Native American Activist Winona LaDuke on Use of "Geronimo" as Code for Osama bin Laden and the "Militarization of Indian Country"

Winona LaDuke has just published a book The Militarization of Indian Country in which she discusses the situation in Hawai’i and the Native-owned military contracting industry.  I spoke with someone from her organization as they were researching information for the book.  I haven’t seen it yet to know how the information was incorporated.  Today, she was on Democracy Now! She discusses the military assault on Hawai’i and the use of “Geronimo” as code name for Osama bin Laden.  One figure she cites – 79,000 acres – of military expansion in Hawai’i doesn’t sound correct.  But she describes Kaho’olawe, Pohakuloa and the Stryker Brigade expansion. Here’s the video of the program and an excerpt from the transcript:


Source: http://www.democracynow.org/2011/5/6/native_american_activist_winona_laduke_on

We’re joined now by Winona LaDuke, Native American activist, writer. She lives and works on the White Earth Reservation in northern Minnesota. She’s executive director of the group Honor the Earth. She was Ralph Nader’s running mate in 1996 and 2000 presidential elections. And her new book is called The Militarization of Indian Country. She’s joining us from Minneapolis.

Winona, thank you so much for being with us. Let’s start off by talking about who Geronimo was and the significance of his name being used.

Let me see how the New York Times described the moment: “The code name for bin Laden was ‘Geronimo.’ The president and his advisers watched Leon E. Panetta, the C.I.A. director, on a video screen, narrating from his agency’s headquarters across the Potomac River what was happening in faraway Pakistan.

“’They’ve reached the target,’ he said.

“Minutes passed.

“’We have a visual on Geronimo,’ he said.

“A few minutes later: ‘Geronimo EKIA.’

“Enemy Killed In Action. There was silence in the Situation Room.”

Winona LaDuke, your response?

WINONA LADUKE: I mean, you know, the reality is, is the military looks at it from its own perspective. This was one of the most expensive single campaigns to find somebody, bin Laden. And the reality was, is that the Geronimo campaign, the campaign against the Apache people, was one of the most expensive wars ever waged by the United States government. You know, for 13 years, they spent millions of dollars, essentially. Five thousand soldiers, and additional, went after these people, relentlessly, for that long period of time. So, from the military’s perspective, that’s a little of how they were looking at it.

You know, from our perspective, of course, and from, I think, all Americans’ perspective, Geronimo is a hero. He’s a national patriot for our peoples. And in that, it is indeed an egregious slander for indigenous peoples everywhere and to all Americans, I believe, to equate Osama bin Laden with Geronimo.

JUAN GONZALEZ: Well, Winona, in terms of the military, this seems to be a constant historical inability to grasp, the relationship of the government to Native American people. I was struck particularly by—during the wars in Kosovo, when the United States used—constantly talked about the Apache helicopters that were leading the fight against ethnic cleansing, or the new helicopter that supposedly was going to be the stealth helicopter that the military developed but then had to scrap, the Comanche helicopter. And there seems to be a constant insensitivity to the long struggle for freedom and defense of their land by the Native American peoples on the part of the U.S. military.

WINONA LADUKE: The reality is, is that the military is full of native nomenclature. That’s what we would call it. You’ve got Black Hawk helicopters, Apache Longbow helicopters. You’ve got Tomahawk missiles. The term used when you leave a military base in a foreign country is to go “off the reservation, into Indian Country.” So what is that messaging that is passed on? You know, it is basically the continuation of the wars against indigenous people.

Donald Rumsfeld, when he went to Fort Carson, named after the infamous Kit Carson, who was responsible for the deaths of thousands of Navajo people and their forced relocation, urged people, you know, in speaking to the troops, that in the global war on terror, U.S. forces from this base have lived up to the legend of Kit Carson, fighting terrorists in the mountains of Afghanistan to help secure victory. “And every one of you is like Kit Carson.”

The reality is, is that the U.S. military still has individuals dressed—the Seventh Cavalry, that went in in Shock and Awe, is the same cavalry that massacred indigenous people, the Lakota people, at Wounded Knee in 1890. You know, that is the reality of military nomenclature and how the military basically uses native people and native imagery to continue its global war and its global empire practices.

AMY GOODMAN: Winona, you begin your book on the militarization of Native America at Fort Sill, the U.S. Army post near Lawton, Oklahoma. We broadcast from there about a year ago in that area. Why Fort Sill? What is the significance of Fort Sill for Native America?

WINONA LADUKE: Well, you know, that is where the Apaches themselves were incarcerated for 27 years for the crime of being Apache. There are two cemeteries there, and those cemeteries—one of those cemeteries is full of Apaches, including Geronimo, who did die there. But it is emblematic of Indian Country’s domination by military bases and the military itself. You’ve got over 17 reservations named after—they’re still called Fort something, you know? Fort Hall is, you know, one of them. Fort Yates. You know, it is pervasive, the military domination of Indian Country.

Most of the land takings that have occurred for the military, whether in Alaska, in Hawaii, or in what is known as the continental United States, have been takings from native land. Some of—you know, they say that the Lakota Nation, in the Lakota Nation’s traditional territory, as guaranteed under the Treaty of 1868 or the 1851 Treaty, would be the third greatest nuclear power in the world. You know, those considerations indicate how pervasive historically the military has been in native history and remains today in terms of land occupation.

I must say, on the other side of that, we have the highest rate of living veterans of any community in the country. It’s estimated that about 22 percent of our population, or 190,000 of our—or 190,000—or 190,000 living veterans in Native America today. And all of those veterans, I am sure, are quite offended by the use of Geronimo’s name, you know, in the assault on bin Laden and in the death of bin Laden.

JUAN GONZALEZ: Winona, in your book, you go through a lot of these takings of land and what it’s been used for. Obviously, the nuclear accident following the tsunami in Japan has been in the news a lot lately, but you talk about the origins of the United States’s own nuclear power, the mining of uranium, the development of Los Alamos Laboratory. Could you talk about that and its connection to Indian Country?

WINONA LADUKE: You know, native people—about two-thirds of the uranium in the United States is on indigenous lands. On a worldwide scale, about 70 percent of the uranium is either in Aboriginal lands in Australia or up in the Subarctic of Canada, where native people are still fighting uranium mining. And now, with both nuclearization and the potential reboot of a nuclear industry, they’re trying to open uranium mines on the sacred Grand Canyon. You know, we have been, from the beginning, heavily impacted by radiation exposure from the U.S. military, you know, continuing on to nuclear testing, whether in the Pacific or whether the 1,100 nuclear weapons that were detonated over Western Shoshone territory. You know, our peoples have been heavily impacted by radiation, let alone nerve gas testing. You’ve got nerve gas dumps at Umatilla. You’ve got a nerve gas dump at the Skull Valley Goshute Reservation. You have, you know, weapons bases, and the military is the largest polluter in the world. And a lot of that pollution, in what is known as the United States, or some of us would refer to as occupied Indian Country, is in fact all heavily impacting Indian people or indigenous communities still.

JUAN GONZALEZ: You also talk about the radiation experimentation in Alaska in the 1960s in your book. I don’t think—very few people have heard of that. Could you tell us a little bit more about that?

WINONA LADUKE: Yeah. You know, I was an undergraduate at Harvard, and I remember I used to—I researched all this really bizarre data, but there was this project at Point Hope, where the military wanted to look at the radiation lichen-caribou-man cycle, of bio-accumulation of radiation. And so, they went into the Arctic. You know, there’s widespread testing on native people, because we’re isolated populations. We’re basically—you know, most of us in that era were genetically pretty similar. It was a good test population, and there was no accountability. You know, testing has occurred, widespread. But in that, they wanted to test, so the village of Point Hope was basically irradiated. Didn’t tell the people. Documents were declassified in the 1990s. And all that time, this community bore a burden of nuclear exposure that came from the Nevada test site, you know, and in testing those communities.

You know, Alaska itself is full of nuclear and toxic waste dumps from the military, over 700 separate, including, you know, perhaps one of the least known, but I did talk about it in this book, The Militarization of Indian Country, VX Lake, where they happened to forget about some nerve gas canisters, a whole bunch of them, and they put them out in the middle of the lake, and they sank to the bottom. And then they remembered a few years later, and then they had to drain the darn lake to go get all these—you know, all the nerve gas, VX, out of the bottom of the lake. And, you know, they renamed it Blueberry Lake, but it’s still known as VX Lake to anybody who’s up there. And, you know, the unaccountability of the military, above reproach, having such a huge impact on a worldwide scale, having such a huge take at the federal trough, the federal budget, and in indigenous communities an absolutely huge impact in terms of the environmental consequences of militarization.

AMY GOODMAN: We’re talking to Winona LaDuke, Native American activist, writer. Her latest book is called The Militarization of Indian Country. Winona, talk about the history of native participation in and opposition to war. But begin with your dad, with your father.

WINONA LADUKE: Yeah, you know, I wrote this book out of a debt, really, to my father. My father was a Korean War resister, and he spent 11 months in prison for refusing to fight a war that he did not believe was his. There is a long history of native people, whether the Zunis, whether the Hopis, whether Iroquois, whether the Ojibwes, who said, “You know, that’s really not our war. We’re staying here.”

The United States, you know, people—one of the reasons that it is said that native people received citizenship in 1924 was so that they could be drafted. And they have been extensively drafted. You know, for a whole variety of social, political, historic, cultural and economic reasons, native people have the highest rate of enlistment in this country, from historic to present. You know, in some places, in our Indian communities, you have very dire economic situations, and the military recruiters are very aggressive. And young people do not have a lot of choices. I mean, I had a young man from my community say, “Auntie, I joined the military.” I said, “Why did you join the military?” He says, “Because I was either going to jail or going to the military.” You know, and I have heard that story more than once in Indian Country.

So, having said that, you have a history of warrior societies, of people who are proud, who have defended our land. You know, 500 years is a long time to defend your territory. And, you know, we’re still here. And within that, our warrior societies continue, whether it is at Oka, whether it was at Wounded Knee, whether it is on the front lines of the tar sands in Alberta, Canada, or whether it is in the Grand Canyon, defending our territory. At the same time, you have a number—you know, a large rate of enlistment. And so, you have native veterans who are, in our community, highly regarded for who they are as courageous individuals and a very significant part of our communities. At the same time, there is no program to reintegrate these individuals into our society. A lot of—you know, the highest rate of homelessness is in the veterans in this country. And many other issues of PTSD and such exist widespread in our communities because of our isolation and our high rates of enlistment and our high rates of veterans.

AMY GOODMAN: Winona LaDuke, you also talk, when talking about Fort Sill, about the Comanche people asking for Fort Sill not to destroy Medicine Bluff. Can you talk about the sacred places in the United States, starting with Fort Sill? Where are they threatened, and how do you preserve these lands?

WINONA LADUKE: Well, you know, the military has—the U.S. government is the largest landowner. The United States—you know, native people are large landowners, but the military has a huge chunk of our territories. And in those, there are a number of places that are our sacred sites. Perhaps the best examples are really in Hawaii, where the military took the island of Kaho’olawe, an entire island, to turn it into a bombing range for 40 years. You know, that was my first politicization, I would say, as to the impact of the military in indigenous communities. Took a whole island, and then, eventually, the island is now returned. The aquifer is cracked from bombing. And, you know, it is in—it’s unconscionable, the practice. Today, Hawaii, you see the continuation of the expansion of military holdings there. Pohakuloa is an expansion for the Stryker that they are looking at on the Big Island of Hawaii to take another 79,000 acres of land—there’s only so much land on an island—full of sacred sites, full of historic sites, that Hawaiians, Native Hawaiians and all people have a right to visit but now is becoming a part of a military base. And increasing land takings, particularly in Hawaii, is one of the worst cases.

JUAN GONZALEZ: And Winona, as we mentioned earlier, you were a vice-presidential candidate twice on the ticket, an Independent ticket, with Ralph Nader. And as you see now, in these years of the last few years of the Obama administration, do you see any significant change in the way that the Native American nations across the country have been treated under the Obama administration?

WINONA LADUKE: You know, I would say that things are better. I would say we’ve got a few egregious problems still. You know, you have, for instance, the U.N. Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People. As you likely know, there were four holdout countries, as of 2007, that did not sign on. U.S. and Canada are the only two countries that have yet to sign on the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. The Obama administration made some lip service to it, posturing. I was thinking maybe we’re in like some kind of yoga position on it; I don’t know what posture he’s in. But we’d like to see that carried out. As well, you know, apology—you know, these are, in many ways, symbolic gestures. There was an apology to native peoples that was issued, but no one heard it. So its’ kind of like saying, you know, “I’m sorry,” to a wall. Probably should have a little formal apology.

But then there is the reality of—that things in Indian Country are not getting better. You can’t keep putting money in the federal budget for the military and robbing everything else, so that people on my reservation and other reservations don’t have housing, don’t have education money, don’t have health service, you know, don’t have basic, basic rights. And the only way in the native community, really, to get economically ahead, in many cases, is to become a military contractor.

I don’t know if you noticed in the book that it turns out that Blackwater is a Native American contractor. Now, I didn’t know that, you know, and I really hadn’t thought of them as a Native American contractor. But with the Chenega native corporation, they’ve got about $1.9 billion in federal contracts that they received, most of those as a sole-source, non-bid contractor, because they went under the shell of an Alaskan native corporation, the Chenega Corporation. And so, you know, native communities are becoming military contractors because that’s where the money is. You know, so the irony of the whole history of colonization, military colonization, valiant patriots like Geronimo fighting against the U.S. taking of our lands, the destruction of our peoples, to now a situation where the largest private army in the world is a Native American contractor. And the fact that they so egregiously abuse the name of Geronimo and, in widespread cases, you know, refer to Indian Country as the territory that is to be taken by the U.S. military, you know, it is time to revisit this history.

AMY GOODMAN: Finally, Winona LaDuke, ending on where we began, with Geronimo, you supported President Obama, Barack Obama, for president, the first African American president, who—it was under him that this Geronimo name was given. Of course, I’m sure it wasn’t he, himself, who gave this name for this operation to kill bin Laden. He was born in Hawaii. His school, native name, and you talk about Hawaii being so important in native history. Your thoughts about President Obama in light of what—this latest controversy?

WINONA LADUKE: Well, you know, I think a formal apology is due to the native community, to the family of Geronimo, as requested.

I think that a review of the impact of militarization on Indian Country—you know, we are trying to get back some of our land that is held by the military, but it’s so darn toxic. And the military is busy making more things toxic, getting more exemptions under federal law, so that they are above any environmental laws. You know, it would be nice to get something back that was taken, and to get it back clean and to get it back good, whether Badger Munitions in Wisconsin, Fort Wingate. But we don’t want—we don’t want toxic land, you know, back, returned to our people.

Reviewing the military psychology of Kit Carson, you know, and using that nomenclature, how offensive it is to native people. And talking about some kind of a justice, in terms of—I don’t have an answer—it’s a tricky one—how you make justice with the military. But what I would say is that what was done historically was wrong, what was done this week was wrong, and it would be an opportunity for the Obama administration to do the right thing in relation to Indian Country, because Indian Country is not to be assaulted by the U.S. military.

AMY GOODMAN: Winona LaDuke, I want to thank you very much for being with us, Native American activist, writer. She lives and works on the White Earth Reservation in northern Minnesota, executive director of the group Honor the Earth. Her new book, just out, The Militarization of Indian Country.

"Living Along the Fenceline" screenings and talks in East SF Bay Area

Women for Genuine Security and UC Berkeley, Center for the Study of Sexual Cultures present:

LIVING ALONG THE FENCELINE

MILITARY VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN, DEMILITARIZATION, & FEMINIST CONCEPTS OF SECURITY

Speaker: Suzuyo Takazato

LOCATION:  370 DWINELLE HALL, UC BERKELEY

DATE & TIME: APRIL 26TH @ 12PM

Suzuyo Takazato is a greatly respected feminist activist in Okinawa (the southern-most prefecture in Japan). Formerly a social worker with victims of gender-based violence, she founded a domestic violence project, and the first rape crisis hotline in Okinawa— REICO. Ms Takazato is a founder of Okinawa Women Act Against Military Violence and still co-chairs this organization. She is one of the founding members of the International Women’s Network against Militarism, which held its first international meeting in Okinawa in 1997. She is one of 1,000 women nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize, Her article, “Report from Okinawa: Long term military presence and violence against women” is published in Canadian Woman Studies 2000 (19) #4: 42-47.2005.

SPONSORS

CENTER FOR THE STUDY OF SEXUAL CULTURES & WOMEN FOR GENUINE SECURITY

GENUINESECURITY.ORG | CSSC.BERKELEY.EDU | CSSC@BERKELEY.EDU

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

FILM SCREENING WITH DISTINGUISHED SPEAKERS:

SUZUYO TAKAZATO, OKINAWAN WOMEN ACT AGAINST MILITARY VIOLENCE &

DEBORAH BERMAN SANTANA, DEPT. OF ETHNIC STUDIES MILLS COLLEGE

April 27 at 7PM

Danforth Lecture Hall, Mills College

5000 MacArthur Blvd.

Oakland, CA 94613

Living Along the Fenceline tells the stories of 7 remarkable women who live alongside U.S. military bases. They are teachers, or- ganizers,& healers, moved by love & respect for the land, & hope for the next generation. From San Antonio (Texas) to Vieques (Puerto Rico), Hawai’i, Guam, Okinawa, South Korea, & the Philippines, this film inspires hope and action. Event Sponsored by Office of the Provost , Barbara Lee Distinguished Chair, Global Fund for Women, and Women for Genuine Security.

www.genuinesecurity.org

info@genuinesecurity.org

510-430-2277

Nanakuli industrial park dead

As we reported previously, the Wai’anae community won a major victory by stopping the proposed industrial park encroachment into agricultural land in Lualualei.  The struggle is not over however.  The landowner may try again to rezone the property, and a parallel struggle is taking place over the Wai’anae Sustainable Community Plan, which was modified in its latest draft to include the spot zoning of industrial land at the Tropic Land site and a proposed highway through Lualualei via Pohakea Pass.  The Pohakea pass was slipped into the plan after it had been debated extensively by the community.  It reveals the long term goals of the politicians and developers to bank on a future industrial corridor through Lualualei.

There is already an access road through Lualualei via Kolekole Pass.  If the Navy and Army opened up access, it could serve to alleviate the traffic congestion around the Kahe Point area.

Meanwhile, it is a good time to begin knocking on the Navy’s door to close down Lualualei Naval Communications Center and Naval Magazine to convert it into sustainable civilian uses.

Lualualei has some of the richest agricultural soil in Hawai’i.  The amazing results of MA’O farms is a testament to the productivity of this ‘aina and the potential for food sovereignty.

>><<

http://thehawaiiindependent.com/story/land-use-commission-denies-industrial-park-petition

Land Use Commission denies industrial park petition

Apr 25, 2011 – 09:25 AM | by Samson Kaala Reiny

The State Land Use Commission has denied Tropic Land LLC’s petition to allow a light industrial park’s construction on Lualualei valley farmland.

Of the eight Commissioners present (absent was Maui Rep. Lisa Judge), three –- Normand Lezy, Charles Jencks, and Ronald Heller –- denied the motion for approval made by Duane Kanuha. Land boundary amendments require a supermajority of six votes for approval.

READ THE FULL ARTICLE

+++

Nanakuli industrial park dead

A refusal to alter the site’s zoning scuttles a project planned for Lualualei Valley

Plans to establish an industrial park in Nana­kuli were derailed Thursday when the proj­ect’s developer failed to win enough state Land Use Commission votes to change the zoning.

The land, once used to grow sugar cane, is now zoned for preservation.

The 96-acre proj­ect in Lua­lua­lei Valley had drawn some opposition for furthering conversion of farmland in the area but also had won praise for its promise to create jobs and business opportunities in an economically disadvantaged region.

READ THE FULL ARTICLE

Hawai'i Island Appeal for Solidarity

Activists from Hawai’i island issued an appeal for solidarity in the face of a massive military expansion planned for Pohakuloa.   Please send solidarity statements to ja@interpac.net. Mahalo!

>><<

For Public Release concerning U.S. military training at Pohakuloa
See list of individual signers below

Further contact: Jim Albertini 966-7622
Contact: Malu `Aina Center for Non-violent Education & Action P.O. Box AB Kurtistown, Hawai`i 96760.
Phone (808) 966-7622.  Email ja@interpac.net http://www.malu-aina.org

Appeal for Solidarity!

We (the undersigned) appeal to all Hawaii peace, justice, environment, and independence activists, to the general public, and to local and state government officials.  We ask that you stand in solidarity with us on Moku O Keawe in resistance to major U.S. military expansion at the 133,000-acre Pohakuloa Training Area, and now even helicopter assault training for Afghanistan on our sacred mountains –Mauna Kea and Mauna Loa.

We congratulate the Malama Makua community organization for its victory in stopping all military live fire in Makua Valley on Oahu.  But Makua is still held hostage by the military and used to train for ongoing U.S. wars of aggression.

We are opposed to pushing U.S. desecration and contamination from one site to another.  We want an end to U.S. occupation in Hawaii and the restoration of the Hawaii nation.  We want the U.S. to stop bombing Hawaii and clean up its opala.  We want to put an end to U.S. desecration and contamination of all sacred cultural sites.  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 military toxins.

Restore the Hawaii Nation!

End U.S. Terrorism!
Military Clean-Up NOT Build Up!
Stop all the Wars!  End all Occupations!

Signers
Isaac Harp, Kelii “Skippy” Ioane, Hanalei Fergerstrom,
Kihei Soli Niheu, Ali`i Sir Kaliko Kanaele, Calvin Kaleiwahea,
Lloyd Buell, Danny Li, Stephen Paulmier, Ronald Fujiyoshi,
Moanikeala Akaka, Tomas Belsky,
Samuel Kaleleiki, Jim Albertini

More on military expansion on Pohakuloa

The full extent of military expansion at Pohakuloa is only becoming more evident.

The Army website for the Pohakuloa Training Areas Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement can be accessed here. Written comments on the proposed action and alternatives will be accepted via e-mail (ptapeis@bah.com) and U.S. mail until February 7, 2011 to:  PTA PEIS, P.O. Box 514, Honolulu, HI 96809. Materials from the scoping meetings will be made available on the “Project Documents” page.

Yesterday, I learned that people witnessed construction activity up on the slopes of Mauna Loa.  The activity was so high on the mountain that the observer thought it surely must be outside the boundary of the Pohakuloa Training Area.    Later, they saw explosions near the site from aircraft and land based artillery fire.

We have confirmed that the construction companies were building ‘targets’.  Julie Taomia, an archaeologist at Pohakuloa said that the activity is most likely related to Marine Corps projects. She said that the Pohakuloa Training Area extends pretty far up Mauna Loa, beyond the old Hilo-Kona Road.   She said that the Marines did an Environmental Assessment (EA) for this range construction work. However, since this was done as an EA, as opposed to a full Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), it slipped past the notice of most people.  Furthermore, since this is a Marine Corps project, she said that cultural monitors, which are required under the Army Stryker Brigade programmatic agreement, are not required to oversee ground disturbing activity, which is just a way for the Army to avoid responsibility for the impacts on an Army range.  This loophole must be closed.   The Marine Corps expansion contributes tot he cumulative impacts of military activity.  There should be way to conduct cultural and environmental monitoring  for all activity related to the installation regardless of which service branch is doing the project.

In addition to this current Marine Corps expansion activity, the Marines are expanding training in Pohakuloa to accommodate the new aircraft scheduled to be stationed at Mokapu (a.k.a. the Marine Corps Base Kane’ohe).  I missed the following article in the Big Island Weekly when it came out in September.

>><<

http://www.bigislandweekly.com/articles/2010/09/01/read/news/news02.txt

The Marines are landing on the island

New squadrons may be using Pohakuloa for future training and gunnery exercises
By Alan D. Mcnarie
Wednesday, September 1, 2010 9:50 AM HST

The United States military is planning yet another expansion entailing increased use of Pohakuloa Training Area. The Marine Corps wants to move up to three additional squadrons of aircraft to the islands, including 9 UH-1Y Huey and 18 AH-1Z Cobra helicopters and 24 of its controversial MV-22 Osprey tilt-rotor aircraft.

The Marines held “scoping meetings” for an Environmental Impact Statement on the proposed expansion last week in Hilo and Kona. The meetings followed an “open house” format: instead of allowing public testimony before an open mic, the meeting’s organizers set up various visual displays manned by experts to answer questions, and allowed members of the public to present written testimony or dictate their input to a court reporter. But a group of protestors led by Malu Aina’s Jim Albertini brought their own microphone system to the Hilo meeting to voice their objections to the plan, including concerns that increased use of PTA’s firing range could stir up depleted uranium dust there and that the Ospreys, which have a less-than-perfect safety record, could present dangers to servicemen and to the community.

The move would essentially allow an entire Marine Air-Ground Task Force to operate out of Kaneohe Marine Air Base. Most of the components of such a task force, including command and ground elements and CH-53D “Sea Stallion” heavy-lift helicopters, are already in place here. The proposed move would allow medium-lift and assault helicopters needed by the MAGTF to train alongside the other elements of the force.

Although the new aircraft would be based on O’ahu, their presence would be felt across the island chain. The plan calls for training, including gunnery exercises, at Pohakuloa; for refueling facilities and night exercises at Molokai Training Support Facility and Kalaupapa Airfield, respectively; for additional activities at the Pacific Missile Range Facility on Kauai, and possibly for target practice on an islet called Kau’ula Rock, near Ni’ihau.

Perhaps the plan’s most controversial element is the Osprey, a hybrid aircraft with stubby wings that end in two giant propellers that can lift the craft like a helicopter, then rotate to pull the machine forward like an airplane. The Marines want Ospreys to replace their aging C-46 “Sea Knight” medium-lift choppers, which have only about half the Ospreys’ range and speed.

“It’s much more capable (than the C-46) and it’s faster – and faster, for the Marines, is safer,” said a Marine spokesperson at the scoping meeting.

But the Osprey has a troubled history. Based on an experimental craft that gained Bell Helicopter and Boeing a joint government contract in 1983, first flown in 1989, Ospreys remained in development for the next 15 years; along the way, it compiled a long record of cost overruns, mechanical failures and crashes, killing 30 people before the first operational Marine squadron began training in 2005.

“The mishaps that we had in the 90s and in 2000 [when two Ospreys crashed, killing 23 people] were tragic,” said Jason Holder, one of the Marines’ authorities at the scoping meeting in Hilo. But he said that since those incidents, the Marines had brought in “outside experts” to fix the problems that no crashes had occurred in over 80,000 flight hours since 2002.

That statement wasn’t entirely accurate. An Osprey went down under combat conditions in Afghanistan in April of 2010. But that accident occurred during a dust storm and may have been influenced by weather, pilot error or even enemy action. Due to an electronic malfunction, another Osprey took off without a pilot and made a rather unsuccessful landing.

The Ospreys have had enough other problems that the U.S. General Accounting Office recommended last year the Secretary of Defense require a new analysis of alternatives to the aircraft, and that the Marines develop “a prioritized strategy to improve system suitability, reduce operational costs, and align future budget requests.”

“Although recently deployed in Iraq and regarded favorably, it has not performed the full range of missions anticipated, and how well it can do so is in question,” the GAO Web site (http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-09-692T) summarized.

At the Hilo meeting, the Sierra Club’s Cory Harden provided a long list of media references about various problems with the Ospreys, including the aircraft’s inability to glide to an unpowered landing, as helicopters can, and a downwash from its rotors that can be so powerful that during a demonstration at Staten Island, New York, it knocked down tree branches and injured 10 spectators.

In light of such problems, Harden asked that the EIS “evaluate the risks of Ospreys harming military personnel and civilians” in Hawai’i.

Another major concern voiced at the meeting was the continued presence of depleted uranium at Pohakuloa and the risk that increased use of the facility’s target range might have of stirring up radioactive dust. The military has maintained that the number of DU shells fired there, and the risk of the dust leaving the area, were both minimal, while critics claim that thousands of uranium spotter rounds may have been fired, that the dust could spread for miles, and that even a few molecules in the lungs could cause cancer. Albertini pointed out that a County Council resolution had called for a moratorium on any live fire exercises at PTA until an independent assessment and cleanup of the DU there had taken place.

The deployment of the new Marine Aircraft would almost certainly mean more use of PTA’s firing range. The Osprey’s notorious downwash could certainly stir up dust. But while it can mount an optional belly or ramp gun, it is primarily a transport, not a gun platform. A much bigger user of the firing range would likely be the Marines’ venerable Cobras, which have been blasting enemy targets with gunfire and Hellfire missiles since the Vietnam era. Jim Isaacs, another Marine expert running one of the information stations at the Hilo meeting, noted that with the Cobras, “sixty percent of events are ordnance related.” He noted, however, that the Marines’ Cobras did not fire any ordnance containing DU.

The new aircraft probably would create some jobs in the islands – especially construction jobs. Ironically, despite the choppers’ and Ospreys’ go-anywhere mission, one big ticket item involved in moving them here could be the construction of new landing pads at Schofield and elsewhere. Marine spokesperson James Sibley told the Weekly that while there were “no plans” currently for new helipads at Pohakuloa, “Right now PTA can barely support the operators of the helicopters that we have here”: that downwash could potentially lift the existing runway’s steel mesh material, causing damage.

Despite their obvious differences, the Marines joined the protestors in an opening pule, or Hawaiian prayer. A court reporter typed continuously during the protestor’s testimony, apparently taking it down.

Members of the public who missed the meetings are encouraged to visit the project’s website, http://www.mcbh.usmc.mil/22h1eis to submit online testimony, or to mail comments to Department of the Navy, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Pacific, Attn: EV21, MV 22/H-1 EIS Manager, Makalapa Drive, Suite 100, Pearl Harbor, HI 96860-3134.

Target: Pohakuloa

The graphic in the Honolulu Star Advertiser article “Upgrade in Sight” is fitting: Pohakuloa in the crosshairs of a sniper’s scope.
STAR-ADVERTISER / October 2009

Pohakuloa has become the target of massive military expansion since 2001. First the Stryker brigade expansion led to a 23,000 acre land grab by the Army:

In 2006 the Army bought 23,000 acres from Parker Ranch for military maneuver training for $31.5 million, and it has spent $33.6 million for a Stryker armored vehicle “battle area complex” expected to open in 2012 at a separate spot at Pohakuloa. But that facility is mainly for Stryker gunnery, officials said.

Then the Air Force expanded its aerial bombardment training to use 2000 lb dummy bombs dropped from stealth B-2 bombers. Then the Marine Corps expansion. Now the Army “upgrade”of the range and proposed high altitude helicopter training on the slopes of Mauna Kea.  The recent announcement that the Army is abandoning live-fire training in Makua on O’ahu after more than 60 years is hardly cause for celebration in light of the shift of major military training activity to Lihu’e (Schofield range on O’ahu) and Pohakuloa on Hawai’i island.
Pohakuloa has been subjected to intense military activity:

Pohakuloa has 153 ranges, including the 566-acre housing and base operations area, and numerous firing ranges directed at a central 51,000-acre ordnance impact area.

Army soldiers, Hawaii-based and transiting Marines, and the Hawaii National Guard are among the ground forces that regularly train at Pohakuloa, officials said.

Artillery, mortars, rockets and missiles are fired at Pohakuloa, and Air Force bombers drop dummy bombs on the range.

Army expansion plans include helicopter training on Mauna Kea, outside the military base:

The high-altitude helicopter training plan seeks to standardize and make an annual requirement of similar exercises that were held at Pohakuloa in 2003, 2004 and 2006, a change that reflects new Army doctrine, according to documents.

The 25th Combat Aviation Brigade at Schofield would use the Mauna Kea and Mauna Loa training as it too prepares for deployment to Afghanistan, where operations routinely exceed 10,000 feet.

Six existing landing zones would be used for approach, landings and takeoff at elevations above 8,000 feet under high winds, extreme temperatures and during night operations.

The training was examined in an environmental assessment separate from the infantry plans. A draft finding of “no significant impact” was released in December.

Helicopter training hours at Pohakuloa would be increased by 30 percent to 6,000 total hours based on 300 to 400 aviators receiving the training, the Army said.

People will resist:

The Army faces opposition to the Pohakuloa plan from some Big Island residents, including peace activist Jim Albertini.

Albertini said in a statement following a public meeting held by the Army on the modernization plan that he is concerned about depleted uranium left over from a 1960s weapon system used at Pohakuloa.

“There has been plenty of money over the years for military buildup but very little funding for military cleanup. It’s time to change those priorities,” Albertini said. “The bottom line is this: Hawaii residents don’t want the U.S. military training to do to others what the U.S. has already done to Hawaii — overthrow and occupy its government and nation and contaminate its air, land, water, people, plants and animals with military toxins.”

The destruction of Pohakuloa, Makua, Kaho’olawe is not simply a result of “training”. What is happening to Pohakuloa is symptomatic of the wars that have become permanent fixtures of these islands. It exposes the Big Lie of Empire: “Pax Americana” – the American Peace. From the mountains of Afghanistan to the slopes of Mauna Kea, Empire is endless war.

As Ann Wright recently shared about her trip to Afghanistan, Afghan Youth Peace Volunteers have engaged in several global call-in days. People from around the world having conversations with youth from a remote part of Afghanistan. For those who still justify the war in Afghanistan and the military training in Hawai’i in preparation for that war, listen to these youth: http://ourjourneytosmile.com/blog/

>><<

Upgrade in sight

By William Cole

POSTED: 01:30 a.m. HST, Jan 22, 2011

Schofield Barracks soldiers of the 2nd Stryker Brigade Combat Team’s 1st Battalion, 21st Infantry spent two weeks at the Big Island’s Pohakuloa Training Area preparing for a deployment to Iraq. Army soldiers, Hawaii-based and transiting Marines, and the Hawaii National Guard are among the ground forces that regularly train there.

The Army wants to modernize its vast Pohakuloa Training Area on the Big Island for the 10,000 to 20,000 U.S. troops who use it each year, and increase high-altitude helicopter training on Mauna Kea and Mauna Loa to meet a shift in emphasis to Afghanistan.

An Infantry Platoon Battle Area at 133,000-acre Pohakuloa that also could be used for companies of about 150 soldiers — and replace past live-fire training at Makua Valley — is a priority for the Army, with the service hoping it can begin construction in 2013.

READ FULL ARTICLE

In the wake of the Army's Makua decision

The Honolulu Star Advertiser did a feature article on David Henkin, an attorney for EarthJustice who represents Malama Makua in its fight with the U.S. Army.  David is a friend and Makahiki brother who has done a great job as the attorney for Malama Makua.   However, I disagree with his suggestion that live fire or other training is more acceptable at Schofield (Lihu’e) or Pohakuloa.  The principles of aloha ‘aina and solidarity that bring thousands of people from around the world to stand with Makua must be reciprocated.  The ‘not-in-my-backyard’ argument leaves unchallenged the very premise that the training is necessary and for some legitimate purpose, which, as the death toll and costs rise in Iraq and Afghanistan, we know to be a lie.  As Jim Albertini writes in his January 12, 2011 leaflet: “The bottom line is this: Hawaii residents don’t want the U.S. military training to do to others what the U.S. has already done to Hawaii: overthrow and occupy its government and nation, and contaminate it’s air, land, water, people, plants, and animals with military toxins.”

Below is the leaflet issued by Malu ‘Aina followed by the interview with David Henkin:

Pohakuloa Military Expansion Opposed Unanimously!

Below is a brief report on the public hearing held Jan. 11th at Hilo Intermediate School cafeteria on plans for military expansion at Pohakuloa. The plans call for new live-fire ranges and training, and construction activities, at Pohakuloa, as well as high altitude helicopter flights and landings on Mauna Kea and Mauna Loa in training for Afghanistan/Pakistan high altitude mountainous warfare.

The first hour and a half was taken up with “open house” science fair type displays by military people who knew very little about the history of militarism in Hawaii and couldn’t answer many questions asked. But the public testimony portion on Pohakuloa was powerful.

The public hearing portion started with Kumu Paul Neves and his Ohana/halau doing chants and then Paul led a Pule.  Lots of young Hawaiians testified both in their native tongue and English.  They spoke eloquently against the military desecration of the sacred mountains and aina.  Other Hawaiians and people of all ages,  testified as well.  The testimony went for 2 hours.  Not one person spoke in support of the military expansion plans. The PTA new commander and the Army Garrison commander from Oahu sat stoned-faced throughout the 2 hours of public testimony

Many citizens noted that no further military activity at the Pohakuloa Training Area (PTA) should go forward.  On July 2, 2008 the Hawaii County Council passed a resolution by a vote of 8-1 calling for a complete halt to all live-fire at PTA and any activities that create dust until there is a comprehensive independent assessment of the depleted uranium (DU) at PTA and a clean up of the DU present.  The council’s resolution also called for 7 additional actions, none of which have been implemented.

Several people emphasized that stopping the bombing and all live-fire, construction, and other activities that create dust at PTA is key.  Du particles are particularly hazardous when inhaled.  People testified that the federal government should pay for the comprehensive independent assessment, testing and monitoring for radiation contamination and that federal funds should be sought through Hawaii’s congressional delegation –senators Inouye and Akaka, and representatives Hirono and Hanabusa.  There has been plenty of money over the years for military build up but very little funding for military clean up.  It’s time to change those priorities.

The bottom line is this: Hawaii residents don’t want the U.S. military training to do to others what the U.S. has already done to Hawaii: overthrow and occupy its government and nation, and contaminate it’s air, land, water, people, plants, and animals with military toxins.

Stop the Bombing!  Stop All the Wars!
Military Clean Up NOT Build Up Now!
End all Occupations! Restore the Hawaii Nation!

1. Mourn all victims of violence. 2. Reject war as a solution. 3. Defend civil liberties. 4. Oppose all discrimination, anti-Islamic, anti-Semitic, etc. 5. Seek peace through justice in Hawai`i and around the world.
Contact: Malu `Aina Center for Non-violent Education & Action P.O. Box AB Kurtistown, Hawai`i 96760.
Phone (808) 966-7622.  Email ja@interpac.net   http://www.malu-aina.org
Hilo Peace Vigil leaflet (Jan. 14, 2011 – 487th week) – Friday 3:30-5PM downtown Post Office

Jim Albertini

Malu ‘Aina Center for Non-violent Education & Action

P.O.Box AB

Kurtistown, Hawai’i 96760

phone: 808-966-7622

email: JA@interpac.net

Visit us on the web at: www.malu-aina.org

+++

http://www.staradvertiser.com/columnists/20110121_David_Henkin.html

David Henkin

The lawyer for Earthjustice won a long campaign to stop the Army’s live-fire training in Makua Valley

By Dave Koga

POSTED: 01:30 a.m. HST, Jan 21, 2011

David Henkin knew early in life that he wanted to protect the environment. As a child in Los Angeles, he would pick up pieces of trash during walks with his mother and wonder aloud how people could be so thoughtless.

“The interest got more sophisticated after that,” he says, “but I think for a lot of people it starts with just looking around and seeing how beautiful the world is and what a gift we’ve been given … and understanding that we all have an obligation to stewardship.”

At Yale Law School, Henkin naturally gravitated toward environmental law, which would give him “the chance to stand up for the Earth.”

“What drew me in was not just the work — the opportunity to make the world cleaner, better, safer — but that the clients are never in it for money or personal gain,” he says. “They’re in it because they have a passion for protecting resources and places for future generations. And so that’s something I’ve always been able to get up in the morning for … to keep my energy up and keep doing it year in and year out.”

Since arriving in Hawaii in 1995 to work for Earthjustice, Henkin has filed numerous cases on issues ranging from protection of the endangered Hawaiian crow to the upgrading of Honolulu’s wastewater treatment facilities.

He is best known for representing the community group Malama Makua, which has pressed the U.S. Army since 1998 to prepare environmental impact statements on its training in Makua Valley, home to more than 100 archaeological sites and 50 endangered plant and animal species.

Two weeks ago, the Army’s commander in the Pacific, Lt. Gen. Benjamin Mixon, announced that “in an effort to balance our relations with the community and the requirements that we have for training,” the Army had abandoned plans to resume live-fire training in Makua Valley and would conduct future exercises at Schofield Barracks and the Pohakuloa Training Area on the Big Island.

Henkin is pleased with the Army’s decision, which he says was too long in coming. But he says the ultimate goal remains the return of the valley to the state — and it may be a while before that issue is resolved.

QUESTION: Now that the Army is saying there will be no more live-fire training in Makua, what’s your sense of what’s going to happen next?

ANSWER: What’s important to understand is that the Army hasn’t done any live-fire training in Makua since 1998 (when Malama Makua filed suit after a series of munitions-sparked brushfires). In the last 12 years, they’ve fired rounds in only 26 exercises during a three-year period. So actually, out of the last 12 years, there have been nine years without a single shot fired. And as you know, during that period of time, particularly from 2001 onward, the Army has been deploying constantly to combat theaters and they’ve been training their soldiers elsewhere. So what Gen. Mixon said is really just an acknowledgment of reality — which is that not only can the Army get by without live-fire training at Makua, it has.

And so the Army and the people of Hawaii have to ask themselves: Is it worth sacrificing the cultural sites and the endangered species? Is it worth training within three miles of heavily populated areas? Is it worth training across the street from areas where people play with their children and gather food from the ocean when there are other options?

The first lawsuit was filed in 1998 … and in 2000 and then again in 2001, the Army came out with a very short document called an environmental assessment where they said there was no potential for training at Makua to cause any significant harm to the environment. This, against a history in which cultural sites have been destroyed and endangered species have been burned, just didn’t pass the smile test. And the judge agreed with us that they needed to do the full-blown environmental impact statement …

To me, this case is a perfect illustration of what Congress intended when it made … the environmental review law. It is, “Let’s get the facts on the table; let’s not do it based on rhetoric and supposition. Let’s get the facts on the table and make a good decision.” And we believe the decision Gen. Mixon announced last week is not only good for us, but good for the Army and good for the people of the state of Hawaii, because for so long the dialogue has been readiness versus the environment. And now we realize that you can have both. You can protect sacred places, special places, and you can also do the training.

Q: What do you think was driving the Army’s reluctance to do any kind of complete study all these years?

A: We’ve heard that the Army had a fear — almost like the old domino theory — that if the Army gave in at Makua, then the activists would be at the gates and they would try to push them out of Schofield and out of Pohakuloa. For Earthjustice and Malama Makua, the issue has always been Makua and whether this is an appropriate place to train. I think there were some concerns about (the Army) saving face. Maybe along the way some of the generals (who commanded Pacific forces) believed their rhetoric.

Q: What are Malama Makua’s thoughts on the Army’s plan to now turn Makua into a roadside-bomb training site?

A: Our clients’ belief, and my personal belief, is that Makua is a very sacred, special place that just is not appropriate for training. I don’t think any rational military trainer in the 21st century would look around the state of Hawaii and say, “I’m going to train at Makua” if they hadn’t been there since World War II. I think it’s a legacy of past decisions made in a different age, with different knowledge and different sensibilities.

So I guess the short answer is there are other places where they can do this kind of training. To do the convoy exercise you basically need a road. There are plenty of roads on Army land at Schofield and Pohakuloa.

Now, the specifics of what’s being proposed are pretty much unknown at this point. My guess is that it is substantially less of an impact on the cultural sites and the endangered species than what they had been doing before, but to get back to my theme, information is vital and there hasn’t really been disclosure. I can just say, based on what I do know, that there are other places they can do it and Makua really ought to be returned to the people of the state of Hawaii for appropriate cultural and civilian use.

Q: Are you confident of that happening?

A: Before (the government’s 65-year lease for Makua expires in) 2029? My approach to the type of work that I do is that you have to be optimistic and idealistic, because that’s what keeps you going. But at the same time, you have to be realistic and keep your expectations low because that’s what keeps you from becoming discouraged. When you’re doing public interest environmental work, it’s always a long-term battle, it’s always an uphill battle, it’s never really over. So I do envision a return of Makua to the people of Hawaii as soon as possible. But I don’t expect it. I hope to be pleasantly surprised.

You have to remember that when Makua was originally taken for training in 1941, the families who lived there, the families who were evicted, were told that their land would be returned six months after the end of hostilities. They’re still waiting. So really, Makua has a history of very profound broken promises to the individual families and in a larger context to the people of Hawaii.

Q: Does Earthjustice have any problem with live-fire training at Pohakuloa?

A: My understanding is that the Army has started an environmental review process, where from the beginning they’ve admitted the need for an environmental impact statement — so there’s been progress over the years — and that they’re doing a review of locations of alternate training facilities to Pohakuloa. It is hard to find a place in the state of Hawaii to do live-fire military training that is not going to cause damage. It is by its very nature a destructive activity. You’re practicing war.

Am I OK with them training at Pohakuloa? That’s not really the lens that I look at it through. I look at it through this lens: If the Army is going to do a certain type of training, where can they do it with the least impact?

Q: As far as returning Makua to Hawaii and having it open to civilians again, do you have a sense of how much unexploded ordnance might still be there and how much clean-up it would take?

A: Well, one of the things we were able to secure through a settlement agreement in 2001, is an obligation for the Army now to be clearing unexploded ordnance from the valley. Normally, the Army has a policy that live training ranges don’t get cleaned up until they’re actually closed. But as part of our settlement we said, “We don’t want you to wait until you’re ready to leave, we want you to start cleaning up now.” So there have been 1,000-pound bombs, 250-pound bombs, a lot of heavy ordnance that has already been pulled out of there. Now they tend to find a mortar round here, a mortar round there.

Compared to Kahoolawe, the entire military reservation’s about 4,100 acres. The flat lands where people would want to carry out cultural activities, maybe start farming again, is a much, much smaller area. So I think it would be manageable.

Testifiers oppose Pohakuloa training plans

Source: http://www.bigislandweekly.com/articles/2011/01/19/read/news/news01.txt

Residents to Army: NO

Testifiers oppose Pohakuloa training plans
By Alan D. Mcnarie
Wednesday, January 19, 2011 8:21 AM HST

An army has to train if it wants to avoid unnecessary casualties. And American troops stationed in Hawai’i face a narrowing set of options for training. Kaho’olawe has been returned, much the worse for wear, to the native Hawaiians. And last week, the Army bowed to public pressure and announced that it would no longer pursue live-fire training in O’ahu’s Makua Valley.

That leaves Hawai’i Island’s 133,000-acre Pohakuloa Training Area to absorb much of the burden. Last year, the Army announced that it would shift its artillery heavy weapons practice from Makua to Pohakuloa. And last week, island residents got a glimpse of some of the specifics of that plan, as the Army held two “scoping sessions” for its “Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement” on the Army’s proposal to modernize PTA’s aged buildings and firing range. But at the two sessions, it appeared that the Army had no more support for training here than it did at Makua Valley.

Compared to some of its recent projects, such as the purchase of several thousand acres of range land for a Stryker vehicle maneuver area, the plans covered by the Programmatic EIS are relatively modest. All of the improvements would fall “within the current footprint. We’re not buying land to expand,” army spokesperson Mike Egami told BIW.

“The cantonment area and the ranges are so old that they’re not up to modern Army standards. The ranges are really fundamental; we have them (troops) training on these Korea-World War II types of facilities,” Egami said.

Plans include a new “shoot house” — an indoor firing range with walls that bullets can’t penetrate — an Infantry Battle Complex for training company-sized groups of foot soldiers, and a Military Operations Urban Terrain (MOUT) site where soldiers can practice dismounted urban warfare, all to be built within the confines of the current firing range.

At this stage, there still appear to be major holes in the Army’s assessment of the new facilities’ impact. Egami couldn’t say, for instance, how much the use of the new facilities would increase the amount of ammunition fired at the base, and when, where and how the unexploded ordnance would be cleaned up. He did tell BIW that all the ammunition used at the new facilities would be from small arms.

At the Tuesday Hilo scoping session, not a single resident spoke in favor of the Army’s plans. The Army got a similar verbal shellacking the next night in Waimea. Most of those who spoke wanted Pohakuloa closed down, not expanded. Several residents suggested that the Army should spend its money on rehabilitating the physical and mental casualties of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, instead of on expanding training facilities.

“I can say that I’m a part of a military family, like it or not,” said veteran Hawaiian activist Moanikeala Akaka, after reciting a long list of relatives who’d served in the military or worked on military bases. “But I can say there are some of us who are sick and tired of the military expansion on the island.”

Relatively few of the speakers, in fact, actually addressed the specifics of the Army proposals contained in the PEIS, though one speaker did suggest that new training sites be moved to a different part of the impact area to get them further away from areas of native vegetation. Several residents wanted to talk about still another army training proposal that was not contained within the PEIS: The Army wants to use existing DLNR helicopter landing sites on Mauna Loa and Mauna Kea to hold high altitude training for the choppers of its 25th Combat Aviation Brigade, which is due to employ to Afghanistan in late spring of this year. The High Altitude Mountainous Environment Terrain Training (HAMET) is being handled in a separate Environmental Assessment; EAs do not require public hearings, though residents can give written input. A Draft Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) was published last month, and the Army is now accepting public comment on it. The draft is available at larger public libraries and online (Search Army + Hawaii + HAMET).

The Army has, in fact, been using those landing sites for years, and not without incident. According to the Draft Finding of No Significant Impact, a helicopter involved in a HAMET exercise in 2003 missed its landing zone and accidentally landed in the Mauna Kea Ice Age Natural Area Reserve. In 2006, another HAMET “incident” occurred when “an aircraft hovered too low over critical habitat.” The “critical habitat” mentioned is home to the palila, an endangered Hawaiian bird found only in the Big Island’s upper-altitude mamane forests, some of which have already been lost to the realignment of the Saddle Road.

Other threatened or endangered species may also be affected by the flights: the ‘io (Hawaiian Hawk); the ope’ape’a (Hawaiian hoary bat); and the nene. One of the helicopter landing sites on Mauna Loa, in fact, lies right on the edge of the Kipuka Ainahou Nene Sanctuary, though a map included in the Draft FONSI shows the border of the actual nene range well to the east of the sanctuary border. The Army plans to mitigate by flying at least 2000 feet over possible habitats, and the FONSI claims that the endangered species are “unlikely to be present at the elevation of any of the LZs [landing zones].”

Paul Neves of the Royal Order of Kamehameha I called the HAMET EA “completely inadequate.” He noted, for instance, that it had “no analysis of people using traditional trails near the landing zones,” and didn’t mention the usage of Mauna Loa Observatory Road by observatory workers, hunters and hikers, even though the military wanted to use landing zones on both sides of that road.

“The helicopters have been landing for seven years now with almost zero public oversight…,” testified the Sierra Club’s Cory Harden. “Helicopters may fly up to 18 hours a day during training, day and night, to within 2,000 vertical feet of the summit. The EA says noise and visual impacts on cultural practices and recreation will not be significant. That’s like saying impacts would not be significant from helicopters at Machu Pichu…. The EA has a cultural overview without one word about the illegal takeover of Hawai’i. That’s like writing a cultural overview of the United States and leaving out the Civil War.”

Harden also brought up another controversy: the furor over depleted uranium ordnance at Pohakuloa and the army’s refusal, so far, to completely remove it, or even to hunt very hard for it. She cited instance after instance of the army documents and spokespeople claiming it was too dangerous to look for DU in Pohakuloa’s impact zone. Yet all of the new battle areas, she noted, were “either in or directly adjacent to the existing impact areas of PTA.”

“Why is it too dangerous to enter the impact area to hunt for DU, but safe to go in and build more military facilities?” she asked.

Egami told BIW that the new live fire training facilities were not in the impact area, but adjacent to it. But one of the displays the army had put up at the scoping session said that the Infantry Platoon Battle Area would be “located at one of three (3) potential locations within the existing impact area”; an adjacent map showed not only the Infantry Platoon Battle area, but the shoot house and MOUT facility all within the impact zone. Army munitions expert Vic Garo explained that there were actually two zones of risk within the impact area. Within the impact area was the Improved Munitions Area, which held unexploded heavy ordnance including Vietnam-era bomblets. The outer zone, where the new facilities would be located, may contain mostly unexploded small arms munitions.

“We had to send our explosive ordnance disposal people in to clear that area [where the new facilities would be]” he said; cultural and natural survey teams could enter the outer zone if accompanied by explosives ordnance demolition teams.

“When projects come up, we go within the impact zone,” confirmed PTA archeologist Julie Toombs. “I keep telling people we haven’t blown any archeologists up yet.”

Toombs said that there had, indeed, been archeological sites found within the Impact Area: “There are platforms, lava tube systems, excavated pits….” Toombs said no one knew for certain what the pits were for, but they may have been carved into the lava to attract nesting sea birds: “Nineteenth Century accounts speak of huge flocks of sea birds in that area.”

Many native Hawaiians, from veteran activists such as Neves to several students who testified in Hawaiian, saw the Army’s plans as a strengthening of an illegal military occupation.

“Pretty soon the Big Island will no longer be the Big Island, because it will be called the United States Military,” predicted Neves.

Others dwelt on the sacredness of the mountain.

“I don’t know how many of you have seen Avatar, but Mauna Kea is like our home tree,” said another. “Your training of our youth is appreciated, but not here on Mauna Kea, not at Pohakuloa.”

Army's Makua move welcome

The editorial from the Honolulu Star Advertiser about the Army’s decision to end live-fire training in Makua is surprisingly favorable to the community groups.    It ends with an acknowledgment that the move of major training activities to Pohakuloa will incite other resistance:  “The decision to move live-fire training from Oahu to the Big Island will not quickly dissolve reasonable resistance and scrutiny — nor should it.”

>><<

Source: http://www.staradvertiser.com/news/20110113_Army_ends_live-fire_training_at_Makua.html

Army’s Makua move welcome

POSTED: 01:30 a.m. HST, Jan 14, 2011

After some two decades battling environmental and cultural advocates, the Army has agreed to remove heavy firepower exercises from Makua Valley. The decision is not the full surrender that some had wanted and the Army needs to provide an analysis of the environmental effects created by the decision to alter its training grounds — but the move is a step in the right direction.

The decision comes five years after a federal judge ruled that the Army had failed to show that 25th Infantry Division soldiers would be “inadequately trained” if denied use of live ammunition in field exercises in the leeward valley, an Army training area since the attack on Pearl Harbor.

Four years have passed since the Army reported to Congress that the training in Makua was “absolutely necessary,” although no live-fire training has been permitted there since 2004.

Just over the Waianae ridge from Schofield Barracks, the 25th Infantry’s headquarters, the valley is regarded by some as a sacred place and is home to a multitude of endangered species.

Little more than two months ago, U.S. District Judge Susan Oki Mollway found that the Army had failed to adequately show how the live-fire training would affect cultural sites in the valley and Makua Beach limu, a seaweed consumed by families that fish in the area.

A trial on unresolved issues had been scheduled to begin next month.

The Malama Makua community group, which challenged the Army in court in 1998, and David Henkin, its Earthjustice attorney, welcomed the Army’s new stance. Waianae physician Fred Dodge, a Malama Makua board member, is understandably cautious about what the Army intends to do with the valley, remarking that he “would like to know more” about the Army’s plans.

Lt. Gen. Benjamin R. “Randy” Mixon, former commander of the 25th Infantry and now head of the U.S. Army in the Pacific, says the artillery and other heavy weapons training will move from the 4,190-acre Makua Valley to the 133,000-acre Big Island Pohakuloa Training Area, Schofield and mainland sites.

The Army is now eyeing Makua for a roadside-bomb and counterinsurgency training center, with conditions replicating those in Afghanistan. The potential effects of that new plan should be cautiously vetted.

The Army already faces opposition at Pohakuloa over depleted uranium contamination, but asserts that the radiological doses are “well within limits” considered safe.

Pohakuloa now is being used as an Army training area for 19-ton Stryker tracked vehicles.

The live-fire training move to Pohakuloa will provide ammunition for the opposition Malu Aina Center for Nonviolent Education & Action, headed by longtime peace activist Jim Albertini.

Mixon says the plan for Pohakuloa will be described in a Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement now being prepared.

The decision to move live-fire training from Oahu to the Big Island will not quickly dissolve reasonable resistance and scrutiny — nor should it.

A partial win for Makua, but struggle far from over

Yesterday, the Army announced that it will end live fire training in Makua valley. This is a win for those who have struggled for many years to save Makua from the destructive and contaminating activities of the U.S. military. The Honolulu Star Advertiser ran a story and so did the Associated Press.

However, it is only a partial victory.

The Army continues to hold Makua hostage and plans to use the valley for other kinds of training. Furthermore, the Army is shifting the bulk of its training to Schofield in Lihu’e, O’ahu and Pohakuloa on Hawai’i island. This is consistent with the recent announcement of a Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement for expanding or renovating training facilities at Pohakuloa.

This was never a “Not-In-My-Back-Yard” movement. Trading one ‘aina for another is not acceptable. Furthermore, it leaves unchallenged the very premise that the training is needed. Training for what purpose? To invade and occupy other countries? Inflict death and destruction in the name of Pax Americana?

The movement to protect Makua moves into a challenging phase as we now push for the cleanup and return of the land. The Army is hoping that non-live fire training will be less likely to inflame community anger. By removing a major flashpoint, the Army hopes to deflate the momentum of the movement. It is more difficult to sustain high levels of energy around the technical and tedious clean up and restoration of a site. So we must be inspired by our vision of the alternative we hope to grow in Makua.

Every gain we make in Makua owes to the thousands in Hawai’i and around the world who have come forward to malama ‘aina, speak out, protest, pray and grow the peaceful and blessed community we wish to see in the world.  The Makua movement must not forget its kuleana to the many people who have stood in solidarity with us, as we continue to stand and speak out in solidarity with others.

>><<

http://www.staradvertiser.com/news/20110113_Army_ends_live-fire_training_at_Makua.html

Army ends live-fire training at Makua

After decades of opposition to bombing the valley, real ordnance will be used only at Schofield and Pohakuloa

By William Cole

POSTED: 01:30 a.m. HST, Jan 13, 2011

The last company of soldiers may have stormed the hills of Makua Valley with M-4 rifles blazing, artillery whistling overhead, mortars pounding mock enemy positions and helicopters firing from above.

After battling environmentalists and Hawaiian cultural practitioners since at least the late 1980s, the Army said this week it is acceding to community concerns and no longer will use the heavy firepower in Makua that started multiple fires in the 4,190-acre Waianae Coast valley and fueled a number of lawsuits.

In place of the company Combined Arms Live-Fire Exercises, known as CALFEXes, the Army said it is moving ahead with a plan to turn Makua into a “world class” roadside-bomb and counterinsurgency training center with convoys along hillside roads, simulated explosions and multiple “villages” to replicate Afghanistan.

READ THE FULL ARTICLE

 OpenCUNY » login | join | terms | activity 

 Supported by the CUNY Doctoral Students Council.  

OpenCUNY.ORGLike @OpenCUNYLike OpenCUNY

false