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?

Army ‘convenant’ with Native Hawaiians – a $500,000 publicity stunt

The Army is trying to buy supportive Native Hawaiians who will sign their covenant for their public relations campaign.  It would all be funny if it weren’t so sad that some would stand with the Army in their strategy to counter resistance movements in Makua and elsewhere.  After spending a half-million dollars for a ‘facilitation’ contract to garner Native Hawaiian support, this covenant turned out to be an expensive piece of paper with no substance.   It will be interesting to see if the Hawaiians who signed the Army covenant will be trotted out when protests heat up against renewed training at Makua.

>><<

http://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/Global/story.asp?S=12200459

Army signs Native Hawaiian covenant

Posted: Mar 24, 2010 6:02 PM Updated: Mar 24, 2010 6:02 PM

WAIKIKI (HawaiiNewsNow) – The Native Hawaiian community and the military have often been at odds over the use of land across the islands. But Wednesday, representatives from both signed a promise to work together.

It’s called the Native Hawaiian Covenant, a simple one-page statement along with six goals designed to heal the hard feelings between the two groups.

The Royal Order of Kamehameha started the ceremony with an offering at the Kukalepa Memorial at Fort DeRussy. The memorial stands in honor of maoli killed in battles. After the playing of the Star Spangled Banner and Hawaii Ponoi, members of the army and the Native Hawaiian Community stepped forward to sign the covenant.

It states the army will work to protect and preserve the fragile environment of the islands, as well as keep a dialogue open with Native Hawaiians while meeting the military’s missions.

One development is already planned at Makua Valley. The leeward Oahu training ground has been the center of several battles from groups who say military action there is destroying cultural sites and living species

“Through funding obtained from Senator Daniel Inouye’s office, we are creating a visitor’s center at the Makua Military reservation that will provide a location to describe the history of the valley and the rare cultural artifacts and unique plants and animal life located in that beautiful valley,” said Maj. Gen. Michael Terry, the Commanding General of the U.S. Army Hawaii. “We encourage people to visit Makua and fully support cultural access events and activities there.”

“It is the responsibility of the army and other other branches of service to safeguard us from unwarranted aggression,” said Neil Hannahs, a Kamehameha Schools Land Manager and member of the Native Hawaiian Advisory Council formed for this covenant. “The Kanaka Maoli advisory council recognizes these circumstances, and strives through this covenant to respect the importance of host culture needs and values while also recognizing the contribution of the military’s presence in ensuring our security and freedom.”

The covenant ceremony ended with hula, and the planting of an ulu to symbolize a new beginning.

Here is the complete text of the Native Hawaiian Covenant:

US Army-Hawaii’s Covenant with Native Hawaiians

We recognize that…

…The Native Hawaiians are nâ kanaka ôîwi Hawaii…the aboriginal peoples of Hawai’i.

…Native Hawaiian’ cultural and historical experiences are shaped by the land and surrounding ocean…that as the Army maintains and uses the land of Hawai’i, it is mindful to protect and preserve this fragile environment and ensure that what remains is a meaningful legacy for future generations.

We are committed to:

Providing sustainable installation support and services for Joint War fighters, our Army Families, and the military community that meets current and future mission requirements, safeguards human health, improves quality of life and enhances the natural environment;

Providing proactive dialogue with Native Hawaiians to ensure the meaningful exchange of information and to enable sound, informed decisions by the Army that respects the legacy of the Native people of Hawai’i while meeting the mission and goals of the Army;

Building a partnership between the Native Hawaiian community and the US Army, a relationship that promotes mutual cooperation, understanding and enhances the standing of each within the community;

We are committed to a mutually beneficial relationship between Native Hawaiians and the US Army, Hawai’i by:

– Enhancing education and understanding of Native Hawaiian issues, culture, and values to Army Soldiers and Families

– Enhancing education and understanding of Army values, culture and actions to the Native Hawaiian community

– Leveraging opportunities for proactive dialogue between the Army and Native Hawaiians

Army tries to patch the bridges it has blown up

The Army is trying to patch up the broken relations with the Kanaka Maoli community through a concerted public relations and counter organizing campaign. They have hired Annelle Amaral to be a Native Hawaiian liaison to organize a Native Hawaiian front supportive of the Army’s activities in Hawai’i.  She is quoted as saying:

“The relationship between Native Hawaiians and the military becomes increasingly hostile as the years progress. Enough already. It’s time for us to learn to work on building bridges instead of blowing them up.”

Um, the only ones blowing things up is the military.  The activists are actually trying to stop the destructive activities of the military.  Hawai’i did not invade the U.S., take American land or destroy American sacred places.   Ms. Amaral needs to stop perverting the history of the U.S. military’s oppressive role in Hawai’i and start supporting her own people who stand up to defend the culture and land.

>><<

http://www.kitv.com/news/22948373/detail.html

Native Hawaiians, Army Sign Covenant

Agreement Aims For Better Relations

Dick Allgire KITV 4 News Reporter

HONOLULU —

U.S. Army officials signed a covenant with Native Hawaiians Wednesay, which they hope will bring greater understanding, more dialogue, and better relations. A ceremony for the covenant signing was held on the lawn at Fort DeRussy in Waikiki. It’s an attempt by the U. S. Army to mend fences with the Native Hawaiian community.

Many Native Hawaiians blame the Army for its role in the overthrow of their kingdom, and with modern issues like the live fire training at Makua Valley, the relationship between Native Hawaiians and the military has been contentious.

“The relationship between Native Hawaiians and the military becomes increasingly hostile as the years progress. Enough already. It’s time for us to learn to work on building bridges instead of blowing them up,” said Hawaiian activist Annelle Amaral.

The covenant promises a mutually respectful attitude, more dialogue, and preservation of culturally sensitive areas.

“We are creating a visitors center at the Makua military reservation which will provide a location to describe the history of the valley and the rare cultural artifacts, and plants located in that beautiful valley,” said Maj. Gen. Michael Terry.

As Hawaiian and military leaders signed the covenant the Hawaiians at the ceremony made it clear they don’t represent all Native Hawaiians. They did stress the importance of good relations with the Army.

“To respect the importance of host culture needs and values, while also recognizing the contribution the military presence makes in assuring our security and freedom,” said Neil Hannahs, a Native Hawaiian Advisory Council member.

Army and some Native Hawaiians to sign a symbolic accord

Is this the product of the Army’s $500,000 public relations campaign targeting the Native Hawaiian community: a photo opportunity with some Native Hawaiians saying that they support the Army in Hawai’i?   Last summer the Army conducted an elaborate public relations campaign flying Native Hawaiian leaders by helicopter into Makua valley to demonstrate its commitment to Native Hawaiian cultural sites and practices.  As you can read in their “strategic communications” plan for Makua, the Army deemed the publicity event a success.

>><<

http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/20100323/BREAKING01/100323049/Army++Native+Hawaiian+community+signing+symbolic+accord+tomorrow

Updated at 2:40 p.m., Tuesday, March 23, 2010

Army, Native Hawaiian community signing symbolic accord tomorrow

Advertiser Staff and News Reports

The Army tomorrow will sign a first-of-its-kind “Native Hawaiian Covenant” with representatives from Native Hawaiian organizations in an effort to improve a sometimes contentious relationship.

The agreement will be signed at 12:30 p.m. at Fort DeRussy.

“The covenant recognizes that Hawai’i’s rich cultural and historical experiences are shaped by the land and surrounding ocean,” said Maj. Gen. Michael J. Terry, commanding general, 8th Theater Sustainment Command. “We acknowledge that the Army has the responsibility of being good stewards for the lands we maintain and that we must be mindful to protect and preserve this fragile environment for future generations.”

The Army said the pledge is a symbolic accord between the Army and the Native Hawaiian community “signifying the commitment to forging a stronger relationship of cooperation, appreciation and understanding of Hawai’i’s native culture and resources.”

The agreement also recognizes the Army’s role in Hawai’i and the soldiers who are a part of the local community.

“We firmly believe that it is possible to protect Hawai’i’s precious cultural and natural environmental resources while still meeting the mission and goals of the Army,” said Matthew T. Margotta, commander of U.S. Army Garrison Hawai’i. “The covenant outlines our pledge to do just that.”

The Army and Native Hawaiians have clashed in the past over the Army’s use of Makua Valley for live-fire training and the decision to bring the Stryker Brigade here.

To strengthen mutual understanding, the Army said the Native Hawaiian Advisory Council was created to guide the Army in working with the Hawaiian community.

The Distinguished Lecture Series also was created featuring prominent Native Hawaiian guest speakers who share the history, culture and customs of Hawai’i with soldiers and their families, the Army said.

Prior to tomorrow’s ceremony, members of the Royal Order of Kamehameha and Benevolent Societies will hold a traditional offering for fallen warrior ancestors.

Rev. William Kaina, the senior pastor of Kawaihao Church, will give the opening invocation, or pule.

Neil Hannahs, Kamehameha Schools and Bishop Estate land manager and a member of the Native Hawaiian Advisory Council, will be one of the guest speakers.

The ceremony will conclude with the ceremonial planting of an ulu tree representing the partnership.

“The ulu is one of the trees brought by canoe to Hawai’i by the first Hawaiians,” said Annelle Amaral, Native Hawaiian liaison to the Army.

Groups protest Office of Hawaiian Affairs over Makua burial issue

The purpose of the action reported in the Honolulu Adverstiser was to protest the Office of Hawaiian Affairs for allowing the Army to desecrate sites in Makua. The demonstration was led by  representatives of families with ties to Makua valley.  This is distinct from the efforts of Hui Malama o Makua and Malama Makua.

>><<

http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/20100305/BREAKING01/100305020/Protesters+gather+outside+OHA+over+Army+plan+on+Makua+Wahipana

Updated at 11:23 a.m., Friday, March 5, 2010

Protesters gather outside OHA over Army plan on Makua Wahipana

Advertiser Staff

Protesters are gathering this morning outside the Office of Hawaiian Affairs building to challenge a recent plan by the Army to excavate “recently discovered” sacred burial complexes in Makua Wahipana and allow visitor access to the site.

The protest, until 10:30 a.m., is being led by Alika Poe Silva, leader of the lineal descendants of those buried in Makua Valley. “The Army wants to exterminate and obfuscate our concerns and the integrity of the Kane temples in Makua Wahipana,” Silva said in a statement.

The protesters say that OHA and Hui Malama have agreed to the Army plan despite the concerns of the lineal descendants and that they will be requesting a legal analysis and opinion from the Hawaii Supreme Court.

Akaka Bill in trouble?

The so-called Akaka Bill, which would establish Native Hawaiians as a federally recognized native tribe under U.S. law and powers, has been strongly opposed by the Hawaiian Sovereignty movement.   The bill would place Native  Hawaiians under the Department of Interior and effectively extinguish claims to land and independence.   The bill would also exempt the U.S. military from any claims that could be brought by Native Hawaiians, say for the illegal taking of Hawaiian national lands. Republicans and racist anti-Native Hawaiian groups also oppose the bill, but for different reasons.

While progressive activists oppose the  anti-gay politics of the author of the following article, he provides a good summation of recent events that may have set back the Akaka Bill.

>><<

AKAKA BILL FALTERS
by Leon Siu
February 5, 2010



The Akaka Bill is in big trouble. Earlier this week, Republican Senator Jim DeMint placed a ‘hold’ on the bill, which in essence freezes the bill from moving forward. This is the newest setback in a series of catastrophic hits over the past six weeks that took the bill from certainty of passage by Christmas, to certainty of passage by February, to being dead in the water.

How did this happen? Let’s go back about eight weeks…the Akaka Bill was literally days away, closer than it’s ever been, to passing…

AKAKA BILL – SNEAK ATTACK PROTEST
Monday, December 14, 2009, independence protesters assembled at the corner of Beretania and Punchbowl to protest an attempt by Hawaii’s US senators Daniel Akaka and Daniel Inouye to sneak the Akaka bill into one of the large US federal appropriations bills while congress and the nation were distracted by the epic battle over the huge healthcare reform bills.

INOUYE’S DENIAL
Senator Inouye in Washington, D.C. hurriedly issued a strong denial, but it was way over the top, like that of someone caught with his hand in the cookie jar. No one believed his denial as everyone knows sneaky back-door deals is his specialty, his modus operandi.

STATE WITHDRAWS SUPPORT
Our SNEAK ATTACK protest triggered inquiries by Governor Lingle, and uncovered a scheme (brokered by Robin Danner) between Akaka and the White House to amend the Akaka bill in two days. State Attorney General, Mark Bennett, sent a scathing letter to Akaka and the members of the house and senate committees, strongly objecting to the unexpected changes and withdrawing the state’s support of the bill. He also suggested that public hearings be held in Hawaii before Congress takes further action on the bill. This constituted a major blow to the Akaka bill, as the State of Hawaii is the most vital player in the scheme of things.

OBAMA ASKS QUESTIONS
The demand for ‘congressional-hearings-in-Hawaii’ grew to a clamor coming from many diverse quarters. Even President Obama caught the hint from protestors at the entrance to his vacation compound while in Hawaii over the holidays. Of course it was hard to miss the huge banners and signs for ‘congressional hearings in Hawaii.’ Sources tell us that upon returning to DC, the White House asked questions about why there had not been hearings in Hawaii.

OHA CAUGHT OFF GUARD
Apparently the Office of Hawaiian Affairs was also caught off guard by the amendments. OHA was strangely silent about the crisis for quite some time. Eventually OHA responded with yet another dog-and-pony TV forum. Their purpose? To squelch the growing demands for congressional hearings in Hawaii and assure everyone that everything was still on track. The OHA show was unbelievably shameful and pathetic.

[Ironically, the day of OHA’s televised forum hyping the Akaka Bill, Senator Akaka was on Maui holding a “public hearing” for Maui veterans for a proposed vet complex (as they deservedly should get). This insult by Senator Akaka (the vets get a hearing, Hawaiians don’t) has not been lost on the people of Hawaii.

CONGRESSIONAL SUPORTERS CAUGHT OFF GUARD
Co-sponsors of the bill like Alaskan Senator Lisa Murkowski, were also kept in the dark about the amendments. Murkowski has hedged her support.

INOUYE’S DAMAGE CONTROL FALLS FLAT
Trying to regain composure, Inouye arrogantly tells the press that the governor’s balk was just a matter of miscommunication and that he would get it straightened out over the holidays, and the bill will pass by mid February.

OHA and STATE TEAM UP
On January 20, the State AG and OHA submitted a list of 30(!) changes they would like to see made to the Akaka Bill, in essence crippling any chances of it being passed any time soon, certainly not “by mid-February.”

SHIFTS IN SENATE KILLS BILL
The surprise upset by Scott Brown in Massachusetts left Democrats in the US Senate one short of the 60 needed for a super majority to dislodge a ‘hold’ or stop a ‘filibuster.’ Sure enough, Senator Jim DeMint placed a hold on the Akaka bill. For all intents and purposes, the bill is dead.

INOUYE/DANNER PLOT EXPOSED
One of the bonuses of the last six weeks is that the long, unholy alliance between Inouye and the Danner sisters has been exposed. The last-minute amendments (that caused the eventual collapse of the bill) would have contracted CNHA (the Danner’s non-profit corporation) to be the interim administrator of the Native Hawaiian tribe, until such time that negotiations were ever completed for the creation of a Native Hawaiian Governing Entity.

In a supreme display of poor judgment, Robin Danner has been sent out into the Hawaiian community to put out the wildfires of growing opposition to the Akaka bill. But Hawaiians are ma’a to what’s going on and Robin’s presence is like pouring gasoline on the flames. The more she tries to extinguish the fires, the larger the conflagration gets.

###

JHSV / Strykerferry invasion of the Pacific?

More information on the proposed stationing of Joint High Speed Vessels in Guam, Hawai’i, San Diego and/or Seattle.   The Army is currently conducting scoping on a Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement for stationing of these military fast transport vessels.   In Hawai’i a grassroots resistance stopped the Hawaii Superferry, a JHSV disguised as a civilian ferry,  through legal and direct action.  Proponents of the Hawaii Superferry denied that there was any relationship between their project and the military.  Then it turned out that the Hawaii Superferry helped the Austal corporation leverage its position to compete for an win a major contract to build the JHSV based on the same design.  Activists who exposed the military agenda behind the Superferry were right all along.

From the Army Environmental Command website: http://aec.army.mil/usaec/nepa/topics00.html

Joint High Speed Vessel

The Army intends to prepare a programmatic environmental impact statement in 2010 for the proposed stationing and operation of joint high speed vessels. The JHSV is a strategic transport vessel designed to support the rapid transport of military troops and equipment in the U.S. and abroad. All interested members of the public, including native communities and federally recognized Native American Tribes, Native Hawaiian groups, Guam Chamorro Groups, and federal, state, and local agencies are invited to participate in the scoping process for the preparation of this PEIS. Comments may be sent to the Public Affairs Office, U.S. Army Environmental Command, 5179 Hoadley Rd, Attn: IMAE-PA, Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD 21010-5401; (410) 436-2556; fax (410) 436-1693; e-mail USAEC NEPA.

Download the NEPA Notice of Intent here.

Testimony heard on Army’s DU permit application

Four petitioners argued that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) should force the Army to clean up depleted uranium (DU) contamination in Hawai’i, acccording to the Hawaii Tribune Herald.  According the the article, the Army admitted it had “no way of knowing how many rounds of depleted uranium were fired at Pohakuloa Training Area and that at least 714 rounds were shipped to Hawaii in the past.”  But they Army, with concurrence from the NRC, argued that the petitioners did not have standing to bring a challenge to the license.

>><<

Testimony heard on DU request

by Peter Sur

Tribune-Herald Staff Writer

Published: Thursday, January 14, 2010 7:09 AM HST

Group wants Army to clean up contamination

Four people urged a panel of judges to force the Army to clean up its depleted uranium-contaminated lands Wednesday.

During the videoconference hearing, which lasted more than five hours, an Army attorney acknowledged that there was no way of knowing how many rounds of depleted uranium were fired at Pohakuloa Training Area and that at least 714 rounds were shipped to Hawaii in the past.

But the Army also challenged the petitioners’ standing, or right to bring a complaint, and said that even if they did have standing they did not have any admissible complaints.

READ MORE…

http://www.hawaiitribune-herald.com/articles/2010/01/14/local_news//local02.txt

Testimony heard on DU request

by Peter Sur

Tribune-Herald Staff Writer

Published: Thursday, January 14, 2010 7:09 AM HST

Group wants Army to clean up contamination

Four people urged a panel of judges to force the Army to clean up its depleted uranium-contaminated lands Wednesday.

During the videoconference hearing, which lasted more than five hours, an Army attorney acknowledged that there was no way of knowing how many rounds of depleted uranium were fired at Pohakuloa Training Area and that at least 714 rounds were shipped to Hawaii in the past.

But the Army also challenged the petitioners’ standing, or right to bring a complaint, and said that even if they did have standing they did not have any admissible complaints.

The Army’s position was shared by attorneys for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, to the dismay of the petitioners.

The Army on Nov. 6, 2008, applied before the NRC for a license to possess and manage depleted uranium at nine -military installations, including Pohakuloa and Oahu’s Schofield Barracks.

Jim Albertini, Cory Harden, Isaac Harp and Luwella Leonardi are opposing the license. They contend that the weak radioactive material left over after enriched uranium is removed is toxic and harmful to humans when vaporized and inhaled.

The Army has said the DU impact zones are in restricted areas and are not a threat to the public. The three-judge Licensing Board heard arguments from the petitioners, the Army and the NRC.

In the 1960s, spotting rounds containing depleted uranium were shipped to Hawaii so troops could practice with the Davy Crockett Recoilless Rifle. The gun was designed to fire a small nuclear warhead against ground troops. The DU was later rediscovered at Schofield, and in 2007 at Pohakuloa.

Wednesday, the petitioners gathered in a small room on the third floor of the University of Hawaii at Hilo’s Mookini Library to argue their cases. They spoke by videoconference to the judges and attorneys for the Army and the NRC, who gathered in Rockville, Md.

About 10 people, friends of Albertini and Harden, watched the proceedings from a television set up just outside the room. The connection dropped several times.

Speaking first, Harden asked the Army to do a thorough search for “forgotten radioactive hazards” and said only 1,000 acres of the 51,000-acre impact area at Pohakuloa was adequately searched.

“If the military has nothing to hide,” said Albertini, a peace activist, “prove it by transparency which at present is terribly lacking.”

Harp and Leonardi both spoke of their heritage as Native Hawaiians. Leonardi lives in Waianae, Oahu, and discussed the situation at Schofield Barracks.

Kauanui: Understanding both versions of the Akaka bill

Understanding both versions of the Akaka bill

By J. Kēhaulani Kauanui

When the U.S. Congress resumes business later this month, the “Akaka bill” will be back on the table in both the House and the Senate. This controversial proposal, officially named The Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act, was first introduced by U.S. Senator Daniel Akaka (D-HI) in 2000. Since then it has gone through numerous revisions to appease conservative opposition, especially during George W. Bush’s presidency. But with the Obama administration in the White House, and Democrats holding the majority in Congress, the bill has a strong chance of passage. The Senate Committee on Indian Affairs passed a newly amended version on December 17, 2009, with changes developed by the Department of Justice in conjunction with the state Office of Hawaiian Affairs, The Council for Native Hawaiian Advancement, and the Native Hawaiian Bar Association meant to improve it. The day before, U.S. Congressman Neil Abercrombie had tried to pass the same heavily amended version of H.R.2314 in the House Committee on natural resources, but last minute letters of opposition from Hawaii’s Republican governor, Linda Lingle, prompted him to set aside the proposed revisions (no surprise that he backed off since he had already announced his plans to resign his seat next month to run for governor himself) and the committee passed the unamended version.

Although the House bill could be amended later to conform to the amended Senate version, the fact remains there are two different versions in the works. What difference does it even matter to those who oppose the Akaka Bill and federal recognition for Kanaka Maoli (Indigenous Hawaiians)?

The Senate version potentially gives the Native Hawaiian Governing Entity (NHGE) more power than the House version. In H.R.2314, Section 9, the bill titled “Applicability of Certain Federal Laws,” clarifies that certain laws pertaining to federally recognized Indian tribes would not apply to the NHGE, and they all happen to be the same laws that greatly benefit tribal nations. Perhaps the most important exclusion is that the NHGE would not be allowed to have the Secretary of the Interior take land into trust. This is important because only land held in trust by the federal government on behalf of tribal nations is allowed to be used as part of their sovereign land base where they can assert jurisdiction. Most notably, this section of the bill also states that “Nothing in this Act alters the civil or criminal jurisdiction of the United States or the State of Hawaii over lands and persons within the State of Hawaii.”

The Senate version does not make the same stipulation from the get go. S. 1011 states that the NHGE, the federal government, and the state “may enter into negotiations” that are “designed to lead to an agreement” addressing: land, governmental authority, the exercise of criminal and civil jurisdiction, and more. None of these are guaranteed in the bill-no land, no jurisdiction, no assets, no governmental power. They are all up for grabs (and we know who will grab what) once representatives of a NHGE sit down with the federal and state agents. There is no equal footing here; all negotiations must take place within the framework of U.S. federal law and policy with regard to Indian tribes.

This means that although S. 1011 seems better that H.R 2314 on the face of it, and Abercrombie says he wants to amend H.R. 2314 to make it identical to S. 1011, the outcome could end up looking the same either way, which is why there is substantial Kanaka Maoli opposition to the legislation.

The name of the bill itself perpetuates at lie. It’s called the “Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act” instead of “The Native Hawaiian Government Organization Act,” which misconstrues the government to government relationship the United States had with the Hawaiian Kingdom. Under the U.S. Constitution, the Hawaiian Kingdom was regarded as a foreign nation (and not an “Indian Tribe”) because the U.S. recognized the Kingdom as an independent sovereign state.

J. Kēhaulani Kauanui is an associate professor of American Studies and Anthropology at Wesleyan University in Connecticut. She is the author of Hawaiian Blood: Colonialism and the Politics of Sovereignty and Indigeneity (Duke University Press, 2008). Kauanui is the producer and host of a public affairs radio program, “Indigenous Politics: From Native New England and Beyond” on WESU, which is syndicated on five Pacifica radio affiliate stations across seven states. All past episodes are archived online: www.indigenouspolitics.com. Kauanui can be reached at: kauanui@hotmail.com. For more information, see: http://jkauanui.faculty.wesleyan.edu/

Kauanui: Pro-Independence Talking Points on the ‘Akaka Bill’

PRO-INDEPENDENCE TALKING POINTS ON THE AKAKA BILL

The Akaka Bill legislation, first introduced in the U.S. Congress in 2000 and now before Congress in two different bills (H.R. 2314 and S. 1011), proposes that the U.S. Government recognize a “Native Hawaiian governing entity” that is to be certified by the U.S. Department of the Interior in conformity with U.S. federal law and practice regarding Native American tribal nations. Why support a federally driven bill that serves both the state’s interests and wraps things up for the federal government that aims strangle our national claims under international law (i.e. the right to restore an independent nation)?

This bill must be rejected for the following reasons:

  • Our claims to independence under international law stem from the fact that our loss of self-determination at no time amounted to a legal termination of political sovereignty, which was not lost via conquest, cession or adjudication.
  • The historical harm the United States first committed in Hawai‘i in 1893 brought down, not a “Native Hawaiian governing entity” but the government of the independent State of Hawai‘i composed of Kanaka Maoli as well as non-Kanaka Maoli subjects. Consequently, the Kanaka Maoli people and other Hawaiian Kingdom heirs have, since that time, accumulated fundamental political and other claims against the United States under international law that the United States must recognize.
  • The bill attempts to sabotage the rightful return of our people to our status prior to 1893-98 by imposing on us a colonial U.S. “wardship” that is anchored in the U.S. judicial doctrine of the plenary power of Congress over Native American nations.
  • The U.S. apology of 1993 recognizes that “the indigenous Hawaiian people never directly relinquished their claims to their inherent sovereignty as a people or over their national lands to the United States, either through their monarchy or through a plebiscite or referendum.” Passage of the bill would mark the first time in history that we could be accused of acquiescing to the illegal U.S.-backed overthrow in 1893.
  • Proponents of the bill insist it will not foreclose our claims under international law, and not acknowledge how the United States asserts its plenary power to keep indigenous sovereigns both domestic and dependent. Moreover, these proponents depend on the Indigenous Peoples Model within the United Nations, whereas independence supporters opposed to the bill rely on the model of either De-Ocupation or Decolonization.
  • This is a FEDERALLY DRIVEN BILL that did NOT spring from our people. Locally, it has been DRIVEN BY OHA – A STATE AGENCY. Although there are Kanaka Maoli running OHA, it is still a STATE AGENCY working on behalf of the STATE’S INTERESTS. The trustees do not even have the mandate of the Kanaka Maoli people since they are ELECTED BY ALL STATE RESIDENTS (since 2000 when the ruling in Rice v. Cayetano found Hawaiian-only voting for OHA trustees unconstitutional).
  • Hawa