DEIS F grade deserves supplemental effort
Tuesday, 23 March 2010 03:17
by Sen. Ben Pangelinan
Marianas Variety
THE recent grade given the draft environmental impact statement by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency merits an extra step in the National Environmental Protection Act process before it goes to final. This is the lowest grade possible and speaks to the inadequacy and technical deficiencies of the document in addressing the impact of the military buildup on our community.
In response, I sent a letter to Nancy Sutley, chairwoman of the Council of Environmental Quality, to step in and order a supplemental impact study, which directs the military to develop and commit to changes in their plan to adequately addresses the concerns raised by the USEPA experts, our own local environmental experts and the economic experts who pointed out blatant errors in the technical assumptions and conclusions of the DEIS.
Below, I share my letter to her with you.
“Dear Ms. Sutley:
In November 2009, the Department of Defense completed close to an 11,000 page draft environmental impact statement that attempted to detail the impact on Guam of relocating 8,000 Marines and 12,000 dependents from Okinawa, dredging the only harbor to allow visiting Aircraft Carrier Berthing, and the creation of an Army Air and Missile Defense Task Force.
“During the 90-day comment period, the citizens of Guam, many of them professionals in the environmental field outlined and submitted thousands of comments identifying defects in the analysis of how the proposed activity will impact Guam and her residents.
“On February 17, 2010, the Unites States Environmental Protection Agency issued a ninety-five page report titled: EPA Detailed Comments on the Draft Environmental Impact statement for the Guam and the CNMI Military Relocation.” In the report, USEPA issued a rating of environmentally unsatisfactory; inadequate information (EU-3); the worst rating that the USEPA could assign to the DEIS.
“Review of USEPA’s comments indicate that the DEIS is “unsatisfactory from the standpoint of public health or welfare or environmental quality,” and thus subject to referral by USEPA to the Council of Environmental Quality pursuant to Section 309 of the Clean Air Act. It is also clear that the issues raised are of national importance because of the threat to the national environmental resources or policies.
“In July 2006, the Civilian/Military Task Force established a working group between the government of Guam, federal agencies and the DOD to create a master plan for the proposed buildup and address all the environmental and socioeconomic issues created by this unprecedented peace time troop movement.
“Subject matter experts from government of Guam agencies that signed confidentiality agreements with the DOD were provided an advanced copy of the DEIS before its release in order to identify any gaps or issues that were not properly addressed.
“Between the creation of the C/MTF, the advance review of the DEIS and the official release of the DEIS, the government of Guam has documented its concerns with the scope and severity of the potential impacts of these projects.
“The contents and substance of the DEIS evidences that little or no progress was made in resolving these differences between government of Guam, its agencies, federal agencies, and the DOD. This is further evidenced by the periodic reports by the United States Government Accountability Office on the progress of the DOD projects on Guam over the time period between the scoping meeting and the release of the DEIS. Review of the DEIS makes clear that the potential adverse environmental impacts are extreme in each of the following categories:
(a) Possible violation of national environmental standards or policies.
(b) Severity.
(c) Geographical scope.
(d) Duration.
(e) Importance as precedents.
(f) Availability of environmentally preferable alternatives.
“As a senior member of the Guam Legislature representing over 150,000 U.S. citizens on our island, I am requesting that Council of Environmental Quality be proactive by ordering a supplemental environmental impact statement be performed that addresses the many issues identified by USEPA and the citizens of Guam during the comment period.
“The SEIS must include corrections to erroneous analysis, identification of compatible alternatives and equitable mitigation. In addition, the SEIS must be completed prior to the issuance of the final EIS and the record of decision by the Department of Defense in light of the volume and scope of the DEIS, and in order to allow the citizens of Guam to fully review and comment on the new plans and revised studies.
“Guam continues to answer the call to support the United States with her resources and citizens; however, we are in need of assistance to ensure that the interests of the federal government, especially the Department of Defense are not placed above the vitality, viability and equitable survival of our homeland and our people.
“Thank you for taking an interest in these important matters that affect both our environment and quality of life. It is my sincerest hope that the council will act expeditiously to protect Guam from any unnecessary and irreversible harm resulting from any proposed actions of the Department of Defense.”
Showing posts with label Ben P. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Ben P. Show all posts
Tuesday, March 23, 2010
Friday, January 15, 2010
Chamorro Self-Determination
Chamorro Self-Determination
(Published in 3 parts by the Marianas Variety)
By Ben Pangelinan
Over 3,600 years before the lost European Ferdinand Magellan ascended into our small island chain, 3,830 years before my grandmother was born and 3,887 years ago before I was born ---the Chamorro people sailed the oceans and lived on this land they called Guahan.
While we may assume that all was well, there was turmoil and fights among the natives, as territories were established, villages were staked out and boundaries were defended. Then in 1668 they came to settle, bringing their own social and religious systems, work, faith and institutions to make our heathen lives civilized and whole.
Some of the natives succumbed and converted. Maga lahis Hineti, Ayihi, So’on and Odo fought on the sides of the occupiers and were rewarded with title and status. Hurao, Ahgao, Hula, Chaifi, Mata’pang and Tolahi and many others resisted and fought these outsiders. They resisted and waged fierce battles to preserve our land, sea, and the fruits and bounties that were ours. They believed it was more important to live as we knew how and to serve our wants and needs as we saw fit. (I Manmanaina-ta: I Manmaga’lahi yan I manma’gas; Geran Chamoru yan Espanot 1668-1695. Ed Benavente 2007).
The resistance lasted for over 27 years and resulted in bloodshed. From the very beginning, the people strongly resisted and would not abandon their ancient customs or bow to the authority of the Spaniards. Governor de la Corta wrote in his Memoria “one does not know which to admire most, whether the tenacity of the Spaniards in conflicts with the elements against a cunning and treacherous people during no less than 20 years of resistance, or that of the natives pursuing such a cruel and prolonged war which could only end in their annihilation and ruin.”
The truth of these words, “annihilation and ruin” is reflected in the “reduccion” which sought to convert the natives. Beginning in 1668, marked by the killing of Pale Diego de San Vitores in 1672 and ending in 1698, it saw the reduction of the Chamorro people from the estimated 60,000 to 100,000 at the time of discovery to just 3,678, according to the 1710 census, a mere 12 years after the end of the war. (The Marianas Islands 1884-1887 Random Notes. Francisco Olice y Garcia. Translated and Annotated by Marjorie G. Driver. Second Edition 2006).
Insight to the determination of the Chamorros to defy the occupiers in the face of certain annihilation and ruin is most clearly articulated by Chief Hurao:
“The Europeans would have done better to remain in their own country. We have no need of their help to live happily. They take away from us the primitive simplicity in which we live. They dare to take away our liberty, which should be dearer to us than life itself. They try to persuade us that we will be happier, and some of us had been blinded into believing their words. But can we have such sentiments if we reflect that we have been covered with misery and illness ever since those foreigners have come to disturb our peace? For what purpose do they teach us except to make us adopt their customs, to subject us to their laws, and lose the precious liberty left to us by our ancestors?
We are stronger than we think! We can quickly free ourselves from these foreigners! We must regain our former freedom.” (Speech by Chief Hurao. Dated: 1671).
But heart and determination was not enough to overcome the resources and the advance weapons of the occupiers. For the next 200 plus years, the people lived under the control and domination of this outside metropolitan government. Then in 1898, as part of the spoils of the Spanish-American War, a new domination was begun. This time it was under the United States of America. While the Spanish used force, faith and bullets to impose their will, this new power was more beguiling using seduction and law to get their way.
An interesting fact of the event of this war, which placed Guam under the United States, was that it was declared after the passage of the Tellar amendment to ensure that the United States would not establish permanent control over Cuba following the cessation of hostilities with Spain. The amended resolution demanded the Spanish withdrawal and authorized the President to use as much military force as he thought necessary to help Cuba gain independence from Spain. Of the four territories taken by the United States because of the war, Cuba, the Philippines, Puerto Rico and Guam, Puerto Rico and Guam continue to be under the administrative control of the United States. While the new occupier had a different approach towards the natives, they had one thing in common with the old—they imposed a government upon us, not of our own choosing. 1898 did not only bring a new occupying government over the people of Guam, it also brought a new occupant to Guam and that was my grandmother who was born on this island.
For the next four decades, the United States wielded its authority over the people, making decisions, which suited their needs and determined for us, the natives, what our needs were. Once again, the native leaders rose up to regain our rights, as a people in our own land..
Using reason and law, the weapons of the new occupiers, instead of sword and violence of the old, our leaders fought for our rights to govern ourselves and determine for ourselves what is best for our people. Once again, the occupier’s resources overwhelmed the meager resources of our people. We petitioned the Congress and even walked out of an institution they said gave us democracy and self-government when it was obvious they only did it to appease us. They continued to deny our right to self-determination and to our sisters in waiting—Puerto Rico, Cuba and the Philippines.
Once again, war came and the geopolitical events affecting independent states brought us a short era of foreign domination and occupation of a new power as Japan invaded Guam. Again, our people resisted and fought, while the United States left the Chamorros behind to deal with the invading enemy. The need for a base of operations to defeat the Japanese saw the return of the Americans, as she reclaimed her lost territory to serve as the launching point to end the war. As part of the structure of the new world order, the states of the world organized as a Union Nations dedicated to resolving future disputes in a peaceful manner and recognized the need to respect and honor the rights of those peoples liberated from domination and war.
The signatory states of the United Nations Charter freely agreed to obligate themselves and accept responsibility for the “administration of territories whose people have not yet attained a full measure of self-government recognize the principle that the interests of the inhabitants of these territories are paramount … and to this end they would seek to develop self-government, to take due account of the political aspirations of the people, and to assist them in the progressive development of their free political institutions, according to the particular circumstances of each territory and its people and their varying stages of advancement.” (Chapter X1, Article 73 (b). United Nations Charter).
At the signing of the United Nations Charter, nearly 100 nations were voluntarily placed on the list of non-self governing territories by the signatory states which held these places before World War II and entrusted to them the administration of the affairs to be governed according to the Charter. The United States as part of this event, accepted the obligation over Guam, American Samoa, the Virgin Islands, Puerto Rico and the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands (Micronesia).
Since the establishment of the list, over 80 of the territories from the original list of non-self governing territories have been herded by their administrative authority through the process of self-determination, attaining the free expression of the people, their ultimate desire. Despite this progress, by 1960 the General Assembly believed that the pace of decolonization of the non-self governing territories, which still included Guam was too slow and adopted two landmark resolutions.
The Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples marked the shift from the “principle of self determination for these territories” to “all peoples have the right to self-determination.” It further states that, “All people have the right to self-determination by virtue of that right, they freely determine their political status and pursue their economic, social and cultural development” (Resolution 1514(XV).
A component of that Declaration of Colonial People, Resolution 1514 set forth three ways in which these territories can attain a full measure of self-determination as envisioned in the Charter.The first option is Free association with an independent State as a result of the voluntarily choice expressed through an informed and democratic process. The second option is through Integration with an independent State based on complete equality between the peoples of the non-self governing territory and the independent State. And the third option was Independence. Whatever the option chosen by the people of the non-self governing territory, it must be the result of the freely expressed wishes of these peoples.
As of today, there remain 16 non-self governing territories from the original list of close to 100 who have yet to exercise self-determination and freely express their choice. Guam, the Virgin Islands, and American Samoa, all administrated by the United States are part of the last remaining 16. There have been attempts by administrating authorities to redefine not only the process of self-determination and decolonization, but the status of self government as well. Decolonization is what happens when one exercises self-determination. It is direct democracy and affirmative action freely expressed by the people themselves, clearly a right inherent in the people of Guam and clearly remains unexercised to this date.
With the signing of the Treaty of Paris on April 11, 1899 between Spain and the United States, Guam’s status as a territory under the sovereignty of the United States was cemented in law with the ratification of the treaty. While we may not accept it, Guam and its people became the property of the United States and the governing of the people of Guam and their rights fell to the Congress. Article IX of the Treaty of Paris declared, “The civil rights and political status of the native inhabitants… shall be determined by the Congress.”
The subsequent placement of Guam on the United Nations list of Non-Self-Governing Territories by the United States effectively transferred the purview and process of determining the civil rights and political status for the people of Guam to the United Nations. The ratification and the acceptance of the United Nations Charters and Resolutions by the United States now governs the processes for granting the rights of the people of Guam to freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development, in my opinion, confers upon the people of Guam the rights contained in the applicable United Nations process.
The petition for citizenship and the subsequent granting of such citizenship by the Organic Act is consistent with the responsibility of the United States as the administrating authority over Guam to “provide progressive development of their free political institutions” in no way can be defended as the free expression of the people of Guam. Acceptance of such incremental development and the improvement in such status is not the free exercise of choosing such status and most certainly not the will of the people. It is still a will imposed upon the people—no matter how generous, no matter how benevolent, no matter how good the administrating authority is. The true test of their goodness is when we decide on our own what we want for ourselves and they support it. Unfortunately, they have not been good.
When we talk about self-determination, one of the key elements of this exercise is the free and educated expression of the people’s right in determining their political status for themselves. As the administrating authority, it is the responsibility of the United States to fund the education process, so that the status option, whichever one is selected is not the status offered by those who have the most money to present their case.
An educated choice is the essential element in the exercise of self-determination and the people must be educated on the promise and the reality of each option to ensure a free choice.
Who are the people vested with the right of self-determination? It is clear that these people are the native inhabitants of a territory who are living under a political status or part of a political relationship with another state without their free expression to do so. These are the people to which the United Nations Charter speaks to as the colonial peoples of the non-self governing territories. Beginning with the Guam Legislature’s empanelling of the Political Status Commission in 1973, the struggle by the people of Guam to exercise their right to self-determination as recognized under the international law was initiated. A special Commission on the Political Status of Guam followed leading to Guam’s first political status plebiscite in 1976. The plebiscite was open to all the voters of Guam with a majority selecting the option of improved status quo.
In 1977, the federally sanctioned Constitutional Convention resulted in the draft of a constitution that was approved by the Congress but ultimately rejected by the people of Guam. The constitution was still subject to a status imposed upon the people, not of their own choosing. With a new Commission on Self-Determination in 1980, another status plebiscite, opened to all registered voters was approved. The plebiscite was held in 1982 with seven available status options. When none received a majority, a run off was held with the choice of commonwealth status eclipsing statehood by a three to one margin. For the next fifteen years, Congress and the President deferred any concrete action to approve the Guam Commonwealth Act.
The Commonwealth Act provided for Chamorro self-determination, mutual consent and immigration control, agreed to by the United States in the Covenant with the Northern Marianas. In 1997 during a congressional hearing before the House Resources Committee, it became clear that federal officials would not support these provisions in Guam’s Commonwealth Act.
With the continued inaction by the United States, the people of Guam and the leaders of Guam turn to the international basis of the right of the people of Guam to self-determination as embodied by the acceptance of the United States of the United Nations Charters and Resolutions which clearly outline the process for the decolonization of a people who remain under the list of non-self governing territories. This foray into accepting a constitution, drafting a constitution, voting on a constitution without the freely expressed wishes of the people as to the political status upon which this constitution will be used to govern, is what is missing.
From that failure, the direction has changed. It is now the policy of the people of Guam to seek first the expression of our right to self-determination through the freely exercised vote on a plebiscite for the statuses available to us under the United Nations articles and resolutions. No granting of any amount of internal self-governance without the people of Guam first freely voting on the political status that frames such self-governance can be interpreted as an expression and the fulfillment of the right of the people of Guam to self-determination.
We look forward to this continued effort, this continued quest of the people of Guam – the colonized people of Guam to exercise and make their fully educated choice on the options presented to us under the UN Charter and UN Resolution to fulfill the right of self-determination inherent in a people subjugated and dominated by administrating powers over the last four hundred years.
(Published in 3 parts by the Marianas Variety)
By Ben Pangelinan
Over 3,600 years before the lost European Ferdinand Magellan ascended into our small island chain, 3,830 years before my grandmother was born and 3,887 years ago before I was born ---the Chamorro people sailed the oceans and lived on this land they called Guahan.
While we may assume that all was well, there was turmoil and fights among the natives, as territories were established, villages were staked out and boundaries were defended. Then in 1668 they came to settle, bringing their own social and religious systems, work, faith and institutions to make our heathen lives civilized and whole.
Some of the natives succumbed and converted. Maga lahis Hineti, Ayihi, So’on and Odo fought on the sides of the occupiers and were rewarded with title and status. Hurao, Ahgao, Hula, Chaifi, Mata’pang and Tolahi and many others resisted and fought these outsiders. They resisted and waged fierce battles to preserve our land, sea, and the fruits and bounties that were ours. They believed it was more important to live as we knew how and to serve our wants and needs as we saw fit. (I Manmanaina-ta: I Manmaga’lahi yan I manma’gas; Geran Chamoru yan Espanot 1668-1695. Ed Benavente 2007).
The resistance lasted for over 27 years and resulted in bloodshed. From the very beginning, the people strongly resisted and would not abandon their ancient customs or bow to the authority of the Spaniards. Governor de la Corta wrote in his Memoria “one does not know which to admire most, whether the tenacity of the Spaniards in conflicts with the elements against a cunning and treacherous people during no less than 20 years of resistance, or that of the natives pursuing such a cruel and prolonged war which could only end in their annihilation and ruin.”
The truth of these words, “annihilation and ruin” is reflected in the “reduccion” which sought to convert the natives. Beginning in 1668, marked by the killing of Pale Diego de San Vitores in 1672 and ending in 1698, it saw the reduction of the Chamorro people from the estimated 60,000 to 100,000 at the time of discovery to just 3,678, according to the 1710 census, a mere 12 years after the end of the war. (The Marianas Islands 1884-1887 Random Notes. Francisco Olice y Garcia. Translated and Annotated by Marjorie G. Driver. Second Edition 2006).
Insight to the determination of the Chamorros to defy the occupiers in the face of certain annihilation and ruin is most clearly articulated by Chief Hurao:
“The Europeans would have done better to remain in their own country. We have no need of their help to live happily. They take away from us the primitive simplicity in which we live. They dare to take away our liberty, which should be dearer to us than life itself. They try to persuade us that we will be happier, and some of us had been blinded into believing their words. But can we have such sentiments if we reflect that we have been covered with misery and illness ever since those foreigners have come to disturb our peace? For what purpose do they teach us except to make us adopt their customs, to subject us to their laws, and lose the precious liberty left to us by our ancestors?
We are stronger than we think! We can quickly free ourselves from these foreigners! We must regain our former freedom.” (Speech by Chief Hurao. Dated: 1671).
But heart and determination was not enough to overcome the resources and the advance weapons of the occupiers. For the next 200 plus years, the people lived under the control and domination of this outside metropolitan government. Then in 1898, as part of the spoils of the Spanish-American War, a new domination was begun. This time it was under the United States of America. While the Spanish used force, faith and bullets to impose their will, this new power was more beguiling using seduction and law to get their way.
An interesting fact of the event of this war, which placed Guam under the United States, was that it was declared after the passage of the Tellar amendment to ensure that the United States would not establish permanent control over Cuba following the cessation of hostilities with Spain. The amended resolution demanded the Spanish withdrawal and authorized the President to use as much military force as he thought necessary to help Cuba gain independence from Spain. Of the four territories taken by the United States because of the war, Cuba, the Philippines, Puerto Rico and Guam, Puerto Rico and Guam continue to be under the administrative control of the United States. While the new occupier had a different approach towards the natives, they had one thing in common with the old—they imposed a government upon us, not of our own choosing. 1898 did not only bring a new occupying government over the people of Guam, it also brought a new occupant to Guam and that was my grandmother who was born on this island.
For the next four decades, the United States wielded its authority over the people, making decisions, which suited their needs and determined for us, the natives, what our needs were. Once again, the native leaders rose up to regain our rights, as a people in our own land..
Using reason and law, the weapons of the new occupiers, instead of sword and violence of the old, our leaders fought for our rights to govern ourselves and determine for ourselves what is best for our people. Once again, the occupier’s resources overwhelmed the meager resources of our people. We petitioned the Congress and even walked out of an institution they said gave us democracy and self-government when it was obvious they only did it to appease us. They continued to deny our right to self-determination and to our sisters in waiting—Puerto Rico, Cuba and the Philippines.
Once again, war came and the geopolitical events affecting independent states brought us a short era of foreign domination and occupation of a new power as Japan invaded Guam. Again, our people resisted and fought, while the United States left the Chamorros behind to deal with the invading enemy. The need for a base of operations to defeat the Japanese saw the return of the Americans, as she reclaimed her lost territory to serve as the launching point to end the war. As part of the structure of the new world order, the states of the world organized as a Union Nations dedicated to resolving future disputes in a peaceful manner and recognized the need to respect and honor the rights of those peoples liberated from domination and war.
The signatory states of the United Nations Charter freely agreed to obligate themselves and accept responsibility for the “administration of territories whose people have not yet attained a full measure of self-government recognize the principle that the interests of the inhabitants of these territories are paramount … and to this end they would seek to develop self-government, to take due account of the political aspirations of the people, and to assist them in the progressive development of their free political institutions, according to the particular circumstances of each territory and its people and their varying stages of advancement.” (Chapter X1, Article 73 (b). United Nations Charter).
At the signing of the United Nations Charter, nearly 100 nations were voluntarily placed on the list of non-self governing territories by the signatory states which held these places before World War II and entrusted to them the administration of the affairs to be governed according to the Charter. The United States as part of this event, accepted the obligation over Guam, American Samoa, the Virgin Islands, Puerto Rico and the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands (Micronesia).
Since the establishment of the list, over 80 of the territories from the original list of non-self governing territories have been herded by their administrative authority through the process of self-determination, attaining the free expression of the people, their ultimate desire. Despite this progress, by 1960 the General Assembly believed that the pace of decolonization of the non-self governing territories, which still included Guam was too slow and adopted two landmark resolutions.
The Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples marked the shift from the “principle of self determination for these territories” to “all peoples have the right to self-determination.” It further states that, “All people have the right to self-determination by virtue of that right, they freely determine their political status and pursue their economic, social and cultural development” (Resolution 1514(XV).
A component of that Declaration of Colonial People, Resolution 1514 set forth three ways in which these territories can attain a full measure of self-determination as envisioned in the Charter.The first option is Free association with an independent State as a result of the voluntarily choice expressed through an informed and democratic process. The second option is through Integration with an independent State based on complete equality between the peoples of the non-self governing territory and the independent State. And the third option was Independence. Whatever the option chosen by the people of the non-self governing territory, it must be the result of the freely expressed wishes of these peoples.
As of today, there remain 16 non-self governing territories from the original list of close to 100 who have yet to exercise self-determination and freely express their choice. Guam, the Virgin Islands, and American Samoa, all administrated by the United States are part of the last remaining 16. There have been attempts by administrating authorities to redefine not only the process of self-determination and decolonization, but the status of self government as well. Decolonization is what happens when one exercises self-determination. It is direct democracy and affirmative action freely expressed by the people themselves, clearly a right inherent in the people of Guam and clearly remains unexercised to this date.
With the signing of the Treaty of Paris on April 11, 1899 between Spain and the United States, Guam’s status as a territory under the sovereignty of the United States was cemented in law with the ratification of the treaty. While we may not accept it, Guam and its people became the property of the United States and the governing of the people of Guam and their rights fell to the Congress. Article IX of the Treaty of Paris declared, “The civil rights and political status of the native inhabitants… shall be determined by the Congress.”
The subsequent placement of Guam on the United Nations list of Non-Self-Governing Territories by the United States effectively transferred the purview and process of determining the civil rights and political status for the people of Guam to the United Nations. The ratification and the acceptance of the United Nations Charters and Resolutions by the United States now governs the processes for granting the rights of the people of Guam to freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development, in my opinion, confers upon the people of Guam the rights contained in the applicable United Nations process.
The petition for citizenship and the subsequent granting of such citizenship by the Organic Act is consistent with the responsibility of the United States as the administrating authority over Guam to “provide progressive development of their free political institutions” in no way can be defended as the free expression of the people of Guam. Acceptance of such incremental development and the improvement in such status is not the free exercise of choosing such status and most certainly not the will of the people. It is still a will imposed upon the people—no matter how generous, no matter how benevolent, no matter how good the administrating authority is. The true test of their goodness is when we decide on our own what we want for ourselves and they support it. Unfortunately, they have not been good.
When we talk about self-determination, one of the key elements of this exercise is the free and educated expression of the people’s right in determining their political status for themselves. As the administrating authority, it is the responsibility of the United States to fund the education process, so that the status option, whichever one is selected is not the status offered by those who have the most money to present their case.
An educated choice is the essential element in the exercise of self-determination and the people must be educated on the promise and the reality of each option to ensure a free choice.
Who are the people vested with the right of self-determination? It is clear that these people are the native inhabitants of a territory who are living under a political status or part of a political relationship with another state without their free expression to do so. These are the people to which the United Nations Charter speaks to as the colonial peoples of the non-self governing territories. Beginning with the Guam Legislature’s empanelling of the Political Status Commission in 1973, the struggle by the people of Guam to exercise their right to self-determination as recognized under the international law was initiated. A special Commission on the Political Status of Guam followed leading to Guam’s first political status plebiscite in 1976. The plebiscite was open to all the voters of Guam with a majority selecting the option of improved status quo.
In 1977, the federally sanctioned Constitutional Convention resulted in the draft of a constitution that was approved by the Congress but ultimately rejected by the people of Guam. The constitution was still subject to a status imposed upon the people, not of their own choosing. With a new Commission on Self-Determination in 1980, another status plebiscite, opened to all registered voters was approved. The plebiscite was held in 1982 with seven available status options. When none received a majority, a run off was held with the choice of commonwealth status eclipsing statehood by a three to one margin. For the next fifteen years, Congress and the President deferred any concrete action to approve the Guam Commonwealth Act.
The Commonwealth Act provided for Chamorro self-determination, mutual consent and immigration control, agreed to by the United States in the Covenant with the Northern Marianas. In 1997 during a congressional hearing before the House Resources Committee, it became clear that federal officials would not support these provisions in Guam’s Commonwealth Act.
With the continued inaction by the United States, the people of Guam and the leaders of Guam turn to the international basis of the right of the people of Guam to self-determination as embodied by the acceptance of the United States of the United Nations Charters and Resolutions which clearly outline the process for the decolonization of a people who remain under the list of non-self governing territories. This foray into accepting a constitution, drafting a constitution, voting on a constitution without the freely expressed wishes of the people as to the political status upon which this constitution will be used to govern, is what is missing.
From that failure, the direction has changed. It is now the policy of the people of Guam to seek first the expression of our right to self-determination through the freely exercised vote on a plebiscite for the statuses available to us under the United Nations articles and resolutions. No granting of any amount of internal self-governance without the people of Guam first freely voting on the political status that frames such self-governance can be interpreted as an expression and the fulfillment of the right of the people of Guam to self-determination.
We look forward to this continued effort, this continued quest of the people of Guam – the colonized people of Guam to exercise and make their fully educated choice on the options presented to us under the UN Charter and UN Resolution to fulfill the right of self-determination inherent in a people subjugated and dominated by administrating powers over the last four hundred years.
Thursday, August 20, 2009
A Blip on the Federal Radar
ben’s Pen
Self-determination: A Blip on the Federal Radar
Marianas Variety
Tuesday, 18 August 2009 00:32 by Sen. Ben Pangelinan
.
THIS past week, Guam hosted one of the largest congressional delegation headed by the Chairman of the Committee on Natural Resources Committee, with direct oversight over Guam, Congressman Nick Rahall of West Virginia. Congressman Rahall was first elected to Congress in 1976 and was on the Capital Hill when Congressman Antonio Won Pat represented Guam. During this recent trip, he was accompanied by old friends of Guam—Congresswoman Donna Christensen of the Virgin Island, Eni Faleomavaega of American Samoa, Congressman Henry Brown of South Carolina, Congressman Gregorio “Kilili” Sablan of the CNMI and of course our very own Congresswoman Madeleine Bordallo.
Different with this visit was the CODEL’s decision to pay a visit to the Guam Legislature. Other delegations have come through and the legislature seems to be an afterthought. I know my colleagues, and this action was not a matter of ego stroking, but a genuine congeniality normally accorded to colleagues of the same branch of government. It really fostered a more open exchange of thoughts on the issues. In my humble opinion, this simple act toned down any desire to play to the camera or even the need for press releases.
The broader focus of Congressman Rahall’s concerns was another surprise with this delegation’s public discourse while they were here. The discussion was not confined to the “tip of the spear” role Guam plays in our national and global goals for the United States’ role in the Pacific and the world. I certainly felt that the chairman looked upon Guam as more than the typical characterization of our importance as location, location, location. Chairman Rahall displayed to me that he saw the people as integral to any equation in the success of the military expansion.
In the discussion on the military expansion and the effects it will have on Guam, this delegation noted the impact it will have to our way of life. Somehow, I got the feeling that although they recognized the military buildup’s positive economic impact on Guam, they also realized that money will not solve all of the problems. They may not have offered any specific remediation, but when they left, I felt better that their understanding of the challenges left more open doors than closed ones.
For me, the most satisfying pronouncement by Chairman Rahall was the unresolved matter of self-determination. The statement of Congressman Rahall addressing this issue is the first instance in my recent memory of someone in the congressional branch with the authority and power to advance it. Even more heartening was the commitment by Chairman Rahall and Congresswoman Bordallo to find the money to support the conducting of a public education campaign leading up to the plebiscite vote.
If ever there was a time when the stars are aligned for our people, this may be that time. With a supportive oversight chairman, a president who recognizes this inherent right for the people of Guam, a native son as an assistant secretary of the Department of Interior, we must do whatever it takes to come together locally to make this happen.
For the last two years, I have endeavored to press on with the decolonization registry and have introduced legislation to build the registry to the point where we can conduct the plebiscite vote on self-determination.
The blip on the radar is the heartbeat of our efforts.
Let’s all do our part to bring it to its full life.
Self-determination: A Blip on the Federal Radar
Marianas Variety
Tuesday, 18 August 2009 00:32 by Sen. Ben Pangelinan
.
THIS past week, Guam hosted one of the largest congressional delegation headed by the Chairman of the Committee on Natural Resources Committee, with direct oversight over Guam, Congressman Nick Rahall of West Virginia. Congressman Rahall was first elected to Congress in 1976 and was on the Capital Hill when Congressman Antonio Won Pat represented Guam. During this recent trip, he was accompanied by old friends of Guam—Congresswoman Donna Christensen of the Virgin Island, Eni Faleomavaega of American Samoa, Congressman Henry Brown of South Carolina, Congressman Gregorio “Kilili” Sablan of the CNMI and of course our very own Congresswoman Madeleine Bordallo.
Different with this visit was the CODEL’s decision to pay a visit to the Guam Legislature. Other delegations have come through and the legislature seems to be an afterthought. I know my colleagues, and this action was not a matter of ego stroking, but a genuine congeniality normally accorded to colleagues of the same branch of government. It really fostered a more open exchange of thoughts on the issues. In my humble opinion, this simple act toned down any desire to play to the camera or even the need for press releases.
The broader focus of Congressman Rahall’s concerns was another surprise with this delegation’s public discourse while they were here. The discussion was not confined to the “tip of the spear” role Guam plays in our national and global goals for the United States’ role in the Pacific and the world. I certainly felt that the chairman looked upon Guam as more than the typical characterization of our importance as location, location, location. Chairman Rahall displayed to me that he saw the people as integral to any equation in the success of the military expansion.
In the discussion on the military expansion and the effects it will have on Guam, this delegation noted the impact it will have to our way of life. Somehow, I got the feeling that although they recognized the military buildup’s positive economic impact on Guam, they also realized that money will not solve all of the problems. They may not have offered any specific remediation, but when they left, I felt better that their understanding of the challenges left more open doors than closed ones.
For me, the most satisfying pronouncement by Chairman Rahall was the unresolved matter of self-determination. The statement of Congressman Rahall addressing this issue is the first instance in my recent memory of someone in the congressional branch with the authority and power to advance it. Even more heartening was the commitment by Chairman Rahall and Congresswoman Bordallo to find the money to support the conducting of a public education campaign leading up to the plebiscite vote.
If ever there was a time when the stars are aligned for our people, this may be that time. With a supportive oversight chairman, a president who recognizes this inherent right for the people of Guam, a native son as an assistant secretary of the Department of Interior, we must do whatever it takes to come together locally to make this happen.
For the last two years, I have endeavored to press on with the decolonization registry and have introduced legislation to build the registry to the point where we can conduct the plebiscite vote on self-determination.
The blip on the radar is the heartbeat of our efforts.
Let’s all do our part to bring it to its full life.
Tuesday, July 21, 2009
Things We Must Remember
ben’s Pen: The things we remember today
Tuesday, 21 July 2009 03:14 by Sen. Ben Pangelinan
Marianas Variety
EACH year, for the past 65 years, this day rolls around and we remember.
At Sumay, we remember the place where our parents made their homes and buried their parents, brothers, sisters and family. We mark this with a mass at the Sumay cemetery; not for those buried there who died during the war, but those buried there before they took the land away and now need permission to return to honor and pay respect at that hallowed place.
At Fena, we remember the pain and the memories, and for some the unspeakable guilt they carry with them for surviving, while others did not, the brutality and atrocity of the enemy-- an enemy not of our own making.
At Manengon, we remember the suffering of the children left to the care of young new mothers with babies exposed to the risk of disease and sickness, because a fire could not be built to boil water from the river, the same river they used to wash clothes and bathe in.
We remember mothers, wives and children who watched husbands, brothers and fathers, walk away from the camp, obedient to the enemy’s order to come with them. And they never looked back. The wives, mothers and children watched never knowing; if the husbands, brothers and fathers did not obey, it would be they who would be beaten or killed.
At Tinta and Faha, we remember the deaths and the fact that our people knew their fate as they were forced into the caves. The explosion of the grenades and the sound of bayonets piercing flesh, looking for the kill left unfinished by the force of the explosion and the shrapnel as clear today as it was 65 years ago.
And we remember the brave men of the Malesso rebellion, those who knew that no amount of cooperation or compliance with the enemy’s orders would spare their innocent loved ones pain or death, who summoned the courage, and who rose up to overpower the enemy. Facing death, they fought and some lost their lives, and their sacrifice and gallantry saved the lives of countless loved ones.
And we remember, the over 45 strong young Chamorro men found at Chi gi’an, with their hands tied behind their backs and be-headed, after they carried the enemy’s provisions to Yigo for their last stand.
Each year, for the past 65 years, this day rolls around and we celebrate.
We celebrate liberation from the hands of a brutal enemy. We celebrate the return of the Americans, who say they gave us democracy and self-government. And they stayed, a kind and generous occupier, but an occupier nonetheless.
Last year, this day rolled around and amidst the remembrance and the celebration we chose to actively embrace a full democracy and freedom as a people. We chose to act to bring about decolonization, move forward our destiny, and fulfill our human right to self-determination.
It is a right that a liberator does not bestow to the liberated. It is a right that a just and moral authority recognizes belongs to those peoples denied such right.
It is a right that can, only by the action of those who have yet to exercise such right, bring about real freedoms and true liberation.
Abiba self-determination! Biba Liberation!
Tuesday, 21 July 2009 03:14 by Sen. Ben Pangelinan
Marianas Variety
EACH year, for the past 65 years, this day rolls around and we remember.
At Sumay, we remember the place where our parents made their homes and buried their parents, brothers, sisters and family. We mark this with a mass at the Sumay cemetery; not for those buried there who died during the war, but those buried there before they took the land away and now need permission to return to honor and pay respect at that hallowed place.
At Fena, we remember the pain and the memories, and for some the unspeakable guilt they carry with them for surviving, while others did not, the brutality and atrocity of the enemy-- an enemy not of our own making.
At Manengon, we remember the suffering of the children left to the care of young new mothers with babies exposed to the risk of disease and sickness, because a fire could not be built to boil water from the river, the same river they used to wash clothes and bathe in.
We remember mothers, wives and children who watched husbands, brothers and fathers, walk away from the camp, obedient to the enemy’s order to come with them. And they never looked back. The wives, mothers and children watched never knowing; if the husbands, brothers and fathers did not obey, it would be they who would be beaten or killed.
At Tinta and Faha, we remember the deaths and the fact that our people knew their fate as they were forced into the caves. The explosion of the grenades and the sound of bayonets piercing flesh, looking for the kill left unfinished by the force of the explosion and the shrapnel as clear today as it was 65 years ago.
And we remember the brave men of the Malesso rebellion, those who knew that no amount of cooperation or compliance with the enemy’s orders would spare their innocent loved ones pain or death, who summoned the courage, and who rose up to overpower the enemy. Facing death, they fought and some lost their lives, and their sacrifice and gallantry saved the lives of countless loved ones.
And we remember, the over 45 strong young Chamorro men found at Chi gi’an, with their hands tied behind their backs and be-headed, after they carried the enemy’s provisions to Yigo for their last stand.
Each year, for the past 65 years, this day rolls around and we celebrate.
We celebrate liberation from the hands of a brutal enemy. We celebrate the return of the Americans, who say they gave us democracy and self-government. And they stayed, a kind and generous occupier, but an occupier nonetheless.
Last year, this day rolled around and amidst the remembrance and the celebration we chose to actively embrace a full democracy and freedom as a people. We chose to act to bring about decolonization, move forward our destiny, and fulfill our human right to self-determination.
It is a right that a liberator does not bestow to the liberated. It is a right that a just and moral authority recognizes belongs to those peoples denied such right.
It is a right that can, only by the action of those who have yet to exercise such right, bring about real freedoms and true liberation.
Abiba self-determination! Biba Liberation!
Friday, May 08, 2009
Tiyan Landowners Concerned About Being Trumped by the Military
Tiyan landowners concerned about getting trumped by military
By John Davis
Published May 8, 2009
KUAM
Tiyan landowners have negotiated a land exchange with the government after 13 hectares was taken for use by the Guam International Airport Authority and well on their way to determining a methodology on how ancestral lands will be divided. So far, the Tiyan Land Exchange Task Force has ensured properties they are looking at have proper easements for infrastructure to be installed.
And landowners are now concerned they'll never get the land exchange because the U.S. military is also looking at using the same parcels for a firing ranges and housing areas.
At the old Federal Aviation Administration, there's over 400 acres of land the land exchange task force is already looking at plotting and dividing for landowners owed smaller and medium sized lots. Tiyan Land Exchange Task Force chairperson Benny Crawford says with military land on both southern and northern boundaries, the feds want to use the old FAA property not as a firing range, but as a housing area.
"Being a retired military myself is they're looking at this land because it's a breach on their security. It's open and they want to close that gap again and I think that's the main purpose," he explained. "An option was to put some ranges up on the Finegayan area with the safety zones extending out into the water, the feedback we got, studies revealed that that would have a potentially negative impact on the people of Guam because it extends out into recreational waters, the double reefs out there."
Those who stand to receive larger portions of land via the land exchange will have their plots in the Marbou command sea land near Anderson South where there is 390 acres of land that can be used for the land swap. The problem? Joint Guam Program Office executive forward director, David Bice says the military plans to use that property as well.
"The planners had looked on the eastern side of Andersen South, Route 15 we call it, and there is some public and some private lands over there where the safety zones go out into the rather choppy waters on the windward side there and that would have less negative impact on the people," said Bice.
Although Bice says no decisions have been made on the use of local government land for the housing area and firing ranges, Crawford says the feds are doing a pretty good job of ignoring his calls. "I don't even know if they're aware of the Tiyan landowners. I've tried to contact this guy Capt. Ruggerio, whatever his name is the public information officer they've never returned my call. I've tried to call a Master Sergeant down there they never return my call, I just want to let them know there's such a task force," he said.
Next week, Crawford will meet with Senator Ben Pangelinan, the Governor and Lt. Governor and hopefully JGPO officials to sign a resolution to set aside the ALC land for Tiyan landowners. In the meantime, landowners will meet tomorrow at the Christ Bible Fellowship building in Tamuning at 1pm.
By John Davis
Published May 8, 2009
KUAM
Tiyan landowners have negotiated a land exchange with the government after 13 hectares was taken for use by the Guam International Airport Authority and well on their way to determining a methodology on how ancestral lands will be divided. So far, the Tiyan Land Exchange Task Force has ensured properties they are looking at have proper easements for infrastructure to be installed.
And landowners are now concerned they'll never get the land exchange because the U.S. military is also looking at using the same parcels for a firing ranges and housing areas.
At the old Federal Aviation Administration, there's over 400 acres of land the land exchange task force is already looking at plotting and dividing for landowners owed smaller and medium sized lots. Tiyan Land Exchange Task Force chairperson Benny Crawford says with military land on both southern and northern boundaries, the feds want to use the old FAA property not as a firing range, but as a housing area.
"Being a retired military myself is they're looking at this land because it's a breach on their security. It's open and they want to close that gap again and I think that's the main purpose," he explained. "An option was to put some ranges up on the Finegayan area with the safety zones extending out into the water, the feedback we got, studies revealed that that would have a potentially negative impact on the people of Guam because it extends out into recreational waters, the double reefs out there."
Those who stand to receive larger portions of land via the land exchange will have their plots in the Marbou command sea land near Anderson South where there is 390 acres of land that can be used for the land swap. The problem? Joint Guam Program Office executive forward director, David Bice says the military plans to use that property as well.
"The planners had looked on the eastern side of Andersen South, Route 15 we call it, and there is some public and some private lands over there where the safety zones go out into the rather choppy waters on the windward side there and that would have less negative impact on the people," said Bice.
Although Bice says no decisions have been made on the use of local government land for the housing area and firing ranges, Crawford says the feds are doing a pretty good job of ignoring his calls. "I don't even know if they're aware of the Tiyan landowners. I've tried to contact this guy Capt. Ruggerio, whatever his name is the public information officer they've never returned my call. I've tried to call a Master Sergeant down there they never return my call, I just want to let them know there's such a task force," he said.
Next week, Crawford will meet with Senator Ben Pangelinan, the Governor and Lt. Governor and hopefully JGPO officials to sign a resolution to set aside the ALC land for Tiyan landowners. In the meantime, landowners will meet tomorrow at the Christ Bible Fellowship building in Tamuning at 1pm.
Monday, March 30, 2009
Monday, March 23, 2009
Ben's Pen
ben's Pen : Conspiracy theorists line up here
Tuesday, 24 March 2009 04:03
by Sen. Ben Pangelinan
Marianas Variety
LAST Friday, as it seems to be the practice of our esteemed federal court chief judge to release orders right before the weekend, found the government of Guam in contempt for the failure to deposit $993,700.00 as ordered by the court in its Feb. 13 order.
The court only cited this section of her order and did not even comment on the other aspects of Public Law 30-1, which was crafted by the Legislature after careful and deliberate and repeated reading of the entire order.
The court did order the payment of the $993,700.00 beginning on March 1. The court also encouraged the legislative and the executive branches to continue efforts to find “viable alternatives” means of financing the consent decree projects at a later time. Public Law 30-1 did not wait for a later time and instead gave the court a viable financing plan prior to March 1.
In the proceedings of the committee of the whole, prior to passing Bill 51 which became P.L. 30-1, I asked point blank the government of Guam’s financial advisor and the underwriter of the bond issue if the conditions for the security of the bond issuance in the bill was viable. These conditions are:
1. It authorized the issuance of the entire amount estimated by the receiver as what is needed to fund the consent decree projects, $202 million.
2. It pledged the full faith and credit of the general fund as a guarantee for the payment of the debt service.
3. It sets the maximum interest rate for the bonds at 9 percent.
4. It approves the terms and conditions and authorizes the Governor to issue the bonds
Both financial experts stated that this was a viable financing plan. Quoting from the same order: “Should this occur, the court will suspend the weekly payments provided the court is satisfied that at a minimum, authorized without the need for further legislative authorization or action, the maximum amount of bonds.” The Legislature clearly did that in the bill it passed.
The court also required that the “governor and the Guam Economic Development Authority in good faith and to the court’s satisfaction move to sell the first series of these bonds as soon as possible and such other bonds as soon as possible and such other bonds at a later date as required to keep the Consent Decree projects and on schedule.”
The court did not even ask the governor or GEDA if they “move to sell the first series of these bonds.” Why? It is clear that the court is not interested in what the Governor is not doing and it remains unknown to everyone, except the court. It is clear that she remains fixated on not only what the Legislature is doing, but on what it is not doing that displeases the court.
It appears that the court as well as the federal government wants a landfill built that serves the needs of someone else other than the people of Guam.
What is your theory?
ben pangelinan is a Senator in the 30th Guam Legislature and a former Speaker now serving his eighth term in the Guam Legislature. E-mail comments or suggestions to
senbenp@guam.net. ctzenben@ite.net
Tuesday, 24 March 2009 04:03
by Sen. Ben Pangelinan
Marianas Variety
LAST Friday, as it seems to be the practice of our esteemed federal court chief judge to release orders right before the weekend, found the government of Guam in contempt for the failure to deposit $993,700.00 as ordered by the court in its Feb. 13 order.
The court only cited this section of her order and did not even comment on the other aspects of Public Law 30-1, which was crafted by the Legislature after careful and deliberate and repeated reading of the entire order.
The court did order the payment of the $993,700.00 beginning on March 1. The court also encouraged the legislative and the executive branches to continue efforts to find “viable alternatives” means of financing the consent decree projects at a later time. Public Law 30-1 did not wait for a later time and instead gave the court a viable financing plan prior to March 1.
In the proceedings of the committee of the whole, prior to passing Bill 51 which became P.L. 30-1, I asked point blank the government of Guam’s financial advisor and the underwriter of the bond issue if the conditions for the security of the bond issuance in the bill was viable. These conditions are:
1. It authorized the issuance of the entire amount estimated by the receiver as what is needed to fund the consent decree projects, $202 million.
2. It pledged the full faith and credit of the general fund as a guarantee for the payment of the debt service.
3. It sets the maximum interest rate for the bonds at 9 percent.
4. It approves the terms and conditions and authorizes the Governor to issue the bonds
Both financial experts stated that this was a viable financing plan. Quoting from the same order: “Should this occur, the court will suspend the weekly payments provided the court is satisfied that at a minimum, authorized without the need for further legislative authorization or action, the maximum amount of bonds.” The Legislature clearly did that in the bill it passed.
The court also required that the “governor and the Guam Economic Development Authority in good faith and to the court’s satisfaction move to sell the first series of these bonds as soon as possible and such other bonds as soon as possible and such other bonds at a later date as required to keep the Consent Decree projects and on schedule.”
The court did not even ask the governor or GEDA if they “move to sell the first series of these bonds.” Why? It is clear that the court is not interested in what the Governor is not doing and it remains unknown to everyone, except the court. It is clear that she remains fixated on not only what the Legislature is doing, but on what it is not doing that displeases the court.
It appears that the court as well as the federal government wants a landfill built that serves the needs of someone else other than the people of Guam.
What is your theory?
ben pangelinan is a Senator in the 30th Guam Legislature and a former Speaker now serving his eighth term in the Guam Legislature. E-mail comments or suggestions to
senbenp@guam.net. ctzenben@ite.net
Friday, January 16, 2009
Monday, November 24, 2008
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
First Our Land, Now Our Ocean
ben's Pen: First our land, now our ocean
28 October 2008
by Sen. Ben Pangelinan
Guam Variety News
First they liberated us from the Japanese. It was a brutal occupation where lives were lost and the people suffered tremendously at the hands of the oppressors and occupiers.
For this the people were eternally grateful and when they said they needed our lands to ensure that such an occupation would never occur again in our lifetime, willingly, a grateful generation surrendered up the lands.
For most of that grateful generation, time is now eternal. They have passed from this earth and are now in a place of eternal rest.
Those remaining behind have seen the truth, no longer colored with gratefulness. The treatment and injustices have erased the goodwill of liberation.
And now they come for more. This time, they want our ocean and deny us of its bounty, which have supported our lives and our families through thousands of years. They want to preserve and conserve, but we have done this for centuries. The only reason they can make such a case today is because we have successfully done so for hundreds of years. But they want to dictate once again on their terms.
But this time, we are not hampered by gratefulness. Among us are vigilant citizens and responsible stewards of our resources.
Mr. Manny Duenas of the Fisherman's Co-op and the other members of the fishing community of Guam who took the initiative to learn about and spread the information regarding President Bush's proposed establishment of a Conservation Area surrounding the Marianas Trench are such.
Ever watchful, the recent meeting was not called by any federal or local government office or elected official, but was organized solely by the community-minded efforts of Manny and others.
Manny and others printed colored maps of the areas potentially affected, comment forms, the August memorandum from President Bush initiating the process, and other relevant information so that we on Guam could quickly educate ourselves and comment before the deadline which was only days away.
His direct efforts resulted in the attendance of NOOA officials, a representative of the federal Council for Environmental Quality, Congresswoman Bordallo, and many of our local fishermen and community members.
The information Manny presented at the meeting, and in particular the President's memorandum, immediately confirmed that restrictions resulting from the establishment of a conservation area of such great scale and without little input on the eve of the largest increase in military activity and equipment in US history affecting the same land and ocean area would "not limit the Department of Defense from carrying out the mission of the various branches of the military stationed or operating within the Pacific."
I object to any further restriction of the local people, especially Guam fishermen, from access to these areas while the military and other international or US commercial access continues.
A matter with tremendous significance for not only the fishermen but for ALL of the people of Guam should have been brought to us and our input solicited by government representatives with more resources for public education purposes, and especially by the federal agencies purporting to work with Guam on matters regarding our oceans, our environment, and our economic viability.
I am proud of and commend these private citizens who despite the odds against the people of Guam having an impact on federal action by the President in this case, are not only brave enough and love Guam enough to stand up for themselves but to also make the great effort to invite and assist all of us on Guam to speak up for ourselves.
They are truly public servants and public leaders.
ben pangelinan is a Senator in the 29th Guam Legislature and a former Speaker now serving his seventh term in the Guam Legislature. E-mail comments or suggestions to senbenp@guam.net.
28 October 2008
by Sen. Ben Pangelinan
Guam Variety News
First they liberated us from the Japanese. It was a brutal occupation where lives were lost and the people suffered tremendously at the hands of the oppressors and occupiers.
For this the people were eternally grateful and when they said they needed our lands to ensure that such an occupation would never occur again in our lifetime, willingly, a grateful generation surrendered up the lands.
For most of that grateful generation, time is now eternal. They have passed from this earth and are now in a place of eternal rest.
Those remaining behind have seen the truth, no longer colored with gratefulness. The treatment and injustices have erased the goodwill of liberation.
And now they come for more. This time, they want our ocean and deny us of its bounty, which have supported our lives and our families through thousands of years. They want to preserve and conserve, but we have done this for centuries. The only reason they can make such a case today is because we have successfully done so for hundreds of years. But they want to dictate once again on their terms.
But this time, we are not hampered by gratefulness. Among us are vigilant citizens and responsible stewards of our resources.
Mr. Manny Duenas of the Fisherman's Co-op and the other members of the fishing community of Guam who took the initiative to learn about and spread the information regarding President Bush's proposed establishment of a Conservation Area surrounding the Marianas Trench are such.
Ever watchful, the recent meeting was not called by any federal or local government office or elected official, but was organized solely by the community-minded efforts of Manny and others.
Manny and others printed colored maps of the areas potentially affected, comment forms, the August memorandum from President Bush initiating the process, and other relevant information so that we on Guam could quickly educate ourselves and comment before the deadline which was only days away.
His direct efforts resulted in the attendance of NOOA officials, a representative of the federal Council for Environmental Quality, Congresswoman Bordallo, and many of our local fishermen and community members.
The information Manny presented at the meeting, and in particular the President's memorandum, immediately confirmed that restrictions resulting from the establishment of a conservation area of such great scale and without little input on the eve of the largest increase in military activity and equipment in US history affecting the same land and ocean area would "not limit the Department of Defense from carrying out the mission of the various branches of the military stationed or operating within the Pacific."
I object to any further restriction of the local people, especially Guam fishermen, from access to these areas while the military and other international or US commercial access continues.
A matter with tremendous significance for not only the fishermen but for ALL of the people of Guam should have been brought to us and our input solicited by government representatives with more resources for public education purposes, and especially by the federal agencies purporting to work with Guam on matters regarding our oceans, our environment, and our economic viability.
I am proud of and commend these private citizens who despite the odds against the people of Guam having an impact on federal action by the President in this case, are not only brave enough and love Guam enough to stand up for themselves but to also make the great effort to invite and assist all of us on Guam to speak up for ourselves.
They are truly public servants and public leaders.
ben pangelinan is a Senator in the 29th Guam Legislature and a former Speaker now serving his seventh term in the Guam Legislature. E-mail comments or suggestions to senbenp@guam.net.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)