Panetta: Two combat brigades to be withdrawn from Europe

The realignment of U.S. military troops will mean a reduction of troops in Europe, but an increase in the Asia-Pacific region. This will pose a threat of military expansion in Hawaiʻi and countries in the Asia Pacific reigon.  But the military, corporate and political special interests that benefit from the military industrial complex in Hawaiʻi are celebrating these developments.

The Pacific Business News reported “Panetta’s announcement renews military optimism in Hawaii”:

Military contractors and top commanders may have even more reason to be excited about all the talk of increasing the focus of U.S. military might the Pacific — it could translate to new construction work and additional troops in Hawaii.

The reason for the optimism is Secretary of Defense Leon Panettaʻs statement Friday that the U.S. was withdrawing two combat brigades from Europe as part of the Pentagonʻs new military strategy.  The AP reported:

Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said Thursday the Army will withdraw two combat brigades from Europe as part of a broad reorienting of U.S. forces and instead rotate units in and out of the region, presumably from U.S. bases.

Panetta made the comment to a Defense Department news service whose representative was traveling with him to Fort Bliss.

[…]

Last week, the Pentagon announced a new defense strategy to accommodate hundreds of billions of dollars in budget cuts over the coming decade. At the time, Panetta said that the military will get smaller and that its presence in Europe would “evolve.” But he declined then to discuss what that would mean for the long-standing U.S. presence in Europe.

A combat brigade typically consists of 3,000 to 4,000 soldiers.

Craig Santos Perez: Our sea of voices

Craig Santos Perez wrote another beautiful letter to the editor about the “giant fish” eating Guahan / Guam.   I like how he is reclaiming the letter to the editor as a powerful literary form:

WHEN the giant fish began eating the middle of Guåhan, our ancestors did not receive an environmental impact statement (EIS) from DOD (Department of Destruction). Our ancestors knew that the wealth (food, clothing, shelter) and security of Chamoru people depended on the health and integrity of our land and water. Thus, the sound of the hungry beast devouring our home must have been terrifying.

Perhaps the sound of its gnawing teeth resembles the drumbeat of typing 11,000 pages of the EIS for the military buildup on Guåhan.

Perhaps the sound of its lashing tongue resembles the loud tongues of those in the Legislature, media, business community, academia, and the We Are Colonizers social network who support the colonization of Guåhan.

Perhaps the sound of its swallowing resembles the sound of the doors at a military recruitment office opening and closing, opening and closing, opening and closing each time it swallows another Chamoru body.

Or perhaps it’s just noise.

The Final EIS (Volume 2, Section 6-1-1) defines “noise” as “unwanted or annoying sound and is not necessarily based on loudness. It comes from both natural and manmade sources. Noise can have adverse effects on physical and psychological health, affect workplace productivity, and degrade quality of life.”

According to the Guam Compatibility Sustainability Study, the military buildup will cause an increased amount of noise from construction, traffic, air and sea operations, ground training and artillery. The land, the air and the water will become targets. Our eardrums will become targets. Violent noise will echo from every corner of the island.

Within all this noise, can we hear our own voices?

READ THE FULL LETTER

“We Are the Many – Across the Pacific Blue Continent”

Listen to a podcast of the “Blue Pacific Continent” forum that was held in Guam on November 30, 2011 via Beyond The Fence, a program of Public Radia Guam- KPRG 89.3 FM:

I invite you to tune in to Beyond the Fence which airs every Friday at noon on Public Radio Guam-KPRG 89.3 FM, immediately following Democracy Now.  This one hour locally produced program features interviews with diverse individuals on a variety of topics that explore the complexities of the US military presence in Guam and the Northern Mariana Islands and the challenges of building community ‘beyond the fence.’

Episode 97 “We Are the Many – Across the Pacific Blue Continent, Part II” (hosted by Dr. Vivian Dames with production assistance of Lydia Taleu) airs 12/16/11.

On 12/2/11 we aired Episode 95  “We Are Many – Across the Pacific Blue Continent, Part I”  which featured presentations by Kenneth Gofigan Kuper and Victoria-Lola Leon Guerrero, two of four panelists at the public forum held at the University of Guam on November 30, 2011 entitled “The Pacific  Blue Continent:  Militarized Experiences in Hawai’i, the Marshall Islands and Guahan.”  This forum was jointly sponsored by the Division of Social Work and the Guahan Coalition for Peace and Justice.

In Part II today, we feature the presentations at this public forum by Mrs. Abacca Anjain-Maddison of the Marshall Islands and Kyle Kajihiro of Hawai’i.  They visited Guam on their return from the solidarity conference ‘For a nuclear weapon-free, peaceful Asia-Pacific without military bases” sponsored by the Japan Peace Committee held in Naha, Okinawa November 23-26.  We also include part of the Q & A session with all four panelists discussing alternative uses of returned military land, island sustainability, the importance of inter-generational activism and moving from intellectual dialogue to direct action.

Mrs. Anjain-Maddison (waanjonok@yahoo.com) is a former Senator and Representative of Rongelap Island in the Marshall Islands which was most damaged by the radioactive fallout of US H Bomb tests conducted at the Bikini Atoll.  As daughter of the Anjain family that led the struggle of the Rongelap people, she continues to advocate for justice and compensation for Rongelap people.  She also works for the establishment of the Rongelap Peace Museum to make known the nuclear tragedy of their  island to the people of the world.  She has participated in the 2008-2010 Bikini Day events, the 2010 New York Action and the 2010-2011 World Conference Against Nuclear Bombs [see also Ep. 12 (4/9/10) “Environmental Justice and Radiation Exposure”].

Kyle Kajihiro (kyle.kajihiro@gmail.com) is a 4th generation man of Japanese ancestry who was born and raised in Honolulu.  He has worked on peace and demilitarization issues since 1996 with the American Friends Service Committee Hawai’i Area Program, which is now Hawai’i Peace and Justice.  He coordinates activities and communication for the DMZ Hawai’i- Aloha ‘Aina network and is involved in campaigns to protect various sites on the island of Oahu from US military activities. He writes and gives talks about the demilitarization movement in Hawai’i and travels throughout the Hawaiian islands to build solidarity on these issues.  He has also been involved in anti-racist/anti-fascist issues, immigrant worker organizing, Central America solidarity,  and community mural, radio and video projects [see also Ep. 18 (5/21/10) “From One Politically Colonized People to Another:  Guahan and Hawai’i Solidarity” ].

Audio podcasts of all episodes are available for free and may be downloaded within five days of the  original broadcast date by going to the Beyond the Fence link at www.kprgfm.com  or directly to  http://kprg.podbean.com/.

Please forward this announcement to your respective networks and encourage listeners to submit their comments on line.  Suggestions for future topics and guests may be sent to vdames_uog@yahoo.com.

Thank you for supporting public radio for the Marianas — and for listening to and promoting Beyond the Fence, locally and abroad.

Be sure to tune in next Friday for a special compilation of Christmas Memories Beyond the Fence.

Vivian Dames, Ph.D.

Public Radio Guam, KPRG -FM 89.3

Beyond the Fence

Anchor Host/Coordinator

 

Members of U.S. Congress question costs of military realignment on Okinawa and Guam

The Ryukyu Shimpo reports:

Barney Frank, a leading Democratic Congressman was quoted in the U.S. magazine “Foreign Affairs” (December issue) as saying, “I do think we could remove the Marines from Okinawa; whose only purpose has been to destabilize Japanese politics, so when the first alternative government to the conservative regime got elected, we caused them trouble.” He is known to have advocated the withdrawal of the U.S. Marines from Okinawa.

The remarks of such an influential congressman, who also suggested that the Marines in Okinawa are a factor destabilizing Japanese politics, may serve to intensify the debate over the necessity of the U.S. Marine Corps being stationed in Okinawa.

Meanwhile Senator McCain urges elimination of all funding for Department of Defense public infrastructure projects on Guam:

U.S. Senator John McCain (R-AZ) today sent a letter to Senators Daniel Inouye and Thad Cochran, Chairman and Vice Chairman of the Senate Committee on Appropriations, urging them to exclude unneeded spending for public infrastructure on Guam from the Department of Defense section of H.R. 3671, the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2012 pending action in the Senate.

McCain attacks the funding for non-base related expenses.   Presumably, he still supports funding for the buildup.  But even he urges a pause in funding projects, given the lack of progress on the Futenma base realignment plan:

The President’s budget request included $33 million in the operations and maintenance account for the Department of Defense to be transferred to other federal agencies to carry out socioeconomic infrastructure improvements on Guam. It is our understanding these funds are intended to be used to purchase 53 civilian school buses and to construct a cultural artifacts repository (museum) and a mental health facility on Guam.  The budget justification states that the funds are required in 2012 to address the impact of the relocation of 8,700 Marines and their families from Okinawa to Guam as well as the temporary migrant workforce that will be needed to support over $20 billion in new construction for facilities required to support the realignment.

I have strong concerns about the challenges and growing costs in a time of severe fiscal constraints of building large new U.S. military facilities and associated training areas on Guam for the permanent stationing of 8,700 Marines and their families. In addition, the Defense Policy Review Initiative as detailed in the 2005 U.S.-Japan Alliance Transformation and Realignment for the Future and the U.S.-Japan Roadmap for Realignment Implementation agreement (‘Roadmap agreement’) of 2006 requires the realignment of forces to Guam to be contingent on tangible progress towards the construction of a Futenma Replacement Facility (FRF) for U.S. Marine air assets remaining on Okinawa. To date, there has been no tangible progress on the construction of the FRF.  As a result of these developments, we believe a pause in further obligations of either U.S. or Government of Japan funds is reasonable pending a study of the strategy and U.S. force posture in the Pacific area of responsibility.

The programs that McCain singles out for cuts may have been items thrown in by Congress to sweeten the pot and mask the bitter taste of the build up. It seems to follow a similar pattern to military-funded, non-military earmarks in Hawai’i.

U.S. and Japan may cut funding for base relocation in Okinawa and Guam

There’s been a lot happening related to the Defense Authorization Act.  The fiscal crisis is finally resulting in some cuts to the military budget.   But the Senate approved inclusion of language authorizing the detention of U.S. citizens.

However, regarding the military base realignment in Okinawa and Guam, there have been some positive developments.  It looks like the U.S. Congress will cut the funding for the relocation of U.S. Marines from Futenma to Guam.   This would be welcome news for the peace movements in Okinawa and Guam.

Mainichi Shimbun reports:

The U.S. Senate and House of Representatives agreed Monday to cut from the annual spending bill for fiscal 2012 through next September the entire $150 million funding requested by the government for the planned relocation of some 8,000 U.S. Marines from Okinawa in Japan to Guam.

The Marianas Variety reports that Japan has also cut its contribution to the base realignment costs:

Following a contentious decision from U.S. Congress that slashed funding for Guam’s military buildup, the Japanese government has announced it too will cut expenses for the planned realignment of U.S. troops from Okinawa to Guam.

The Mainichi Daily reported yesterday that the Japan Defense Ministry and Finance Ministry plan to reduce funding allocated for the relocation of 8,000 U.S. Marines from about ¥52 billion ($667 million) to just ¥10 billion ($128 million) for Fiscal Year 2012.

The announcement comes on the heels of U.S. Congress concluding negotiations on the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act, or NDAA, that freezes significant funding for the Guam military buildup.

Even Nobuteru Ishihara, Secretary General of the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP), the conservative, opposition party acknowledged the political realities in Okinawa have made the base expansion in Henoko very difficult.  In remarks to the Hudson Institute, Ishihara deflected from the Futenma controversy, saying that the collapse of the base realignment agreement is “not the main issue” and that the two countries should instead focus on the continuation the U.S.-Japan Security Alliance.    Although the LDP maintains that the agreement to relocate Futenma to Henoko should proceed, Ishihara admitted that in Okinawa gubenatorial campaign LDP incumbent candidate Governor Nakaima adopted an anti-base stance and that the LDP had to “accept local opinion.”

But, let’s not celebrate too fast.  Mainichi Daily News also reports that Michael Schiffer, deputy assistant secretary of defense for East Asia, told Ishihara that funding for the relocation could be rescued if Japan follows through on its environmental assessment of the “rape” of Henoko:

Schiffer said it is possible for Congress to be flexible on funding to move the Marines to Guam — a plan linked to relocating the U.S. Marine Corps’ Futenma Air Station to the Henoko district in Nago from a densely populated area of Ginowan, both in Okinawa Prefecture — if the Japanese government goes through with its plan to submit to Okinawa by the end of this year an environmental assessment report for the relocation.

The winds of trade

UHM prof, Craig Santos Perez wrote this powerful letter to the editor of the Marianas Variety. Also see Craig’s poem at the Moana Nui conference:

The winds of trade

Thursday, 08 December 2011 00:16 Letter to the Editor

THE northeast trade winds brought Magellan to Guåhan on his quest to trade with China (for silk, tea and porcelain). We became a fueling stop on the Manila Galleon trade route between Acapulco and Manila. With Spanish missionization, our souls were also traded.

To protect these material and spiritual trade routes from other European traders, the Spanish militarized Guåhan, building 14 military structures between 1671 and 1835. The Chamorro-Spanish War began in 1671. U.S. corporate trade interests in the Caribbean, Pacific, and Asia spurred the Spanish-American War of 1898. After the war, Puerto Rico, Guam and the Philippines were annexed by the United States, traded from one colonizer to another.

The “Insular Cases” that decided our fate also involved trade. In DeLima v Bidwell (1901), the DeLima Sugar Company sued New York City for charging tariffs on sugar from Puerto Rico. In Downes v Bidwell (1901), S.B. Downes & Company sued New York City for charging tariffs on oranges from Puerto Rico. Goetze v United States (1901) challenged tariff law on goods from Hawai’i (annexed after the Hawaiian kingdom was overthrown by U.S. military-backed corporations). In Fourteen Diamond Rings v United States (1901), an American who purchased 14 diamond rings from the Philippines refused to pay tariffs. The plaintiffs in these cases argued tariffs were illegal since all the countries they imported from were annexed, hence they were no longer “foreign countries.”

Annexation was a free trade strategy, orchestrated by U.S. corporations and protected by the U.S. military. While the Spanish traded crucifixes for Chamorro souls, the U.S. traded flags for Chamorro bodies. More than 600 Chamorro men enlisted as mess attendants during the U.S. Naval period. Of course, our bodies were inspected and vaccinated first.

After World War I, Japan gained control over trade in other parts of Micronesia. When Japan occupied Guåhan during World War II, we were incorporated into the “Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere.” Again, we were traded from one colonizer to another.

When the U.S. re-occupied Guahan, we were traded once again. Then the Guam Organic Act of 1950 traded U.S. citizenship for more Chamorro bodies. Approximately 3,700 Chamorros enlisted by 1971. The children of the Organic Act became the soldiers of the Vietnam War. Their children are now exported by a new breed of traders: military recruiters.

It is not a coincidence the military buildup on Guåhan was announced in 2005/2006. It was the same time the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) – a group of world leaders and global CEOs (Big Sweatshops, Big Pharmaceutical, Big Military Contractors, Big Oil, Big Agriculture, Big Mining, Big Banking) – began pushing the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) Agreement, a NAFTA-like free trade agreement for our region. Of course, “free trade” means eliminating tariffs, labor unions, fair wages, health benefits, job security, safety standards, and environmental regulations.

It is not a coincidence the military buildup on Guåhan was approved before the 2011 APEC meeting was held here in Honolulu.

Will we trade our children to the military recruiters? Will we trade our economic sovereignty for commissary privileges? Will we trade our ancestral burial grounds for a museum? Will we trade the innocence of a 12-year-old Chamorro girl for the sexual violence of 8,000 U.S. Marines?

Will we trade our culture for tourists from Russia and China? Will they trade our “Native Inhabitant Vote” for a “Haole-Always Vote?”

Will we trade the scent of the ocean for the scent of U.S. dollar bills?

Corporate trade and military interests have been controlling our destiny since the 16th century. Will we continue to trade away our future?

Craig Santos Perez,
poet, professor
Honolulu, Hawai’i

Occupy APEC with Aloha

Christine Ahn wrote an brilliant article in FPIF on the Moana Nui conference and peoples’ resistance to the APEC neoliberal – militarization agenda.   I quote liberally from the article below.  You should read the full article here.

“The time has come for us to voice our rage,” the Hawaiian artist Makana sang as he gently strummed his slack-key guitar. “Against the ones who’ve trapped us in a cage, to steal from us the value of our wage.”

Makana wasn’t serenading the Occupy movement; rather his audience included over a dozen of the world’s most powerful leaders, including President Obama and China’s Premier Hu Jintao, at the world’s most secure, policed, and fortified event: the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) dinner in Hawaii.

[…]

Makana, however, wasn’t the only one voicing his outrage during the APEC summit. As government and corporate leaders from 21 Asia-Pacific economies plotted how to expand a global free trade agenda, civil society activists from throughout the Asia Pacific gathered across town at the Moana Nui (the Great Pacific Ocean) conference to discuss pressing issues facing people and the planet, such as climate change, income inequality, and militarization of the region.

Organized by Pua Mohala I Ka Po and the International Forum on Globalization (IFG), scholars, activists, policy analysts, lawyers, labor union leaders, practitioners, and artists traveled from Guam, Marshall Islands, Palau, Tonga, Fiji, Micronesia, New Zealand, Australia, Rapa Nui, Samoa, Japan, Siberia, Okinawa, Philippines, South Korea, Vanuatu, and the United States.

[…]

What’s significant is what preceded and then followed Obama’s China bashing. Ahead of the summit, both State Secretary Hillary Clinton and Defense Secretary Leon Panetta outlined the United States’ expanded role in the Asia-Pacific. In “America’s Pacific Century,” an article in Foreign Affairs, Secretary Clinton writes that the United States will “substantially increase investment—diplomatic, economic, strategic and otherwise—in the Asia-Pacific region.” Defense Secretary Leon Panetta also echoed Clinton on his last trip to Asia, where he promised greater U.S. military presence throughout the Asia-Pacific—that is, more than the 300-plus U.S. bases that have already been there for over half a century.

After APEC, President Obama visited Australia to announce the arrival of 250 U.S. marines to northern Australia next year, with the eventual buildup to reach 2,500. “The goal, though administration officials are loath to say it publicly,” writes Mark Landler of the New York Times, “is to assemble a coalition to counterbalance China’s growing power.” Although Washington is posing China as a military threat, the reality is that in 2010, the United States spent $720 billion on its military, compared with China’s $116 billion, and it’s the United States that has over 300 military bases in the Asia-Pacific, whereas China has none.

Moana Nui: The Alternative to APEC

Moana Nui brought together several social movements—the indigenous and native communities fighting for sovereignty with activists working to stop corporate globalization and militarism. It was significant to be gathering in Hawai’i, a once-sovereign nation whose Queen Lili’uokalani was overthrown by American gunboat “diplomacy” in 1893. Moana Nui opened with a daylong conversation among indigenous and native communities from throughout the Pacific. This was an important reminder of the United States’ long history of stealing indigenous peoples’ lands, without treaties, without democratic process. Moana Nui participants also reframed the Pacific in aquatic terms as the “liquid continent” instead of the continental approach used by hegemonic powers.

Their voices were soon joined by those who have been organizing and resisting against the onslaught of trade liberalization and militarization, the new and more subtle face of colonialism. Moana Nui participants shared how transnational corporations, empowered by free trade and structural adjustment policies, have destroyed local economies, cultural properties, natural resources, and ultimately the sovereignty and self-sufficiency of communities. Jane Kelsey, Professor of Law at the University of Auckland, warned that the TPP will further impact domestic policy and regulation and “give more ammunition to corporations to challenge governments,” by granting foreign investors stronger intellectual property rights and further facilitating corporate global supply chains.

The corporate-led free trade agenda, however, needs the military to secure its profits. Kyle Kajihiro of Hawaii Peace and Justice reminded the audience of Thomas Friedman’s classic quote, “The hidden hand of the market will never work without a hidden fist—McDonald’s cannot flourish without McDonnell Douglas, the designer of the F-15. And the hidden fist that keeps the world safe for Silicon Valley’s technologies is called the United States Army, Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps.” The military has gone hand-in-hand with free trade by forcing open new markets for investment and new natural resources for exploitation (let’s not forget Iraq). Although it may allow for the safe and secure transport of vital natural resources such as oil and natural gas, the military is there to project force, a lethal force that could intervene militarily if U.S. interests were compromised.

[…]What was clear during Moana Nui was that the peoples of the Asia-Pacific refuse to fall victim to the growing arms race between the United States and China. Echoing a proverb widely known in the Pacific, Gerson warned, “When the elephants are battling or making love, it’s the ants that get squashed.” Activists from Guam and Okinawa shared how the decades-long presence of U.S. military bases had destroyed their livelihoods, culture, and sovereignty, but also how their organizing has led to victories, such as delaying the transfer of 8,000 U.S. marines from Okinawa to Guam, and mass protests that brought nearly 100,000 Okinawans to the streets to protest the transfer of U.S. bases within Okinawa.

[…]

The final sessions of Moana Nui carried a clear message: the only way to address these challenges to sovereignty is to fundamentally roll back the conditions and laws imposed by FTAs, the WTO, and structural adjustment. As Walden Bello put it, “We need to de-globalize economies instead of being subordinated to free trade and global markets if we want to achieve food security, human livelihoods and ecological sustainability.”

[…]

The final declaration that emerged out of Moana Nui united the struggles of those who traveled across the great Pacific Ocean. “We invoke our rights to free, prior and informed consent. We choose cooperative trans-Pacific dialogue, action, advocacy, and solidarity between and amongst the peoples of the Pacific, rooted in traditional cultural practices and wisdom.”

The declaration also included a Native Hawaiian prophesy which echoes the principles of the Occupy movement: E iho ana o luna, E pi’i ana o lalo, E hui ana na moku, E ku ana ka paia. “That which is above shall be brought down, that which is below shall rise up, the islands shall unite, the walls of our foundation shall stand.” E mau ke ea o ka aina i ka pono. “Forever we will uphold the life and sovereignty of the land in righteousness.”

Navy will re-evaluate selection of Pagat for firing range

In a win for opponents of the Navy buildup on Guam, the Pacific News Center reports that the Navy has agreed to do a supplementary environmental impact statement for a proposed live fire training facility in Guam:

The national trust for historic preservation, The Guam Preservation trust and We Are Guahan filed a suit against the Navy in attempts to stop them from going forward with their plans to use Pagat as a firing range complex. The crux of the plaintiffs argument is that the Navy did not adequately evaluate or consider all of the alternative sites that could’ve been used as a firing range complex. A thorough evaluation of all potential sites is required by the National Environmental Policy Act or NEPA.

[…]

Back on June 17th Hawaii district court judge Leslie Kobayashi denied without prejudice DOD’s request for a stay in the lawsuit. The Navy then filed a motion to dismiss for a lack of jurisdiction. However, before the hearing on the motion to dismiss which was scheduled for November 30th the Joint Guam Program Office Director Joe Ludovici filed today’s declaration in essence agreeing to redo the entire firing range selection process which could result in the selection of an entirely new site. This declaration from ludovici is expected to result in an order from Judge Kobayashi instructing the Navy to go ahead and conduct a supplemental environmental impact statement.

Read the declaration by JGPO Director Joseph Ludovichi. However, it should be noted that a win under NEPA does not stop the project outright.  After reviewing alternatives for its proposed firing range, the Navy could choose a different location, or it could choose the same location.