Documents confirm 1959 Japan-U.S. secret meeting over court case

Did the U.S. interfere with the outcome of a trespass case in Japan where in 1959 protesters were accused of trespassing on a U.S. military base slated for expansion?  After a district court in Tokyo acquitted the protesters on the grounds that the U.S. bases were unconstitutional, secret meetings took place between the U.S. and Japanese governments. The Japanese Supreme Court later overturned the lower court ruling.   The Japanese government has long denied the existence of any documents related to these meetings, but recently one of the former defendants in the case received documents from the secret meeting from the government.

>><<

http://mdn.mainichi.jp/mdnnews/news/20100403p2a00m0na007000c.html

Documents confirm 1959 Japan-U.S. secret meeting over court case

In a drastic turnaround, the Foreign Ministry has acknowledged the existence of documents on a secret meeting between Japan and the United States following a 1959 court decision that ruled the U.S. military’s presence in Japan unconstitutional.

The ministry disclosed the documents to one of the former defendants in the so-called Sunagawa Case, in which anti-base demonstrators accused of trespassing on a U.S. military base in western Tokyo were acquitted after a court ruled the base unconstitutional. The decision was later overturned by the Supreme Court and the defendants convicted.

Shortly after the initial ruling, the then U.S. ambassador to Japan met with the Japanese foreign minister and the Supreme Court chief justice, but the Foreign Ministry had denied there were any documents left regarding the meetings.

The latest revelation underscores the ministry’s reluctance to comply with the principle of information disclosure, following a recent finding that the ministry may have discarded some of the important documents related to secret pacts made between Japan and the United States during the Cold War.

The documents related to the secret bilateral meeting over the Sunagawa Case were disclosed on Friday evening to Shigeru Sakata, 80, a resident of Kawasaki, who along with 40 supporters had filed a request for their disclosure following the change of regime in September last year.

“We need to scrutinize the content (of the documents), but it’s a step forward,” said Sakata.

Sakata is among the former defendants accused of trespassing on a U.S. military base in Tachikawa, Tokyo, while they staged a protest against the base’s expansion in July 1957. Out of the 23 demonstrators who were arrested in September the same year seven were indicted, but all were acquitted by the Tokyo District Court in March 1959 after the court ruled the U.S military’s presence unconstitutional. However, prosecutors appealed the case to the Supreme Court, which overturned the lower court decision in December 1959.

Since the Supreme Court decision came shortly before the January 1960 revision to the Japan-U.S. Security Treaty, suspicions were raised that Tokyo and Washington rushed to settle the case by annulling the lower court decision ahead of the bilateral security arrangement amendments.

In April 2008, it emerged through U.S. official documents that then U.S. Ambassador to Japan Douglas MacArthur II met with Japanese Foreign Minister Aiichiro Fujiyama over the district court ruling and urged Tokyo to appeal the case to the Supreme Court. The U.S. documents also revealed that MacArthur discussed the timetable of the appeals hearing with then Supreme Court chief justice Kotaro Tanaka.

Sakata and others filed a request for the disclosure of information over the issue in March last year, but the Justice Ministry, the Foreign Ministry, the Cabinet Office and the Supreme Court all replied by May last year that there were no documents regarding the meetings with the U.S. ambassador.

Following the change of government in September last year, the petitioners once again filed a request for information disclosure in October, after Foreign Minister Katsuya Okada ordered a survey into Japan-U.S. secret pacts on the introduction of nuclear weapons into Japan and other issues. Although the Justice Ministry, the Cabinet Office and the Supreme Court insisted on nondisclosure in November, the Foreign Ministry pledged to “continue to investigate the case” while saying they “could not identify the documents at this moment” in its reply on Dec. 25.

The documents that were disclosed to Sakata on Friday evening came in 34 pages, handwritten and sealed as “confidential,” and are titled “minutes from a meeting between Minister Fujiyama and the U.S. ambassador in Tokyo.” The meeting took place in April 1959, only two days after the Tokyo District Court ruling. Lawyers and others from a group supporting Sakata will analyze the details of the documents.

Gentaro Tsuchiya, 75, a resident of Shizuoka and another former defendant of the Sunagawa Case, said: “Due to the heightened public attention on the bilateral secret pacts issue, the Foreign Ministry may have had no choice but to give serious consideration (to the disclosure of the documents).”

Japan Lawyers International Solidarity Association speak out Futenma base

Thanks to the Peacephilosophy blog for sharing this statement. There is a Japanese language version of the article on the peacephilosophy website.

>><<

http://peacephilosophy.blogspot.com/2010/04/statement-on-mcas-futenma-by-jalisa.html

Thursday, April 01, 2010

Statement on MCAS Futenma by JALISA, Japan Lawyers International Solidarity Association 日本国際法律家協会 普天間基地に関する声明

Statement on Marine Corps Air Station Futenma

According to newspaper reports, the government maintains that Japan must provide a replacement facility for Marine Corps Air Station Futenma in Okinawa, which is used by the US Marines, that it has given up on finding a candidate site outside of Okinawa, and that the base will very likely be relocated within Okinawa.

From our stance of seeking to implement the spirit of the United Nations Charter and the ideals of Japan’s Constitution, we of the Japan Lawyers International Solidarity Association believe that the government’s judgment invites criticism on two points, and we strongly urge the government to reconsider.

1) Japan is not obligated to provide the US Marines with bases.

In the first place, US military bases in Okinawa were illegally expanded and built. Even before acceptance of the Potsdam Declaration on August 14, 1945 land was expropriated while Okinawans were detained in prison camps, and by means of “bayonets and bulldozers” with the start of the Cold War. Such acts are not justifiable even by the law of war, and therefore violate international law. And the Japan-US Security Treaty, which is invoked to paper over these illegalities, establishes that bases are provided to US forces under the conditions that provision is based on the will of the Japanese government, and that it contributes to the security of Japan and the Far East, but the US Marines, owing to the nature of the force, does not help to achieve such purposes, and as such their stationing in Japan lacks justification under the treaty. Further, 75% of US military bases and facilities are concentrated in this one prefecture of Okinawa, and all Okinawans want US bases to be downsized and removed. The principles of democracy, which are recognized universally the world over, do not tolerate troop stationing which goes against the will of the people.

2) In Japan the Constitution’s Preamble and Articles 9 and 98 provide the right to seek removal of US military bases.

The Japanese Constitution provides that “never again shall we be visited with the horrors of war through the action of government” and recognizes that “all peoples of the world have the right to live in peace, free from fear and want.” It says that the Japanese renounce war, do not maintain “land, sea, and air forces, as well as other war potential,” and it pledges to faithfully observe “established laws of nations,” which include the law of war and international humanitarian law. From the perspective of this extensive peace design, when at least part of the US forces stationed in Japan are highly problematic to bringing about peace and eliminating “fear and want,” it is possible to exercise one’s legitimate rights, including appeals to the international community, to resolve the matter which is the cause. In view of the situation with US military bases, which is a never-ending stream of aircraft crashes, traffic accidents, crimes, and pollution, it stands to reason that the people of Okinawa Prefecture seek the return of Futenma Air Station, and, with respect for their will, the Japanese government indeed has the right to take the initiative and ask the US government to immediately remove Futenma Air Station.

March 24, 2010

Japan Lawyers International Solidarity Association, Executive Committee

Osamu Niikura, President. Jun Sasamoto, Secretary-General

Pupukea Paumalu was saved, but did it bolster military expansion in Hawai’i and wars in other lands?

The Hawaii Independent carried a story about the recent release of the draft long range resource management plan for Pupukea Paumalu.  The preservation of Pupukea Paumalu (on the north shore of O’ahu, near Sunset Beach) as the North Shore Community Land Trust (NSCLT) is the fruit of a decades long struggle to protect the area from development by a Japanese corporation.  It represents a significant win for the environmental movement in Hawai’i and should be celebrated.

However, there is a troubling underside to the land purchase arrangement that complicates the story.   As the Hawaii Independent article states:

TPL [Trust for Public Land] signed a $7.97 million purchase agreement with Obayashi, making TPL the owners of the land. Funds were raised with the combined efforts of NSCLT, the U.S. Army Garrison Hawaii, the State Department of Land and Natural Resources, and other public and private sectors. The acreage is divided between the two ahupuaa, Pupukea and Paumalu, and ranges from the Kahuku border of Sunset Hills to the Haleiwa side of Paumalu Gulch. Twenty-five acres of the property located along Kamehameha Highway was transferred to the City and County of Honolulu Parks Department and the remaining 1,104 acres was transferred to the State of Hawaii Parks Division, which holds it as a park reserve.

The U.S. Army contributed around 2 million dollars toward the purchase of the land.   There is nothing inherently wrong with a community group accepting military money for protection of the environment, but why would the military contribute money to a community organization for the preservation of land?  The Army’s contribution was not driven by its concern for keeping the north shore “country”.

The Draft Long Range Resource Management Plan for Pupukea Paumalu contains a clue:

Army training activities at KTA [Kahuku Training Area] are restricted to blank ammunition, limited pyrotechnics, but use of live-fire and tracer ammunition, incendiaries, and explosives is prohibited.  Small arms up to .50 caliber and 3.5 inch rockets with inert rounds may be used.

The Army occupies tens of thousands of acres of adjacent land in Kahuku and the northern Ko’olau range.  As part of its Stryker Brigade expansion that was protested by affected residents, the Army seized an additional 25,000 acres of land – 23,000 on Hawai’i island and 2000 on O’ahu.   It expanded training facilities in Mokuleia and Kahuku to include Military Operations in Urban Terrain (MOUT) and Stryker Brigade maneuver training.  The Army is also expanding military access roads connecting Schofield Barracks in Wahiawa, with Mokuleia and Kahuku.  Essentially the entire North Shore of O’ahu is being transformed into a maneuver zone for the Strykers.  It was with the backdrop of protests and contentious community hearings that the Army contributed to the purchase of the Pupukea Paumalu land trust.

The Army’s rationale was that over the last twenty years, creeping urbanization near military training facilities have resulted in conflicts over land use and constraints on training activities. The military calls this “encroachment”.  In order to prevent encroachment, the military came up with what it calls conservation buffers, that is, creating natural areas as buffers around training areas.   From the military’s point of view it is a “win-win”: development near bases is held at bay; ecosystems are preserved; and the Army gains in public relations points.

Under the Army Compatible Use Buffer Program (ACUB):

An ACUB allows an installation to work with partners to encumber land to protect habitat and training without acquiring any new land for Army ownership. Through ACUBs, the Army reaches out to partners to identify mutual objectives of land conservation and to prevent development of critical open areas. The program allows the Army to contribute funds to the partner’s purchase of easements or properties from willing landowners. These partnerships preserve high-value habitat and limit incompatible development in the vicinity of military installations.

Ironically, in the case of the Pupukea Paumalu land deal, it was the Army and its Stryker brigade that was encroaching on undeveloped and uncontaminated areas with its destructive training activities.  Yet the encroachment buffer was used as the rationale for contributing to the Pupukea Paumalu deal.   The other factor to consider is that since the majority of the land that the U.S. military occupies in Hawai’i are the stolen national lands of the Hawaiian Kingdom, decisions that help to entrench destructive military activities in Hawai’i prolong the injustice.

Around 2005, leaders of the North Shore Community Land Trust and Trust for Public Land met with representatives of DMZ-Hawai’i / Aloha ‘Aina to discuss the pending ACUB funding.  DMZ-Hawai’i / Aloha ‘Aina was assured that ACUB monies were unrelated to the Stryker Brigade expansion, and yet, the land trust leaders would not publicly oppose the Stryker brigade expansion for fear of upsetting the deal.  So 1200 acres were preserved, but at what price?  Silence in the face of losing 25,000 acres, the largest military land grab since WWII?

The Army is using the conservation buffer in Pupukea Paumalu to solidify its grip on land it wrongfully occupies; facilitate the expansion of the Army’s destructive impacts; and neutralize opposition from key environmental leaders and groups.  Furthermore, the Pupukea Paumalu deal was a precedent for other ACUBs, including Moanalua Valley and Waimea Valley.  In an age when our planet is shrinking and our actions and very survival on the planet are intricately interconnected, can we afford to remain “single issue” at the expense of harm to other people or resources?

Finally, partnerships with the military always raise the question: what mission does the partnership endorse, either explicitly or implicitly?   In the case of the Native Hawaiian covenant with the Army, Native Hawaiians who signed the document essentially agreed that destructive military training on Hawaiian lands and the wars furthered by such training are acceptable.    Similarly, “Army Compatible Use Buffers (ACUBs) support the Army’s mission to fight and win the nation’s wars.”   Strykers that train in Kahuku and Pohakuloa will soon be patrolling the streets in Iraq and Afghanistan.  Will their war fighting skills perfected in the beautifully protected mountains of the North Shore leave wailing mothers in distant Afghan villages mourning dead children?

Will the Endangered Mariana Fruit Bat throw a wrench into military buildup plans?

Today, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service issued a Draft Revised Recovery Plan for the Mariana Fruit Bat or Fanihi (Pteropus mariannus mariannus). This endangered species has cultural significance to the Chamoru people. As an endangered species, the federal government designated “critical habitat” for the survival and recovery of the species which includes Ritidian point limestone forests, much of Rota, areas on Tinian and a number of the smaller uninhabited islands.  Critical habitat designation has been controversial among Chamoru people because it is seen as adding another layer of federal control over their native lands and resources. However, listing of endangered species and critical habitat designation in this case may provide added leverage against the proposed military buildup.

The Draft Revised Recovery Plan for the Mariana Fruit Bat or Fanihi (Pteropus mariannus mariannus) states:

Urbanization and other forms of development remain a threat to the Mariana fruit bat.  This threat may manifest as fragmentation or degradation of forest habitat, direct disturbance of bats, and/or increased likelihood of new introductions of the brown treesnake or other predators to islands.  On Guam, development takes the form of urbanization associated with an increasing population and tourism industry and the expansion and refurbishment of military infrastructure.  On Rota and Tinian, development includes the clearing of lands set aside as agricultural homesteads (CNMI Senate Bill 13-32, C.S. 1, November 2002; CNMI Senate Bill 14-44, S.S. 1, July 2004), military infrastructure and new businesses such as the casino on Tinian.  On Saipan, increasing urbanization, road building, and the tangantangan charcoal industry are ongoing issues of concern.

The Department of Defense has several military installations and training programs in the Mariana Islands.  The Department of Defense live fire and bombing exercises on Farallon de Medinilla have effectively precluded that island as a foraging or roosting site for fruit bats.  However, survey crews in 1996 and 2008 each observed a single bat on the island, indicating that Farallon de Medinilla may still function as a stopover site for bats in transit (A. Brooke, pers. comm., 2009).  Recent and new activities proposed by the U.S. Air Force at Andersen Air Force Base on northern Guam have been determined likely to adversely affect fruit bats under section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, prompting formal consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to estimate the risk of take and develop measures to avoid and minimize that take.

As of this writing, the Department of Defense is developing Environmental Impact Statements for new training, development, and other activities on Guam and in the CNMI associated with the redeployment of a U.S. Marine Corps Expeditionary Force from Okinawa to the Marianas.  We do not currently have sufficient information to summarize in this draft revised recovery plan the potential threat to fanihi posed by these actions and will evaluate these proposed activities under section 7 of the Endangered Species Act once the data have been provided.

In other words, the military’s Draft EIS for the Guam military buildup in insufficient.  The EPA has already slammed the EIS.  Now USFWS can be pressed to disallow activities that will threaten the survival and recovery of the Fanihi.    The USFWS page on the Fanihi is here: http://ecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=A07X

>><<

http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/20100330/BREAKING01/100330055/Feds+devise+recovery+plan+for+Marianas+fruit+bat

Posted at 1:13 p.m., Tuesday, March 30, 2010

Feds devise recovery plan for Marianas fruit bat

Associated Press

HONOLULU — The federal government has developed a plan to help revive the threatened Mariana fruit bat.

The species, known as fanihi in Chamorro, is found only in Guam and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands.

The bat’s fur is black and brown, and it has a wingspan of about 3 feet. Some people call the fanihi flying foxes because their faces resemble canines.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service said Tuesday its draft management plan for the species would reduce or eliminate hunting to allow fanihi numbers to increase.

The agency also aims to protect of the best existing fanihi habitat.

Most fanihi now live north of Saipan on relatively isolated islands in the Marianas archipelago.

The agency is accepting comments on the plan through June 28.

Kane’ohe Marine death under investigation

http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/20100330/BREAKING01/100330078/Death+of+Marine+under+investigation

Updated at 8:14 p.m., Tuesday, March 30, 2010

Death of Marine under investigation

Advertiser Staff

The Navy is investigating the death of a Marine who was found unresponsive Tuesday morning at Marine Corps Base Hawaii at Kaneohe.

Military police responded to a 911 call for help at a barracks room on the base early Monday morning, according to a Marine Corps statement. Two service personnel were checking the man’s vital signs and told military police that the man was not breathing.

Two MPs began CPR, but were unable to revive the man and he was pronounced dead at the scene.

The statement did not provide information on the victim. The Naval Criminal Investigative Service is investigating the case.

Tokunoshima is not a viable alternative for Futenma relocation

The Japanese government is scrambling to find a replacement site for the Futenma military base.  One of the sites it has proposed for relocating some marine corps functions is Tokunoshima, a small island just north of Okinawa. As you can see from the following slide show, Tokunoshima is not a suitable alternative site.  4000 residents of Tokunoshima protested against the possible U.S. military base on their island.   This issue was covered by the Kurashi blog http://martinjapan.blogspot.com/2010/03/tokunoshima-island-shima-no-uta.html The alternative that neither the U.S. nor the Japanese government is proposing: remove the Futenma base from Okinawa without a replacement site and reduce the overall U.S. military bootprint in the Pacific.

Military brass who disagree should quit

The author calls for Gen. Mixon to resign over his public campaign to undermine the Obama administration’s repeal of the “Don’t ask don’t tell” policy regarding gay persons serving in the military.   It is shameful that Mixon has publicly campaigned to uphold blatant discrimination in the armed services.    But the author is wrong about LT Watada, who tried to resign because he believed the Iraq war to be illegal but was refused.  Watada publicly declared that he would not obey what after much study and reflection he considered to be illegal orders to deploy to Iraq.  This was not a frivolous decision by Watada.   Refusing illegal orders, or what one believes to be illegal orders is a duty under international human rights law.   In Nuremburg, Nazi officers were still guilty of crimes against humanity even when they were “just following orders.”

>><<

http://the.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/2010/Mar/29/op/hawaii3290314.html

Posted on: Monday, March 29, 2010

Military brass who disagree should quit

By Thomas D. Farrell

Note to a three-star from an old colonel: If you want to publicly criticize the policies of the president, do what I did and retire first.

The three-star to whom I refer is Lt. Gen. Benjamin Mixon, commander of United States Army Pacific, headquartered here at Fort Shafter. Mixon thinks that President Obama’s plan to abolish the Pentagon’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy is a terrible idea. He doesn’t agree with our elected commander in chief that gays and lesbians should be able to serve openly in our armed forces.

Mixon is entitled to think whatever he wants. But the general has done more than just think. He has tried to actively subvert the policies of the president of the United States, and he has encouraged other soldiers to do so, too.

In a letter published March 8 in Stars & Stripes, Mixon urged soldiers to write elected officials opposing repeal of “don’t ask, don’t tell.” He called President Obama’s proposal an “ill-advised” change to “a policy that has achieved a balance between a citizen’s desire to serve and acceptable conduct.”

What’s wrong with this? After all, lots of people disagree with the president on lots of issues. The consciences of military officers are not hard drives to be reprogrammed with every new administration. Why not let the general advocate to keep gay soldiers in the closet?

The reason that serving military officers may not publicly challenge the president is because the U.S. Constitution makes the president the commander in chief and subordinates the armed forces of our country to the civil power. It is not required that serving officers in our military agree with the decisions of the president, but it is an act of insubordination to publicly campaign against them.

This point is one that inexperienced lieutenants — Ehren Watada comes to mind — sometimes fail to grasp. That an experienced lieutenant general should fail to understand this principle is inexcusable.

Mixon is not the first high-ranking Army officer to forget that the president is in charge, however. Douglas MacArthur tried to subvert President Truman’s policy to limit the Korean War. Truman fired him. That is exactly what President Obama should do with Gen. Mixon.

I served as an Army intelligence officer in Iraq in 2005-2006. Well before I deployed, I concluded that the war policies of President Bush and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld were idiotic at best, and quite possibly malignant. Nonetheless, during my year in Baghdad, I did not express my opinions beyond a circle of friends and colleagues, and I carefully refrained from publicly criticizing the commander in chief. Regardless of whether I personally thought Mr. Bush’s war was a good idea, I did everything in my power to win it.

When I came home to Honolulu, I had a few months left before I had to retire. I would have liked to have served out a full 30 years, but I felt I had a greater service to perform.

I wanted to write on issues of defense and national security. I wanted to be able to criticize our presidents (and I have since criticized both Bush and Obama) free of the ethical and legal constraints of a serving officer. So I pulled the plug, said aloha to the Army that I loved, and retired. Since then, I have been published more than a dozen times. It was well worth it.

Those who have accepted the president’s commission as officers of our country’s armed forces know that this is what is expected. Gen. Mixon knows this, too. He has not set a good example for the officers that he commands. The officer corps waits and wonders what the general will do to reclaim our honor.

Residents protest against possible relocation of Futenma base to Tokunoshima island

http://www.asahi.com/english/TKY201003280234.html

Tokunoshima eyed for U.S. helicopters

THE ASAHI SHIMBUN

2010/03/29

More than 4,000 people attended a rally on Tokunoshima island in Kagoshima Prefecture on Sunday to protest its possible use as a relocation site for some of the functions of the U.S. Marine Corps Air Station Futenma in Ginowan, Okinawa Prefecture.

Sources said Tokunoshima was mentioned by Foreign Minister Katsuya Okada and Defense Minister Toshimi Kitazawa in their respective discussions Friday with U.S. and Okinawa prefectural government officials in which the central government’s proposal was explained.

Tokunoshima has been mentioned as a possible site for helicopter training exercises as a way of lessening the U.S. military burden on Okinawa Prefecture.

However, because of Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama’s stated wish to transfer as many of Futenma’s functions outside of Okinawa Prefecture as possible, Tokunoshima has now emerged as a candidate for an alternative base site.

In a speech Saturday in Nagano, Kitazawa said: “There is no location willing to accept all 60 of the helicopters at Futenma. We may need to redistribute this number to at least two different locations.”

In addition to Tokunoshima, the other possible relocation site for Futenma’s functions within Okinawa Prefecture is at U.S. Camp Schwab in Nago.

The fight to end colonization in the island-territory of Guahan

Perspectives on Social Justice: The fight to end colonization in the island-territory of Guahan

3.28.10 Blog Post written for the Therapeutic Justice Project blog at http://therapeuticjustice.blogspot.com/

By Dr. Hope Cristobal

I was 18 in the fall of 1996— “Rock the vote!” was in the air. MTV touted, “Choose or Lose!” Unfortunately that year, I was about to be labeled the “loser,” not by my choice, however, but by the choice made for me by the United States Department of the Interior.

I am an indigenous Chamoru from the island of Guam (the pronunciation given to the island by foreigners). Guahan, is the actual name given by the indigenous people—it means, “We have.”

“Do you guys wear grass skirts?…Do you even have stop lights there?…What do you call your tribe?…Wow, you speak such good English!” These were common questions I encountered when I moved to Washington State at the age of 17. You see, for the first 17 years of my life, I grew up in a United States colony in the Pacific, and many Americans knew nothing of Guahan, so I did a lot to educate my college friends that year. Yes, Guahan is a colony—or politically termed, an Unincorporated Territory of the United States. This is a fancy name for a place where the people are “part of the United States,” and have American citizenship, but do not fall under the United States Constitution, and thus, do not share in the inherent rights afforded most citizens of this country. As a colony, the people of Guahan have no vote in Congress and are governed and “cared for” by the Dept of the Interior—the same federal department that cares for all the national parks and endangered species.

It was the year of my 18th birthday that I encountered the question, “Who are you going to vote for? Clinton or Dole?” It took me a second. It was in this fraction of time that I witnessed my prior 18 years of oppression come splashing onto me, like a bucket of contaminated water that I had been told was fresh from a spring. I realized my “citizenship” was a lie. You see, as an American citizen who still claimed residency in Guahan, I was not allowed to vote for the president of the United States. But my roommate, who was a resident of the US and who shared equally in our household, could vote. She had a voice, a say for who she wanted to govern her life. I did not. She could “choose,” so did that mean I was left the “loser?”

Growing up in a colony you are governed by an outside force you never see. All decisions are made by an outside invisible entity, and the only thing you can do is follow what you’re told. You do not even determine your own destiny. You become the ignored, the silent—you become a void. On some maps, Guahan doesn’t even exist!

I was taught through my US textbooks, through my school instruction, and through the media in Guam that America is one of the bravest, strongest, most powerful, most benevolent, most generous countries in the world. “America the beautiful!” It is such an honor to be a citizen of such a great country! I learned all about American values: “life, liberty, the pursuit the happiness,” and “equality and justice for all.” I learned how to be a good American. As a matter of fact I was such a good American, I perfected the American education system and graduated with my doctorate degree in 2006!

Growing up in a colony, the US education system never taught me about how to be a successful Chamoru or a great Chamoru. I never learned my own identity, my culture, my language, my values, my ancestors, my saina (my great Chamoru leaders), my Chamoru history, history of the Pacific, the plants, the land, the ocean, the sky, the animals, how to grow food and hunt for fish, how to sail the ocean, how to kiss the back of my grandparents’ hand to show honor and respect, how to ask the ancestors of the jungle permission to enter their sacred place.

As a child, my mom tells the story of how she was hit for speaking Chamoru on school grounds. I tell the story of how I “hit” myself for sounding too Chamoru. Back then, I was degraded and in turn, I degraded others for being too Chamoru—I used a bad word called “chaud.” Before I was de-colonized in my mind, I owned the racism and void taught to me through my education, taught to me through television, read in the news, heard through the radio. I wanted to erase myself in order to fit in with the pressure to be a good American.

After that fateful day in 1996—the day I realized I was covered in contamination fed to me by colonial pressure and American idolization, I no longer wanted to be a part of that self-disgust. This was the day I began to lift the veil of colonialism away from my eyes and re-own my greatness as an indigenous Chamoru.

I went to school to become a psychologist because I wanted to empower my people; I wanted to find a way to re-awaken the power inside of them. I wanted to learn how to take away the pain of colonialism and replace it with a renewed sense of self—a powerful self that has a voice, no matter how small. Today, I am a psychologist living and practicing in California. All my training and research has been based on multicultural psychology, social justice and empowerment practices. I remain active in my Chamoru community and work with an organization called Famoksaiyan (means “to nurture, to grow”), speaking out and educating the American public about the injustice done to the Chamoru people because of their political placement within the American family. In 2007, I took my story to the United Nations’ Committee on Decolonization and urged them to continue their moral and ethical responsibility to eradicate colonies around the world. I am going again this year to remind the Committee that Guahan still needs their help.

My people experience a wide array of health, mental health, and legal problems. Chamorus are over-represented in correctional facilities and within the mental health system. We suffer high rates of teen suicide, school dropouts, depression, family violence, incarceration, poverty, substance abuse and social problems typical to subjugated native peoples. We have the highest rates of cancer, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, and parkinsonism-dementia on US soil because of the military’s contamination of our land and water. We have high rates of cardiovascular disease, diabetes, hypertension, and obesity because of the change in our diet from indigenous food sources to packaged, processed foods imported from the US.

Today, we face the threat of further loss. In November 2009, the US military released a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS). In this statement to the Chamoru people, they say they plan to take an additional 40% of our 212 square mile island, in addition to the 1/3 they already own. They propose plans to relocate armed personnel from Okinawa to Guahan, which will increase our population by 45% over the next 4 years. As part of this project, they also plan to rip out 71 acres of our fragile reef to make way for a transient nuclear aircraft carrier. The DoD has rattled our cage and many Chamorus are saying “No!” to the military buildup and its proposed projects.

Even though we are unable to use the US Constitution to fight for our rights, we are gathering together in large numbers to save what we can of Guahan—what “we have”—our language, our culture, and our livelihoods. We are speaking about our experiences, our struggles, and our hopes for our people. We publish and speak out at weareguahan.com. And, we are gaining national and international attention. You can read the March 23rd Washington Post article here: http://weareguahan.com/2010/03/23/washington-post-runs-article-on-buildup/

The story of the US-colonized Chamorus in Guahan is one wrought with political, social, psychological, cultural, and economic subjugation, death, suffering, sacrifice, and alienation. Our struggle: my mother’s struggle and my struggle, has been perpetually memorialized in a very educational new PBS documentary called, The Insular Empire: America in the Mariana Islands, a film by Vanessa Warheit, a fierce Chamoru ally and activist. It will air on KCTS Seattle, March 28, at 7pm. It will replay on April 2 at 4am. Here is a schedule of upcoming national PBS air dates: http://www.mynewsletterbuilder.com/email/newsletter/1410236557 You can also read the blog here: http://theinsularempire.blogspot.com/. Vanessa Warheit and Famoksaiyan are working together to try to bring the film to the Seattle area for a screening with the producer and myself.

The end of colonialism begins on the shores of the United States. I am asking you now, my fellow American social activist, to help end colonialism for all indigenous people!

How can you be helpful to us?

• Educate yourself. If you are reading this right now, you already know so much more than the average American!

• In 5 minutes you can tell 5 more fellow Americans about what you’ve learned about Guahan. Encourage them to tell 5 more people, and so on.

• Sign up on the We are Guahan website and the Insular Empire blog to stay informed.

• You can donate to our California organization, Famoksaiyan. Our Paypal email is supportfamoksaiyan@gmail.com. We operate solely from money donated to us by angel funders such as you, and out of our own pockets. Your money can help conduct educational outreach in the schools and colleges; provide the opportunity for a Chamoru person to speak out at the local, national, and international levels about our injustice; further educate and empower our fellow Chamorus about their rights; and allow the bridging of our fight in Guahan to the fight here in the states.

• Call your local Congressperson and tell them about what you know. Tell them not to support the military buildup in Guahan.

On behalf of the Chamoru people, si yu’us ma’ase, yan saina ma’ase. Thank you for your support, and we also recognize and thank the leaders and guides that have gone before us. Manggaisuette siha ni’ manggaibosa! Blessed are those with voice!

Bio for Dr. Hope A. Cristobal

As an indigenous Chamoru living in the Diaspora, Dr. Hope Cristobal was born and raised on the island-territory of Guahan. She is a psychologist who specializes in the treatment and assessment of indigenous and marginalized populations, focusing on the unique situation for colonized Chamorus from Guahan. Dr. Cristobal believes that the long-term sustainability of the Chamorus is rooted in the resolution of colonization and marginalization, and the installation of community empowerment through the establishment of indigenous-lead, culturally sensitive solutions and programs. In 2007, she testified at the United Nations regarding the psychosocial problems currently facing the Chamoru people and urged the Committee on Decolonization to move forward with their commitment to eradicate colonies around the world. She is an active member of Famoksaiyan and is dedicated to raising awareness among the American public, and Chamorus from the Diaspora, about the social ills facing the colonized Chamoru communities in Guahan. You can contact Dr. Cristobal at hope.cristobal@gmail.com.

Colombian social movements launch Colombia No Bases Coalition (Espanol)

A new anti-bases coalition was launched by social movement groups in Colombia.  After the U.S. military base in Manta, Ecuador was evicted by a widespread popular movement, the U.S. negotiated with the government of Colombia to build several new military bases.  The Colombia No Bases Coalition was formed in opposition to these developments.  Apologies that the article is only in Spanish.

>><<

Organizaciones Sociales colombianas lanzan coalición contra las bases de EE.UU.

Bogotá, marzo 26 de 2010

——————————————————————————————–

Más de 150 organizaciones colombianas, entre ellas el Comando Nacional Unitario (CUT, CGT, CTC, CPC), la Gran Coalición Democrática, Fecode, Recalca, e importantes personalidades democráticas del país, han firmado una declaración rechazando la presencia militar estadounidense en Colombia en –por lo menos– siete bases militares.

El documento con todas sus adhesiones será presentado el próximo 8 de abril en un evento público que tiene como objetivo oficializar la conformación de la Coalición Colombia No Bases. Este es un espacio democrático, pacífico y pluralista que tiene como objetivo coordinar las acciones para enfrentar la cesión de la soberanía colombiana que hizo el gobierno de Uribe Vélez a Estados Unidos, a través del Acuerdo firmado el 30 de octubre de 2009.

La presentación de la Coalición se realizará en la Universidad Autónoma de Colombia el jueves 8 de abril de 2010, a las 6:30 p.m., (Calle 13 No. 4-31, Bogotá) con la participación de destacados dirigentes políticos, de los movimientos sociales e invitados internacionales.

El evento es convocado por el comité impulsor de la Coalición Colombia No Bases y por la Gran Coalición Democrática. Más información:

Enrique Daza, por la Coalición Colombia No Bases (Teléfono: 3128716, 2488989)

Tarsicio Rivera, por la Gran Coalición Democrática (Teléfono: 3237550, 3237950)

Más información sobre la programación:

www.colombianobases.org o a través del correo: colombianobases@gmail.com

——————————————————————————————–

LANZAMIENTO DE LA COALICIÓN COLOMBIA NO BASES

Recalca, Bogotá, marzo 24 de 2010

——————————————————————————————–

A 200 años de conmemorarse la independencia de Colombia, nuestra república está siendo víctima de las peores formas de agresión extranjera. El gobierno de Álvaro Uribe Vélez cedió el control de siete bases militares a tropas estadounidenses, la mayor claudicación a la soberanía nacional desde que el país dejó de ser una colonia española.

Semejante agresión requiere la mayor unidad de las fuerzas democráticas y progresistas del país, de todos los sectores, bajo una bandera central de recuperar la democracia y la soberanía. Desde la Gran Coalición Democrática, espacio amplio y pluralista de articulación de luchas para enfrentar las políticas del actual gobierno, hemos venido impulsando y fortaleciendo la idea de conformar una Coalición Colombia No Bases, que coordine tareas a nivel nacional e internacional en torno a los impactos que para el país y la región tiene la agresión estadounidense con su accionar militar.

Por ello estamos convocando a todos los colombianos y colombianas de los sectores democráticos, de actividades productivas, empresariales, gremiales, artísticas, culturales y científicas, a las fuerzas políticas de oposición, a los trabajadores, pensionados, campesinos, mujeres, afrodescendientes, profesionales, intelectuales y académicos, indígenas, asociaciones comunales, organizaciones no gubernamentales, centros de estudio e investigación, universidades y medios de comunicación, a que nos acompañen y participen de la asamblea de conformación de esta Coalición Colombia No Bases, en acto que se realizará el jueves 8 de abril de 2010, a las 6:30 p.m. en el auditorio Fundadores de la Universidad Autónoma de Colombia (Calle 13 No. 4-31).

Más información:

Web: www.colombianobases.org

Correo: colombianobases@gmail.com