Tag: Native / Indigenous People

Posted on

Military junk pulled from Kalaeloa pond raises fresh concerns

 

COURTESY JOHN BOND Ordy Pond, off Tripoli Road near Coral Sea Road on the former Barbers Point Naval Air Station, is shown in a photo taken with former City Councilman Tom Berg in August of last year.

Some Native Hawaiian cultural practitioners and historians are protesting the Navy’s method of cleaning up unexploded ordnance at a sinkhole site within Kalaeloa (once the site of Barber’s Point Naval Air Station). The Honolulu Star Advertiser reports (“Military junk pulled from Kalaeloa pond raises fresh concerns” February 3, 2013):

The Navy said at least 300 bits of junk and ordnance-related material have been pulled out of or near Ordy Pond, a 10,000-year-old sinkhole and possible pre-contact fishpond on the former Barbers Point Naval Air Station that has come under scrutiny by Hawaiians, historians and state officials.

Controlled detonations will be used Monday on site to destroy some of the items, including MK-24 aircraft flares used to mark submarine locations; 1-pound “spotting” charges in 100-pound practice bombs; and a spotting charge in an MK-106 practice bomb, the Navy said.

Apparently, the Navy dumped all sorts of munitions and scrap into the pond:

According to a 2007 Navy study, Ordy Pond reportedly was used for the disposal of ordnance-related scrap from the late 1960s to the late 1970s.

But no detailed information about the types of ordnance disposed of was available, according to the Navy report. The study also said that during site surveys, the Navy found and removed flares and small arms ammunition, but no explosive ordnance was discovered.

[. . .]

During an ordnance survey in 1994, “they found a couple of unusual items they didn’t expect to find,” said Denise Emsley, a Naval Facilities Engineering Command Hawaii spokeswoman. “They found some flares, some flare dispenser cartridges, an inert bomb fin assembly. So bits and pieces of things that shouldn’t have been there.”

Emsley added that Ordy Pond was never used as a training area, “and the fact that this stuff was found (means) it was probably left there or dumped there incorrectly.”

I suppose this is how military valued Hawaiʻi.

One concern about the cleanup is the use of heavy equipment to remove mangrove and the detonation of munitions.  The ʻEwa plains have some of the most unique geological, biological and cultural formations in the Hawaiian islands.  Critics of the Navy’s actions fear that such activity will harm the cultural sites:

John Bond, an Ewa Beach historian, said Ordy Pond has become a “major destruction site” with all the heavy equipment work.

“This entire Ordy Pond project has all the appearances of way too much to spend with way too little documentation,” Bond said. “There could be very significant impacts to the pond water, underground karst system and very possible destruction of numerous yet undocumented archaeological sites — and even iwi kupuna burials.”

The work could have been done with chainsaws and machetes to better protect the pond environment, Bond said.

[. . .]

Both Bond and Michael Lee, a cultural descendant of Native Hawaiians buried in the area, question why an archaeological inventory survey was not conducted for the Ordy Pond site.

“How can you say you are protecting archaeological sites when you haven’t inventoried them?” Lee asked.

A May 5, 2011, letter from the state Historic Preservation Division to the Navy noted that the Ordy Pond project “area of potential effect” included 18 archaeological features and said an archaeological inventory survey would be “appropriate.”

The Navy said the project subsequently was revised to “avoid all archaeological resources,” so the survey was not done.

Bond said that “doesn’t appear to be the case at all,” adding, “In fact, the entire project has been greatly expanded into the most important and culturally sensitive area on the former base.”

Posted on

Employee of a “8(a) Native Hawaiian Organization” security firm sentenced for embezzlement

The Honolulu Star Advertiser reported “Woman sentenced for pocketing salaries of ‘phantom’ employees” (June 7, 2012):

A former employee of a Native Hawaiian organization that provides security guards at Pearl Harbor and other Navy facilities on Oahu is going to prison for nearly two years for putting “phantom” employees on the payroll and pocketing their salaries.

A federal judge sentenced Corinne Haunani Cabral Thursday to 21 months in prison for wire and mail fraud.

U.S. District Judge J. Michael Seabright also ordered Cabral, 57, of Kaneohe, to repay the Hana Group the $223,572 she stole from the company from June 2008 to July last year.

According to the Pacific Business News, a Hana Group subsidiary Hui O Ka Koa received the Pearl Harbor and NCTMS security contracts in 2005:

The U.S. Navy has outsourced the security of its Hawaii bases to a private company for the first time.

The contract marks a major shift in policy by the Navy as it moves to privatize some duties that are performed by sailors. Starting Feb. 1, sailors at Pearl Harbor, the naval magazine at West Loch and a communications center in Wahiawa were replaced at guard posts by officers from the private security firm.

Hui O Ka Koa Security of Honolulu, a Native Hawaiian-owned firm that is a joint venture of a local engineering firm and a Mainland conglomerate, was awarded the five-year deal worth $83 million.

The contract pays the company to guard five Navy bases: three in Hawaii, one in Maine and another in Connecticut, said Alvin H. Pauole, general manager of Hui O Ka Koa, which means “team of warriors.”

The two partners in the venture are Hana Engineering, an 8-year-old Native Hawaiian-owned firm in Honolulu, and Day & Zimmermann, a Philadelphia-based company whose subsidiaries include a large security services division that specializes in guarding nuclear, defense and power facilities.

Hana is the managing partner in the Hawaii portion of the contract, which was awarded without competitive bidding.

“It’s a single/sole-source contract,” Pauole said. “We marketed our team to the Navy, they were convinced we can do the job and they gave us the contract.”

Take note that one of the “experienced” partners in the venture is a company based in Philadelphia.  This has been a component of the Special 8(a) program, framed as “mentoring” for the native-owned company, but in many cases it has become a convenient way for military contractors to bypass competitive procurement by riding the Special 8(a) coattails of a native-owned company:

To qualify for bigger contracts, small firms like Hana are required to have an established company as a mentor. Day & Zimmermann is privately held, has annual revenue of $1.3 billion and employs 20,000, including about 3,000 in its security division.

Along with the two contracts to guard Navy bases, a $17.6 million contract was awarded to Hui O Hawaii Hale LLC on Wednesday for family housing maintenance.

Hui O Hawaii Hale LLC is a separate partnership of Day & Zimmermann and Hana Engineering.

“We needed them to go after larger military contracts, and they have been helpful to us,” Pauole said.

The Hana Group is one of a number of so-called Native Hawaiian Organizations (NHO), a federal definition under the Small Business Administration 8(a) minority and women owned business development programs.   For normal 8(a) set-aside programs, the federal contracts are competitively procured  and limited to maximum awards of $5.5 million for manufacturing contracts and $3.5 million for all other acquisitions. But there’s a special provision created for native-owned companies on the rationale that native governments and corporations have responsibility for economic development and have unique needs and challenges.

The Special 8(a) program allows sole-source (i.e. non-competitive awards) to Alaska Native Corporations, Indian Tribal corporations and most recently, Native Hawaiian Organizations.  There are no limits to the size of these non-competitive awards. Furthermore, native-owned companies may create unlimited subsidiaries that can also qualify for the program.  This has created a sort of Native-Military-Industrial complex that has grown immensely in Hawai’i in recent years.   In several reports to Congress, the Government Accounting Office expressed concerns over the lack of controls and oversight of this program:

Procuring agencies’ contracting officers are in need of guidance on how to use these contracts while exercising diligence to ensure that taxpayer dollars are spent effectively. Equally important, we stated, significant improvements were needed in SBA’s oversight of the program. Without stronger oversight, we noted the potential for abuse and unintended consequences.

Perhaps, more attention should be given to federal procurement trends that may be utilizing the sole-source contracting option with Super 8(a) firms to simplify their work, but at the same time creating a big loophole in accountability in federal contracting.  Also, more attention should be given to the “partnerships” between native corporations and large military contractors that may be simply business fronts for circumventing competition.   In this specialized marketplace of federal contracting, some enterprising native entrepreneurs have found ways to exploit their indigenous identity as an immaterial form of capital.  Indigenous identity as an exploitable resource, a competitive advantage over other businesses seeking federal contracts.   But the lingering question is “At what cost?”

Posted on

Helicopter training on Mauna Kea and Mauna Loa, Army-Native Hawaiian convenant and more military housing

The Army wants to conduct helicopter training exercises on Mauna Kea and Mauna Loa.   Jim Albertini of Malu ‘Aina issued the following call to oppose the Army’s High Altitude Mountainous Environment Training (HAMET) on the slopes of the sacred Mauna Kea and Mauna Loa.  The Army had conducted these helicopter training exercises in the past under temporary permits from the state.  Now they are seeking a regular and permanent right of access which would also affect the endangered Palila bird .  Recently, the Army had to move its helicopter training to Colorado, an existing high altitude training area, because the state required the Army to follow the law and complete an environmental review for its proposed actions which did not fit the Army’s schedule.  The Army has previously violated permits and laws by recklessly landing in the protected Mauna Kea Ice Age Reserve and in other locations where it was not allowed to train. The draft environmental assessment is now out and public comments are being accepted until August 21st:

More military training on Hawaii Island for wars of aggression: Speak OUT!

“…no significant direct, indirect, or cumulative impacts on natural resources…” !!! WHO SAYS? The people, plants, animals, the aina, air, water, etc. are all interconnected.  What effects one effects all. The impacts are not just physical, but cultural, psychological, and spiritual. The training proposed is all part of U.S. occupation and what the Nuremberg trials following WWII called the Supreme War crime –waging a war of aggression. We want to stop all these illegal wars.  We do not want the U.S. training anywhere to do to others what the U.S. has already done to Hawaii: overthrow and occupy its government and nation, desecrate its sacred sites, and contaminate its air, land, water, people, plants, and animals with a wide range of military toxins.  We want the U.S. to stop bombing Hawaii and clean up its opala (rubbish).  Justice demands an end to U.S. occupation and the restoration of the Hawaii nation.   And all of this being done on the slopes of the Sacred Mountains.  Akua weeps.

Jim Albertini

> From Hawaii’s OEQC July 23, 2011 “The Envornmental Notice”
> http://oeqc.doh.hawaii.gov/Shared%20Documents/Environmental_Notice/current_issue.pdf
> High Altitude Mountainous Environment Training Draft EA

> Permits:
> Right of Entry via Hawai’i Department of Land and Natural Resources, Division of Forestry and Wildlife Special Use Permit
> Proposing Agency:
> United States Army Garrison, Hawai’i (USAG-HI), 851 Wright Avenue, Wheeler Army Airfield, Schofield Barracks, Hawai’i 96857-5000. Contact: Mr. William Rogers (808) 656- 3075
> Approving Agency:
> Department of Land and Natural Resources Kalanimoku Building, 1151 Punchbowl Street, Honolulu, Hawai’i 96813. Contact: William J. Aila, Jr., (808) 587-0400
> Consultant:
> Portage, 1075 S. Utah Ave., Suite 200, Idaho Falls, ID 83402. (208) 419-4176
> Status: Anticipated Finding of No Significant Impact.
> 30-day comment period begins; comments are due on August 21, 2011.
> Send comments to the Proposing Agency and the Consultant
> The proposed action is to provide 90 helicopter pilots and crew 180 hours of high altitude training in October 2011 in preparation for deployment to Afghanistan to satisfy mandatory annual training requirements. The Army’s preferred alternative consists of flying to, hovering, and touch and go landings at three (3) landing zones (LZs) located on the slopes of Mauna Kea and three (3) LZs located on the slopes of Mauna Loa. Aircraft landing in the LZs would not be picking up or dropping off troops or supplies. Aircraft will be spending a minimal amount of time in the LZ areas, and ground time should not exceed 10 minutes per landing.
>
> Familiarity with this specialized high altitude environment is critical to save the lives of our 25th Combat Aviation Brigade aircrews and the Soldiers they transport when operating in support of Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan.
Based on careful review of the analysis and conservation measures set forth in the EA and consideration of public comments received to date, implementing the Preferred Alternative would result in no significant direct, indirect, or cumulative impacts on natural resources, cultural resources, water resources, recreational resources and other resources assessed in the EA. Implementing the Preferred Alternative is not a major federal or state action that would significantly impact the quality of the environment.

Meanwhile, the Army seems to be digging in for a longer stay.  In a press release “Native Hawaiian Covenant promotes partnerships”, the Army describes how it is spending a lot of money to cultivate a stable of Native Hawaiian “leaders” to support the military mission in Hawai’i and counter the opponents of military activities.   The Native Hawaiian liaison office functions as a cross between glorified hospitality program and counter insurgency asset:

Through the covenant, Army civilians and Soldiers new to the islands now receive an informative briefing on the Native Hawaiian people, history and culture. This critical information gives Army individuals an opportunity to learn the culture of the community around them and be sensitive to its customs.

In addition, Native Hawaiian cultural practitioners lead free Hawaiian workshops for those interested in learning about the different aspects of Hawaiian culture. Featured workshops include hula, ukulele, lei-making, Hawaiian legends, Hawaiian language, Hawaiian healing plants and coconut weaving.

“Positive responses from Soldiers and their families have been received through these briefings and workshops we offer,” said Annelle Amaral, Native Hawaiian liaison, USAG-HI. “We have found that it not only teaches the culture, but it provides an opportunity to spend time with their families and meet new friends. To be a part of this has been truly rewarding.”

A monthly “Ho olauna” bulletin is a resource for interested Army individuals, containing Hawaiian history, a featured Hawaiian word, upcoming Hawaiian events, happenings around town, a featured dining spot and volunteer opportunities. This resource keeps readers informed and offers opportunities for them to experience life outside the Army bases.

The program is also actively constructing its own list of “approved” Native Hawaiians that can be consulted to meet various federal requirements:

Through the covenant, the Army’s cultural and natural resources representatives are leading tours of the Kahuku Training Area and Makua Military Reservation for surrounding community members.

The program is even appropriating Kanaka Maoli concepts and mining the wisdom and reputation of elders to lend support to the military’s mission:

“Right now, we’re working on a ‘hanai’ concept, where we bring our young Army families and our elderly Hawaiian aunties and uncles together for a ‘talk-story’ session. This will fill the gap for one group (of people) who miss their families, and the other group (of people) who miss the opportunity to share life-lessons they’ve learned.” 

Apparently, military personnel stationed in Hawai’i are not getting the message about malama ‘aina.   Recently, fishermen and cultural practitioners at Ka’ena Point documented drunken and destructive military offroading.    As previously reported on this site, this is a recurring problem.   We recently did an ‘Olelo television program on the problem of military off-roading and the efforts to protect Ka’ena.

Military construction is also booming.  Lend Lease company recently won an extension of its contract to construct, refurbish and manage thousands of homes for military personnel.

Lend Lease has secured approval from the US Department of the Army for a US$168m (£103m) change to the scope of its Island Palm Communities project in Hawaii.

Lend Lease will now build more larger homes than previously planned, reflecting the changing needs of military service members and their families.

Island Palm Communities, a partnership between Lend Lease and the Army, is the largest residential privatisation project ever awarded by the US Army. The partnership will develop, design and construct 5,241 new homes, renovate 2,515 existing homes, and provide property and maintenance management services through to 2054.

Lend Lease group chief executive officer and managing director Steve McCann said that the increased work scope reflected Lend Lease’s collaborative working relationship with the US Army. “We continue to work very closely with our long term partner to bring quality homes to US Army service members and their families,” he said.

Posted on

Ainu and Okinawan Human Rights- United Nations Forum on indigenous issues

A coalition of Asian Indigenous Peoples advocacy groups delivered a Collective Statement to the United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues, in United Nations Headquarters, New York,
16-27 May, 2011, which brings up the issue of U.S. militarization in Okinawa (Henoko & Takae) < http://okinawabd.ti-da.net/e3421074.html>.    The groups utilized the U.N. Declaration on on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples to challenge the imposition of U.S. military bases on indigenous territories.   Chamorro activist and legal scholar Julian Aguon wrote a short article about how the Declaration applies to issues and problems facing Kanaka Maoli people in Hawai’i.

The statement addresses the failure of the Japanese government to recognize Ryukyuan/Okinawan people as an indigenous people and blasts the U.S. military bases in Okinawa as a form of discrimination against the Okinawan people:

Second, regarding the Ryukyuan/Okinawan people, the Government of Japan has not implemented the recommendations of the UN Human Rights Committee and the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, which call on the government to recognize Ryukyuan/Okinawan people as an indigenous people. As a result, as reported by UN Special Rapporteur Contemporary Forms of Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance, Doudou Diene, the heavy presence of the U.S. military bases in Okinawa remains as a form of discrimination against the people of Okinawa. At present, two new military bases construction plans are being carried out under the agreement between the governments of Japan and the U.S., despite the longtime opposition from local indigenous peoples’ communities.

One massive military base is being constructed in Henoko and Oura bay. While the International Indigenous Forum on Biodiversity (IIFB) expressed its concerns on this plan in the closing statement of the 10th Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD COP10) in Nagoya in 2010, the Government of Japan has ignored the concerns raised in the statement and is proceeding with the plan. Another military base, six new helipads, is being constructed in Yambaru forest, Takae district of the Okinawa island. In response to their protest, the Okinawa Defense Bureau, the local agency of the Government of Japan, has filed Strategic Lawsuit against Public Participation (SLAPP) against local indigenous community members.

The reluctance of the Japanese government to implement the UNDRIP at the local level violates Ainu and Okinawan rights to participate in the decision-making process. The authorization of the construction of the Industrial Waste Dumping Site in Mombetsu city, Hokkaido Prefecture, and the construction of military bases in Henoko and Oura bay and helipads in Takae, not only violates Article 29 of the UNDRIP but also seriously violates the indigenous peoples’ right to Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) which is clearly stated in Article 32. It also denies the important role of indigenous and local community to preserve bio-diversity as stipulated in Article 8(j) of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD).

The statement calls for:

1. We recommend the Government of Japan shall establish national and local systems in conjunction with indigenous peoples to obtain their free and informed consent prior to the approval of any project affecting their lands or territories and other resources, in accordance with the UNDRIP.
2. We recommend that the city government of Mombetsu shall respect Free, Prior and Informed Consent of the local Ainu community concerned, and to reconsider the authorization of the Industrial Waste Dumping Site.
3. We recommend that the Goverments of Japan and the U.S. immediately stop the construction of the military bases in Henoko and Oura bay as well as helipads in Takae and review the plans.
4. We request the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights and fundamental freedoms of indigenous people shall use his good office to directly intervene in the Government of Japan regarding the construction of the Industrial Waste Dumping Site in Mombetsu city, Hokkaido Prefecture, and the construction of military bases in Henoko and Oura bay and helipads in Takae, Okinawa Prefecture.

Jen Teeter wrote a great article about the issue on the Ten Thousand Things blog:

Wednesday, June 1, 2011

Ainu and Okinawan Human Rights- United Nations Forum on indigenous issues

The tenth session of the United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues convened at the United Nations Headquarters, New York from the 16th to 27th of May. Shimin Gaikou Centre (Citizens’ Diplomatic Centre for the Rights of Indigenous Peoples) vice president, Makiko Kimura, on behalf of her organization, Asia Indigenous Peoples’ Pact, Forest Peoples’ Programme, Citizens’ Network for Biological Diversity in Okinawa, No Helipad Takae Resident Society, and Mo-pet Sanctuary Network, submitted a collective statement to the forum.

These organizations urge the Japanese government to fully realize the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) and address human rights violations against the Ainu and Okinawan communities. Japan ratified UNDRIP in 2007, and subsequently recognized the Ainu people as the indigenous people of Japan, but does not recognize the indigeneity of the Okinawan people despite UN recommendations.

The report addresses how the government of Japan has violated Articles 29 and 32 of UNDRIP by authorizing projects which affect the lands and/or resources of indigenous peoples (including Okinawans) without “free, prior and informed consent” of the indigenous inhabitants. The report highlights a proposed industrial waste facility project in Monbetsu, Hokkaido, and the (de)construction which will result from the proposal of a new U.S. military base and helipads in Okinawa. The organizations request the direct intervention of the Special Rapporteur to the forum to halt further construction and ensure the establishment of a system by which the Ainu and Okinawans must provide free, prior, and informed consent before such projects are authorized.

READ THE FULL ARTICLE

Posted on

Hawaii fights release of details on drone contracts

Jim Dooley wrote an interesting article on watchdog.org about the proposed use of aerial drones to monitor harbors in Hawai’i as part of no-bid contracts awarded to Hawaiya Technologies.  Hawaiya is a military technology company owned by Paul Schultz. Schultz, formerly a Rear Admiral and commander of a fleet stationed in Okinawa, was demoted to captain when he retired from the Navy. He had come under investigation for allegations of adultery and fraud tied to a Navy research contracts scandal at the University of Hawai’i and the Pacific Missile Range Facility.

While in the Navy, the married Schultz allegedly had an affair with an Office of Naval Research program manager Mun Won Chang Fenton who helped to steer research funds and technology to Schultz’s ships outside of normal procurement channels.  Fenton later awarded several grants to University of Hawai’i professors for research related to missile defense systems.  She directed the UH researchers to hire technical personnel under the grant. These “directed hires” took their orders from Chang Fenton. Chang Fenton directed these personnel to write a large net-centric warfare technology contract proposal under the auspices of the Research Corporation of the University of Hawai’i (RCUH) and submit the proposal to Navy research programs that Chang Fenton helped to manage.  The Navy awarded RCUH a contract for its proposal named “Project Kai e’e”, to establish a military Pacific Research Center to serve as a conduit for federal military high technology funding.

Naval Criminal Investigation Service (NCIS) documents and other sources allege that the Schultz and Chang Fenton tried to use government funds to create jobs for themselves in the new Pacific Research Center.   The job announcement for Executive Director of the Pacific Research Center was posted on the bulletin board in the RCUH office for a few minutes.  After Schultz submitted his application the job announcement was taken down.  RCUH staff were directed by Chang Fenton to rate the applicant favorably.  Schultz was offered the job, but he never formally accepted it.  RCUH Executive Director Harold Masumoto suddenly sent a letter to the Office of Naval Research canceling the contract award.

Naval investigators were closing in. My theory is that someone may have tipped off Schultz and his co-conspirators, sending them scurrying for cover.

The Project Kai e’e scandal morphed into the proposed University Affiliated Research Center (UARC), a military classified research lab that met fierce protest by students, faculty and community groups in 2004 – 2006.  The really interesting part of the this sordid tale is that the various projects were earmarks from Senator Inouye.  Sources familiar with the scandal told me that the investigation went nowhere because it could have implicated four admirals and a senator.

As Dooley’s article suggests, Schultz seems to have found a new niche in the homeland security gold-rush.  But the proposed use of unmanned aerial drones to monitor harbors raises many issues of civil liberties, safety and propriety.   The contracts were awarded without any bidding.  The plans for aerial drones are proceeding without approval from the Federal Aviation Administration.  And details about the project are being kept from the public.

Could the no-bid contract have been awarded via Aina Kai, a Native Hawaiian Organization (NHO) established by Schultz and Chang Fenton (who are now married) in partnership with former Hawai’i governor John Waihe’e?  NHOs are given special preferences for federal contracting to receive contract awards without competition and without a limit on the size of the award.

High stakes government funding, exotic and dangerous military technologies and secrecy are a recipe for corruption.   The tsunami of military spending that was unleashed in the wake of the 9/11 attacks have brought with it a flood of corruption. Such is life in the military-industrial-political complex.

>><<

http://watchdog.org/8124/hawaii-fights-release-of-details-on-drone-contracts/

Hawaii fights release of details on drone contracts

Posted on January 28, 2011

BY JIM DOOLEY — The state and a private contractor are installing extensive new security and surveillance measures at harbors and shorelines that include planned use of unmanned aerial drones, according to public records.

Neither the contractor nor state officials have applied to the Federal Aviation Administration for necessary permission to deploy the unmanned aerial vehicles in civilian air space here.

Repeated requests for details about the plans and their status made to the state and its contractor have not been answered for more than a month.

Paul Schultz, chief executive of Hawaiya Technologies, the company installing the new security measures, refused to discuss his company’s shoreline security plans in general or the use of UAV’s in particular.

“You can go find out your story on your own,” Schultz said.

“This is not a friendly story,” Schultz continued. ”You’re coming after me. You can come after me by yourself. But don’t call me looking for information.”

State Department of Transportation and harbors division personnel did not respond to repeated requests for comment submitted by email, telephone and in-person since late last year.

Glenn Okimoto, nominated by Gov. Neil Abercrombie as director of the Transportation Department, and his harbors division deputy director, Randy Grune, have said a department response was being prepared.

Okimoto was head of the harbors division in 2007 and personally recommended award of the original $1.46 million non-bid Honolulu harbor security contract to Hawaiya Technologies, according to state purchasing records.

Some $1 million of the contract is paid with federal grant money and the remainder comes from the state.

Grune said three weeks ago the department was still researching “technical issues” about non-bid security contracts awarded to Hawaiya.

The UAV’s are described as an anti-terrorism tool in documents describing new security measures at Honolulu and Kalaeloa Harbors on Oahu under a 2009 contract awarded to Hawaiya Technologies.

Another non-bid contract award worth nearly $1 million to Hawaiya is planned for Kahului harbor on Maui and the contractor has proposed installing the same system on Kauai and the Big Island.

The jobs would include use of UAV’s to conduct surveillance flights in the congested skies above state harbors, which abut two international airports, a general aviation airfield and Hickam Air Force Base.

The drones can’t fly without an FAA “certificate of authorization” and the state has not applied for one, said Ian Gregor, FAA spokesman.

The drones cost $75,000 each, according to purchasing records posted at the state procurement office website.

The type of drones – there are many different designs being marketed now – and the number to be purchased are details that the state has redacted from contracting files.

Only two civilian government agencies in the country – one in Texas and one in Kansas – have applied for and received necessary certifications for use of the drones, which must be operated by licensed pilots from ground control stations, said Gregor.

The Texas aircraft would be used to patrol remote sections of the Mexican border and the Kansas drones would be flown at a UAV testing and training facility 30 miles outside of Wichita.

The FAA requires that civilian-operated airborne drones must also be tracked by either a ground spotter vehicle or a manned chase plane.

The American Civil Liberties Union has expressed concern about invasion of privacy issues raised by use of surveillance drones in other states and is monitoring the Hawaii plans.

“Use of ‘Unmanned Aerial Vehicles’ or ‘drones’ by law enforcement has a vast potential for abuse,” sad Daniel Gluck, senior staff attorney for ACLU Hawaii.

READ FULL ARTICLE

Posted on

Native Hawaiian-Owned Companies and the Militarization of Hawai’i

Jim Dooley wrote a revealing article for the Hawaii Reporter on the growth of Native Hawaiian Owned Companies (NHO) since the passage of legislation that gave them special preferences in federal contracting.  Under special provisions for Native American, Alaska Natives and Native Hawaiians, these NHOs can get no-bid, unlimited sized contract awards, nearly all of it related to military funding.   Here’s an excerpt:

A handful of Native Hawaiian-owned companies used federal contracting preferences authored by U.S. Sen. Daniel Inouye, D-HI, to land some $500 million in non-bid or reduced competition government work since 2005, according to federal purchasing records.

Officials, employees and partners of many of the same companies donated nearly $100,000 during the same period to the Inouye election campaign and $100,000 more to other members of Hawaii’s congressional delegation, files of the Federal Election Commission show.

Much of the contract work involved installation of computer and communications systems for the armed services. A wide range of other jobs have been performed, including security guard work, explosive ordinance disposal and even provision of mental health professionals for treatment of U.S. Marines at Camp Lejeune in North Carolina.

The article gives several specific examples of NHOs, including those associated with the Council for Native Hawaiian Advancement and their military contracting programs.

A note on the source: the Hawaii Reporter is a conservative-right news outlet that has opposed programs for Native Hawaiians, Hawaiian sovereignty in any form or federal spending on social programs.   DMZ-Hawai’i / Aloha ‘Aina usually disagrees with the editorial stances of the Hawaii Reporter on many of these issues. However, while our reasons may differ, we do agree with them on this point, that the public must be wary of the rise of NHOs in the context of corruption and lack of accountability in military pork barrel spending.  In our view, this system of NHO military contracting has increased Native Hawaiian dependency on and participation in a corrupt military-industrial complex.  In that way, NHOs promote the increasing militarization of Hawai’i.

In a perverse twist, Ken Conklin, known for his extreme anti-Native Hawaiian views, wrote a follow up editorial heavily drawing on original research by Hawaiian sovereignty activist and journalist Keala Kelly that lays out connections between NHOs, Alaska Native Corporations and leading proponents of the Native Hawaiian federal recognition bill.

Paul S. Schultz and Mun Won Chang (Fenton), a husband-wife team and two central figures in the Project Kai e’e/ Navy UARC scandal – a federal contracts fiasco involving the Navy, several high tech research programs at the Pacific Missile Range Facility, University of Hawai’i researchers and administrators and congressional earmarks by Senator Inouye – have recently turned up in the NHO fray.   It seems they have teamed up with former Governor John Waihe’e to form a NHO as a way to cash in on the Native Hawaiian military contracting bonanza. Their new entity is called Aina Kai Environmental.  But since neither Schultz nor Chang appear to have Native Hawaiian ancestry, Aina Kai with a Native Hawaiian principal appears to be a front for its partner company Hawaiya Technologies to access NHO for Super 8(a) contracts.

Recently the Army created a Native Hawaiian Advisory Council to counter community resistance to Army expansion plans. An example of how the military is using NHO contracting preferences to co-opt Native Hawaiians is a recent workshop sponsored by the Army Native Hawaiian Advisory Council to promote NHO military contracting opportunities.

The rise of “Tea Party” politics and the turning political tide in Washington D.C. may signal an end to the era of unbridled military earmarks in Hawai’i, at least temporarily.  The Honolulu Star Advertiser reports that “141 Hawaii earmarks worth $321 million were in the omnibus 2011 spending bill that recently died in the Senate.”  This could be an opportunity to imagine and work for more peaceful, just and sustainable economic alternatives for Hawai’i.

Posted on

“Pacific Integration” and What the Army really thinks about Native Hawaiians

According to a press release by the US Army Pacific Command is incorporating the 8th Army in Korea into its revised command structure.  (The full article is posted below)  They are calling this reorganization “Pacific Integration”.  It underscores the shifting center of gravity to the Asia Pacific region.   The article states:

Growing the force throughout the Pacific is another aspect of PI, that has “been below the radar the last several years,” Mixon said.

Below the radar?  Hardly.   The military expansion in Hawai’i and the Pacific region is a destructive and invasive force to the communities, cultural sites and sensitive environmental resources. Communitie have opposed the military expansion on nearly every front.  Nearly ten years ago, when groups in Hawai’i first became aware of plans to station the Stryker brigade in Hawai’i, the community voiced its opposition.  Despite years of hearings and testimonies, protests and litigation, the Army, backed by Hawai’i’s most powerful politicians imposed the Stryker brigade on Hawai’i. This resulted in a 25,000 acre land grab, the largest military expansion in Hawai’i since WWII.  This expansion is causing endless incidents of destruction of cultural sites and desecration of sacred sites including burials in the Lihu’e (Schofield) area.

In order to contain the growing opposition, the Army has undertaken counterinsurgency-type strategies to co-opt some Native Hawaiian leaders and neutralize opponents.  It spent $742,392 to hire a Native Hawaiian liaison to counter-organize Native Hawaiians into an advisory council to help facilitate the Army program in Hawai’i. Part of the stated purpose of the Native Hawaiian liaison contract is to:   “Enhance USAG-HI’s understanding of, and develop alternative solutions to, complex community issues, and provide advice on Native Hawaiian issues and concerns, and propose a way-ahead” and “Provide training or workshops to USAG-HI or Army personnel on Native Hawaiian issues and concerns.”

It seems that the Army did not get their money’s worth of sensitivity training:

army.mil-89982-2010-10-27-101009

Take a look at this photo of a racist spectacle put on by the Army at a recent conference.   The article states: “Hula dancers and musicians evoked Hawaii’s blend of native, European and Asian cultures.”

+++

http://www.army.mil/-news/2010/10/26/47163-pacific-integration-key-to-army-strategy/

Pacific Integration key to Army strategy

Oct 26, 2010

By David Vergun

WASHINGTON (Army News Service, Oct. 26, 2010) — As part of Pacific Integration, Eighth Army in Korea will alter its name next year and fall under U.S. Army Pacific.

“One team, combat ready” sums up Pacific Integration, according to USARPAC Commander Lt. Gen. Benjamin R. Mixon, whose area of responsibility extends from Hawaii to India and from Alaska to Australia, with about 60 percent of the world’s population. He spoke with several reporters at the AUSA Annual Meeting and Exposition Oct. 25.

In a nutshell, here’s what PI will do: By late summer 2011, the Eighth U.S. Army in Korea — a sizeable organization with a large sustainment command — will become the Eighth U.S. Field Army and integrate into USARPAC, Mixon said, “But the reality is that transformation has already been going on now for several years,” he said. “It’s not like flipping on a light switch. It’s a process.”

If a conflict were to occur right now on the Korean peninsula, Mixon said Eighth Army would “focus on the fight, which I believe would be intense, while we provide logistical support and additional troops, not only for the peninsula but elsewhere, as it could become a regional conflict. So instead of having two Army service components, we now have one, more capable force.”

The PI transition is mostly completed, he said. “We already have overlapping responsibilities with Eighth Army should anything happen.”

Growing the force throughout the Pacific is another aspect of PI, that has “been below the radar the last several years,” Mixon said. He cited the formation of airborne, squadron, maneuver enhancement and aviation brigades in Alaska and the reorganization of the 25th Infantry Division in Hawaii from a light to a medium division, along with increased manpower there for a stryker brigade, heavy brigade combat team and medium aviation brigade.

To move this beefed-up force quickly around half the globe, he acknowledged, requires close coordination with the Navy and Air Force for ships and transport aircraft.

How does PI bode for America’s allies?

“In addition to reinforcing our long-term relations with allies such as Japan, Thailand, Australia and the Philippines, we’re reaching out to India, Indonesia, Malaysia and other countries,” Mixon said, citing Vietnam as an example where military exchanges are increasing, along with Army medical support.

The general said multilateral, not bilateral exercises with Asian countries, will be the blueprint for the future, citing the example of the annual Cobra Gold exercise in Thailand, where a number of Pacific-rim and other nations participated or observed.

PI is also providing better utilization of LandWarNet, the global information connectivity necessary for intelligence sharing.

“A greater sharing of intelligence is now occurring,” Mixon said, providing an example of improvised explosive device threats, where armies throughout the Asia-Pacific and other areas “share intelligence on the types of IED threats and pass them along to trainers so they can deal with the type being used. We stood up a counter-IED task force a year ago and we’re already doing support,” he noted. He said there’s a real threat of IEDs in India, southern Thailand, Philippines, Indonesia, “and, should war break out, on the Korean peninsula.”

In addition to potential for conflict in Korea, there are other areas of concern, he said, noting Abu Sayyaf, an Islamist separatist group in the southern Philippines, known for carrying out terrorist attacks; and more recently, the Islamist terrorist group Lashkar-e-Taiba, based in Pakistan, but active in India, Nepal, Bangladesh and allegedly in the Chicago area, where two of its members were arrested in November.

How will USARPAC interact with China?

“We’re hopeful that in the near future we’ll have an army-to-army relationship. The 25th ID Band performed in China and Russia and we’re hopeful it’ll open the aperture a bit,” Mixon said. “I’d like to take a trip there myself to talk to some of the senior leadership and investigate how we can work with them.”

What’s uppermost on Mixon’s wish list?

“Families,” he said. “The last nine years have been difficult on Soldiers and Families. Senior leadership is trying to extend dwell time to 18 months to two years. This would allow more time to train, take care of Families, recoup from injuries; we always need more time.”

Posted on

No justice for Native Hawaiians in the justice system

Despite a lot of tourist oriented baloney about Hawai’i’s mythic racial harmony, and in contradiction to the more malicious accusations of “reverse racism” by the right wing “color-blind” groups in Hawai’i, a new report by the  Office of Hawaiian Affairs confirms that Kanaka Maoli are hit hardest by racism in Hawai’i’s criminal justice system.  The Honolulu Star Advertiser writes:

Native Hawaiians are treated unfairly by the criminal justice system in Hawaii, according to a report released yesterday by the state Office of Hawaiian Affairs.

The study featured statistics showing that the percentage of native Hawaiians incarcerated is significantly higher than the percentage of Hawaiians in the general population and that native Hawaiians are more likely to get prison sentences, and longer prison sentences, than other ethnic groups.

OHA officials called the report groundbreaking because it uses numbers to show native Hawaiians are being treated disparately.

This is to be expected under the ideological and legal system of a foreign occupation, especially one that took over Hawai’i with a messianic belief in the racial superiority and mission of “The Aryan” to civilize the world.

Posted on

Hawaii Independent: OHA considers legal action to protect cultural sites against Army Stryker vehicles

The Hawaii Independent reported that the Office of Hawaiian Affairs is considering legal action to get the Army to protect Hawaiian cultural sites.    The report also exposes the fact that the Army Native Hawaiian liaison program and Native Hawaiian Advisory Council is a front for the Army that is incapable of standing up for Native Hawaiian culture, land or rights.

>><<

http://www.thehawaiiindependent.com/story/molokai-stryker/

OHA considers legal action to protect cultural sites against Army Stryker vehicles

Aug 21, 2010 – 01:17 PM | by Samson Kaala Reiny

MOLOKAI—The Office of Hawaiian Affairs (OHA) is using a “balanced approach” to hold the Army accountable for protecting cultural sites from further desecration on its Stryker Brigade locations, according to OHA’s CEO Clyde Namuo at a board of trustees meeting on Molokai yesterday.

A member of the community complained that the letter OHA sent to the Army on August 13 had no legal teeth because no clear-cut demands or timelines were made.

The OHA letter only states that the Army “promptly evaluate the historic properties identified” as a result of the 2008 settlement between the two groups. It concludes by asking “in the spirit of cooperation and in good faith … a continued collaboration between our office and your agency.”

Namuo disagreed.

“I do believe it does have teeth because it states the Army is not fulfilling substantially [sic] the Programmatic Agreement,” Namuo said.

But Namuo thinks that OHA should connect with new Army personnel first. Colonel Mulberry, U.S. Army Garrison Commander, has only been on the job a few months and doesn’t know the issues. Namuo believes OHA should first reach out to him. There’s a chance he could be very receptive to concerns in the Native Hawaiian community.

“Past garrison commanders were sensitive,” Namuo said.

Nonetheless, Namuo believes the Army’s negligence in recent months, particularly with the unearthing of iwi at Schofield Barracks at Lihue in May, is telling.

“The spirit of the Army is not what we had hoped,” Namuo said.

READ MORE

Posted on

Partial transcript of First Friday show with guest Annelle Amaral, Native Hawaiian liaison

On Friday, August 6, 2010, Annelle Amaral was the guest on the “First Friday” live call-in program on ‘Olelo Community Television, Channel 53.  The taped program will run on subsequent Fridays for the month of August.    The program is also available online on-demand: http://olelo.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=30&clip_id=15103

Annelle Amaral is the Native Hawaiian liaison for  the Army Garrison Hawai’i.  In 2008, she was awarded a contract (W912CN-08-C-0051) to perform the duties of the Army’s Native Hawaiian liaison in Hawai’i.  The original contract and its eight modifications are worth $742,392 until August 15, 2010.  Below is a partial transcript fo the First Friday program.

>><<

First Friday 8/6/2010 – Guest: Annelle Amaral

Mililani Trask:

. . . Tonight we are going to be talking a look at a topic that has become controversial in the community because some people feel that there shouldn’t be a native Hawaiian covenant with the US Army. In part it is controversial because there’s not much known about what the covenant is, how it came about, and who the people are who are involved, and what the goal of this covenant really is. Tonight we’ll be taking a look at that . . .

Mililani:

. . . Joining us tonight to take a look at our main show which is focusing on the native Hawaiian covenant with the Army. Joining us tonight is Annelle Amaral someone who I have worked with for many years, someone who has been involved in many ways with the Hawaiian community. She was among the first women to become a fully vested police officer in the state of Hawaii. When she was a police officer she created the rape prevention education program which eventually covered all islands and reached 40,000 citizens. She was appointed to head up the affirmative action office by ex-governor George Ariyoshi she did a lot of grievances and mediation during that time. She went to the legislature in 1988 she served there until 1996 in the house of reps and was the majority floor leader when she left in 1996. She is a Hawaiian and in recent years she also had acted as a facilitator for some real difficult issues involving US government agencies private sector as well as the military. These issues such as the Superferry, Mauna Kea, and of course the Makua valley problems, and a number of other things. But let’s welcome to the show Annelle Amaral. And ask you Annelle to start by telling us a little bit about yourself and your background here in Hawaii.

Annelle Amaral:

Aloha and thank you for having me here, I appreciate it. Let’s see, what can I tell you about myself? I was born on the island of Hawaii raised here on Oahu. I’m a graduate of Star of the Sea High School, that’s a nice Catholic all girls school, not KS by the way. I also graduated from the University of Dayton. I have a BA in journalism, though I never worked in the field of journalism. You’ve given my background of work and what I found after sitting through far too many hearings at the legislature, and finding very little resolution there, I found myself drawn to the field of facilitation. Feeling as if, if people could just hear one another if they could just quiet the voices in their heads and listen to one another we actually would find ourselves agreeing more often than not, and though I after the leg became more and more involved with facilitation as a private business. It is to that end by the way that I end up here now as a contractor with the US Army.  It was Peter Adler who was putting together a team of facilitators when the Stryker hearings first began back in I think was 2001. And he asked if I would join his team and I did.

There were about 7 of us then. It turned out I ended up being the last facilitator standing and ended up facilitating almost all the Stryker hearings and facilitating almost all of the Makua meetings. The last facilitation I did for Stryker was at Kawananakoa School and at the end of the day when everyone was headed home it turned into sort of a bad scene with one young lady screaming at me and with a group gathered around me and sort of shoving and pushing and a camera in my face to try to provoke me and I ended up being escorted to my car by the police. So I went to the then colonel, the garrison commander, the day after and told him it was time for him to look for another facilitator. That clearly I was no longer perceived as neutral and I could no longer function in this capacity.  At that point, Col Margotta asked if I would consider another job, another task, and we talked about how hard the situation was becoming between Hawaiians and the Army and that clearly there had to be another way, another path. So he said to me, would you be willing to help us write a native Hawaiian community plan for the Army?  And my response was I am not crazy. There is no way I’m going to write a native Hawaiian plan I said what I will do is I will help bring together Hawaiian leaders that could advise you and I would be happy to staff that effort and together we would write the plan, and if he was interested in that. And so that, actually,  was the beginning of what ended up being the Native Hawaiian Advisory Council which is a group of people that come with either some substantive experience in broad subject matter areas like education, or economic development, or business, or people that come with a large constituency that have worked on Hawaiian issues like membership org like the Association of Hawaiian Civic Clubs and there’s another group,  whose name slips my mind, but they represent cultural practitioners, Aha Kiole, and so we invited them to come and to work together to draft up a plan. The end result of what essentially is about a year and a half of work is the signing of a covenant that essentially sort of mirrors the family covenant with the Army . . . we recognize, we are committed to, that’s sort of the way the family covenant goes.

Mililani:

You know Annelle, back in March, KITV news had done coverage of this and they had quoted you saying the relationship between native Hawaiians and the Army has become increasingly hostile as the years have progressed and I think that that’s probably a good place to begin because as you had pointed out, the Stryker hearings were terrible and you know that from coming up to Hilo. There was strong opposition to Stryker and I’m not surprised that you had to be escorted to your car because the issues that Hawaiians have with the military have gone on for years starting from the overthrow and they really haven’t ever been addressed. I’d like to ask you Manu if you’d maybe look at some of these issues and then we can come back, because some of these issues such as the situation with Pohakuloa, Stryker, Makua we can then focus in on but there’s a background of history that really is a terrible history.

Manu Kaiama:

Yeah I would assume that that’s something that you looked at within your group because unfortunately the American military truly has a less than glorious history in the islands. We have to begin with the military’s involvement in the illegal overthrow of our queen . . . with the excuse of protecting American interests . . . theft of crown and government land . . . not looking back at 1893, let’s roll it forward . . .161 military installations in Hawaii . . . 7 superfund sites . . . military makes up top polluters . . . Kahoʻolawe . . . Stryker Brigade . . . most recent EIS seriously flawed . . . Makua . . . Schofield Barracks . . . Depleted Uranium . . .

Mililani:

I think Depleted Uranium is also a big one, I think we’ve talked about it for the Big Island, but you can see that a lot of the history and a lot of the problems relate specifically to military use and toxicity . . . I wanted to go back Annelle to the community plan of action, you had brought some people together. When I looked at the plan of action, it seemed that there was a framework to actually address some of these horrible things that Manu has raised I mean the actual language, the preambular section, here it says the military is recognizing here, “our training programs require access to lands for the purpose of conducting activities that we realize may impact the environment, social and cultural conditions. It is our responsibility to prevent pollution, minimize adverse impacts to land, and to conserve protect and preserve our natural and cultural resources. So in this action plan there actually is this recognition and there is this commitment and there is also a statement that we are going to be sensitive to the relationship with native Hawaiian peoples. Now this is strong words in a community plan of action how are the Native Hawaiian Adv council people who were working on this and who are working on this now. What is their actual role in ensuring that these commitments come about? We have some Hawaiians, actually we have a list that’s going to be showing provided to us by Annelle, some folks on the list are Hawaiian and they are members of the NHAC other signatories actually are folks signing for the military. But those Hawaiians that are the Native Hawaiian Advisory group worked on this plan and are aware of this commitment, what is their role? What are they doing?

Annelle:

The first thing that we’ve accomplished is that we have come to agreement on this language that we are talking about right now, this preamble, this one goal, this covenant, this promise, this sacred promise that we’ve made to one another. The next thing that we will do is start to work on steps to begin to address that. Now I will tell you that we have not yet come up with specific steps as it relates to this language that you just read out. We meet on a quarterly basis, the signing was in March, the meeting after that was in May, and actually that was a short meeting because our garrison commander left and we were being introduced to the new garrison commander. So the next meeting we’ll have in August. Our commitment is now that we’ve finished the business of putting together this broad language together we will begin to work on specific issues and identify the steps forward. Actually, the first meeting that we’re going to have in August what is on the table is a discussion first about economic opportunities. So that is in that meeting in august. But the work ahead is in these three documents that we were discussing.

Mililani:

You know Annelle, one of the things that you just bring up now, is looking for economic opportunities, and one of the big criticisms that has come out is that when this group came together, it was flawed because many of them were actually subcontractors from the military and that they were actually there they were receiving money from the military and the example was of course the Danners, Jade and Robin Danner who have military contracts for digitizing military data but the point was that are these really, these members of the NHAC, are they really independent can they really be honest if they in fact are receiving contracts from the US military and one of the purposes in the preamble is to create opportunities for mutual enrichment. That can have a cultural interpretation but clearly that has an interpretation in terms of the contract money that they’re getting from the US government.

Annelle:

I think you have to admit that the Council on Native Hawaiian Advancement does a little more than just digitizing some documents with department of defense some more than that. They are not entirely supported with that one contract. And it is true that also on our council sits Bruce Kepler, who is an attorney with an organization that gets department of defense money. My hope is, quite frankly, that we will be able to create an educational program to help more native Hawaiians who own their own businesses to be able to compete for these contracts and other contracts that are available right now for NHOs (Native Hawaiian Organizations). Right now we only have 15 native Hawaiian organizations, we get millions of dollars of contracts that go unclaimed by native Hawaiians because we’re not qualified, and instead, those contracts are picked up by native Alaskans and Native Americans.

Mililani:

Well the thing is what is really the purpose of the effort? Is the purpose of the effort to address the commitments . . . in the covenant or is it really just a cover so people who are getting these contracts can say that they are going to be a part of the advisory council, but to the extent that they are, what are they doing outside of that to address some of these environmental, social and cultural conditions . . . the long litany of which Manu just read?

Annelle:

Well Jade Danner is a member of our council and helped to craft this language as did all the other members of the council. So it would seem to me that all of us are part of producing a larger effort than simply economic development. Economic development is one piece of it, and as I said, we’re going to be discussing that in August. We haven’t started the discussion yet, but we will start and this is not an economic development council it is a council that deals with all facets of our life – employment and enrichment and sustainability of us as individuals is I think one good goal to go towards, but there are other aspects that we’ll be working on.

Manu:

Do the council members paid for their membership, for participating?

Annelle:

No, they’re all volunteers.

Mililani:

I don’t know if you took a look at who the members of the council are – they are Peter Apo, Jade Danner, Chris Dawson, Neil Hannahs, Alan Hoe, Rev. Bill Kaina, Charles William Kapua, Jalna Keala, Bruss Kepler, Leimomi Kahn, Deejay Mailer, Kaleo Patterson and William Richards those are the Hawaiians that signed the covenant, but they also together comprise what we are calling the Native Hawaiian Advisory Council. Annelle, are these people here representing Hawaiian organizations? Are they representing the Bishop Estate? In what capacity are these people serving?

Annelle:

These people, Mililani, were invited because of the whole body of work that they as individuals have done in the Hawaiian community. The wisdom, the knowledge of all of their work when it’s brought to the table is amazingly powerful. But they do not come to the table representing their businesses or where they work, they come to the table as Hawaiians who love things Hawaiian and who want to help create some positive solutions. No, they don’t come representing their organizations.

Mililani:

When I looked at the materials you had sent me, it seemed that they were clearly identified because they were people who were high profile and because they would be viewed as Hawaiian leadership. Also when I look at some of the press releases that are coming out from the military itself they’re identified in this way. Here’s a press release: ʻNative Hawaiians and Army talk about ʻIwi Kupuna.ʻ This was the recent July NAGPRA event that you had . . . and this was released by the US Army Garrison Hawaii Public Affairs Department, it says, “among those attending were reps of native Hawaiian organizations, later it goes through identifying Bishop Estate, Kamehameha Schools, but the military itself is saying reps of NHOs, and you’re saying they really are not . . .

Annelle:

This is the workshop that we had though. So, the workshop we had on NAGPRA at the end of July, what we intended there was to invite individuals from different native Hawaiian organizations to hear what NAGPRA defines as claimants, to understand the law, and to make informed choices as to whether or not they or their organizations qualifies as claimants for the ʻiwi kupuna found at Schofield BAX. So in that press release, when we talk about organizations, those people were invited to that training were invited because of the organizations they belong to that’s different from the NHAC.

Mililani:

Do these organizations provide funding, did the Bishop Estate or Kamehameha Schools ever provide funding for this effort.

Annelle:

No. The work that we do, the work that I do is funded by the Army

Manu:

You know there are so many things for me . . . when I look at this sheet for the NHAC and they are characterized as native Hawaiian leaders, I think that’s a loose interpretation because when I look at the names, and I know many of these people, I have aloha for many of them, but I don’t know what group of n Hawaiians they have led so I guess ʻleadersʻ meaning not that they lead native Hawaiians but they are native Hawaiians and maybe in a leadership position in their job or in their community.

Annelle:

These people have not led native Hawaiians? Rev. Kaina has not led native Hawaiians?

Manu:

I’m not saying all of them, but I wouldn’t consider all of them for example Peter Apo as a native Hawaiian leader.

Annelle:

Ok, he’s a former legislator, he’s led somebody.

Manu:

So that’s my point, the use of the term ʻNative Hawaiian leaderʻ is a little bit misleading or confusing. Because . . . when you have something like a huge media blast: US Army Hawaii Covenant with Native Hawaiiansʻ not with ʻsome Hawaiians in leadership positionsʻ but with ʻnative Hawaiians’ . . . it’s putting out to the general public that look, we are on this road, and native Hawaiians are on that waʻa also. It almost marginalizes those of us who have legitimate claims against the military for some of the wrongs that have been committed. So, my point is this kind of looks to me like an illusion of inclusion type deal . . . we are going to put this forward, we are going to have a big celebration, have a covenant signing and have a bunch of people willing to sign it, because I noticed that there were many people who could have tried to be involved in this, but the invitation wasn’t extended to them. And what we’re doing is we are making an illusion to the general public that things are going in a positive direction with the military and the Hawaiians and you read the covenant and I just don’t understand what the native Hawaiians are getting out of this. The Army is going to consider our culture and historical experience. I see the Army as being the recipient of everything here, and us, nothing that can even be quantified. And that goes even further for the things that you’ve been sponsoring. Like teaching the military wives hula or moʻolelo or oli …

Mililani:

It’s not things that get to the issue I think. But you know Manu, if I could just ask you, you’re a lineal descendent of Makua. I think maybe if we looked at an actual problem, the situation at Makua, the situation with Depleted Uranium on the Big Island, where there’s great concern. Initially Army said that there was no DU, but now we have the testing, we know there is. There was hope that when this covenant would be signed, there would then be a follow up and a way to address it. And I think that some of the folks in Makua were hoping that would come about as well, because there was an event in Makua. (To Manu) But yourself, as a lineal descendant, what issues do you raise, and how can these issues be addressed by either the military or yourself (Annelle), or possibly this Native Hawaiian community leaders group.

Manu:

Well, they do not speak for me so I can’t even answer that question.

Mililani:

No I mean as a lineal descendent at Makua.

Manu:

No, but you’re saying how can we work with them. So I don’t want them speaking for me. I find it very mahaʻoi that they went and signed this as native Hawaiians and they’re talking about many sensitive issues that Hawaiians do not want to be delegated to the sidelines on this because they are really, really important issues. So I don’t really have an answer for that . . . maybe in your plan Annelle, you guys have an answer of rolling it out to the people who have really been affected by the military and their misuse of the land, and maybe reaching out to lineal descendants, I don’t know. So is that a plan?

Annelle:

We don’t deal specifically with those issues, with any specific issue, quite frankly. The intention of the work of the council is to deal with the large issues that impact the lives of native Hawaiians and in a way that the Army may have some influence. So when it comes to Makua, I think that the division, the cultural resources deals directly with the issues around Makua, as does natural resources. The people in training, and so there are specific people who deal with the Makua issue. The council does not deal with that, neither do we deal with Depleted Uranium . . .

Mililani:

I think that’s the point.

Annelle:

It’s not within our skill range to deal with those specific issues.

Mililani:

But I think that’s the point, when you have a community plan of action, a preamble, and it says here . . . we realize that these things may impact the environment, social and cultural conditions. It’s our responsibility to prevent pollution, to minimize these adverse impacts. So, when we begin the native community plan of action, then we have this covenant, you would expect that there would be some responsible action on the part of the military to address this. When I went back and did the research for Makua, the military released these statements that say: ʻthe native Hawaiian community leaders day at the Makua Military Reserve was a Key part of releasing the military reserve EIS record of decision. This was done quote to counter negative media and native Hawaiian opposition when the record of decision was released. The strategic communications plan called for a community leader and media day consisting of noted native Hawaiian businesses, education and community leaders and all newspaper and TV stations. Native Hawaiian leaders were solicited from throughout the community. So what really happened was Native Hawaiian Community Leaders Day was sponsored but it was a cover for bringing out this EIS and the record of decision, and at the end, what happened was that the Army announced that they were planning to resume training with live ammunition at Makua on August 31st. I think that the point that Manu is making is a good one. In that we have issues, we have a covenant, we have a plan, we say we’re going to address it, but what actually happens is there’s a native community leadership day to cover a military announcement that they we’re going to resume bombing, and it comes up looking like Hawaiians are endorsing it because these leaders are there. So how is that actually addressing the concerns of lineal descendents and others in Makua who are saying that they don’t want any more live fire and actually you were informing us that everything had fallen apart after this and it was back in court.

Well, alright, so, back the truck up . . . the article that you are reading is 2009; the signing of the covenant is 2010. The leadership day is a day to announce the record of decision, and what the garrison commander does in that meeting where certain Hawaiians were invited, not all Hawaiians, but some Hawaiians were brought, was for the purpose of the garrison commander to make an announcement about the use of Makua for training. Live fire training has in fact, till now, till August 6th not taken place at Makua . . .

Mililani:

Why? Why hasn’t it taken place?

Annelle:

Well, as I’ve later read is there are different types of training strategies I think that are being planned for Makua, as well as for Pohakuloa. And that’s the bringing out with these commanders, bringing out their strategies for training. In part, the use of live fire has, I think, not taken place because there are still a couple of issues still pending in the court. One of them had to do with a shellfish study, and another had to do with cultural sites, so those are the two issues that I think are still pending in the courts, and that’s I think why live fire has not resumed live fire training. But when they are talking about the live fire training, they really are talking about a different kind of training in Makua than what you’ve seen in the past. That was the purpose of this prolonged explanation by the garrison commander in 2009. Given the situation in Afghanistan, the different way they would be using the land for training. Let me be real clear, the Army only has only one mission, and the only mission of the Army is to protect and defend this nation. And those that work for the Army only have one purpose, and that one purpose is to assure that the mission of the Army is carried out and that soldiers are trained properly to be able to carry it out. I mean, it’s that simple.

Mililani:

I think that puts things down pretty clearly, in that this is Hawaii, this is our land. We know that the mission of the military is basically for the making of war, and to defend a country, but it may not be ours. It’s the US and they are an occupying force.  The thing is that if you’re . . .

Annelle (interrupting):

Well, you and I disagree there because I see myself as American

Mililani:

…We still haven’t had reparations for the overthrow, we’ve had an apology. The US has admitted to the illegality of the overthrow. The US admitted to the illegality of the military occupation, but we’ve never seen the reparations, we’ve never seen the restitution. We have military bombing at Makua, it hasn’t been cleaned up. We have DU up on Pohakuloa, and that’s a problem . . .

Annelle (interrupting):

And isn’t the Akaka Bill one of those steps toward getting reconciliation and reparations?

Mililani: The Akaka Bill? The Akaka Bill is not on this show, what’s on this show is the covenant and how it’s supposed to be addressing these issues.

*Questions

Mililani: . . . You know we’re obviously  . . . were coming to the end of our program now, we didn’t get to half of our questions . . . we may have to revisit this.  In fact, the American Friends Service Committee has called in saying that their research shows that this contract is worth $742.000 is that correct and will they have a chance to make some response . . .

Yes AFSC, we will bring you on to respond to this show. And Annelle is it true that you have a contract for 3 years worth $750,000?

Annelle:

I . . . if they say it’s true it must be true . . .

Proudly powered by WordPress