Making Waves: Defending Ka’ena

Making Waves: Defending Ka’ena, Episode 55

Length: 0:27
Social issues & cultural programming dedicated to peace and social justice.
7/19/2011 Tue 9:30 am, Channel NATV Channel 53
Or streaming online:  http://olelo.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=30&clip_id=21987

I speak with Summer Mullins and Uncle Fred Mullins about their efforts to protect Ka’ena from the scourge of off-roaders destroying the sand dunes with their mud bogging, drunken crashes, bonfires and garbage. According to Uncle Fred Mullins, 90% of the offenders are military.  We show some video and photos from Ka’ena.

Also, you can watch past episodes online.

Making Waves, Episode 54 “No Can Eat Concrete!”

I speak with Wai’anae kupuna, Auntie Alice Greenwood (Concerned Elders of Wai’anae) and Candace Fujikane (UH Manoa English Professor) about the struggle for environmental justice to preserve Wai’anae’s cultural sites and agricultural lands from industrial encroachment.

Making Waves, Episode 51, “Violence and the Military Culture”

Darlene Rodrigues speaks with Col. Ann Wright about the epidemic of violence against women in the military and discuss how the military culture exacerbates the violence.

 

 

Military studies Waikane Valley bomb cleanup

The Honolulu Star Advertiser published an article about the progress of unexploded ordnance (UXO) cleanup in Waikane valley in Ko’olaupoko district of O’ahu.

Waikane is a lush valley that is very significant in Hawaiian legend and history.  The name refers to the waters of the great deity Kane. Sites in the valley are referred to in ancient chants about creation. As this is a land of flowing streams, there are extensive lo’i kalo (taro fields).

Waikane was granted to the Kamaka family during the Mahele. But land speculators like Lincoln McCandless acquired vast amounts of land in Waikane and other areas like Makua, allegedly through illegal or unethical means.

During World War II, the military leased Waikane lands for training and promised to return the land in its original condition.  When the lands were returned to the Kamaka family, Raymond Kamaka began farming and working with youth.   But the bombs kept turning up.  Instead of cleaning up as promised, the Marines condemned the land over the objections of the family.

In 2003, the Marines announced that they planned to conduct jungle warfare training in Waikane and held community meetings.  The community turned out in large numbers to protest the plan and to demand that the military clean up the land and return it to the Kamaka family. The Marine corps abandoned its training plans for Waikane.  Several years later, it began the administrative process for closing and cleaning up the range.

The surrounding lands were also affected by training, but since they are currently in private hands, a different program called the Formerly Used Defense Sites (FUDS) program under the Army Corps of Engineers has the responsibility to conduct the ordnance removal.

The very fact that the munitions are being studied and removed is a win for the community.  What was once “too dangerous” and “too costly” is now within reach.  But the level of cleanup depends on the cost and feasibility analysis as well as the final land use.   This is where continued pressure is needed to ensure that the land is returned to Mr. Kamaka or to an entity that he designates to carry on the kuleana (responsibility) he solemnly swore to fulfill to his ancestors.

The Hawai’i congressional delegation can ensure that the cleanup is conducted to the highest level possible by ensuring that there is adequate funding to achieve the highest level of cleanup.

There are currently two cleanup operations underway in Waikane.  Under the Army Corps of Engineers FUDS program, a Restoration Advisory Board (RAB) has been established to oversee its portion of the cleanup. Under the Marine Corps, a separate Restoration Advisory Board has been established.  These RABs include military, government regulators and community members and provide input to the military on the cleanup process.   The meetings are open to the public.

The Army Corps of Engineers FUDS RAB will meet Wednesday, June 22, 2011 from 7-9 pm in the Waiahole Elementary School Cafeteria.

Below are excerpts from the Honolulu Star Advertiser article. The time line at the end has an error: the Marine Corps did not fence the Kamaka parcel in 1992 after it condemned the land.  It installed a fence some time after 2003, only after the community blasted the Marines for being hypocritical, i.e. claiming that the land was so dangerous it had to be condemned but never enclosing it with a fence.

Military studies Waikane Valley bomb cleanup

A Windward Oahu area littered with old munitions is being looked at by both the Marines and the Army

By William Cole

POSTED: 01:30 a.m. HST, Jun 19, 2011

WILLIAM COLE / WCOLE@STARADVERTISER.COM
Marine Corps officials and an ordnance removal technician view Waikane Valley in the vicinity of the ordnance impact area.
WILLIAM COLE / WCOLE@STARADVERTISER.COM
The Marine Corps said it is spending $1.37 million to investigate the 187-acre impact area in Waikane Valley where the majority of the munitions are located and to develop a feasibility study for cleanup options that is expected to be released in the fall. Here, a warning sign is posted at the edge of the Marine Corps’ impact area

More Photos

Up a rutted road in jungly Waikane Valley, past the old Ka Mauna ‘o ‘Oliveta Church, through a locked gate and beyond a security fence is the former Kamaka family farm, the now-defunct military training range that replaced it, and the long-held hope — going on decades now — that the land can be returned to the agricultural and cultural place it used to be.

Waikane Valley is one of dozens of former military training sites in Hawaii undergoing the slow, arduous and sometimes painful process that goes along with demilitarization.

Among those many sites, Waikane is considered by some to be a special place, and there’s been momentum in recent years to clean up the munitions that litter it.

The Marine Corps and Army Corps of Engineers are each conducting studies on removing ordnance from a total of 1,061 acres in Waikane Valley. Citizen advisory groups are asking Congress for millions in cleanup funds.

“Things seem to be moving in a good direction — at least things seem to be moving, which is a good direction,” said Windward resident and attorney David Henkin, who is on the two restoration advisory boards for the land.

Land in and around the former training area is valued as a cultural and natural resource. The city thought highly enough of the land in 1998 to spend $3.5 million for 500 acres to the southeast of the Marine Corps land that are intended to become the Waikane Valley Nature Park. A private landowner, Paul Zweng, bought 1,400 acres — part of which is in the former training area — for a proposed Ohulehule Forest Conservancy to preserve and restore the endemic flora and fauna in the valley, officials said.

[…]

Despite the potential risk, off-road vehicles tear up Waikane Stream, and pig hunters cut through the fence that surrounds the 187 acres still owned by the Marine Corps.

Between 1943 and 1953 the Army leased more than 2,000 acres in the Waiahole and Waikane valleys for jungle training; small arms, artillery and mortar fire; and aerial bombing, according to a recent Navy investigation.

In 1953, the Marine Corps took over, leasing 1,061 acres for live-fire training. The report said live fire “apparently” stopped in the early 1960s, and that the lease was terminated in 1976.

A Marine Corps clearance effort in 1976 removed 24,000 pounds of practice ordnance and fragments, and 42 unexploded munitions.

In 1984 the Marines came back and recovered 480 3.5-inch rockets from what is known as the Waikane Valley Impact Area. A 2009 site inspection turned up 66 shoulder-fired rockets, one 2.36-inch rocket and three rifle grenades.

The unexploded ordnance, or “UXO,” as it’s known, was so thick the Marines abandoned in 2003 a plan to conduct blank-fire jungle training in the valley, saying it was too dangerous.

Despite that, community members working with the military on continuing studies say there’s progress and hope that Congress will provide cleanup funding.

[…]

Two remediation efforts are taking place in Waikane Valley. The Marine Corps said it is spending $1.37 million to investigate the 187-acre impact area where the majority of the munitions are located and to develop a feasibility study for cleanup options that is expected to be released in the fall.

The Army Corps of Engineers, meanwhile, is working on 874 adjoining acres that contain fewer munitions as part of the FUDS program. In addition to a $1.34 million study, the Army Corps said it has a $1.94 million ordnance clearance effort under way with Environet Inc. focusing on two parcels totaling 44 acres.

Among the decisions the Marine Corps will have to make is whether to clean up the 187 acres it still owns and to what degree, as well as what to do with the land afterward.

While some community members have complained about the number of plans put forth and the length of time for the Marine Corps to address the issue, an email response from Marine Corps Base Hawaii to the Star-Advertiser said the latest “munitions response program,” which began in 2008, “is detailed and takes time to ensure potential risks to human health and the environment are thoroughly identified and appropriate cleanup action is selected.”

People have been injured and killed by mishandled munitions in Waikane Valley, though there have been no incidents recently, according to the Navy “remedial investigation” draft report issued in March.

In 1944, two people were killed and two others were injured when a 60 mm mortar discovered in the valley accidentally detonated, the report said.

Three children were injured in 1963 when a “souvenir” rifle grenade reportedly discovered in Waikane Valley exploded after it was thrown against a wall. There have been no other reports of injury attributed to munitions found in the valley, the report said.

Raymond Kamaka, 72, said his family owned and farmed the Marine Corps land as far back as 1850 through a deed from King Kamehameha III, and he still lays claim to it.

His great-great-great-grandmother, Racheal Lahela, who came from Waikane, was a half sister of Queen Liliuokalani, Kamaka said.

Kamaka recalled playing in the valley as a kid. “It was our playground. Up there we used to swim,” he said. He remembers three ancient heiau.

The government later said it needed the land for wartime training, leased it from the Hawaiian family, and said it would clean it up and return it afterward.

The lease was terminated in 1976, and the Marines conducted several cleanups. Kamaka, a one-time professional wrestler, returned to farm in the early 1980s. He grew taro and raised pigs and brought in schoolchildren for visits.

When munitions were found on the property’s higher reaches, the military condemned the land in 1989. Much of the family settled for $2.3 million in 1994 — but not Raymond Kamaka.

“Nobody settled with me,” said Kamaka, who claims to be the only rightful heir.

The ensuing years have been “hell,” Kamaka said. “I lost everything.” He went to jail for two years in disputes with the government over the land, he said.

He still expects to farm on the family land again one day.

“Am I gonna come back? Yes,” he said.

Kajihiro, who also is program director for the American Friends Service Committee, a Quaker organization that supports Native Hawaiian rights, said “there is some political will to do some cleanup (on the Marine Corps land). To what level is a question of cost.”

“We’re saying it should be cleaned up to the highest level possible to allow the broadest number of uses,” Kajihiro said. He added that those uses “need to be mindful of, and consistent with, Uncle Raymond Kamaka and his family’s vision and uses of the land — which were agricultural and cultural uses.”

LOOKING BACK

Waikane Valley’s history as a military training range:

Early 1940s
U.S. Army leases more than 2,000 acres in Waiahole and Waikane valleys and uses the property for jungle training, artillery, mortar, small arms fire, maneuvers and as a bombing range for air-to-ground fire.

1944
Two people are killed and two are injured by a 60-millimeter mortar discovered in the valley.

1953
Marine Corps leases 1,061 acres. Training includes small-arms fire, 3.5-inch rockets and medium artillery.

Early 1960s
Marines stop use of live fire.

1963
Three children are injured when a “souvenir” rifle grenade is thrown against a wall and explodes.

1976
Marines conduct ordnance clearance sweeps.

1984
Marines conduct additional ordnance clearance sweeps and remove 480 3.5-inch rockets.

1989
U.S. government acquires title to the 187-acre ordnance impact area.

1992
A perimeter chain-link fence is installed around the impact area.

2002
Marines propose conducting blank-fire training on the site.

2003
Marines abandon the idea when a study finds too much danger from unexploded ordnance.

2010
Marines conduct a “remedial investigation” on the 187-acre Waikane Valley Impact Area.

2011
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is investigating ordnance on 874 adjoining acres and removing munitions from 44 acres within that parcel.

Source: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; Marine Corps

 

Around the Globe, US Military Bases Generate Resentment, Not Security

Writing on the Nation blogKatrina vanden Heuvel zeroes in on the social and financial costs of U.S. foreign military bases:

As we debate an exit from Afghanistan, it’s critical that we focus not only on the costs of deploying the current force of more than 100,000 troops, but also on the costs of maintaining permanent bases long after those troops leave.

This is an issue that demands a hard look not only in Afghanistan and Iraq, but around the globe—where the US has a veritable empire of bases.

According to the Pentagon, there are approximately 865 US military bases abroad—over 1,000 if new bases in Iraq and Afghanistan are included.  The cost?  $102 billion annually—and that doesn’t include the costs of the Iraq and Afghanistan bases.

In a must-read article in the Bulletin of the Atomic Sciences, anthropologist Hugh Gusterson points out that these bases “constitute 95 percent of all the military bases any country in the world maintains on any other country’s territory.”  He notes a “bloated and anachronistic” Cold War-tilt toward Europe, including 227 bases in Germany.

She describes the global anti-bases movement:

Institute for Policy Studies (IPS) fellow Phyllis Bennis says that the Pentagon and military have been brilliant at spreading military production across virtually every Congressional district so that even the most anti-war members of Congress are reluctant to challenge big Defense projects.

“But there’s really no significant constituency for overseas bases because they don’t bring much money in a concentrated way,” says Bennis.  “So in theory it should be easier to mobilize to close them.”  What is new and heartening, according to Bennis, is that “there are now people in countries everywhere that are challenging the US bases and that’s a huge development.”

[…}

IPS has worked diligently not only with allies abroad but also in the US to promote a more rational military posture with regard to bases.  Other active groups include the American Friends Service Committee and the Fellowship of Reconciliation, the latter focusing on bases in Latin America.

In 2010, IPS mobilized congressional opposition to the building of a new base in Okinawa by working with groups in the US and in Japan.  This campaign included the creation of a grassroots coalition of peace, environmental and Asian American groups called the Network for Okinawa, a full-page ad in the Washington Post, articles in various progressive media, and a series of congressional visits.  (The East Asia-US-Puerto Rico Women’s Network Against Militarism also played a key role, linking anti-base movements in Okinawa, Guam, Puerto Rico and Hawaii.)

Yes, that’s right.  U.S. bases in Hawai’i are foreign bases in an occupied country.  As Thomas Naylor writes in Counterpunch “Why Hawai’i is Not a Legitimate State – What the Birthers Missed” (There’s a typo in the title of the original article.):

Notwithstanding a series of clever illegal moves by the U.S. government, Hawaii cannot be considered a legally bona fide state of the United States.  In 1898 the United States unilaterally abrogated all of Hawaii’s existing treaties and purported to annex it on the basis of a Congressional resolution.  Two years later the U.S. illegally established the so-called Territory of Hawaii on the basis of the spurious Organic Act.  After a period of prolonged belligerent occupation by the U.S., Hawaii was placed under United Nations Charter, Article 73, as a “non-self-governing territory” under the administrative authority of the United States.  Then in 1959 the U.S. falsely informed the U.N. that Hawaii had become the 50th state of the United States after an illegal plebiscite.  Among those allowed to vote in this invalid election were members of the U.S. military and their dependents stationed in Hawaii.  In other words, Hawaii’s occupiers were permitted to vote on its future.

[…}

Hawaii became an alleged state of the United States as a result of a foreign policy based on full spectrum dominance and imperial overstretch – the same foreign policy employed by Obama over a century later in places like Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Pakistan, and Palestine.


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

A Win for Environmental Justice! People of Wai'anae Save Farmland

The people of Wai’anae won a big victory for environmental justice. KAHEA reports, “Tropic Land’s petition for a boundary amendment to allow an industrial park on fertile farmland was DENIED today, April 21, 2011.”  The post continues:

The Petitioner recognized that Commissioners had concerns about the proposed industrial park, especially whether they had access to use the Navy-owned road to leads to the property site.  So in a last minute hail-mary, the Petitioner told the Commission that the Navy was now considering dedicating the land to the City.  Interestingly, the City’s attorney did not know about the proposed dedication.

The Elders reminded the Commission that for six years the Navy and the City negotiated over dedicating the Lualualei Naval Access Road, which did not result in any change in the ownership or use of the road.  The question of proper access to the property is something Tropic Land should have figured out long before proposing a permanent change in the land use designation of their property.

This is a campaign that began back in 2009 when the Wai’anae Environmental Justice Working Group was formed.    Ka Makani Kaiaulu o Wai’anae youth participated in documenting and raising awareness about the issues related to the encroachment of industrial and military activity into farm land, protection of cultural sites, including the important sites pertaining to Maui the demigod, and health effects of environmental contamination.

Congratulations and thanks go out to the Concerned Elders of Wai’anae, the Wai’anae Environmental Justice Working Group, KAHEA, MA’O Farms and the many groups and individuals who worked on this campaign. For now the agricultural land in Lualualei will be spared an industrial onslaught.   However, the threat is still looming, and struggle continues on another front.  The City and County of Honolulu Planning Commission is in the process of reviewing and receiving public comments on the Wai’anae Sustainable Communities Plan (WSCP). The community has long fought to preserve the natural, cultural and human waiwai (wealth) of Wai’anae, but this latest version of the plan includes an invasive ‘spot’ of industrial use where the Tropic Land LLC industrial park is proposed in the middle of agricultural land.    Yesterday, I testified in the second of two long days of hearings on the WSCP.  The Planning Commission will make a decision on the plan in May.

Pentagon Takes Aim at Asia-Pacific, and deploys mercenary social scientists

Recently, versions of the same op ed piece appeared in both Guam and Hawai’i newspapers by James A. Kent and and Eric Casino.  Kent describes himself as “an analyst of geographic-focused social and economic development in Pacific Rim countries; he is president of the JKA Group (www.jkagroup.com).”  Eric Casino is “a social anthropologist and freelance consultant on international business and development in Southeast Asia and the Pacific.”

The authors argue that Guam and Hawai’i should capitalize on the U.S. militarization of the Pacific and remake our island societies into “convergence zones” to counter China’s growing power and influence in the region.   They write:

Because of their critically important geographic positions at the heart of the Pacific, Hawaii and Guam are historically poised to become beneficial centers to the nations of the Western Pacific, the way Singapore serves countries around the South China Sea. In the 19th century, Hawaii was the “gas and go” center for whalers. In the 20th century it was the mobilization center for the war in the Pacific.

The writers even invoke the uprisings in the Arab world to encourage Guam and Hawai’i citizens to step up and take the reins of history:

Citizen action has shown itself as a critical component in the amazing political transformation sweeping the Middle East. It is time to change the old world of dominance and control by the few — to the participation and freedom for the many. The people of Hawaii and Guam will need to navigate these historic shifts with bold and creative rethinking.

“Change the old world dominance and control by the few – to the participation and freedom for the many”?   You would think that they were preaching revolution.  But its quite the opposite.   In the Guam version of the article, they attempt to repackage the subjugation of the peoples of Guam and Hawai’i as liberation, part of the neoliberal agenda of the upcoming APEC summit:

The opportunity to capitalize on these trends is aligned with the choice of Hawaii as the host of the Asian-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit in November.

Furthermore they encourage the people of Guam and Hawai’i to partake in and feed off of the militarization of our island nations while denigrating grassroots resistance:

The planned move of a part of the Marine Corps base must take place in a manner that builds Guam into a full social and economic participant in the power realignments and not just a military outpost for repositioning of American forces. Citizen unrest in Guam would sap U.S. energy to remain strategic and undermine its forward defense security.

So, while they exhort the people of Hawai’i and Guam “to navigate these historic shifts with bold and creative rethinking,” in the end, they are just selling the same old imperial and neoliberal arrangements imposed by foreign powers that the people of Hawai’i and Guam have had to contend with for centuries.

So what is the point of the op ed?  It makes more sense when you understand the history and context of the authors.  Both Kent and Casino are part of James Kent Associates, a consulting firm that has worked extensively with the Bureau of Land Management to manage the community concerns regarding development of natural resources in a number of western states.  In 1997, the Marine Corps hired JKA Group to help counter resistance from the Wai’anae community to proposed amphibious assault training at Makua Beach, or as they put it to help “sustain its training options at Makua Beach in a cooperative manner with the community, and to be sure that community impacts and environmental justice issues were adequately addressed. JKA engaged in informal community contact and description by entering the routines of the local communities.”

They were essentially ‘hired gun’ social scientists helping the military manipulate the community through anthropological techniques:

Prior to JKA’s involvement, the NEPA process was being “captured” by organized militants from the urban zones of Hawaii. The strategy of the militants was to disrupt NEPA by advocating for the importance of Makua as a sacred beach. As community workers identified elders in the local communities, the elders did not support the notion of a sacred beach-“What, you think we didn’t walk on our beaches?” They pointed to specific sites on the beach that were culturally important and could not be disturbed by any civilian or military activity. As this level of detail was injected into the EA process, the militants were less able to dominate the process and to bring forward their ideological agenda. They had to be more responsible or lose standing in the informal community because the latter understood: “how the training activity, through enhancements to the culture, can directly benefit community members. Therefore, the training becomes a mutual benefit, with the community networks standing between the military and the activists.”

So community members active in the Native Hawaiian, environmental and peace movements are “organized militants from urban zones of Hawaii”?   The military uses similar language to describe the resistance fighters in Iraq and Afghanistan.   In a way, their methods anticipated the use of anthropologists in the battlefield in the “Human Terrain System” program.

What they don’t report on their website is that they failed to win over the community. Opposition to the Marine amphibious exercises was so strong that PACOM hosted an unprecedented meeting between Wai’anae community leaders on the one hand and CINCPAC, the Governor, and other public officials on the other.  As preparations were made for nonviolent civil resistance, CINCPAC canceled the exercise in Makua and moved the amphibious landing to Waimanalo, where the community also protested.

It seems as though JKA Group has been contracted by the Marines once again to help manage the community resistance to the military invasion planned for Guam and Hawai’i.  So the people of Hawai’i and Guam will have to resist this assault “with bold and creative rethinking.”  One such initiative is the Moana Nui conference planned to coincide with APEC in Hawai’i in which the peoples of the Asia Pacific region can chart our own course for development, environmental protection, peace and security in a ways that “change the old world dominance and control by the few – to the participation and freedom for the many.”

On the topic of the militarization of the Asia-Pacific region, I recently spoke with Korean solidarity and human rights activist Hyun Lee and community organizer Irene Tung on their radio program Asia Pacific Forum on WBAI in New York City.

http://www.asiapacificforum.org/show-detail.php?show_id=221#610

Pentagon Takes Aim at Asia-Pacific

Last month, the Pentagon unveiled the first revision of the National Military Strategy since 2004, declaring, “the Nation’s strategic priorities and interests will increasingly emanate from the Asia-Pacific region.” Join APF as we discuss the implications of the new document.

Guests

  • KYLE KAJIHIRO is Director of DMZ Hawaii and Program Director of the American Friends Service Committee in Hawaii.

A Marriage of Convenience: “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” –a complex and costly policy

Ashley Lukens wrote a great article in the Honolulu Weekly about the recent repeal of the  military’s Don’t Ask Don’t Tell policy and the complexities surrounding the issue of gays in the military:

One year into earning his bachelor’s degree at Hawaii Pacific University (HPU), John Foster longed for more structure and direction in his life. In 2003, he joined the US Navy and began a career as a linguist. Shortly after, Foster married Amy Carson. During their five-year marriage, the couple, who asked not to have their real names published, remained open about their gay and lesbian sexual identities.

Their story highlights the absurdities of living as a gay or lesbian service member under the military’s Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell (DADT) policy. It also illustrates the complexities involved in the repeal of the policy, which will soon go into effect. What will the repeal of DADT mean for Foster, Carson and other soldiers–gay or straight, married or single?

She raises complex questions about justice and equality for LGBTQ service members and the impacts and role of the military in U.S. wars and occupations of other countries, including Hawai’i.  Some doubt that the repeal of the policy will amount to significant change in the military culture:

Kathy Ferguson, professor of political science at the University of Hawaii at Manoa, doubts that the repeal of DADT will significantly alter the military’s homophobic culture.

“As long as the military proudly trains soldiers through the strategic use of sex and gender –“Don’t be a lady, a little girl, etc.,” and as long as contempt for women and homosexuals remains at the heart of soldiering –then gay service members will remain the object of contempt.”

The importance of sexuality in soldiering underpinned the conservative opposition to the repeal of DADT.

Eri Oura, former organizer of the Collective for Equity Justice and Empowerment and AFSC Hawai’i committee member and yours truly were interviewed for this article:

“A change in policy does not lead to a change in culture,” echoes local LGBT activist Eri Oura. “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, like gay marriage and civil union legislation, are policy changes. The repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell does not in any way imply that we can stop fighting for justice for all peoples.”

For Oura, this fight for justice requires that we not uncritically laud the repeal of DADT.

“I remember the day that Obama signed the repeal, there was an air of triumph across the LGTB community. People were really excited about it, my friends included, because it would open up new job and educational opportunities. What people were forgetting is that the military is a vehicle for war. Every day, people are being killed unnecessarily–soldiers and civilians alike. It does not help those of us who are struggling to liberate their communities from the forces of our economic draft.”

So, does celebrating the repeal of DADT bolster US militarism or make us complicit with the US’s wars in Afghanistan and Iraq? Does it implicate LGTB activists in the effects of militarism here in Hawaii?

The fight against militarism and the fight for equality are important political battles in Hawaii. As Native Hawaiian activists struggle for cultural access at Makua Valley, environmentalist fight against the Stryker Brigade and LGTB advocates begin to assess the passage of a civil unions bill, the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell raises some interesting questions for local residents and political leaders.

Kyle Kajihiro of the American Friends Service Committee (AFSC), is particularly wary of the effects of DADT’s repeal on demilitarization efforts in Hawaii. The AFSC focuses on the clean up, restoration and return of military-held lands in Hawaii as a way of moving toward a sustainable, peaceful society.

“We feel Hawaii should not be used as a place to expand US militarism and conduct wars against other peoples,” he explains. AFSC focuses on educating Hawaii’s youth on the realities of military service and promoting alternative ways of serving their community.

But even Kajihiro admits that the repeal of DADT creates a conundrum for progressive activists.

“Although we advocate for demilitarization and alternatives to the military, we are strong supporters of Hawaii’s LGTB youth. The AFSC feels that they should be treated fairly and equally when serving in the military.”

The author generously gave me the last word:

For the Army, no matter how you look at it, the repeal of DADT is a step in the right direction, according to Kajihiro.

“People feel that if they applaud the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, they are somehow endorsing the further militarization of Hawaii,” he says. “It’s not so. Anytime the government has less control over our bodies is a reason to celebrate. That is what the repeal of DADT means — for gay and straight people alike.”

READ THE FULL ARTICLE

Remembering the Ehime Maru

Ten years ago, the USS Greeneville nuclear submarine smashed into a Japanese high school fishing training ship the Ehime Maru sending it to the bottom of the sea and killing nine passengers including four students.  The collision was a product of the rampant militarization in Hawai’i, where sub commanders give joy rides to wealthy political donors so that these civilians become advocates for maintaining levels of funding for the Cold War era sub fleet.    The highly charged political incident was smoothed over by hands at the highest levels of government in Tokyo and Washington.   A captain was rather lightly disciplined for the reckless action. Yet he claims to have been made a scapegoat.  The higher ups who arranged for these political joy rides were not brought to justice.  Nor was there significant debate about the dangers of such intensely militarized seas surrounding the Hawaiian islands.

Here’s an opinion piece I wrote about the incident in 2001.  Let us remember the nine who perished in the seas off Maunalua Bay and work to reduce the militarization of our islands to ensure that another Ehime Maru incident will never happen again.

The Honolulu Star Advertiser published a retrospective on the incident:

Ten years ago Wednesday, the USS Greeneville was impressing 16 civilian guests south of Oahu with some of the capabilities of a U.S. nuclear-powered submarine.

On the surface, there was open-air time with the Greeneville’s gregarious, cigar-smoking captain, Cmdr. Scott Waddle, as the sub powered through the waves.

Underwater there were steep ascents and descents — “angles and dangles” in Navy jargon, at one point reaching a classified depth below 800 feet — as well as high-speed turns.

And finally, there was the demonstration of an emergency main ballast tank blow, an action that forces 4,500 pounds per square inch of air into ballast tanks, causing the 6,900-ton submarine to breach the surface like a humpback whale.

On Feb. 9, 2001, the Greeneville, longer than a football field, rocketed upward from a depth of 400 feet, its crew not knowing it was on a collision course with a Japanese high school fishing training vessel, the Ehime Maru.

What came at 1:43 p.m. was unthinkable: The submarine hit the Japanese ship. The Greeneville’s steel rudder — reinforced to punch through Arctic ice — cut through the underbelly of the 190-foot Ehime Maru.

The Japanese vessel sank in five minutes nine miles south of Diamond Head. Twenty-six on board survived, but nine others — including four high school students — perished.

Never in U.S. Navy history had a collision between a nuclear submarine and a civilian vessel killed so many people.

READ THE FULL ARTICLE

 OpenCUNY » login | join | terms | activity 

 Supported by the CUNY Doctoral Students Council.  

OpenCUNY.ORGLike @OpenCUNYLike OpenCUNY

false