argued Japan had to host the U.S. military as a deterrent against military threats from outside.

When he spoke at Okinawa University during Hatoyama’s visit, Takanashi compared a deterrent to a police officer guarding a safe to prevent possible theft.

“U.S. Marines are stationed all over the world and they are fighting at this very moment,” said Takanashi.

“There would be no conflicts if the Marines were serving as an effective deterrent.” Takanashi argues that the word “deterrent” is a fictitious mantra the government uses to pull the wool over people’s eyes.

When asked whether the world would face any difficulty if the Marines were not in Okinawa, he said the Marines can operate effectively in any place in East Asia, meaning their presence in Okinawa is not indispensable.

“The Marine Corps is still in Okinawa because the United States built its military bases here after Japan’s defeat in World War II and the situation has gone unchanged ever since,” Takanashi said.

Takanashi grew up in Hiroshima City where his great-grandparents died because of the atomic bombing on Aug. 6, 1945. As a child, he often saw off-duty U.S. soldiers come to his city from another Marine Corps air station in Iwakuni of the neighboring Yamaguchi Prefecture.

He grew resentful of the Americans who visited the city to have fun, even though it was a site of intense suffering during the final days of the war. He also felt that Caucasians looked down on Asians.

After serving in Japan’s Ground Self-Defense Force for two years, he obtained his U.S. green card and joined the Marine Corps at the age of 23, partly to prove that he could do as well at work as any white American.

Still, he commends the U.S. military, saying, “Compared with the thorough training at a Marine Corps boot camp, what the Japanese SDF recruits go through is like boy scouts’ assignments.”

He was shipped out to some of the world’s hot spots including Africa and the Korean Peninsula. “The good thing about the Marines is that they can be dispatched to their destination from anywhere.”

He was assigned to Camp Schwab in Okinawa in June 1995. Three months later three U.S. soldiers gang-raped a 12-year-old local girl and Okinawa exploded in fury.

The gravity of the matter prompted Tokyo and Washington to agree in the following year on the return of the Futenma base to Japan on condition that Tokyo provides a replacement facility elsewhere.

Amid the vigorous protests by the enraged Okinawans, the U.S. servicemen in general, according to Takanashi, were apathetic. Marines around him were annoyed by the incident because they were afraid that they might get banned from going out when they were off duty, he said.

Okinawans began calling for a full revision of the Status of Forces Agreement between Japan and the United States, which pertains to the handling of U.S. soldiers who commit crimes in Japan. Of particular concern for both countries was defining the specific circumstances under which offending U.S. servicemen should be handed over to Japanese law enforcement authorities.

No major progress has been made on the overhaul of the accord while the planned relocation of the Futenma base went nowhere.

“U.S. soldiers tend to think they won’t face criminal charges whatever they do here and also know that it is unfair,” Takanashi said. “They don’t talk about this because the inequities (inherent in the Status of Forces Agreement) are advantageous for them.”

Takanashi argues that their attitude reflects their disregard for human rights and racism. “Japan is like a colony of the United States and the most important issue facing Okinawa is neither military nor political but ethnic,” he added.

He is also critical of the way money Japan pays for the U.S. armed forces as host-nation support is squandered.

“Facilities where no one works are air-conditioned to excess and almost nobody goes to movie theaters the Japanese government has built,” he said. “Japan should stop playing the role of a sugar daddy.”

U.S. military identifies vast mineral riches in Afghanistan

Echoes of the science fiction film Avatar, the U.S. military has located mineral riches in the ground in Afghanistan.    Were the minerals a factor driving the war?   Why is the U.S. military even doing mineral prospecting in Afghanistan? The NYT article says that the size of the deposits are valued at a $1 trillion, the cost of the U.S. wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Afghanistan’s mining law was designed with help from the World Bank, to help make the resources available to foreign investors and exploiters, no doubt.  It also seems that the U.S. is trying to head off China as a competitor for these resources.   Or will tribal leaders fight the Afghan national government over control of these resources?

>><<

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/14/world/asia/14minerals.html?pagewanted=all

U.S. Identifies Vast Mineral Riches in Afghanistan

By JAMES RISEN

Published: June 13, 2010

WASHINGTON — The United States has discovered nearly $1 trillion in untapped mineral deposits in Afghanistan, far beyond any previously known reserves and enough to fundamentally alter the Afghan economy and perhaps the Afghan war itself, according to senior American government officials.

The New York Times
June 14, 2010

The previously unknown deposits — including huge veins of iron, copper, cobalt, gold and critical industrial metals like lithium — are so big and include so many minerals that are essential to modern industry that Afghanistan could eventually be transformed into one of the most important mining centers in the world, the United States officials believe.

An internal Pentagon memo, for example, states that Afghanistan could become the “Saudi Arabia of lithium,” a key raw material in the manufacture of batteries for laptops and BlackBerrys.

The vast scale of Afghanistan’s mineral wealth was discovered by a small team of Pentagon officials and American geologists. The Afghan government and President Hamid Karzai were recently briefed, American officials said.

While it could take many years to develop a mining industry, the potential is so great that officials and executives in the industry believe it could attract heavy investment even before mines are profitable, providing the possibility of jobs that could distract from generations of war.

“There is stunning potential here,” Gen. David H. Petraeus, commander of the United States Central Command, said in an interview on Saturday. “There are a lot of ifs, of course, but I think potentially it is hugely significant.”

The value of the newly discovered mineral deposits dwarfs the size of Afghanistan’s existing war-bedraggled economy, which is based largely on opium production and narcotics trafficking as well as aid from the United States and other industrialized countries. Afghanistan’s gross domestic product is only about $12 billion.

“This will become the backbone of the Afghan economy,” said Jalil Jumriany, an adviser to the Afghan minister of mines.

American and Afghan officials agreed to discuss the mineral discoveries at a difficult moment in the war in Afghanistan. The American-led offensive in Marja in southern Afghanistan has achieved only limited gains. Meanwhile, charges of corruption and favoritism continue to plague the Karzai government, and Mr. Karzai seems increasingly embittered toward the White House.

So the Obama administration is hungry for some positive news to come out of Afghanistan. Yet the American officials also recognize that the mineral discoveries will almost certainly have a double-edged impact.

Instead of bringing peace, the newfound mineral wealth could lead the Taliban to battle even more fiercely to regain control of the country.

The corruption that is already rampant in the Karzai government could also be amplified by the new wealth, particularly if a handful of well-connected oligarchs, some with personal ties to the president, gain control of the resources. Just last year, Afghanistan’s minister of mines was accused by American officials of accepting a $30 million bribe to award China the rights to develop its copper mine. The minister has since been replaced.

Endless fights could erupt between the central government in Kabul and provincial and tribal leaders in mineral-rich districts. Afghanistan has a national mining law, written with the help of advisers from the World Bank, but it has never faced a serious challenge.

“No one has tested that law; no one knows how it will stand up in a fight between the central government and the provinces,” observed Paul A. Brinkley, deputy undersecretary of defense for business and leader of the Pentagon team that discovered the deposits.

At the same time, American officials fear resource-hungry China will try to dominate the development of Afghanistan’s mineral wealth, which could upset the United States, given its heavy investment in the region. After winning the bid for its Aynak copper mine in Logar Province, China clearly wants more, American officials said.

Another complication is that because Afghanistan has never had much heavy industry before, it has little or no history of environmental protection either. “The big question is, can this be developed in a responsible way, in a way that is environmentally and socially responsible?” Mr. Brinkley said. “No one knows how this will work.”

With virtually no mining industry or infrastructure in place today, it will take decades for Afghanistan to exploit its mineral wealth fully. “This is a country that has no mining culture,” said Jack Medlin, a geologist in the United States Geological Survey’s international affairs program. “They’ve had some small artisanal mines, but now there could be some very, very large mines that will require more than just a gold pan.”

The mineral deposits are scattered throughout the country, including in the southern and eastern regions along the border with Pakistan that have had some of the most intense combat in the American-led war against the Taliban insurgency.

The Pentagon task force has already started trying to help the Afghans set up a system to deal with mineral development. International accounting firms that have expertise in mining contracts have been hired to consult with the Afghan Ministry of Mines, and technical data is being prepared to turn over to multinational mining companies and other potential foreign investors. The Pentagon is helping Afghan officials arrange to start seeking bids on mineral rights by next fall, officials said.

“The Ministry of Mines is not ready to handle this,” Mr. Brinkley said. “We are trying to help them get ready.”

Like much of the recent history of the country, the story of the discovery of Afghanistan’s mineral wealth is one of missed opportunities and the distractions of war.

In 2004, American geologists, sent to Afghanistan as part of a broader reconstruction effort, stumbled across an intriguing series of old charts and data at the library of the Afghan Geological Survey in Kabul that hinted at major mineral deposits in the country. They soon learned that the data had been collected by Soviet mining experts during the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan in the 1980s, but cast aside when the Soviets withdrew in 1989.

During the chaos of the 1990s, when Afghanistan was mired in civil war and later ruled by the Taliban, a small group of Afghan geologists protected the charts by taking them home, and returned them to the Geological Survey’s library only after the American invasion and the ouster of the Taliban in 2001.

“There were maps, but the development did not take place, because you had 30 to 35 years of war,” said Ahmad Hujabre, an Afghan engineer who worked for the Ministry of Mines in the 1970s.

Armed with the old Russian charts, the United States Geological Survey began a series of aerial surveys of Afghanistan’s mineral resources in 2006, using advanced gravity and magnetic measuring equipment attached to an old Navy Orion P-3 aircraft that flew over about 70 percent of the country.

The data from those flights was so promising that in 2007, the geologists returned for an even more sophisticated study, using an old British bomber equipped with instruments that offered a three-dimensional profile of mineral deposits below the earth’s surface. It was the most comprehensive geologic survey of Afghanistan ever conducted.

The handful of American geologists who pored over the new data said the results were astonishing.

But the results gathered dust for two more years, ignored by officials in both the American and Afghan governments. In 2009, a Pentagon task force that had created business development programs in Iraq was transferred to Afghanistan, and came upon the geological data. Until then, no one besides the geologists had bothered to look at the information — and no one had sought to translate the technical data to measure the potential economic value of the mineral deposits.

Soon, the Pentagon business development task force brought in teams of American mining experts to validate the survey’s findings, and then briefed Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates and Mr. Karzai.

So far, the biggest mineral deposits discovered are of iron and copper, and the quantities are large enough to make Afghanistan a major world producer of both, United States officials said. Other finds include large deposits of niobium, a soft metal used in producing superconducting steel, rare earth elements and large gold deposits in Pashtun areas of southern Afghanistan.

Just this month, American geologists working with the Pentagon team have been conducting ground surveys on dry salt lakes in western Afghanistan where they believe there are large deposits of lithium. Pentagon officials said that their initial analysis at one location in Ghazni Province showed the potential for lithium deposits as large of those of Bolivia, which now has the world’s largest known lithium reserves.

For the geologists who are now scouring some of the most remote stretches of Afghanistan to complete the technical studies necessary before the international bidding process is begun, there is a growing sense that they are in the midst of one of the great discoveries of their careers.

“On the ground, it’s very, very, promising,” Mr. Medlin said. “Actually, it’s pretty amazing.”

How does Rajin-Sonbong factor into the Cheonan-sinking controversy?

The Statehood Hawaii blog has posted analysis of the sinking of the South Korean navy ship Cheonan in the context of the U.S. military expansion in the Pacific and suggests other factors that may be driving the concerted “official story” blaming North Korea that has been pedaled by the U.S., South Korea and Japan:

One other factor that none of the sites covering the sinking of the Cheonan mentions, is why the governments of South Korea, Japan and the U.S. is aligned and cooperating with this scenario.

Consider Rajin-Sonbong (Rason)

North Korea, China and Russia share borders and are separated by the Tumen river.  The waters near Najin and Rajin, in the Sea of Japan, is an ideal waterway for the development of a state-of-the-art port. the waters near Najin are deep and do not freeze, directional currents allow for ships to move resources down towards the manufacturing corridor along the Eastern China Sea more quickly than with rail. This port development gives the DPRK trade opportunities that could potentially help lift North Korea from poverty, a result of imposed economic sanctions.

China who had previously signed a lease agreement with North Korea, receives a huge advantage for furthering its manufacturing base, and is renewing its contract over the 1st port at Najin for another 10 years. As China watchers have pointed out, this agreement gives China access to the Sea of Japan for the first time in over a hundred years and this has also given rise to unfounded concerns that China might use this base for military purposes.

Ken O’Keefe issues a statement about the defense of the flotilla from Israeli commando attack

LiveImagesFoto Haber551Kennetth O’Keefe İsrail'den böyle geldiD042309180 LiveImagesFoto Haber551Kennetth O’Keefe İsrail'den böyle geldiD04230919 LiveImagesFoto Haber551Kennetth O’Keefe İsrail'den böyle geldiD04230915

From: Fadwa Dajani <f_dajani@hotmail.com>

Sent: Sat, June 5, 2010 9:04:04 PM

Subject: PRESS RELEASE: Ken O’Keefe Aboard the Mavi Marmara, Personal Statement & Photos

Hello all,

I write to inform you about Ken O’Keefe, who was aboard the Mavi Marmara when it was stormed by the Israeli military in the early hours of Monday 31st May, towed to Ashdod Port in Israel and all its passengers detained.

Ken was transferred to Ben Gurion Airport on Wednesday and was due to be deported by the Israeli authorities to Istanbul, and then repatriated to Dublin by the Irish officials. He refused deportation and demanded that he be sent to Gaza, or the Occupied Palestinian Territories, using his Palestinian travel documents (he was awarded Palestinian citizenship when he captained one of the two Free Gaza boats into Gaza in August 2008). The Israelis acknowledge that he is a Palestinian citizen, but refused his demand on the basis that his passport was invalid since it had not been registered.

The general atmosphere in the airport on Wednesday was quite chaotic, and a scuffle broke out. Ken was bashed on the forehead and then badly beaten by the Israeli officials/police. He has a large bloody gash on his head, and some bruised ribs. When I spoke with him he had a hoarse, croaky voice. He had been put in a head lock until he nearly passed out. His aggressor released Ken at the last possible moment. Ken refused medical attention because he was not allowed access to a lawyer, nor was he being allowed to make phone calls.

On Thursday Ken’s case went before a judge who ruled that he be detained pending deportation (Ken wanted to be released without charge).

Having already been complaining of dizziness following his first beating by Israeli police, Ken was beaten again that night in his cell. Again, he has refused treatment for his injuries. Ken was unable to eat for a few days as his throat was sore following being held in a head lock on Wednesday.

He wanted to appeal his deportation and go to Gaza, but his solicitor advised him that for his own safety he should leave Israel. The longer he stays, the greater the detriment to his health. On Friday morning he signed his Emergency Travel Documents provided to him by the Irish Consulate and was booked onto a flight to Istanbul.

Israeli officials asked him to clean himself up as his face was bloody and he was quite dishevelled. He refused, as he wanted the world to see what had happened to him. The officials threatened to keep him in custody unless he co-operates, but he called their bluff, and was allowed to board his flight to Istanbul as he was. He was met by Irish Embassy staff and a press conference. He also gave an interview with Turkish newspaper the Hurriyet, which was featured on the front page. Prior to the press conference he had issued the following statement:

“I want to discuss my role in defending the ship and disarming two Israeli commandos along with conditions and treatment while in Israeli custody, including two beatings at the hands of Israeli agents.”

Ken will depart Istanbul on Monday 7th June for Dublin, where he will stay for two days before returning home to his wife and baby son on Wednesday 9th June.

Please find attached a personal statement written by Ken in Istanbul, along with photographs taken on his arrival to Istanbul.

Press conferences are being arranged in Dublin and London. Please contact me if you would like to interview Ken.

Best wishes,

Fadwa Dajani

(Mrs O’Keefe)

+++

Defenders of the Mavri Mamarra & So Much More

by Ken O’Keefe from Istanbul

I have for many years understood that we, people of conscience, are the true holders of power in this world. Frustratingly however we have largely relinquished that power and failed to reach our full potential. Our potential to create a better world, a just world. Nonetheless I have conspired with others of like mind to reveal and exercise our true power. In 2002 I initiated the TJP Human Shield Action to Iraq because I knew that the invasion of Iraq had been planned well in advance, that it was part of a ‘Global Spectrum Dominance’ agenda as laid out by the Project For A New American Century. I knew that protests had no chance of stopping the invasion, and that largely these protests were just a way of making us feel better about the coming mass murder; by being able to say I protested against it. With that understanding I argued that the only viable way to stop the invasion was to conduct a mass migration to Iraq. A migration in which people from around the world, especially western citizens, would position themselves at sites in Iraq that are supposed to be protected by international law, but which are routinely bombed when it is only Iraqi, Palestinian, generally non-white, western lives who will be killed. I felt 10,000 such people could stop the invasion, or at the very least, expose the invasion for what it was from the start, an act of international aggression, a war crime and a crime against humanity.

When our two double decker busses travelled from London to Baghdad through Turkey, it was ever clear that the people of Turkey also could sense the power of this act, and they were the biggest participants in it. In the end we did not get the numbers required to stop the war, with at least one million Iraqi’s dead as a result, but I remain convinced that it was within our power to prevent the invasion. A massive opportunity lost as far as I am concerned.

In 2007 I joined the Free Gaza Movement with its plan to challenge the blockade of Gaza by travelling to Gaza by sea. From the moment I heard of the plan I knew it could succeed and ultimately I served as a captain on the first attempt. The Israeli government said throughout our preparation that we were no better than pirates and they would treat us as such. They made clear we would not reach Gaza. And still I knew we could succeed. And we did. Two boats with 46 passengers from various countries managed to sail into Gaza on August 23, 2010; this was the first time this had been done in 41 years. The truth is the blockade of Gaza is far more than three years old, and yet we, a small group of conscientious people defied the Israeli machine and celebrated with tens of thousands of Gazans when we arrived that day. We proved that it could be done. We proved that an intelligent plan, with skilled manipulation of the media, could render the full might of the Israeli Navy useless. And I knew then that this was only the tip of the iceberg.

So participating in the Freedom Flotilla is like a family reunion to me. It is my long lost family whose conscience is their guide, who have shed the fear, who act with humanity. But I was especially proud to join IHH and the Turkish elements of the flotilla. I deeply admire the strength and character of the Turkish people, despite your history having stains of injustice, like every nation, you are today from citizen to Prime Minister among the leaders in the cause of humanity and justice.

I remember being asked durýng the TJP Human Shield Action to Iraq if I was a pacifist, I responded with a quote from Gandhi by saying I am not a passive anything. To the contrary I believe in action, and I also believe in self-defence, 100%, without reservation. I would be incapable of standing by while a tyrant murders my family, and the attack on the Mavri Mamara was like an attack on my Palestinian family. I am proud to have stood shoulder to shoulder with those who refused to let a rogue Israeli military exert their will without a fight. And yes, we fought.

When I was asked, in the event of an Israeli attack on the Mavri Mamara, would I use the camera, or would I defend the ship? I enthusiasticly committed to defence of the ship. Although I am also a huge supporter of non-violence, in fact I believe non-violence must always be the first option. Nonetheless I joined the defence of the Mavri Mamarra understanding that violence could be used against us and that we may very well be compelled to use violence in self defence.

I said this straight to Israeli agents, probably of Mossad or Shin Bet, and I say it again now, on the morning of the attack I was directly involved in the disarming of two Israeli Commandos. This was a forcible, non-negotiable, separation of weapons from commandos who had already murdered two brothers that I had seen that day. One brother with a bullet entering dead center in his forehead, in what appeared to be an execution. I knew the commandos were murdering when I removed a 9mm pistol from one of them. I had that gun in my hands and as an ex-US Marine with training in the use of guns it was completely within my power to use that gun on the commando who may have been the murderer of one of my brothers. But that is not what I, nor any other defender of the ship did. I took that weapon away, removed the bullets, proper lead bullets, separated them from the weapon and hid the gun. I did this in the hopes that we would repel the attack and submit this weapon as evidence in a criminal trial against Israeli authorities for mass murder.

I also helped to physically separate one commando from his assault rifle, which another brother apparently through into the sea. I and hundreds of others know the truth that makes a mockery of the brave and moral Israeli military. We had in our full possession, three completely disarmed and helpless commandos. These boys were at our mercy, they were out of reach of their fellow murderers, inside the ship and surrounded by 100 or more men. I looked into the eyes of all three of these boys and I can tell you they had the fear of God in them. They looked at us as if we were them, and I have no doubt they did not believe there was any way they would survive that day. They looked like frightened children in the face of an abusive father.

But they did not face an enemy as ruthless as they. Instead the woman provided basic first aid, and ultimately they were released, battered and bruised for sure, but alive. Able to live another day. Able to feel the sun over head and the embrace of loved ones. Unlike those they murdered. Despite mourning the loss of our brothers, feeling rage towards these boys, we let them go. The Israeli prostitutes of propaganda can spew all of their disgusting bile all they wish, the commandos are the murders, we are the defenders, and yet we fought. We fought not just for our lives, not just for our cargo, not just for the people of Palestine, we fought in the name of justice and humanity. We were right to do so, in every way.

While in Israeli custody I, along with everyone else was subjected to endless abuse and flagrant acts of disrespect. Women and elderly were physically and mentally assaulted. Access to food and water and toilets was denied. Dogs were used against us, we ourselves were treated like dogs. We were exposed to direct sun in stress positions while hand cuffed to the point of losing circulation of blood in our hands. We were lied to incessantly, in fact I am awed at the routineness and comfort in their ability to lie, it is remarkable really. We were abused in just about every way imaginable and I myself was beaten and choked to the point of blacking out… and I was beaten again while in my cell. In all this what I saw more than anything else were cowards… and yet I also see my brothers. Because no matter how vile and wrong the Israeli agents and government are, they are still my brothers and sisters and for now I only have pity for them. Because they are relinquishing the most precious thing a human being has, their humanity.

In conclusion; I would like to challenge every endorser of Gandhi, every person who thinks they understand him, who acknowledges him as one of the great souls of our time (which is just about every western leader), I challenge you in the form of a question. Please explain how we, the defenders of the Mavri Mamarra, are not the modern example of Gandhi’s essence? But first read the words of Gandhi himself.

I do believe that, where there is only a choice between cowardice and violence, I would advise violence…. I would rather have India resort to arms in order to defend her honour than that she should, in a cowardly manner, become or remain a helpless witness to her own dishonour. – Gandhi

And lastly I have one more challenge. I challenge any critic of merit, publicly, to debate me on a large stage over our actions that day. I would especially love to debate with any Israeli leader who accuses us of wrongdoing, it would be my tremendous pleasure to face off with you. All I saw in Israel was cowards with guns, so I am ripe to see you in a new context. I want to debate with you on the largest stage possible. Take that as an open challenge and let us see just how brave Israeli leaders are.

Beggars’ Belief: The Farmers’ Resistance Movement on Iejima Island, Okinawa

This article from Japan Focus gives a vivid account of the origins and history of the anti-bases movement in Iejima, Okinawa.  Also see the accompanying article by Ahagon Shoko and C. Douglas Lummis: I Lost My Only Son in the War: Prelude to the Okinawan Anti-Base Movement. This article is a translation of two chapters from a book by one of the leaders of the Iejima anti-bases resistance.  The stories are reminiscent of other military land grabs:  Vieques, Pyongtaek, Makua, Mokapu, Waikane, Lualualei. 

>><<

http://www.japanfocus.org/-Jon-Mitchell/3370

Beggars’ Belief: The Farmers’ Resistance Movement on Iejima Island, Okinawa

Jon Mitchell

The first American invasion of Iejima occurred on April 16th, 1945. U.S. Army accounts chronicle in meticulous detail the vicious battle for this small island, situated three miles west of Okinawa’s main island (hontou). One thousand troops aboard eighty landing craft stormed Iejima’s eastern beaches, meeting heavy resistance from dug-in Japanese defenders. In the following five days of bloodshed, two thousand Imperial Army soldiers were killed, together with fifteen hundred civilians. As was the case throughout much of Okinawa, not all of these civilians were killed by the Americans.

Clothes of an infant bayoneted by Japanese forces on Iejima, April 16, 1945

In Yunapachiku, Ahashagama and other caves across Iejima, Imperial Army soldiers gathered together families and assigned each of them a hand grenade. They were reminded of the torture and rape they’d suffer should they be captured alive; those who attempted to surrender were shot. Even civilians who succeeded in turning themselves over to the Americans were not safe from the Japanese military’s determination that the entire population must shatter like glorious jewels rather than surrender. Survivors tell of five Iejima women who, after surrendering, were killed by Japanese troops when they returned to retrieve some abandoned belongings from a cave, while six youngsters, who’d been moved by American forces to internment camps on the Kerama Islands, were killed by Imperial Army officers when they encouraged others to surrender. Although U.S. fatalities were relatively light compared to those of the Japanese, by the end of the fighting, three hundred American had lost their lives, including Ernie Pyle – the correspondent famous for putting a human face to enlisted men in World War Two.

The second U.S. invasion of Iejima occurred a decade later. It has barely been noted by American historians, but the inhabitants of Iejima are still suffering from its repercussions today. On March 11th, 1955, with Okinawa a military colony of the United States, landing craft came ashore once again on the eastern beaches. Their mission: to expropriate two-thirds of the island in order to construct an air-to-surface bombing range. This time, the Army only brought three hundred soldiers – their new foes being but the island’s unarmed peanut and tobacco farmers.

The Americans had prepared for this second assault with all the thoroughness with which they’d planned the first. In July 1953, the military had sent a team to the island on the pretense of conducting a land survey. Having recruited some of Iejima’s residents to help, after finishing their work, the Americans asked the Okinawans to affix their hanko seals to some English documents. The Americans told them these were receipts for payment for their assistance but, in fact, the islanders would later learn that they had stamped their own voluntary evacuation papers. After discovering the deception, a handful of residents, fearful of antagonizing their new master, agreed to move. Witnessing this, the Americans assumed further land seizures would proceed just as smoothly. The following 50 years of struggle would prove just how much they’d underestimated the farmers.

Initially, on the first day of the March 1955 invasion, the Americans made quick progress across the south of the island. Dragging families from their houses, they burned the buildings and bulldozed the smoldering ruins. Those who protested were arrested, then sent to the regional capital, Naha, for prosecution. When one family pled that their home be spared because their six-year old daughter was seriously-ill in bed, soldiers carried the terrified child from the house and dumped her outside the doors of the island clinic. A herd of goats that impeded the Americans’ advance was slaughtered by rifle fire. After the entire village had been leveled, Army officers veneered the invasion with a thin layer of legitimacy – at gun-point, they forced fistfuls of military scrip into the hands of the farmers, then twisted their faces towards a camera and took pictures to send to Headquarters as proof of the islanders’ acquiescence.

“The Americans weren’t the only ones taking photographs that day,” explains Jahana Shoko, “The farmers realized that if they wanted the world to understand what they were going through, they needed proof, too.” Jahana is a white-haired woman in her late sixties with a smile that instantly wipes twenty years from her full-moon face. She is the caretaker of the Nuchidou Takara no Ie (“Treasure House of Life Itself”) – the Iejima museum dedicated to the farmers’ ongoing struggle to retrieve their land from the American military. The museum consists of a pair of ramshackle buildings located close to the shore where the Americans landed in 1955. Now the beach is home to a Japanese resort, and as we speak, our conversation is punctuated by the shouts of Tokyo holidaymakers, the slap and drone of jet skis.

Jahana shows me the farmers’ photographs of the destruction from March 1955 – empty monochrome scenes of charred land and blackened bricks of coral. Some of the pictures are blurred as though the camera is trying to focus on where the houses once were. “Ahagon Shoko was one of the farmers whose home was destroyed that day. He went on to organize the islanders in their struggle against the bombing range. People call him the Gandhi of Okinawa.

Jahana points to a large color photograph on the wall. A sun-wrinkled man smiles serenely from beneath the brim of a straw hat. Think of a slimmer Cesar Chavez with thickly-hooded eyes that glimmer with intelligent compassion. Ahagon was 52 years old when the Americans came ashore for the second time. Born into a poor – but educated – family, as a young man, he’d converted to Christianity before travelling to Cuba and Peru to seek his fortune. Things didn’t work out according to plan – in the Americas he could barely make enough money to live. Upon returning a virtual pauper, Ahagon worked hard to buy some farmland on Iejima. In the years prior to the war, he launched a temperance campaign on the island, while entertaining his neighbors with home-made kami-shibai performances. This streak of morality, interwoven with the talents of a natural-born raconteur, would prepare Ahagon well for the lectures on the farmers’ movement which he gave to visiting parties of schoolchildren right up until his death in 2002. He was 101 years old.

As Jahana speaks, there’s a gentle knock on the door and an elderly woman enters, carrying a small convenience store bag. When she sees that Jahana is busy talking to me, she bows and sets the bag carefully on the side of her desk. It’s full of earthy cylinders pushing against the white plastic and I remember, earlier at the port, seeing the island’s famous peanuts for sale, alongside dusty bricks of black sugar and tangles of bright pink dragon fruit.

“Ahagon-sensei established the Treasure House in 1984,” Jahana continues, “He wanted to create a permanent exhibit of what went on here after the Americans came ashore in 1955. I’ll ask my assistant to show you around the main museum.” A younger woman in her forties comes in. Jahana lifts the plastic bag from the desk, but when she passes it to her assistant, its sides split open. A dozen rusty bullets clatter to the floor. I jump but neither woman bats an eyelid as they bend and scoop them back up.

The assistant walks me from the reception to the exhibition hall at the rear of the property. When she slides open the doors, I’m struck by a hot blast of air, the smell of second-hand clothes mixed with that of used bookstores. Inside, the museum is a mélange of memorabilia from the past fifty years. American parachutes hang next to musty protest banners. Old newspaper articles line the walls alongside dozens of photographs taken by the farmers to record their struggle. Just in front of the doorway, there’s a massive mound of rusting metal—shell casings and missile fins, grenades and rockets. The assistant kneels down and adds the bullets to the heap. Her action wakes a small white gecko and it scuttles across the deadly pile, finding shelter in a half-blown mortar round.

“Within days of leveling the farmers’ houses, the Americans had completed construction of their bombing range. They marked huge bull’s eye targets with white sand trucked in from the beaches. The explosions went on day and night. Those shells are just a selection of the things they fired. Farmers still come across them now and bring them here for our collection.”

When I ask her what happened to the displaced villagers, she points to a photo of a row of tents. “The Americans had promised them building materials and they were good to their word.” She gives me a sad smile. “The cement they gave had already hardened to concrete in its bags. The boards were rotten and the nails long corroded spikes that couldn’t be used for anything.” One picture shows a family of fifteen packed into a small, open-sided tent. “The villagers quickly fell sick with dehydration, sunstroke and skin diseases.”

Along with the poor-quality building supplies, the American Army offered the farmers financial compensation. Realizing that acceptance of the money would be interpreted as assent to the seizure of their land, they refused. The farmers maintained that the actions of the American military were illegal, and they insisted upon the right to continue farming their original fields rather than the barren ones upon which the Americans had forced them to establish camp. Throughout May, 1955, the farmers crossed onto the Air Force range and tilled their land. Ignoring the large flags which they raised to alert the Americans of their presence, the military continued its practice bombings. As the shells fell around them, the farmers tended their crops—compelled by a fierce sense of injustice coupled with a pressing need to feed themselves and their families.

The Iejima islanders continued to work on their fields until June 13th. On this day, soldiers arrested eighty farmers and confiscated their tools. Military courts summarily sentenced thirty-two of the men to punishments ranging from three months in prison to year-long suspended sentences. As soon as those who’d been released arrived back on Iejima, they headed straight to their fields. The American military’s response was merciless – it sprayed three hundred acres of fields with gasoline and reduced the farmers’ potato, melon and tobacco crops to ash.

With no other means to support themselves, Ahagon and the villagers decided to throw themselves on the mercy of their fellow Okinawans. She shows me a letter they wrote to explain their actions. “There is no way for [us] to live except to beg. Begging is shameful, to be sure, but taking land by military force and causing us to beg is especially shameful.”

On July 21st 1955, the villagers boarded a ferry to Okinawa hontou. Calling themselves the “March of Beggars”, over the next seven months, they made their way from Kunigami in the north to Itoman almost seventy miles to the south. In every town they passed, the villagers met with local people and told them of their struggle. Throughout their walk, they were greeted with warm welcomes and sympathy. Even the poorest villages gave them food and shelter for the night. The assistant shows me the photos the farmers exchanged as thanks to the people who supported them. The men stare proudly at the camera – their trousers are patched and threadbare, but their shirts are starched clean white. The women try to hold their smiles while stopping the children from squirming from their knees.

The reception of the authorities stood in stark contrast to the hospitality encountered from ordinary people. Both Okinawan politicians and intellectuals alike ignored Iejima’s farmers’ pleas for assistance. When the islanders confronted the U.S. High Commission, General James Moore played the Red card, proclaiming that the farmers were uneducated dupes who were being manipulated by communist agitators. An Air Force spokesman called the problem “a petty dispute” – inconsequential in light of the practice bombings which ensured security “both for the Free World and for [Okinawan] people.”

Protest banners written by Iejima villagers

After seven months on the road, the March of Beggars returned home to Iejima in February, 1956. They found their situation no better than when they had left; the leaking tents still stood and they continued to be denied access to the fields which they’d depended on for their livelihood. Bombings and jet plane strafings went on day and night, wearing down frayed nerves and making rest impossible.

“When the farmers attempted to send word of their predicament to the main Japanese islands, their letters were intercepted by the American military,” explains the assistant. “They didn’t want the world to know what they were doing here.” Some letters, however, did make it through the cordon of censors, and when the Japanese media reported news of the farmers’ struggle, people of the main islands rallied to support them. Students, homemakers and businessmen sent care packages to Iejima. They flooded the islanders with powdered milk and sugar, rice and canned fish, notebooks, textbooks and pens. The boxes are on display at the museum. Many of them are addressed simply “To the brave farmers of Iejima.”

No matter how small the parcel, each one was rewarded with a handwritten banner of appreciation and a photograph from the islanders. Upon receiving a huge package from far-off Hokkaido, the entire village gathered to witness the opening of the thirty-one crates. As the mayor distributed the shoes and clothes contained in the boxes, even the sick and elderly got out of bed to shed their worn-out clothes and try on the gifts from the snowbound northern island. The sign the villagers penned still hangs in the museum today: “To the coal miners of Kushiro, We who live in this southern country thank you very warmly.”

These packages, though substantial, were hardly enough to sustain the villagers. As the 1950s progressed, with no financial aid from the government or the military, many of the islanders were desperate. Where once they harvested tobacco and sweet potatoes, now they scavenged the fringes of the bombing range for scraps of military metal. They collected chunks of shrapnel and bullet casings, and sold them to traders for a pittance. From time to time, they’d come across a whole bomb that had failed to explode. The farmers would drag it away and defuse it themselves with a plumber’s wrench and a length of steel pipe. In this manner, they taught themselves to become bomb disposal technicians. But for these men – like their professional counterparts – sometimes their luck ran out. Between 1956 and 1963, a dozen islanders were killed or wounded while collecting or dismantling American ordinance. Among them were three teenagers who were hit by shells from a fighter plane, and twenty-year old Ryofuku Heianzan, struck by an overshot bomb while cutting grass outside the range. Photos on the walls show these farmers with their arms torn off and their faces sheered away—combat pictures from an island purportedly at peace.

“In the early 1960s,” says the assistant walking me down the room, “one of the farmers stumbled across a piece of scrap far too precious to sell.” She gestures towards a long white tube with four tell-tale fins. “He found it sticking out of his field one day. He hid it in his shed while the Americans searched high and low.”

I can well understand the military’s eagerness to retrieve this particular missile. I recognize it almost immediately from another story I’ve been covering about Okinawa. In December 1965, some hundred and fifty miles north of Iejima, the USS Ticonderoga ran into rough seas. A Sky Hawk jet that was on the ship’s deck slipped its cables and tumbled into the ocean. The accident would not have been particularly newsworthy if it hadn’t been for the payload it was carrying: a one megaton atomic bomb. The Japanese government prohibits nuclear weapons in its waters, and it was only when the device started to leak in 1989, that a nervous Pentagon confessed to Tokyo about the missing bomb.

The assistant must have noticed the panic on my face. “Don’t worry, it’s just a dummy they used for practice runs.” It looks so real that this does little to allay my fears. Nearby a cicada ticks Geiger-like. “You can touch it if you want,” she offers. I take two steps back and she laughs.

Back in the reception area, Jahana tells me of the successes achieved by Ahagon and the farmers. In 1966, the American military attempted to station two surface-to-air missile batteries on Iejima, but after a concerted campaign by the islanders, they were forced to withdraw them after only three days. Demonstrations such as these, combined with a concerted publicity campaign (including three books and a documentary), would force the military to stop the bombings and close down the range.  Many of the farmers were able to recover the fields that were stolen in 1955.

Jahana takes a map of Iejima from her desk drawer. The western portion is marked off by a red dotted line. “Today, the American military controls a third of the island. The Marines have a training area where they still conduct parachute drops. A few years ago, some of their jumpers went astray and landed in a tobacco field. They wondered why the farmer was so angry. They’d only crushed a few tobacco plants – perhaps a carton of cigarettes’ worth. They don’t know what these people have had to put up with over the past fifty years. They have no idea of the sufferings they’ve been through.”

Before I head back to the port, I ask Jahana if she’s hopeful the Americans will change their policy and return the rest of the land. She smiles wryly. “Ahagon-sensei had a saying he often repeated. ‘Even the most evil beasts and devils are not beyond redemption. They might become human one day. All they need is to be shown the error of their ways.’ Ahagon-sensei believed this very strongly. That’s why he built this museum and that’s why it will be here until the day the farmers get back their land.”

Jon Mitchell is a Welsh-born writer based in Yokohama. He has covered Okinawan social issues for both the Japanese and international press – a selection of which can be accessed at jonmitchellinjapan.com . Jon currently teaches at Tokyo Institute of Technology.

This is an edited and expanded version of an article which first appeared in Counterpunch.

See the accompanying article by Ahagon Shoko and C. Douglas Lummis: I Lost My Only Son in the War: Prelude to the Okinawan Anti-Base Movement

Recommended citation: Jon Mitchell, “Beggars’ Belief: The Farmers’ Resistance Movement on Iejima Island, Okinawa,” The Asia-Pacific Journal, 23-2-10, June 7th, 2010.

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