Movements and Resistance – Page 65

October 9, 2009

What is the new Japanese government’s position on U.S. bases in Okinawa?

As these two articles illustrate, the new government under the Democratic Party of Japan, which committed in a pre-election manifesto to “move in the direction of re-examining the realignment of the U.S. military forces in Japan,” is not in complete unity about its position. The DPJ position has been to move the U.S. Futenma military base presently at Ginowan, Okinawa, out of the prefecture entirely. But Hatoyama made, then retracted comments that the government may be close to approving plans to relocate the Futenma base to Henoko, Okinawa, a site of consistent protest by Okinawans. This may indicate a split within the ruling party leadership. We’ll have to wait and see what develops.

>><<

Japan threatens to kick out US troops

Japan is threatening to ask US troops based on the island of Okinawa to leave the country amid growing resentment over crime.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/japan/6269279/Japan-threatens-to-kick-out-US-troops.html

By Julian Ryall in Tokyo

Published: 6:11PM BST 07 Oct 2009

The new government is reviewing an agreement with Washington on US military facilities following through on a campaign pledge to islanders who have borne the brunt of the American presence for more than 60 years.

Around 50,000 American troops are based in Japan , around two-thirds of the total are in Okinawa . Resentment against their presence has grown in recent years due to a series of crimes committed by service personnel.

Many of the crimes are relatively trivial, but other cases have brought tens of thousands of protesters onto the streets. In February 2008, a case against a marine accused of raping a girl aged 14 was dropped after she withdrew the accusation, apparently to avoid the ordeal of a trial.

The case revived bitter memories of the abduction and rape of a 12-year-old schoolgirl in 1995 by three US servicemen.

Katsuya Okada, the foreign minister, said he wants the American military to remain in Japan but that the concentration on Japan ‘s most southerly islands needed to be reduced.

“The only way this presence can be sustained in the long term is to make sure that the burden on the Okinawans is decreased in some way,” he said. “Only by accomplishing these goals will we be able to ensure that the US-Japan alliance will be sustainable.”

Another long-standing complaint against the US forces is pollution and the noise their aircraft make during practice flights, particularly at bases that are in the most densely populated parts of the island.

The most seriously affected municipality is Ginowan, which surrounds the Marine Corps’ Futenma Air Station.

The previous Japanese government had reached an agreement with Washington to transfer 8,000 Marines and their dependants to the Pacific island of Guam by 2012, close the Futenma facility and transfer its functions to an enlarged US base on the north-east coast of the prefecture.

The plan has been attacked by people living close to Camp Schwab and environmentalists, who claim that the proposal for new runways built on reclaimed land will devastate the local flora and fauna.

The US has stated that it wants to stick with the existing plan. John Roos, the US ambassador to Tokyo , said on Friday that Japan will be given time “to analyse, to review, to ask questions and, hopefully, come to the conclusion that it is in both parties’ best interests.”

It is not at all certain that Yukio Hatoyama, the prime minister, agrees with that assessment as he has been a vocal critic of U.S. foreign and financial policies, as well as expressing a desire to follow a more independent security line than previous Japanese governments.

Mr Hatoyama himself has indicated that he would support reducing the burden on the people of Okinawa by moving the activities of Futenma out of the prefecture entirely.

Work to review the agreement began in the Japanese cabinet on Friday, with no deadline set for a decision, according to Mr Okada.

The urgency of the situation is underlined by the arrival in Japan in November of President Barack Obama, who will arrive with hopes of settling the contentious issue once and for all.

+++

http://www.asahi.com/english/Herald-asahi/TKY200910090105.html

Hatoyama now backtracking on Futenma relocation pledge

THE ASAHI SHIMBUN

2009/10/9

Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama appears to be vacillating on his party’s election pledge to consider relocating a major U.S. facility out of Okinawa Prefecture.

Meeting reporters Wednesday, Hatoyama indicated his government may eventually approve the current Japan-U.S. agreement to relocate the heliport functions of the U.S. Marine Corps Air Station Futenma from Ginowan to Henoko in Nago, both in Okinawa Prefecture.

But on Thursday, he was at pains to emphasize that he did not mention Henoko in his previous remarks.

His comments Wednesday would undermine a Democratic Party of Japan election pledge to “move in the direction of re-examining the realignment of the U.S. military forces in Japan.”

The DPJ has previously called for the Futenma facility, located in a crowded residential area in Ginowan, to be relocated to another part of Japan to ease the burden of bases on Okinawan residents.

“I do not deny the possibility that (the pledges in the DPJ’s manifesto) could change because of a time factor,” Hatoyama said Wednesday, indicating Henoko could be an option after all.

The current plan to relocate the facility to Henoko point was formally agreed to in 2006 under the Liberal Democratic Party administration as part of the “road map” for the realignment of U.S. forces.

The prime minister’s remark was taken to reflect the growing belief in his government, through talks with U.S. officials and a review of the agreement, that finding an alternative site will be difficult.

“The manifesto is a promise, so it should not be changed easily,” he said Wednesday. But he added that “there is the Japan-U.S. agreement as a premise. The greatest question is whether under that premise we can shape a plan in ways to gain the understanding of Okinawa Prefecture residents.”

Foreign Minister Katsuya Okada made a similar comment Wednesday in a speech at the Foreign Correspondents’ Club of Japan in Tokyo.

“We are seeking ways to further reduce the burden on Okinawa,” he said, indicating the party was continuing to look for an alternative site for the relocation.

But he said at the same time that “it is a fact that both the Japanese and U.S. governments had worked under the agreement.”

After his apparent change of stance was reported, Hatoyama said Thursday he did not mean to say the government will approve the LDP administration’s agreement with Washington “as it is.”

Hatoyama said he would honor a coalition agreement with two junior partners to review the bases issue to lessen the burden on Okinawa.(IHT/Asahi: October 9,2009)

October 9, 2009October 9, 2009

Julian Aguon on Democracy Now! Speaks Against U.S. Military Buildup on Guam

http://www.democracynow.org/2009/10/9/guam_residents_organize_against_us_plans

Guam Residents Organize Against US Plans for $15B Military Buildup on Pacific Island

The United States is planning an enormous $15 billion military buildup on the Pacific island of Guam. The project would turn the thirty-mile-long island into a major hub for US military operations in the Pacific in what has been described as the largest military buildup in recent history. We speak with Julian Aguon, a civil rights attorney from the Chamoru nation in Guam. [includes rush transcript]

Guest: Julian Aguon, Chamoru civil rights attorney and author of three books, including The Fire this Time: Stories of Life Under US Occupation and What We Bury at Night: Disposable Humanity.

Rush Transcript

JUAN GONZALEZ: We turn now to the Pacific island of Guam, where the United States is planning an enormous military buildup to the tune of $15 billion. The project would turn the thirty-mile-long island into a major hub for US military operations in the Pacific. It has been described as the largest military buildup in recent history and could bring as many as 50,000 people to the tiny island.

On Capitol Hill, the conversation has been restricted to whether the jobs expected from the military construction should go to the mainland Americans, foreign workers or Guam residents. But we rarely hear the voices and concerns of the indigenous people of Guam, who constitute over a third of the island’s population.

We’re joined now by a civil rights attorney from the Chamoru nation in Guam, Julian Aguon, who is the author of three books, including The Fire this Time: Stories of Life Under US Occupation and What We Bury at Night: Disposable Humanity.

Welcome to Democracy Now!

JULIAN AGUON: Thank you very much for having me.

JUAN GONZALEZ: Well, this latest buildup, how did this develop? It is now troops that are being moved from Okinawa by the United States to Guam. Could you talk a little bit about the decision in recent years on this buildup?

JULIAN AGUON: OK. The military buildup was first announced in 2005. Basically, the United States had made a bilateral agreement with the Japanese government to transfer some 7,000 US Marines from Okinawa to Guam, in large part due to Okinawan mass protest against military presence, because they shoulder roughly 70 percent of the US military presence in all of Japan in Okinawa. So, that was in 2005.

Fast-forward to 2009, we see that the US has recently announced that the number—it keeps ballooning. It’s really unbelievable, because now it’s set to include 8,000 US Marines and their 9,000 dependents, another thousand troops from South Korea, as well as an outside labor—foreign labor workforce estimated upwards of 20,000 people. So we’re talking about a four- to five-year injection of a population increase of 20 percent in five years.

So that’s really—what we’re concerned about, the indigenous Chamoru community of Guam, is that we haven’t exercised self-determination yet. Guam remains one of only sixteen non-self-governing territories, i.e. UN-recognized colonies, of the world. We don’t even vote for the US president. We have no effective, meaningful representation in the US Congress. And the entire buildup was announced, and it was basically—any Chamoru consideration was really de facto. We’re never really at the table. We were just informed by the US that they were going to bring in outside population of these many tens of thousands of people.

And the entire population of Guam is set roughly at 171,000 only, and the Chomoru population makes up roughly 37 percent of that population. So, really, this demographic change will have irreversible consequences, and we don’t even have the infrastructure, and no money has been really—has been, in essence, promised to the government.

JUAN GONZALEZ: Well, your country, of course, is—the status of your country—

JULIAN AGUON: Yes.

JUAN GONZALEZ: —is familiar to me as an unincorporated territory, because, of course, I come from—I was born in another unincorporated territory or colony of the United States, Puerto Rico, and both of our countries were—came under US sovereignty at the same time as a result of the Spanish-American War. Could you talk a little bit about the history of Guam—

JULIAN AGUON: OK.

JUAN GONZALEZ: —and the lives of your people under US rule for the last more than a century now?

JULIAN AGUON: OK. Well, Guam is one of the longest-colonized islands in the Pacific. We were colonized by Spain for almost 300 years and then by the United States. We got ceded to the United States under the 1898 Treaty of Paris, along with Cuba, Philippines, Puerto Rico, as you know. So, since 1898 until present, with the exception of a three-year—1941 to 1944, we were occupied by the Japanese imperial forces during World War II, which is a completely other story, which was also horrific. But we basically have been under US colonization since 1898 until the present. So we’re actually coming on 500 years of uninterrupted colonization.

And that’s sort of why being even on this program is so precious for us, because we never, ever get a word in edgewise. And basically, the US uses language all the time to disappear us. We’re often called “where America’s day begins,” a possession, even according to US court cases, “possession.” We’re essentially an instrumentality of the federal government. Or they use words like “unsinkable aircraft carrier” now or “tip of the spear.” All of this language is, you know, really—it’s really clever, and it just disappears us. And so, the outside world, including mainland United States, really they’re allowed to sort of forget that there are people there. There are only ghosts. So, that’s been our experience.

And the military buildup has been no different. We actually situate the current US military buildup as the latest in a very long line of covenant breaches on the part of the United States, because in 1946, the US placed Guam on the, you know, the UN list of non-self-governing territories and basically assumed a, quote, “sacred trust obligation” under international law, by virtue of Article 73 of the UN Charter, to guide Guam toward self-determination. And now, with the military buildup, which—it really seeks to pack the last punch. It will be decisive, because it is so large and it’s so enormous. And basically, the way I see it is, the needs of my people are buckling. We’re not going to be able to withstand so much more weight.

JUAN GONZALEZ: And in terms of the other aspect of life in Guam that most Americans don’t know about, the radiation exposure that your islands were subjected to in the World War II, post-World War II era?

JULIAN AGUON: Mm-hmm. Well, the most well known, or the most notorious, actually, is the nuclear campaign launched by the United States in our neighboring islands, because Guam is part of a region of the Pacific, the western Pacific, known as Micronesia, which includes the Federated States of Micronesia, the Republic of Palau, the Republic of the Marshall Islands, and this Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands. Actually, Guam is only thirty miles long, but it really is the largest and southernmost island in its own natural archipelago, the Mariana island chain. So we were one people, up until 1898. So that’s another reason why that date is so important, because it basically politically divided us in 1898. Guam was taken by the US, and CNMI went to Germany. So, we’re in that part of the region.

Between 1946 to 1958, the US dropped more than sixty nuclear weapons on the people of the Marshall Islands. One bomb, the most notorious, Bravo, that shot—the latest estimate—I speak with senators over there, including Tony deBrum of the Marshall Islands, who’s been such a longstanding advocate in the Marshall Islands, now puts this—this is the number used. That bomb, dropped only 1,200 miles from Guam, is the equivalent of 1.6 or 1.7 Hiroshima bombs every day for twelve years. That’s its total radioactive capacity. And Guam being so close and downwind, we have downwind exposure.

And that’s yet another reason why we’re always at the Congress, you know, throwing ourselves on the funeral pyre of the US Congress, or the UN, like we were on this trip, and we went to the United Nations, as well, to basically keep articulating these rights or trying to get—at least as far as the US is concerned, trying to get compensation for radiation exposure. And there’s no real acknowledgement. It hasn’t happened yet. The Chamoru people of Guam experience such an alarmingly high rate of cancer. So that’s a legacy.

JUAN GONZALEZ: And, of course, in Congress itself, your representation is limited to one non-voting representative?

JULIAN AGUON: Yes, one non-voting representative.

JUAN GONZALEZ: So the people of Guam are US citizens but cannot vote in any kind of federal elections at all.

JULIAN AGUON: Yes. The document that purports to be our foundational or constitution document is actually a document passed by the US Congress, or the Organic Act of 1950, passed on August 1st, 1950. Basically, by virtue of that act, we are statutory citizens. US citizenship was extended to us. However, we’re not allowed to vote for the US president, and we’re not allowed to have a voting—an effective voting representative in the US Congress.

And that’s what’s so ironic, and you hear about—I just heard about the Nobel Peace Prize being awarded to Obama, and that’s great, but for us, it’s really like the US has, you know, really justified its current war on terror, I mean, using all—employing all of the classic language of human rights and international law. And that was my specialty area in law school, international law and human rights, and for indigenous people specifically, as well as for colonized peoples.

And we don’t even have to necessarily talk about human rights in Guam; we’ll settle for civil rights. We just want to vote for president. So, I mean, even in America’s own backyard, nuclear contamination is not cleaned up. We can’t vote for president. We can’t really make changes in the US Congress. Yet, all the decisions made for us are made by people we don’t vote for. I mean, this is such a wildly deficient phenomenon today, I mean, because, really, I mean, I guess the best way to explain the Guam situation is that there’s nothing neo about our colonialism. This is such old school-styled colonialism, it’s unreal. It really is unreal. And I think that’s why the Chamoru people of late, our indignation and our moral outrage is sort of taking a new lease of life.

JUAN GONZALEZ: Well, Julian Aguon, I want to thank you for being with us, a Chamoru civil rights attorney—

JULIAN AGUON: Thank you so much.

JUAN GONZALEZ: —and the author of three books, including The Fire this Time: Stories of Life Under US Occupation and What We Bury at Night: Disposable Humanity.

October 5, 2009October 9, 2009

SURGE THE RESISTANCE – NOT THE WAR!

Call to action from World Can’t Wait

Microsoft Word – October 17 color poster

SURGE THE RESISTANCE – NOT THE WAR!

JOIN THE PROTEST MARCH

on SATURDAY, OCTOBER 17

3pm

END U.S. WARS, OCCUPATIONS, AND TORTURE FOR EMPIRE!

Gather near the Atkinson entrance to Ala Moana Park for a permitted street march. Bring signs and noisemakers! There will be a trolley for those unabl to walk the route circling Ala Moana Shopping Center.

This is a national day of protest, and there will be regional protests in dozens of cities as we enter the 9th year of war and occupation in Afghanistan!

Stand with humanity to demand a better world!

WHAT CAN YOU DO?

Build for this march! Help bring hundreds of people to the streets. Break the silence and re-envigorate the anti-war movement.
* Leaflet and Poster: World Can’t Wait-Hawai`i has leaflets and posters. If you would like some sent to you let us know how many leaflets you can distribute or how many posters you want. We’ll send them to you. Just send an address and a phone number and let us know how many. You can also pick up a stack at Revolution Books.

* Put the announcement (or leaflet) up on your FaceBook or MySpace. If you would like an electronic version of the leaflet let us know. Send out an announcement on your e-list.

* Announce the protest in your classroom, organization and/or church. Phone your friends and relatives.

* Build your own contingent around a particular issue – and bring a banner representing your group and/or message.

THE WORLD CAN’T WAIT!

October 5, 2009

45 days for public to comment on military tsunami about to hit Guam

45 days to review buildup draft study

By Dionesis Tamondong • Pacific Daily News • October 6, 2009

Senators are concerned the public won’t be given adequate time to properly review and comment on a draft study of the military buildup’s environmental impact to Guam.

The Joint Guam Program Office yesterday gave an overview and update of the draft Environmental Impact Statement to several senators. The detailed study, consisting of 10 volumes and thousands of pages, looks at the potential consequences the planned military projects will have on the island’s environment.

The draft study is scheduled to be published Nov. 20 on the Federal Register, said Sen. Judith Guthertz, chairwoman of the legislative committee on the military buildup. Government of Guam agencies and the public will have 45 days to go over the study and comment on it.

The pending buildup includes plans to build a base for thousands of U.S. Marines, facilities for recurring visits by an aircraft carrier group, an Army ballistic missile defense facility and expansions to Andersen Air Force Base and the Navy base on island.

No project will break ground until after military officials issue a record of decision, which authorizes which projects can move forward. Guthertz said that authorization is expected in early January.

“We have to have it as early as possible so we can have as much time to review it,” Guthertz said. “We need every GovGuam agency to diligently review it, and we need a strong community response.”

Guthertz, citing JGPO officials, said the military is looking at operating its own water system, which would require digging for water wells.

But the military is planning to integrate its wastewater system into the local system, which would require expanding the northern sewage treatment plant.

Doing so would mean the military could help pay for the expansion of the wastewater system, including additional projects recently required by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

The federal EPA denied the renewal of two federal Clean Water Act waivers to the Guam Waterworks Authority, and will require Guam Waterworks Authority to apply secondary treatment for the Hagåtña and Tanguisson wastewater facilities.

GWA officials have said those expansion projects could cost about $300 million and would require steep increases to customers’ water bills.

Senators want copies of the EIS study available at public libraries and mayors’ offices, but making copies of the voluminous document is quite costly. Guthertz said JGPO officials will work to have electronic copies available and possibly have computers at certain locations or during outreach meetings so the public can more easily review the study.

The only local regulatory agencies that have had a chance to review the draft are the Guam Environmental Protection Agency, the Bureau of Statistics and Plans’ Coastal Management Program, the Department of Park and Recreation’s State Historical Preservation Office and the Department of Agriculture’s Division of Aquatics and Wildlife.

But Guthertz said every agency must have ample time to review it because the buildup will change the island’s landscape socially and economically — not just environmentally.

Source: http://www.guampdn.com/article/20091006/NEWS01/910060304/45%20days%20to%20review%20buildup%20draft%20study?GID=oT4HQqvTuzROZPx%20D8Agxf906MS7y2zwT7aluVVZmzY=

October 5, 2009

Protest of Stryker and other live-fire training at Pohakuloa Training Area (PTA)

Press Release Monday, Oct. 5, 2009

Protest of Stryker and other live-fire training at Pohakuloa Training Area (PTA)

Saturday, Oct. 10, 2009 Mauna Kea State Park

There will be a peaceful protest l0AM Saturday Oct. l0th at Mauna Kea State park –l mile east of the Pohakuloa main gate on Saddle Road. (Car pools will leave 9AM from the Hilo Bayfront parking lot at Pauahi and Kamehameha Ave.) The protest will begin at the park and then move to PTA’s main gate. The protest is over Stryker tank and other ongoing live-fire training at the base known to be contaminated with Depleted Uranium (DU) radiation from past weapons training. Live-fire and other activities that create dust, risk spreading the radiation off base into civilian areas. The Hawaii County Council passed a resolution 8-1 in July 2008 calling for a halt to all live-fire at PTA until there is a complete assessment of the radiation contamination and clean up of the DU present. The military continues to ignore the Council’s call to action.

Reports are that l00 Stryker l9 ton eight-wheeled tanks (perhaps more) are currently doing training at PTA. These tanks have recently returned from Iraq where their l05 mm canons and 50 cal machine guns have fired DU munitions.

The protest is sponsored by Malu ‘Aina Center for Non-violent Education & Action.

Jim Albertini of Malu ‘Aina said: It’s time to Stop Strykers! Stop all live-fire on Pohakuloa, and live-fire in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan. The military needs to clean up its mess and end its occupations, not make more of a mess.”

-pau-

STRYKER PROTEST

Stop Live-fire on Pohakuloa,
Iraq, Afghanistan, & Pakistan, etc.

Time: 10AM

Date: Saturday, Oct. l0th

Meeting place: Mauna Kea State Park
One mile east of the new main gate of the Pohakuloa Training Area on Saddle Rd. in the center of the island. Car pools will leave 9AM from the Hilo Bayfront parking lot at Pauahi and Kamehameha Ave.

A Stryker is an eight-wheeled, l9-ton modern tank (urban assault vehicle). It’s not a defensive weapon. It is a killing machine. A full Stryker Brigade is based on Oahu at Schofield Barracks. Earlier this year the Brigade, including more than 300 Stryker tanks, returned from Iraq. The Brigade is now training for another deployment to Iraq or possibly Afghanistan, as President Obama escalates the war there.

The Stryker tanks fire depleted uranium (DU) ammunition. They have fired it in Iraq and have contributed to the widespread DU contamination there which is causing widespread health problems, including cancer, birth defects, and deaths. Whether these tanks have brought DU contamination back to Hawaii is unknown. No independent testing has been done.

Reports are that a hundred Strykers (perhaps more) have been brought via Kawaihae Harbor from Ohau and are now doing training at the Pohakuloa Training Area (PTA), including live-fire. While the Army says no DU weapons are presently used in training at PTA, the area is already officially acknowledged to be contaminated with DU from earlier weapons training. Live-fire, and other activities that create dust such as tank maneuver training, risk spreading radiation contamination — toxic deadly poison, off-base into civilian areas, carried by the strong winds that travel through the Saddle Area toward the Hilo and Kona sides of our Island.
Stand Up and Speak Out!

Let a cry go out by all of us who are charged to be responsible stewards of this ‘aina: Stop Strykers! Stop all live-fire on Pohakuloa, and live-fire in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan. But let us do more. Let us work to end the illegal U.S. occupation of Hawai’i as well as illegal occupations of Iraq, Afghanistan, etc. The people and the land are spiritually interconnected as one. So too are the issues of Justice & Peace. Join our non-violent protest, where hearts come together to help remove the obstacles to peace. Mahalo.

For more information please contact: Malu `Aina Center for Non-violent Education & Action P.O. Box AB Kurtistown, Hawai`i 96760. Phone (808) 966-7622. Email ja@interpac.net http://www.malu-aina.org
—
Jim Albertini
Malu ‘Aina Center for Non-violent Education & Action
P.O.Box AB
Kurtistown, Hawai’i 96760
phone: 808-966-7622
email: JA@interpac.net
Visit us on the web at: www.malu-aina.org

October 3, 2009

U.S. seeks two Navy bases in Panama, after Panama kicked out the bases years ago

Puerto Rican scholar and activist Deborah Santana just sent me news of U.S. plans to establish two Navy bases in Panama. The article is in Spanish, but I took an excerpt from Deborah’s email summarizing the article:

This news just got reported in the Mexican daily La Jornada. Unfortunately I don’t have time to translate it into English, but I think it’s important enough to alert people immediately. No doubt more news and information, including in English, will be forthcoming.

Briefly, the conservative new govt of Panama President Ricardo Martinelli will allow the US Navy to establish two new bases, both on the Pacific and one of which borders Colombia. This after the US closed 14 bases in Panamá (including the School of the Americas, which was moved to Georgia) and restored the canal zone to Panamanian sovereignty.

During the 1990’s the Panamanian government rejected a US proposal to establish a “Multilateral Antidrug Center” established by the US (another euphemism for a base). Panama is part of the US “Mérida Plan” which along with Colombia and México is supposed to be waging a collective war against drugs and terrorism.

>><<

http://www.jornada.unam.mx/2009/09/28/index.php?section=mundo&article=029n2mun

EEUU instalará bases navales en Darién y Punta Coca, Panamá

El acuerdo se firmará antes del 30 de octubre”, dice un ministro de Gobierno

La Jornada

Estados Unidos establecerá bases navales en Bahía Piña, en la provincia de Darién, limítrofe con Colombia, y Punta Coca, al sur de la provincia occidental de Veraguas, ambas en el litoral de Panamá, en el Pacífico, informó el ministro panameño de Gobierno y Justicia, José Raúl Mulino.

En declaraciones al diario local La Prensa, Mulino, quien integró la comitiva del presidente de la república, Ricardo Martinelli, a Estados Unidos, en el 64 período de sesiones de la Asamblea General de Naciones Unidas (ONU), indicó que el tratado que regirá el uso de estas bases se firmará antes del 30 de octubre.

Previamente al anuncio oficial, fue celebrada una reunión entre la secretaria de Estado de Estados Unidos, Hilary Clinton, y Martinelli, para abordar temas de cooperación conjunta.
De acuerdo con Mulino, un acuerdo bilateral autorizará la instalación de estaciones navales en territorio panameño, para el combate al narcotráfico y la protección en áreas costeras.
Los Tratados Torrijos-Carter, de 1977, garantizaron el desmantelamiento progresivo en este país de unas 14 bases y sitios de defensa, y aseguraron las recuperación soberana de la vía interoceánica y la denominada Zona del Canal de Panamá el primero de enero de 2000.

Bajo el gobierno nacionalista del desparecido general Omar Torrijos, Panamá obligó a Estados Unidos a cerrar la Escuela de las Américas, un centro de enseñanza de torturas y guerra sucia en la que se graduaron los antiguos dictadores de América Latina.

La decisión del gobierno del conservador Martinelli sugiere un retorno a la presencia militar estadunidense en suelos y mares panameños.

En el gobierno del ex presidente Ernesto Pérez Balladares (1994-1999), fue rechazado un proyecto para establecer en este país un Centro Multilteral Antidrogas, dirigido por Estados Unidos.
Panamá forma parte del Plan Mérida, el cual fue promovido por Washington, en contra de las organizaciones dedicadas al trasiego de drogas y armas, e integra una alianza política con México y Colombia para enfrentar el terrorismo.

Colombia anunció el julio pasado que Estados Unidos podrá utilizar siete bases militares en su territorio, lo que fue rechazado categóricamente por los países de la región, en especial Venezuela, que comparte frontera con territorio colombiano.

October 2, 2009

Important new website: Militarization in the Marianas

I just learned about this important website Militarization in the Marianas covering various aspects of U.S. militarization and Chamoru resistance in the Marianas. Here’s an excerpt from the welcome message:

Hafa Adai and Welcome to Militarization in the Marianas, an informational website about the U.S. military presence in the CNMI and Guam. This website serves to avail you of resources regarding the impacts of the U.S. military in the Marianas. It was designed for accessibility to the residents of the Marianas, who have often had only official Pentagon information to use in assessing that impact. It is meant to critically analyze the U.S. military as an institution that has been a domineering presence within the Marianas for decades, a presence that has not been adequately assessed and critiqued because of this lack of information, even as it is projected to grow in the coming years. This website will help residents make informed decisions about future military plans for the use of these islands. It will also allow community members to assess the costs and abuses -documented and undocumented- that have been associated with the presence of such a powerful institution, especially in the midst of the upcoming military build-up.

October 2, 2009October 2, 2009

New party sweeps elections in Japan – What does it mean?

In a recent election, Japanese voters ousted the ruling Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) and brought to power what had been the main opposition party, the Democratic Party of Japan (DPJ). This is the first time that the LDP has not ruled, and it raises many questions about the prospects for the future of Japan, including the future of U.S. military bases in Japan and Okinawa.

The People’s Plan Japonesia website, a leading English Language Japanese political journal, carried an preliminary analysis of the election results by Muto Ichiyo, a respected political watcher. The article was prompted by an email from an Indian colleague:

Dear Muto san and friends in Japan, Suddenly, with the election results in Japan, there is a flood of memory about all you friends. The results look pretty unprecedented sitting here in India. But one has no idea whether it comes anywhere close to what you all have been struggling for all these years?! Or whether one should even hope for any changes; even mild. If anyone has written anything on it in English, or has the time to pen a small paragraph, it would really help to reconnect again. In admiration and with regards,

Vinod Raina Delhi, India September 1 2009

In response Muto writes:

Dear Vinod, I thank you for prompting me to write on it. The August 30 general election here has brought on the decisive downfall of the Liberal Democratic Party, ushering in a new dynamics in Japanese politics…

The Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) for the first time tumbled down from its position of power. And this occurred because an overwhelming majority of Japanese voters felt enough is enough after a half-century of one-party rule by the LDP. The Democratic Party of Japan (DPJ), the major opposition party, saw its Lower House force explode from 115 to 308 seats, and the LDP’s strength shrank from 300 to 119. The New Komei Party, LDP’s coalition partner, lost all its seats from single seat constituencies, its total seats cut from 31 to 21.

While describing the election as “major change, even a drastic change”, Muto tempers his prognosis that “political dynamism which the election ushered in has created new possibilities as well as new dangers.”

Muto writes that “the major significance of the 2009 August election is that this [political] machinery [of the LDP and its power] has fallen apart.” The radical neoliberal economic policies of the Koizumi administration and the resulting social and economic devastation of the poor, working, and middle classes helped to precipitate this political upheaval: ““Market fundamentalism” and “neoliberal policies” had become negative symbols even in the mainstream media.”

Furthermore, two subsequent Prime Ministers from the LDP, including the ultra-right wing Shinzo Abe, were forced to resign.

While the DPJ is not a “left”party by any means, it appears that the new government is sincerely trying to break up the bureaucracy and its embedded interest groups that has dictated Japanese politics during the LDP era. The new government has made some bold statements critical of the present U.S. – Japan military and security arrangement, but it remains to be seen whether it will aggressively pursue changes to the Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) or change the base realignment underway in Okinawa. On this Muto writes:

One major question to be asked is if the new government is changing the Japan-U.S. security relations in meaningful ways. This is the touchstone of the new government’s will to change. In the post-Cold War period, Japan was brought into an ever-tighter U.S. military embrace than at the height of the Cold War as I discussed in detail in past issues of the Japonesia Review. Especially during the Bush period, the U.S. military transformation program turned Japan into a cog in the U.S. global military apparatus, even institutionally subjecting Japanese military forces to American command. Confronting persistent resistance from local people, the Japanese and U.S. governments were dead-set on imposing a new military base on Okinawa. In the 2009 Manifesto, the DPJ states that “in order to create a close and equal Japan-U.S. relationship, we will propose amending the Japan-U.S. Status of Forces agreement, and will consider revising the planned realignment of U.S. forces in Japan, as well as reviewing the nature of U.S. bases in Japan.” (translation by the Japan Times) You may think this is a bold statement defying the American dominance. But I am not sure whether the DPJ government is going to seriously negotiate this matter with Washington.

There is an episode that may be prognostic. When negotiating terms of its coalition with the Social Democratic Party, then-DPJ Secretary General Okada Katsuya was reluctant to mention renegotiation of the Status of Forces agreement in the coalition accord. SDP Chair Fukushima Mizuho adamantly insisted on this point, and Okada only grudgingly and patronizingly agreed to include in the accord the exact phrase that had been printed and widely publicized in the party Manifesto. The negotiations dragged on and on because Okada said he did not want to provoke US President Obama. Okada was subsequently appointed Foreign Minister. Is this Foreign Minister going to negotiate with Washington, or just beg?

Muto points out a number of key leaders in the DPJ that raise concerns, including Ozawa Ichiro:

The recognized strongest man of the party, Ozawa Ichiro, former secretary general of the LDP, and now appointed Secretary General of the DPJ, is one of the major strategists who advocated “Japan as an ordinary country.” His scenario of turning Japan into a country having fully legitimate military forces through the revision of constitution is shared by all conservative politicians.

He sums up that:

…there is an alarming gap between what one says and what one is, a gap that unsettles, and even scares, me. For without principles, one can change from one to the other extreme without qualms. That is why I said that this change can entail dangers as well as possibilities.

The DPJ, in order to be consistent, need to establish principled positions at least on the following issues, (1) the military alliance with the United States, (2) self-critical view of history, (3) neoliberal capitalism, and (4) the constitution. The party says a bit of something on each of these, but is articulate on none.

In conclusion, Muto sees hope coming from the grassroots movements:

This means that now is the time when social movements working on different fronts – labor, women, peace, welfare, environment, agriculture – should get together to establish their common principled positions and visions of Japanese society. That is to tell the DPJ government that we are here and will stay here until you take principled positions on crucial matters and act accordingly. This does include lobbying activities but the main approach is not lobbying but the influence we exert on the DPJ government through our uncompromising presence in the midst of society. Such pressure from below may split the party, triggering a process of reconsolidation of parliamentary political forces toward a sounder, more principled disposition of political forces, a welcome outcome benefiting our march forward.

The full article can be read here: http://www.ppjaponesia.org/modules/tinycontent/index.php?id=6

October 1, 2009October 23, 2009

Disarm Now! Mobilizing Call for the NPT Review

Please support this call for nuclear disarmament by leading anti-nuclear and peace groups. Their is a small window for making progress on nuclear disarmament. In 2010, the countries that are party to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty will meet in New York for the 5-year review of the treaty. Civil society groups will converge to hold parallel events to influence the outcome of the talks. The key issue many see is holding the nuclear powers to Article VI of the treaty which calls for disarmament. Without a commitment by the nuclear powers tot honor this section, it will be difficult to expect near nuclear powers to abide by commitments to not pursue nuclear weapons. This is the major flashpoint issue with Iran and North Korea.

>><<

PLEASE SIGN ON: Disarm Now! Mobilizing Call for the NPT Review

Dear Friends

Even as we focus on ending the U.S. wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, I have been deeply involved in work with nearly thirty international and U.S. peace organizations to bring pressure to bear on the U.S. and other nuclear powers to do more than talk about a nuclear weapons free future, but to create it.

Next May the seminally important Nuclear Proliferation Treaty Review Conference will take place in New York.

Given the continuing urgent need to prevent nuclear war, global demands – including from many governments and the United Nations – hat the nuclear powers finally fulfill their Article VI commitments to negotiate the elimination of the world’s nuclear arsenals, and the hopes for abolition aroused by President Obama, we are hopeful that popular demands for NPT Review conclude with a commitment to begin negotiations on a nuclear abolition treaty can have a powerful impact.

Recall that Obama has been clear that to create change, including a nuclear weapons free world, people and the social movements have to demand it. We have to make it politically possible, unavoidable, for the U.S. and other nuclear powers to eliminate the genocidal and omnicidal weapons.

I am writing to urge that your organization sign the attached call, initiated by eight international and nineteen national organizations that are organizing a series of inspiring and powerful activities at next April and May to impact the NPT Review. Those activities include: a massive global petition campaign (the U.S. petition can be found at http://www.peace-action.org/nukes/campaigns/nptpetition.htm; movements in other nations are circulating petitions that best meet their needs,) an international peace conference (April 30 and May 1,) and an International Day of Action for a Nuclear Free World (May 2.)

Please arrange for your organization to join by signing our call and by planning to join in our activities. As Quakers would say, this is not a time “to hide our light under a bushel.” If we are to change the course of history our voices must become louder and omnipresent. Unless we deepen our commitments and extend ourselves in educating, organizing and mobilizing, the powers that be will be free to act as recklessly as they will.

Our call needs to be as broad and strong as possible. We need many organizations from many countries and movements to sign it and to engage in the NPT Review Conference. Please also share our call with other organizations in your networks and your country so that they can join in too.

Endorsements of the call should be sent to npt@ialana.de. You can further contact us at AFSC, JGerson@afsc.org or 2161 Massachusetts Ave., Cambridge, Ma. 02140 and IALANA, Schützenstrasse 6a, 10117 Berlin, Germany, as well as by contacting any of the other participating organizations.

Join Us!

Joseph Gerson
American Friends Service Committee

___________________________

International Planning Group – for Nuclear Abolition, Peace and Justice

Disarm Now!

Mobilizing Call of the NPT Review 2010

Today our world is facing crises on an unprecedented scale – global warming, poverty, war, hunger, and disease. They threaten the very future of life as we know it, and on a daily basis bring death, sorrow and suffering to the majority of people on our planet. Yet these problems are almost entirely the results of human action and they can be equally be resolved by human action. We have an unprecedented opportunity to create the political will to manage the riches and natural bounty of our world in such a way as to meet the needs of all peoples, and to enable us to live together in peace and justice

Such is the desire of the overwhelming majority of peoples, yet we face a situation today where global military spending – money for killing – has now reached a total of $1.46 trillion in 2008. Furthermore, nine countries maintain arsenals of nuclear weapons – all together, over 23,000 warheads. These uniquely destructive weapons can not only destroy life on our planet many times over, but they are also used as political weapons of terror, reinforcing an unjustifiable global inequality. The eradication of these weapons will not only end the threat of global annihilation and this hierarchy of terror, but it will unlock enormous resources to address climate change and mass poverty, serve as the leading edge of the global trend towards demilitarisation, and make advances in other areas of human aspiration possible.

In spite of treaty obligations and international resolutions and rulings over the decades since the criminal atomic bombings of Japan by the United States in 1945, the nuclear weapons states have failed to eliminate their nuclear arms. Their continued possession of these weapons, together with modernisation of systems and increasingly aggressive nuclear use policies in recent years, have contributed to an increasing tendency towards their proliferation – and a greater likelihood of nuclear war.

The nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) requires both non-proliferation and disarmament, and must be supported and strengthened – yet it lacks a concrete process for achieving these essential goals. Furthermore, there are grave problems with its Article IV. This guarantees the right to peaceful nuclear energy but overlooks the inextricable link between nuclear power and weapons technologies and their health and environmental costs.
The newly-launched International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA) provides an opportunity to phase out nuclear power, superseding the Article IV guarantee. This said, the NPT continues to provide the framework for advancing towards an essential new initiative – a timetable for the elimination of nuclear weapons so urgently sought by the global majority.

The NPT Review Conference in May 2010 presents a precious opportunity to take that initiative. It is an opportunity that must on no account be missed. After the spiralling aggression of the Bush era, the Obama presidency provides a new context for our campaigning. President Obama’s commitment – alongside that of President Medvedev of Russia – to global abolition of nuclear weapons is greatly welcomed, and their first steps towards bilateral reductions and support for treaties restricting nuclear developments are positive. However, the goal of global abolition cannot be postponed into the indefinite future, for only a defined, achievable and timetabled process can halt the proliferation that threatens us all.

To this end, to secure a future for humanity and our planet, to help create the conditions for a world of peace, justice and genuine human security, we urge the 2010 NPT Review Conference to make an unambiguous commitment to begin negotiations on a convention for the time-bound elimination of all nuclear weapons – a Nuclear Weapons Convention.

Such a step will not happen without the active encouragement of civil society, giving voice to the yearning of the global majority for a world free from the fear of nuclear annihilation. We urge all those who share this vision to join us in mobilising for the international peace conference in New York on May 1st and the International Day of Action for a Nuclear Free World, in New York and globally, on May 2nd, as well as for the presentation of petition signatures to the NPT Review Conference.

First Signatories:

International Organizations

Abolition 2000 Global Council

Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space

International Association of Lawyers Against Nuclear Europe

International Association of Peace Messenger Cities

International Network of Engineers and Scientists for Global Responsibility

International Peace Bureau

Pax Christi International

Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom

National Organizations

American Friends Service Committee, USA

Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, UK

Deutsche Friedensgesellschaft – Vereinigte KriegsdienstgegnerInnen, Germany

Emil Touma Institute for Palestinian and Israeli Studies, Israel

Gensuikyo, Japan

International Lawyers Against Nuclear Arms, German Section

International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War, German Section

Mouvement de la Paix, France

Naturwissenschaftlerinitiative Verantwortung für Frieden und Zukunftsfähigkeit, Germany

Nuclear Age Peace Foundation, USA

Peace Action, USA

Peace Women Partners Asia-Pacific, Philippines

STOP the War Coalition, Philippine Section

Swedish Peace Committee, Sweden

Swedish Peace Council, Sweden

The Coalition for a ME Free of Nuclear Weapons, Israel

U.S. Peace Council, USA

Vredesactie – Bomspotting, Belgium

Western States Legal Foundation, USA

Cambridge / Berlin, 29th of September 2009

>><<

Japan threatens to kick out US troops

Hatoyama now backtracking on Futenma relocation pledge

Guam Residents Organize Against US Plans for $15B Military Buildup on Pacific Island

SURGE THE RESISTANCE – NOT THE WAR!

JOIN THE PROTEST MARCH

on SATURDAY, OCTOBER 17

3pm

END U.S. WARS, OCCUPATIONS, AND TORTURE FOR EMPIRE!

45 days to review buildup draft study

Protest of Stryker and other live-fire training at Pohakuloa Training Area (PTA)

STRYKER PROTEST

Stop Live-fire on Pohakuloa, Iraq, Afghanistan, & Pakistan, etc.

EEUU instalará bases navales en Darién y Punta Coca, Panamá

PLEASE SIGN ON: Disarm Now! Mobilizing Call for the NPT Review

Stop Live-fire on Pohakuloa,
Iraq, Afghanistan, & Pakistan, etc.