Civilians Left Out of Task Force

Mayor feels civilians neglected on civilian/military task force

by Clynt Ridgell, KUAM News
Sunday, November 26, 2006


The task force created to accommodate the anticipated military expansion on Guam in the opinion of one sitting member exists just for show, as one particular village mayor says when he attends meetings, decision are already made. And evidently, Guam's chief executive rejected the request of each village mayor having a voice in the task force.

Several months ago Governor Felix Camacho created a civilian/military task force to develop a comprehensive master plan that would not only identify opportunities to benefit island residents, but one that would accommodate military expansion and operations in the territory. The idea was to have members of both the uniformed and non-uniformed communities come together to make this organization. The problem is that not all the members feel that their voices are being heard.

Agana Heights mayor Paul McDonald is the only mayoral representative on the task force and said, "I've attended a couple of those meetings and I think the meetings that we've had were meetings that have already been decided upon on." According to the municipal leader, when he attends meetings most of the decisions that are supposed to be made by some form of consensus have already been made. This is why McDonald says that he feels as if the task force is more for show than for actual function.

"I've felt that the community was not properly being represented on issues that I don't think have been addressed down to the community level, which is I feel our level - my level," he stated. Mayor McDonald says that he wrote to the Governor requesting that all the mayors be included on the task force, but he says that request was summarily put down. McDonald adds that he's concerned that the head of the civilian/military task force is a member of the military community.

The mayor continued, "I really think that a civilian should take the lead of this task force and nothing personal to General [Donald] Goldhorn, but he's a military personnel and he should, of course, respect the higher military authorities in D.C., and I'm sure that if it was a civilian person in his place that we will get more voice. [sic]"

McDonald's main concern is that the civilian voice is heard, as it is by its nature the civilian/military task force. But as for right now, he says that's sorely not the case.

Women's Magazine on Guam Militarization

http://www.kpfa.org/archives/index.php?arch=17238

About this program:
Preeti Shekar of KPFA radio's Women's Magazine talks to Noble peace prize winner and author Wangari Maathai about her new memoir, her struggle for human rights, the rights of women and the environmental movement in Kenya. And Catalina Vazquez talks to two women from Guam, one of the last colonies in the world, about the U.S. military occupation and militarization of Guam and their recent visit to the United Nations to get support for the independence of Guam and to stop the military's plans to increase that occupation.

Anderson Growth to Continue

Owens: Anderson Growth to Continue

By Gerardo R. Partido
Variety News Staff

THE projected growth at Andersen Air Force base will continue despite the replacement of Department of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and the Democrats’ takeover of Congress.

This was the assurance given yesterday by the 36th Wing’s new commander Brig. Gen. Doug Owens during a media briefing.

Rumsfeld and the previous Republican Congress had been very vocal about their support for Guam as a forward base for the U.S.

But despite the change in the U.S. political landscape, Owens said Guam’s strategic location assures that the island will continue to play a significant part in the military’s strategic posture.

He added that this was one of the reasons why a general has been assigned at Andersen for the first time.

“General Hester decided that we needed someone more senior to facilitate the growth at Andersen,” Owens said.

Military construction is set to boom inside Andersen Air Force Base as the military installation prepares for 3,100 additional active duty personnel and their dependents to be deployed in the next few years.

This is in addition to the 8,500 active duty personnel and their dependents already residing inside the base and the impending relocation of some 8,000 Marines and their dependents from Okinawa.

“I’m sure military construction appropriations for Guam will continue. Besides, you have a good representative in Congresswoman Bordallo,” Owens said.

He pointed out that construction on the new complex that will house the Global Hawk surveillance has already started, as well as work on the Northwest Field.

Owens, who spent time on duty in Korea, said Andersen is always prepared in case a crisis erupts with North Korea.

“In my personal opinion, our actions will be consistent with whatever actions North Korea initiates,” Owens said.

On a personal note, Owens said he and his wife are “extraordinarily happy” to be on Guam.

He added that he was very impressed with the warmth, friendship, and patriotism of the people of Guam and that he would like to stay on island “for a very long time.”

Owens promised to adopt a policy of “openness” to the media, except during times when this is not operationally expedient.

He also vowed to work closely with the local community and foster better civilian-military ties.

November 15, 2006

More CNMI Students want to Join the Military

Due to Worsening Economy, More Students Want to Join the Military

By Gemma Q. Casas November 15, 2006
Variety News Staff

AS the islands’ eight-year economic crisis continues to worsen, more public school students on Saipan are enlisting with the world’s most powerful armed forces in hopes of financing their college education.

But the students must first pass the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery, a multiple choice aptitude tests on general science, arithmetic, word knowledge, paragraph comprehension, mathematics, electronic information and auto shop knowledge.

For many of these students, one way of preparing for the ASVAB is entering the Junior Reserve Officers Training Corps.

JROTC is a program envisioned to instill discipline and nationalism among American high school students — and it is becoming more popular now among Northern Marianas students.

JROTC offers a regular review of ASVAB, which increases the students’ chances of passing the test.

At Saipan Southern High School, 748 of close to a thousand students are JROTC cadets.

Kelvin Babauta, a junior at SSHS, said joining the military will enable him to study in college, serve his country and see the rest of the world.

“I would die for my country. I also see the military as a way to travel. See better things besides Saipan,” said Babauta, who is a cadet 2nd lieutenant.

He said he feels he has to pass the ASVAB now more than ever due to the CNMI’s deteriorating economic condition.

His friends feel the same way.

“We must pass ASVAB,” he said. “It’s a difficult test.”

Henry Camacho, a sophomore at SSHS, also sees his future in the military.

“I want to serve my country,” he said, adding that some of his cousins are already deployed in Iraq.

He said his cousins’ stories about combat and “living on the edge” have inspired him to pass the ASVAB.
For 15-year-old Michelle Ramon, the JROTC program is crucial to her future.

She and Kayla Naboliv Jr. see a brighter future ahead of them if they sign up with the military.
Ramon said the JROTC can help prepare her for life’s challenges.

“The military is one of my options,” she said.

Naboliv, for her part, said the military would help finance her college education.

“I want to be independent and I see the military helping me get a degree in history and education. It will open a new world for me,” she said.

Sgt. Major Shawn Goins, adviser to Col. Stephen Smith, commander of the 13th Brigade, which oversees the U.S. JROTC in the Pacific region, said the program is not aimed at recruiting military personnel but it does help cadets have a better chance of entering the armed forces.

“We just want to give them a map that shows if you work hard it pays in the end. The JROTC is not a recruitment operation nor is the senior ROTC program. It is just a program in high school to help young adults become better citizens no matter what they want to do after they leave high school,” said Goins.

He said the 13th Brigade oversees 55 JROTC and SROTC programs in Montana, Oregon, Alaska, Hawaii, Guam, the Northern Marianas and American Samoa.

The visiting military official said the Pacific region has one of the best JROTC programs in the U.S.
“JROTC programs stretching from here to Guam, all the way to the American Samoa and Hawaii, are, in my eyes, some of the best that we have. The kids are very disciplined. They understand that someone wants to show you a better way of life and they get it in this part of the country,” the North Carolina-based Goins said.
Goins and Smith are scheduled to talk with various public school principals and Northern Marianas College officials during their stay on island.

Solidarity with South Korea

CINDY SHEEHAN & MEDEA BENJAMIN LEADING DELEGATION TO SOUTH KOREA

U.S. Activists Join South Koreans to Protest US Military Base Expansion and US-Korea Free Trade Agreement

New York, NY (Nov. 16, 2006) – American peace activists Cindy Sheehan and Medea Benjamin are leading a delegation of U.S. peace and social justice activists to South Korea to oppose the expansion of Camp Humphrey, the US military base in Pyeongtaek, South Korea and to protest the proposed Korea-US Free Trade Agreement.

The delegation of 18, who will be in Korea from November 20 to November 24, includes members of Working Families Party, Veterans for Peace, Service Employees International Union, CodePink, Global Exchange, and Gold Star Families for Peace. This will be the first trip to Korea for Sheehan, whose son Casey was killed in Iraq, and Benjamin, founder of Global Exchange and CodePink.

They will meet with elderly Korean farmers of Pyongtaek, whose farmland and homes were violently seized by the Korean military to accommodate the expansion of the U.S. military base. For over two years, Korean farmers have exhausted every legal channel and resisted relocation, holding candlelight vigils for 800 nights.

"The U.S. government spends $9 billion dollars a month on overseas military operations," said Cindy Sheehan, "We are traveling to Korea to witness first-hand how U.S. tax dollars are being spent to destroy Korean farm lands, homes, schools and lives."

According to Kisuk Yom, head of the Korean-American coalition leading the U.S. delegation, "There is no democracy for elderly villagers whose farmlands were stolen. The South Korean public, too, has been silenced, yet they are the ones who will suffer the consequences of a future military conflict."

On November 22, the delegation will join the nationwide mobilization against the U.S.-Korea Free Trade Agreement. One million Koreans are expected to take to the streets in Seoul. "The proposed FTA will dramatically expand the failed model of NAFTA," says Christine Ahn, policy analyst with the Korea Policy Institute. "We will let the Korean people know what NAFTA has meant for
working Americans: factories shutting down and farms falling into foreclosure."

Korean Americans against War and Neoliberalism, (KAWAN), a coalition of US based Korean organizations working to stop the passage of the FTA and the expansion of the U.S. military base, is the sponsor and organizer of the trip. "We hope this delegation will return to the U.S. to tell the American people about the true human cost of the U.S. military expansion in Korea," said Hyukkyo Suh, Executive Director of National Association of Korean Americans. "Korea is a democratic and sovereign nation, and the Korean people want—as they deserve-- to make decisions that will affect their lives for years to come."

For more information about the delegation and KAWAN, please visit
www.kawanlist.blogspot.com.

Remembering Japan's War of Aggression

Center a testimony to Japan's war of aggression
By MIYA TANAKA

KAWAGOE, Saitama Pref. (Kyodo) A resource center focusing on Japan's wartime aggression in China and other parts of Asia has opened in Saitama Prefecture, exhibiting documents in which some 300 Japanese veterans confess to atrocities.

Most of the confessions, to crimes such as murdering and raping civilians, were made under the auspices of the peace group Chukiren, formed in 1957 by about 1,100 repatriated Japanese who had been imprisoned in China after the end of World War II as war criminals.

"This center will be the most powerful weapon to show the truth of the war," said Fumiko Niki, 80, head of the Chukiren peace memorial museum in the city of Kawagoe and a longtime supporter of the group.

Chukiren, a Japanese abbreviation for a phrase meaning network of repatriates from China, was dissolved in 2002 because its members were aging. But its activities were taken over by a new, younger group headed by Niki, which launched the center. People in their 20s and 30s have joined her.

The center, in a 180-sq.-meter space converted from a warehouse, houses about 23,000 books along with video footage and photos related to war, peace and other issues, according to center officials.

The books were mainly donated from Chukiren members and the late Masami Yamazumi, a former president of Tokyo Metropolitan University and critic of Japan's education system.

The launch of the center comes at a time when Chukiren members are increasingly concerned over Japan's current situation, including moves to revise the pacifist Constitution and the basic postwar education law with the aim of teaching patriotism in the classroom.

"Primarily, 1,000 Chukiren members were talking in public about the reality of the aggression. And we have to admit that raising the Japanese people's awareness as victimizers more than 60 years after the war has not been enough," said Tetsuro Takahashi, 85, former Chukiren secretary general.

Chukiren's unique activity of "testifying to the acts of aggression" can be traced back to the members' experience of being detained in China's Fushun and Taiyuan prisons, the former from 1950.

Surprisingly treated with leniency by Chinese prison staff, including being provided with medical treatment and Japanese meals, about 1,100 former Japanese Imperial Army soldiers and officers of the puppet regime in Manchuria underwent a re-education process, confessing to their "sinful acts" and reflecting on them.

Only 45 were indicted and convicted in 1956 at military tribunals held in China. None were sentenced to death. All, including those convicted, were able to return to Japan by 1964.

More than 5,000 pages of copies of handwritten testimony by the prisoners are also presented at the newly opened center, provided through the Chinese Embassy in Tokyo, Niki said.

Tsuyoshi Ebato, a former soldier held in Fushun, said the confession process he underwent in the prison was "a miracle" that made him realize the graveness of his crime. He recalled how he had ordered new recruits to bayonet captured Chinese tied to stakes as part of training, including a boy who clutched his knees and begged for life.

Ebato, 93, has talked about his experiences on about 10 occasions this year at the invitation of college students, citizens' groups and teacher unions. This is double the number of such opportunities he had the previous year. They "probably thought I don't have much time left," he said.

As the number of Chukiren members still alive, believed to be about 100, is rapidly decreasing, the group headed by Niki has stepped up efforts to find war veterans who will cooperate in talking about their experiences to preserve the memories of war.

Hisao Kubotera, 86, from Hadano, Kanagawa Prefecture, a Chukiren member who responded to the group's call, gave a lecture in October.

Health problems, including an ulcer, had made him reluctant to go out to speak, but recent moves by the government that he fears are leading Japan to make the same mistakes as it did in the prewar days have spurred him to talk about his experiences in detail.

"I thought a terrible thing is going to happen when I saw the government moving toward revising the Constitution and eyeing passing an amendment to the Fundamental Law of Education in the ongoing Diet session," Kubotera said.

"I believe these moves will be a large obstacle in facing Asian countries that suffered greatly (in the war)."

Kubotera was born the first of 10 children in a farming family and joined the war in China in 1942. He said he is still haunted by the memory of shooting a boy, around 14 or 15, who was hiding with his mother in a hollow, at the order of his squad leader in Shandong Province.

"I pulled the trigger immediately, like a machine. . . . We were taught that the superior's order was the same as that of the Emperor. I didn't even hesitate." he said. "But I felt as if I was killing my little brother. My heart was thumping, and I was surprised that I even had to do such a thing in war.

"Other soldiers kind of sneered at me and said, 'Oh, my, Kubotera killed a child!' But they also killed others, even though it may not have been a child," he said.

As the days passed, the memories of killing the boy faded, until he was imprisoned in Fushun. Kubotera said it still took a few years until he was able to confess in prison.

"All people who went to the war, directly or indirectly, took part in a massacre," he said.

"Japanese people talk about the sufferings of atomic bomb attacks and air raids, but we need to understand them from the context of Japan's war of aggression."

Welcoming the opening of the center, Kubotera expressed willingness to keep on relating his experiences of war.

"In my local area, there are few people willing to listen to what I say, labeling me a communist. I'm also sad that many who have been to the war remain silent," he said. "But I should keep on talking. . . . I think this will be our long, long fight to preserve peace."

The Japan Times: Wednesday, Nov. 8, 2006

Military Chemical Dumping

Law takes aim at Army for dumping
Congress to military: Inspect, test and clean up the chemical weapons dumped into the sea.
BY JOHN M.R. BULL
247-4768
October 18, 2006

The military must inspect the chemical weapons it dumped into the ocean decades ago to determine the danger they now pose to people or marine life, under a bill signed into law on Tuesday.

Then the Army will have to figure out how to clean up or contain - if possible - the mess it secretly made in more than two dozen offshore locations.

"We're elated," said Dave Helfert, a spokesman for U.S. Rep. Neil Abercrombie, D-Hawaii, who pushed for the new law. "This is the first concrete step that addresses a serious threat to the public. It's very important."

A Daily Press investigation last October revealed that the Army dumped at least 64 million pounds of deadly mustard and nerve gas - included in artillery shells, bombs and rockets - off the U.S. coastline, kept it secret and stopped checking 30 years ago to see whether the weapons were leaking. Some evidence suggests the munitions may now be leaking and pose a danger to marine life and people who eat some types of seafood.

The weapons are off the coast of at least 11 states, including Virginia, New Jersey, North Carolina, Hawaii, Alaska and Florida. But more dumpsites may exist because the Army's records are sketchy and were destroyed long ago.

If not cleaned up, the weapons likely pose a threat for generations to come. Metal deteriorates at different rates in the ocean, depending on the depth, temperature and prevailing currents. This causes the weapons to potentially leak at different times and at different rates.

The Daily Press investigation prompted the Army to conduct an extensive search of all surviving ocean-dumping records. A report on that research is finished but has sat unreleased in the hands of top Pentagon officials for more than a month.

After reading the newspaper's findings, several lawmakers demanded the military do more than just check records for unrevealed dumpsites.

A provision in the defense authorization act - signed into law Tuesday by President Bush - requires that the military inspect its known chemical weapons dumps and record the locations on nautical charts so mariners knowthe potential dangers.

The inspections must include water and seabed environmental testing to see whether the weapons are leaking, or have leaked, and determine thecurrent and potential future threat to sea life. The military also must assess the risks to humans.

Mustard gas survives in seawater in a concentrated gel that can last for years, pushed around by ocean currents. Other chemicals can accumulate in seafood and be passed up the food chain to humans.

"This requirement is absolutely necessary to protect the public health of everyone who lives, works or visits the oceans near these munitions dumps as well as the condition of the oceans and marine life," said U.S. Rep. Rob Andrews, D-New Jersey, one of the first lawmakers to raise a fuss.

The bill requires the military to monitor each site - most, but not all, are located in deep water - and determine how to clean them up if that is possible.

The weapons are likely to be unstable and extremely hazardous to disturb after decades in the ocean. They were dumped between 1940 and 1972.

The bill went a step further than experts expected because it applies to all ocean-dumped munitions, not just chemical weapons. "That really is quite amazing," said Craig Williams, director of the Kentucky-based Chemical Weapons Working Group, a citizen advocacy operation that monitors the Army's disposal of land-based chemical weapons. "I'll be in the ground 100 years before they get around to all of that. This isn't going to be cheap."

The Army and Navy extensively dumped surplus conventional weapons off the side of ships for decades and in the late 1960s and early 1970s loaded old ships with old weapons and blew them up, scattering unexploded ordnance inall directions.

The military will abide by the new law "in an effort to ensure the continued protection of the environment and safety of the American public," said Pentagon spokeswoman Cheryl Irwin.

There is no estimate on what the new law's requirements will cost, and this year's defense-funding bill doesn't include any money for the military to begin complying with the new law's provisions. Congress makes such appropriations annually.

The law does not apply to U.S.-created chemical weapon dumpsites off the coasts of at least 11 other countries. At the end of World War II, the Army dumped its overseas chemical weapon stockpiles where they were located, killing or injuring hundreds in the ensuing decades.

Bush and the Military

Published on Tuesday, October 31, 2006
by CommonDreams.org
Bush Losing Support of Military
by Bob Burnett

One of the most memorable Iraq war images was President Bush's May 1, 2003, speech from the deck of the aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln. As Bush announced, "Major combat operations in Iraq have ended," framed by the banner, "Mission Accomplished," he was surrounded by hundreds of cheering troops. At the time, it would have been hard to predict that three years later major combat operations would not have ended, the mission would not be accomplished, and Bush would be losing the support of the military.

How did George Bush manage to lose the backing of our armed forces, which at one time was highly supportive of his Administration?

Four factors contributed to this change: First, the occupation of Iraq was botched. Michael Gordon and Bernard Trainor's recent book, Cobra II: The Inside Story of the Invasion and Occupation of Iraq argues the Administration "committed five grievous errors" during the planning and execution of the invasion: "They underestimated their opponent and failed to understand the welter of ethnic groups and tribes that is Iraq." "They did not bring the right tools to the fight and put too much confidence in technology." "They failed to adapt to developments on the ground;" did not recognize the rise of the insurgency. "They presided over a system in which differing military and political perspectives were discouraged." Finally, "they turned their backs onŠ nation-building."

Second, the Bush Administration's failure to "bring the right tools to the fight" directly impacted rank-and-file troops. Particularly in the early days of the occupation, most had inadequate equipment. A recent poll indicated that 42 percent of Iraq and Afghanistan veterans "said their equipment was below the military standard of being 90 percent operational."

Third, the longer our troops stayed in Iraq the more they became aware that most Iraqis didn't want them there. A recent poll indicated that 71 percent of Iraqis want occupation forces to leave within a year. Further, 60 percent supported attacks on US-led forces.

And fourth, increasing numbers of retired Army and Marine generals began to express opposition to the war. (It's a violation of the Uniform code of Military Justice for an active-duty officer to criticize the President or anyone in the chain of military command.)

The Administration attempted to keep a lid on this discontent. As a result, there have been very few surveys that asked active-duty troops how they felt about the war. The most recent poll indicated that 72 percent of active-duty personnel believed the war should end in 2006. A more recent survey indicated that 53 percent "did not always know who the enemy was."

Increasing numbers of soldiers have gone AWOL or asked for Conscientious Objector status. In October, military personnel began adding their names to a web-based petition calling for withdrawal from Iraq. Active duty troops have begun to speak against the war.

The most notable recent comment came from Kevin Tillman on October 19th. Kevin is the brother of former pro football star, Pat Tillman, who killed in Afghanistan on April 22. 2004. Both brothers enlisted after September 11, 2001, and initially served in Iraq; then they were trained as Army Rangers and sent to Afghanistan. Kevin said, "Somehow American leadership, whose only credit is lying to its people and illegally invading a nation, has been allowed to steal the courage, virtue and honor of its soldiers on the ground."

One of the reasons the military has turned on the Bush Administration is the increasing number of wounded troops. There have been more than 21,000 such casualties, in addition to the more than 2800 deaths. The Bush Administration prohibits pictures of coffins returning from Iraq.

They've also told the Department of Veteran's Affairs to not give out the names of the wounded. Democratic Congressman John Murtha noted that in addition to the soldiers' grievous physical injuries,"50,000 will suffer from what I call battle fatigue." In July 2004, the PBS News Hour reported, "about one-sixth of troops returning from Iraq showed symptoms of mental health problems but many are not receiving treatment." ( A recent study indicated these injuries will cost the US more than $1 trillion.)

Of course, Active-duty troops are being required to spend multiple tours of duty in Iraq. This has increased their financial and psychological problems. Recently, Stars and Stripes reported the divorce rate for Iraqi veterans jumped from 9 to 15 percent and alcohol abuse rose from 13 percent to 21 percent.

Last year, decorated combat veteran John Murtha came out against the war in Iraq. One of his reasons was the damage the occupation is doing to the military. Murtha spoke movingly of his visits with returning veterans. He concluded, "Our military is suffering."

It is this suffering, the consequences of an ill conceived and tragically mishandled war, that cost the Bush Administration the support of our troops.

Bob Burnett is a Berkeley writer. He can be reached at bobburnett@comcast.net
###

Bula Nukes Giya Guahan

‘US Unlikely to Redeploy Nukes in South’
By Jung Sung-ki
Staff Reporter

Washington is unlikely to re-deploy tactical nuclear weapons on the Korean Peninsula to deter North Korea's nuclear threat largely because of its goal ofdenuclearizing the peninsula, the Washington Post reported Saturday.

``The chances of the United States re-deploying those weapons are slim,'' the newspaper reported, citing U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice's remarks last week that the goal of U.S. diplomacy is to denuclearize the peninsula.

A group of 17 former South Korean defense ministers and war veterans last week issued a statement calling on the government to ask the U.S. military to re-deploy tactical nuclear weapons, which were removed by former President George H.W. Bush's administration in 1991 as part of arms reductions following theCold War.

In the same year, the two Koreas signed a pact pledging not to deploy, develop or posses nuclear bombs on the peninsula, which was apparently breached by Pyongyang when it reportedly conducted a nuclear bomb test on Oct. 9.

Defense analysts also said the U.S. government is expected to provide a stronger nuclear umbrella to Seoul rather than re-deploying nuclear weapons on the peninsula, which would fan a nuclear arms race among countries like South Korea, Japan and Taiwan.

Kim Tae-woo, a researcher at the state-funded Korea Institute for Defense Analyses (KIDA), said the current U.S. nuclear umbrella for South Korea is enough to counter North Korea's nuclear capability.

``What South Korea needs right now is the United States' firm commitment to the provision of nuclear umbrella to South Korea, given that U.S. aircraft carriers and submarines frequently visit South Korean ports and are being deployedaround the peninsula,'' said Kim.

Defense Yoon Kwang-ung and his U.S. counterpart Donald H. Rumsfeld are to meet in Washington, D.C. on Saturday to reaffirm military cooperation, includingthe nuclear umbrella for Seoul, against the apparently nuclear-armed Pyongyang regime.

During the security talks, called the Security Consultative Meeting, the two sides are also expected to draw up a final road map regarding the transition of wartime operational control that has remained in the hands of the U.S. military.

The U.S. military is reportedly deploying about 10,000 tactical nuclear weapons around the world. Most of the atomic weapons are being stationed at bases in Hawaii and Guam and have advanced aircraft carriers and submarinesavailable for nuclear weapons installment.

Tactical nuclear weapons are used in a limited nuclear war targeting the enemy military forces. They have an explosive yield ranging from 0.1 kiloton (100 tons of TNT) to 1 megaton (1 million tons of TNT).

The ``low-yield'' weapons are short-range, covering less than 500 kilometers, and take the form of artillery shells. An arms control treaty does not currently cover these nuclear weapons.

Tactical nuclear weapons expected to cover Korea include the Tomahawk cruise missile capable of carrying a 200 kiloton nuclear warhead, the AGM-69 short-range attack missile, the AGM-86B air-launched cruise missile fo rB-52 bombersand the BGM-109G ground-launched cruise missile, according to defense experts.

Strategic nuclear weapons are used in an attack aimed at an entire country, including both military and civilian targets, in a full-scale nuclear war. Such an attack would seek to destroy the entire economic, social and military infrastructure of a country.

A case in point is the United States' nuclear bombing of the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945.

gallantjung@koreatimes.co.kr10-15-2006 17:41

Bula Nukes

‘US Unlikely to Redeploy Nukes in South’
By Jung Sung-ki
Staff Reporter

Washington is unlikely to re-deploy tactical nuclear weapons on the Korean Peninsula to deter North Korea's nuclear threat largely because of its goal ofdenuclearizing the peninsula, the Washington Post reported Saturday.

``The chances of the United States re-deploying those weapons are slim,'' the newspaper reported, citing U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice's remarks last week that the goal of U.S. diplomacy is to denuclearize the peninsula.

A group of 17 former South Korean defense ministers and war veterans last week issued a statement calling on the government to ask the U.S. military to re-deploy tactical nuclear weapons, which were removed by former President George H.W. Bush's administration in 1991 as part of arms reductions following theCold War.

In the same year, the two Koreas signed a pact pledging not to deploy, develop or posses nuclear bombs on the peninsula, which was apparently breached by Pyongyang when it reportedly conducted a nuclear bomb test on Oct. 9.

Defense analysts also said the U.S. government is expected to provide a stronger nuclear umbrella to Seoul rather than re-deploying nuclear weapons on the peninsula, which would fan a nuclear arms race among countries like South Korea, Japan and Taiwan.

Kim Tae-woo, a researcher at the state-funded Korea Institute for Defense Analyses (KIDA), said the current U.S. nuclear umbrella for South Korea is enough to counter North Korea's nuclear capability.

``What South Korea needs right now is the United States' firm commitment to the provision of nuclear umbrella to South Korea, given that U.S. aircraft carriers and submarines frequently visit South Korean ports and are being deployedaround the peninsula,'' said Kim.

Defense Yoon Kwang-ung and his U.S. counterpart Donald H. Rumsfeld are to meet in Washington, D.C. on Saturday to reaffirm military cooperation, includingthe nuclear umbrella for Seoul, against the apparently nuclear-armed Pyongyang regime.

During the security talks, called the Security Consultative Meeting, the two sides are also expected to draw up a final road map regarding the transition of wartime operational control that has remained in the hands of the U.S. military.

The U.S. military is reportedly deploying about 10,000 tactical nuclear weapons around the world. Most of the atomic weapons are being stationed at bases in Hawaii and Guam and have advanced aircraft carriers and submarinesavailable for nuclear weapons installment.

Tactical nuclear weapons are used in a limited nuclear war targeting theenemy military forces. They have an explosive yield ranging from 0.1kiloton (100tons of TNT) to 1 megaton (1 million tons of TNT).The ``low-yield'' weapons are short-range, covering less than 500 kilometers,and take the form of artillery shells. An arms control treaty does notcurrently cover these nuclear weapons.Tactical nuclear weapons expected to cover Korea include the Tomahawk cruisemissile capable of carrying a 200 kiloton nuclear warhead, the AGM-69short-range attack missile, the AGM-86B air-launched cruise missile forB-52 bombersand the BGM-109G ground-launched cruise missile, according to defenseexperts.Strategic nuclear weapons are used in an attack aimed at an entire country,including both military and civilian targets, in a full-scale nuclear war.Suchan attack would seek to destroy the entire economic, social and militaryinfrastructure of a country.A case in point is the United States' nuclear bombing of the Japanese citiesof Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945.gallantjung@koreatimes.co.kr10-15-2006 17:41

Only 5.3% of Guam is over the age of 65

Compensation overdue for radiation victims
by Jean Hudson, KUAM News
Sunday, October 22, 2006

One non-profit organization continues to push for victims of radiation exposure. President of the Pacific Association for Radiation Survivors Robert Celestial says according to the National Research Council Guam has missed out on many years of compensation. "Because as of 2000 through 2002, counties in the United States have been receiving millions of dollars through the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act, and we missed it back then and last year again,' he explained.

Celestial continued, "And so what that does, we now have to justify ask for funding for a new hospital, radiation therapy, and we need a radiation oncologist and a team to operate the machine because they appropriated $2 million for through the Legislature for the machine. It's like buying an airplane without the pilots and mechanics to run it."

He says according to the National Research Council, survivors who lived on Guam between 1946 and 1962 may qualify for compensation. Also, during the PARS annual membership meeting this afternoon, guest speaker Dr. Luis Syzfres with the Cancer Research Center talked about research that reveals that only 5.3% of Guam's population is over age 65. "This is something that is even published in the U.S. Census. I began to ask what is going on in Guam? I receive answers like 'Oh, they're on vacation, the old people', 'They are visiting their children.' No! So what is it? What is unique to Guam that people can't get really old?

"And when we say old, we know that these are diseases that are not like bullets. They are chronic diseases that start early in life," he said.

How Prepared is Guam?

How prepared is Guam for a nuclear attack?
by Clynt Ridgell, KUAM News - Saturday, October 21, 2006

With concerns about North Korea and nuclear testing, some in the community may be wondering if Guam is ready. Guam homeland security advisor Frank Blas, Jr says that he takes the threat of a nuclear attack seriously, telling KUAM News, "There is the concern of North Korea's capability to be able to launch nuclear missiles not only to Guam but to Hawaii, Japan and the [United States] West Coast."

Blas says that they are in constant contact with the Department of Defense, the Department of Homeland Security, and the White House about the North Korean threat. "We can only hope and pray that the diplomacy that is ongoing right now will help to calm the situation down," he speculated. Aside from this, Blas says they've already procured some equipment and training to deal with a nuclear disaster and are looking at expanding this training.

But what should you and I do in the event of a nuclear attack? Blas suggests, "Make sure you've got you're emergency supply kits, you've got your flashlights, your battery-operated radios, your batteries, three days' supply of food just in case; then should an incident occur and should you get word of something that may be going on please listen to radio and television broadcasts for official homeland security civil defense releases."

We asked the homeland security advisor if there were any actual bomb shelters for people to go to in the event of a disaster. "No no, I think a lot of people can recall back in the old days the fallout shelters were concrete, and a lot of that was based on," he continued. "Back in those days there were less concrete buildings than, there were steel and wooden structures. Now, obviously there are a little bit more concrete structures."

Blas says your best bet is to stay indoors.

Navy May Outsource Civilian Jobs

Navy may outsource civilian jobs
By Gerardo R. Partido Variety News Staff

A NUMBER of civilian workers at U.S. Naval Base Guam may lose their jobs if the Navy proceeds with plans to outsource their work. According to the Department of the Navy, jobs that may be affected would be in the non-guard security support services and emergency management dispatch support services.

These include jobs in the field of vehicle inspection, explosive detection, pass and ID, court services or administrative support, armory and ready for issue, training, physical security, supply/logistics, crime prevention, surveillance detection, and dispatching functions.

According to the Navy, two separate competitions will be conducted to determine if it is more cost-effective for the Navy to continue to perform these functions or to contract them out.

The jobs are being considered as part of a Navy-wide review of commercial activities being undertaken as per Office of Management and Budget Circular A-76, which establishes federal policy for the performance of commercial activities. If an activity can be performed by either contract or government in-house personnel, an A-76 study will be done to determine the most economical method of operation.

Sen. Antonio Unpingco, R-Santa Rita, who heads the Legislature’s military committee, wrote to Congresswoman Madeleine Z. Bordallo to ask for assistance. “It has been brought to my attention that once again, the people of Guam are subjected to unfair treatment by the Department of Defense. Guam is the only jurisdiction in the country that has an A-76 Study. It is unfair that our island and our people are the only ones who continue to suffer from the impact of this program,” Unpingco wrote.

He added that Guam has seen how the A-76 Study has devastated the island’s economy and negatively impacted a large number of families.

“We have observed how the A-76 Study has caused the deterioration of existing military assets such as the Fena Reservoir which supplies water to the Navy. It is time that we diligently work together to terminate this program,” Unpingco stressed.

The OMB Circular requires periodic review of each commercial activity to determine if continued performance by government personnel is economical.

Both the government and contract cost figures used in the competition are based on the same scope of work and the same performance standard to assure a fair comparison and continued high level of performance. If the costs of contracting are lower than the costs of continued government performance, the Navy said the jobs will be contracted out.

Nuclear Sub Docks At Apra

Nuclear submarine docks at Apra
By Gerardo R. Partido
Variety News Staff
10/21/06

THE nuclear attack submarine USS Seawolf (SSN 21) has docked at the Navy’s Apra Harbor facility, Variety sources said.

The USS Seawolf is more advanced than the three Los Angeles-type submarines currently homeported on Guam.

Variety sources said this was the first time that the USS Seawolf has been to Guam or this part of the world.

It was unclear yesterday whether the USS Seawolf’s visit was connected to the current North Korean crisis.

The Navy yesterday confirmed the presence of the submarine but did not give details. “The submarine is here for a routine port visit,” COMNAVMAR public affairs assistant Ben Keller told Variety. But he could not say how long the submarine would be on Guam or where it was headed for next.

“For security reasons, we do not discuss ship movements,” Keller said.

Usually, submarines or any ships making routine port visits to Guam are announced by the Navy.

Ceremonies are even held to welcome the crew and ship visits are offered to the public. But this time, the Navy said no such things were planned for the submarine.

The USS Seawolf is the lead ship of her class, succeeding the Los Angeles-type of attack submarine. It is said that the USS Seawolf is quieter at its tactical speed of 25 knots than a Los Angeles submarine is at pier side. Originally, 29 were to be produced, but with the end of the Cold War, the cost was judged to be prohibitively high and only three were built in favor of the smaller, cheaper, Virginia class.

According to Global Security, the USS Seawolf is designed to rapidly deploy to hostile ocean areas and clear the way for strikes by other friendly forces, as well as engage and destroy surface forces and land targets.

In addition, the USS Seawolf is designed to be a quiet, fast, heavily armed, and shock-resistant submarine. Variety sources said the USS Seawolf is just the first of more submarines that will be sent to Guam as part of normal rotations and a more deliberate show of force in the region.

Currently, Guam is home port to two attack submarines, the USS City of Corpus Christi and the USS Houston, as well as the submarine tender USS Frank Cable.

Another submarine, the USS Buffalo, will join them next year to replace the USS San Francisco, the Los Angeles-class submarine currently being repaired in the mainland.

But the number of U.S. submarines based on Guam may further increase to five in line with the Department of Defense’s quadrennial defense review released last February, which recommended the deployment of more submarines to the Pacific by 2010.

In addition, the Navy is reportedly planning to deploy missile submarines to Guam, in addition to the attack submarines already homeported on island.

The cruise missile submarines are designed to attack large warships and tactical targets on land in contrast to the attack submarines currently based on Guam, which specialize more in combat with other naval vessels.

Two cruise missile submarines, perhaps as many as four, may be deployed to Guam as part of deterrence measures against China and North Korea, which has lately been beefing up its military posture in the region.

US Reviewing War Plans with North Korea

US Reviews War Plan on N. Korea
By Jung Sung-ki
Staff Reporter
The Korean Times
10 - 16- 06

The United States is mapping out a new theater war plan on the Korean Peninsula aimed at striking weapons of mass destruction in North Korea, reports said yesterday, citing an unidentified Chinese defense expert in Canada.

The U.S. move comes after North Korea's self-proclaimed nuclear weapon test on Oct. 9.
According to the report, the United States is considering a plan against North Korea to neutralize Pyongyang's nuclear capability with overwhelming use of the U.S. Air Force.

Whether the new plan is related to the joint contingency plan with South Korea, dubbed OPLAN 5027, was not confirmed.

South Korea's Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS) declined to comment on the report.

Under the envisaged plan, U.S. combat aircraft and bombers, such as F-117A Nighthawk stealth fighters and F-15Es, would conduct ``surgical strikes'' on major weapons of mass destruction (WMD) facilities, training sites, and intelligence and communication facilities in the North instead of ground forces advancing into the North, the report said.

OPLAN 5027, drawn up by the ROK-U.S. Combined Forces Command (CFC), aims to deter North Korean forces armed with conventional weapons. The South Korean and U.S. militaries review the contingency scheme every year and update it in accordance with the security situation.

Washington is reportedly committed to dispatching some 690,000 troops with 1,600 aircraft and 160 ships to the peninsula within 90 days after a war breaks out under OPLAN 5027.

The plan, however, lacks specific actions to cope with a nuclear war.

Since Pyongyang's nuclear test, the South Korean military has also stepped up preparations for a possible nuclear war on the peninsula.

Sources at the JCS said last week that Seoul is reviewing OPLAN 5027 to address North Korea's missile and nuclear threats.

The JCS has submitted two reports to Defense Minister Yoon Kwang-ung since Oct. 3 when Pyongyang announced its plan to conduct a nuclear test, they said.

Guam Rebuffs NK Threat

GUAM REBUFFS NORTH KOREA THREAT OF MISSILE ATTACK
HAGÅTÑA, Guam (Pacific Daily News, Oct. 16)

A North Korean missile attack on Guam will likely fail because the communist country doesn't have the capabilities to accurately target such weapons, according to U.S. officials. Any attack on Guam also would result in an "overwhelming retaliation" from the United States, according to Delegate Madeleine Bordallo. The top Air Force commander on Guam said U.S. forces are "ready to go yesterday" should an attack happen. Also, such an attack would have to first penetrate U.S. military and allied defenses that includes missile interceptors in bases and ships that line the Asia-Pacific region from South Korea and Japan to Guam. A missile launched from North Korea could reach the island within an hour. An unofficial spokesmanfor North Korea in Japan, Kim Moyong Choi, during an interview with ABC Radio Australia yesterday, said North Korea might attack Guam, Japan and Hawai'i if tougher sanctions are levied against the country. Kimtold ABC Radio Australia that North Korea might test a hydrogen bomb in a show of force.

Arms Race in Asia

N. Korea nuke test fans fears of Asian arms race
Regional stability shaken as Pyongyang's neighbors feel threatened
AP

SEOUL, South Korea - The specter of an Asian atomic arms race loomed over the region Monday after communist North Korea shocked its neighbors by announcing it conducted its first-ever nuclear test.

Raising the nuclear stakes from Pyongyang to Tokyo would put some of the world’s biggest cities in the shadow of atomic weapons. It might also put nuclear arms in the hands of previously reluctant powers like South Korea or Taiwan.

On a wider scale, North Korea’s dabbling with atomic weapons could spur other nuclear powers, including the United States, India or China, to resume their own nuclear testing, a move that raises the risk of proliferation.

“If the test was true, it will severely endanger not only Northeast Asia but also the world stability,” Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe said.

Officials from Washington to Seoul had warned of an arms race even before North Korea said it fulfilled its threat to join the elite club of nuclear powers.

'No equalizer like the bomb'
South Korea fears Japan would be the first to go nuclear, triggering countermoves by suspicious Asian neighbors in a cascade that upends regional security.

“There’s no equalizer like the bomb,” said Peter Beck, head of the Seoul office of the International Crisis Group think tank. “It’s safe to say it will lead to an arms race — will push all the governments in the region to increase defense spending.”

Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld warned Thursday that allowing North Korea to test a bomb would provoke far-reaching fallout.

“The lack of cohesion and the inability to marshal sufficient leverage to prevent North Korea from proceeding toward a nuclear program ... it will kind of lower the threshold, and other countries will step forward with it,” Rumsfeld said.

The current North Korean nuclear standoff dates to 2002, when the United States accused North Korea of conducting a secret nuclear program in violation of a 1994 agreement.

North Korea announced Monday it had safely conducted an underground test, claiming the development “will contribute to defending the peace and stability on the Korean Peninsula and in the area around it.”

But a top concern is the possibility of North Korea mounting bombs atop missiles aimed at Seoul, Tokyo or even parts of the United States.

Japan to reconsider?
While the North’s ability to accurately deliver a warhead toward its neighbors is in doubt, the communist nation shocked the world in 1998 by firing a long-range ballistic missile over Japan into the Pacific Ocean.

In July it test-launched seven missiles, although a long-range rocket believed capable of reaching American shores exploded shortly after liftoff.

Abhorrence of nuclear weapons runs deep in Japan, where memories of the U.S. atomic attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki are burned into the collective consciousness.

But just last month, a think tank run by former Prime Minister Yasuhiro Nakasone proposed in a policy paper that Japan “consider the nuclear option.”

Tokyo weighed atomic weapons back in 1995 to counter the threat of a nuclear-armed North Korea. But the government ultimately rejected the idea because it might deprive Japan of U.S. military protection and alarm neighboring countries.

So far, Japan’s post-World War II pacifist Constitution keeps its overseas strike ability in check; it has no aircraft carriers, bombers or long-range missiles. But Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, a staunch North Korea critic, wants to amend the Constitution to give Japan’s military greater leeway in international action.

If Japan decides to go nuclear, it wouldn’t take long to convert the nation’s huge stockpile of plutonium from the spent fuel of its nuclear power plants.

Domino effect
That would undoubtedly rattle China and South Korea, which have viewed Tokyo with suspicion since their neighbor invaded and colonized them in the early 20th century.

Both South Korea and Japan have largely relied on the U.S. nuclear umbrella as insurance against attack. But when faced with the verified presence of atomic bombs on the other side of the border, South Korea may consider arming itself.

In 1991, U.S. tactical nuclear weapons were removed from South Korea as part of arms reductions following the Cold War, according to South Korean defense experts. In the same year, the two Koreas signed an accord pledging not to deploy, develop or possess atomic bombs on the peninsula.

But back in the 1970s, Seoul was actively pursuing its own atomic program.

Fearful of a regional nuclear arms race, the United States forced then-dictator Park Chung-hee to drop the plan, partly by threatening economic penalties for a nation that was then poor and still recovering from the 1950-53 Korean War.

Shen Dingli, the executive deputy director of the Institute of International Issues at Fudan University in China, thinks Japan and South Korea are unlikely to seek nuclear arms now for many of the same reasons.

“This is bound to erode their alliance with the United States, thus subjecting the East Asian security situation headed by the U.S. to even greater challenges,” he wrote in a report on North Korea’s latest threat. “The chances of Japan and South Korea developing their own nuclear programs are not great.”

But other countries might still use North Korea’s test as an excuse to build atomic arsenals, says Ralph Cossa, president of the Honolulu-based Pacific Forum.

“If North Korea is ’justified’ because it faces a threat from a bully superpower, Taiwan can make the same argument,” Cossa said.

“Let’s not overlook Southeast Asia either. Burma is talking about obtaining a research reactor and both Indonesia and Vietnam are exploring nuclear energy options, although these dominos are a long way from falling,” he added.

© 2006 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

A US Invasion of Korea

A US `invasion' of Korea
The Boston Globe
By Catherine Lutz October 8, 2006

In May, South Korean police and soldiers descended on a schoolhouse where rice farmers and their supporters were resisting eviction. The police bloodied heads, destroyed the school, and backhoed rice fields and irrigation systems to prevent spring planting. They were sent by the Korean Ministry of Defense, at the behest of the US government, to claim a large swath of land to expand Camp Humphrey . Already covering 2 square miles, the base is slated to swallow an additional 2,851 acres.

Part of a grand plan of global military base restructuring announced by US Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld in 2003, the Pyongtaek base is meant to take in soldiers and equipment from closing military installations near the de militarized zone and in Seoul. However, the bases' relocation to Pyongtaek is part of a plan to use the bases to strike at will anywhere in Asia and to contain China. It is this ``expeditionary" or aggressive role of the bases that is behind concurrent US negotiations with South Korea, seeking ``strategic flexibility" to use the forces based there throughout Asia. Such an agreement would change the original defensive purpose of the base. So it concerns people across the region, who see remilitarization, arms races, and intensified danger where the United States simply claims realignment. Recent US and allied military exercises off Guam, itself targeted for a massive US military buildup, were of unprecedented size, and North Korea's missile launch might be seen as a response to that provocation.

While the arguments for this restructuring suggest the United States and Korea are mutual and equal allies, Korea in fact remains a semi sovereign state under US control in many respects. Most strikingly, Korean troops come under the command of an American officer in wartime. US military plans in Asia, then, necessarily implicate the Koreans and draw them into conflict with their neighbors. Imagining China as the new national enemy is a process well underway in Washington, and the Koreans know all too well that their surgical twinning to US strategic plans will make them China's enemy as well.

All of this is playing out within the context of a difficult relationship between the more than 30,000 US soldiers based around Korea and the local citizens who see them as a source of prostitution, crime, and pollution. Koreans can point to two young girls crushed by US tanks in 2002, multiple rapes and rape-murders of Korean women, and a recent leaked report showing stratospheric levels of soil and water contamination at closing US bases.

In Daechuri, the farmers have been holding a candlelight vigil every night for the last two years in a Quonset hut on the school grounds, under the thunderous thut-thut-thut of US helicopters passing in and out of Camp Humphrey . Supporters have come in from around the country by the thousands, members of groups from across a wide range of Korea's civil society, still vibrant with an enthusiasm for the democracy they achieved only in 1987 after years of brutal dictatorship (armed and supported by the United States). While a majority of Koreans want to see the US military leave, powerful business interests, conservative Christians, and an older generation convinced of the value of the US presence continue to support Washington's military plans and Korean annual payments of at least $625 million toward their execution.

The justification for the US military buildup across Asia is the advance of political and economic freedom. The residents of Daechuri might be forgiven for being suspicious of such claims. Some of the village's oldest residents with whom I spoke last fall remember the Japanese evicting their parents for a military base during Korea's pre war annexation. The US Army took over and expanded the base in World War II, and now, for some, their third eviction in the name of a misconstrued vision of military rather than human security is imminent.

Halting the eviction of Daechuri's farmers would be a good first step toward demilitarizing the peninsula and the region. Their homes are being destroyed in the name of America 's citizens, and we have more power than anyone to reverse the escalating rhetoric and reality of arms in Asia by calling on the US government to halt its regarrisoning of Korea, Guam, and Asia-Pacific region.

Catherine Lutz, a professor of anthropology at Brown University and its Watson Institute for International Studies, is the author of ``Homefront: A Military City and the American 20th Century."

© Copyright 2006 Globe Newspaper Company.

The Question of Guam

United Nations Petitioners on the Question of Guam

GUAHU SI JULIAN AGUON, Chamoru Nation, said the indigenous people of Guam, the longest-colonized island in the Pacific Ocean, were preparing for the United States military realignment in the region that sought to homeport 60 per cent of its Pacific fleet in and around the island starting next year. With no input from the Chamoru people and as part of its realignment plan, the United States would flood Guam with 55,000 people. The Navy had recently suggested that six more nuclear submarines would be added to the three already stationed in Guam and there was talk of developing a global strike force. That build-up complemented the Air Force and Navy forces already occupying one third of the island and the influx would have devastating consequences on the Chamoru people, who comprised only 37 per cent of the 171,000 people living in Guam.

There had been no social or environmental impact study to assess the burdens of the build-up and it was reasonable to think that Guam would suffer similar problems of rape and violence as had Okinawa, he said. Guam officials were waiting with bated breath to learn whether any of the $10.3 billion settled upon would be spent on Guam's infrastructure as virtually every public sector in Guam was threatened with privatization. Public education was under duress and the burden on the school system was compounded by the United States' failure to compensate Guam for shouldering the costs of its free association compacts with Micronesian States. What was happening today was like an awful re-run of the Second World War. There was no free press on Guam and its people were not unified around the military build-up. The island needed help to attract international attention. The Committee should pass a resolution condemning the massive military transfer and build-up of Guam as a grave breach of duty on the part of the administering Power.

KERRI ANN NAPUTI BORJA, Organization of People for Indigenous Rights, said the aggressive campaign by the United States to institute political and military superiority in the Pacific after the Second World War had resulted in land confiscations that had claimed more than 50 per cent of the land and created reservations for the Chamorro people. The unilaterally passed congressional Guam Organic Act, which had made the island's inhabitants United States citizens in 1950, had also legitimized United States ownership of confiscated lands. It was a sad commentary that the administering Power, year after year, abstained from voting or voted against United Nations resolutions addressing the question of Guam.

She said a process of interim political status with limited internal self-government had been initiated after the locally mandated 1987 plebiscite, which had resulted in commonwealth status, a choice by registered United States voters. The resulting draft Guam Commonwealth Act had been rejected by the United States Congress in 1997 because of provisions on Chamorro self-determination, controls over local immigration and other aspects of United States control over the Territory. Military personnel and their families were eligible to vote in local elections.

Following the failure of the commonwealth proposal, the territorial Government had begun a decolonization process by enacting into law a Chamorro Registry that set the registration mechanism for the self-determination vote, she said. However, there had been little progress towards the exercise of Chamorro self-determination. The stated position that the term "non-self-governing" was inappropriate for those who could establish their own constitution did not reflect the reality. The right to elect a non-voting United States-paid delegate to the United States Congress did not equate with political freedom. A resolution was required by which the General Assembly would reaffirm that the Guam question was one of decolonization to be completed by the Territory's Chamorro people.

VICTORIA LOLA M. LEÓN GUERRERO, Guahan Indigenous Collective, said her homeland was in grave danger as young Chamoru doctors, teachers and future leaders left the island to be replaced by United States marines, military aircraft and submarines and foreign construction workers. The exodus could be ended by including in the draft resolution that the United States military build-up on Guahan was a direct impediment to decolonization and the right of indigenous Chamorus to decide their own future. The island's natural resources were its people's most precious asset. Every effort must be made to educate the people about community involvement in decision-making, which would impact on their survival.

She said the legacy of the Second World War had led to the toxic pollution of the land and surrounding waters by nuclear and other carcinogenic waste. There was a shortage of competitive jobs for young Chamoru people. The United States Department of Defence had unveiled its plan to move 8,000 marines and their 9,000 dependents from Okinawa and Japan to Guahan, which would have a great impact on the island's current population and change its cultural, political, social and ecological environment. The draft resolution should therefore include a provision that military activities and arrangements by the colonial Power impeded the implementation of the decolonization declaration.

SABINA FLORES PÉREZ (Guam), speaking on behalf of the International People's Coalition against Military Pollution (IPCAMP), said the recent United States military build-up on Guam posed the latest threat to human rights. The estimated influx of 35,000 military personnel, dependents and administrative staff would alter the island's demographics and political atmosphere. The build-up would transform Guam into a forward base with the planned expansion of runways and wharf storage facilities and the establishment of a global strike force. Unilateral decisions about the island's future were being made primarily outside Guam, without the people's participation or consent, which signified the exploitation of its political status as a colony.

She noted that Guam's strategic interest had evolved since 1898 when its harbour represented a key nodal point linking United States mercantile interests with Oriental economic possibilities. Under that colonial context, water, land, culture and the spirit of the Chamoru people were being stripped away. The Fourth Committee should include in the draft resolution on the question of Guam encouragement to the administering Power to fund Guam's decolonization process and clean up toxic military sites among other things.

TIFFANY ROSE NAPUTI LACSADO, National Asian Pacific American Women's Forum (NAPAWF), said United States cultural hegemony had created ripples throughout the Chamoru diaspora and did not allow for the survival of Chamoru language and traditions. An entire generation was living with the legacy of pillage that their parents and grandparents had faced in the Second World War, which had robbed generations of their most basic right: access to their language and traditions.

Erased from collective memory was the fact that the United States, by signing the United Nations Charter, was obligated to ensure Guam's self-determination and decolonization, she said. The psychosocial impact of the military was nothing less than total dependence. It plagued the Chamoru's land, bloodline, mind and spirit. The United Nations should become a more active participant in Guam's decolonization process and the Fourth Committee should take direct action to stop the military occupation of Guam by engaging directly with the Guam Commission on Decolonization office and grass roots groups. The sum effect of United States cultural hegemony and militarism was to permanently deny Chamoru people their right to self-determination.

FANAI CASTRO, Chamoru Cultural Development and Research Institute, quoting from a history of the Chamoru, said it was a testimony to how they had survived despite hundreds of years of colonization, genocide and war. However, that history was now threatened by the "worldwide western hegemony". The testimonies presented today were stories that had too often been kept out of sight. More than anything, the Chamoru sought an end to the chaos of war as they had been victimized for too long.

She recalled that the administering Power, the United States, had promised the United Nations that the self-determination of the Chamoru would not be denied. The Organization held the power of voice to break the cycle of colonialism and in that noble endeavour the indigenous voice must be an equal one because its heritage was being systematically destroyed for the sake of keeping colonial order.

Base Found Illegal in Hawai'i

Stryker base here is found illegal
Plaintiffs claim the Army must halt related work while preparing a supplemental study
» A look at the Stryker situation
By Gregg K. Kakesako
gkakesako@starbulletin.com

A federal appellate court found yesterday that the Army had violated environmental laws by not considering all alternatives in establishing a Stryker Combat Brigade in Hawaii.

The 2-1 vote by a three-judge panel assigned to the San Francisco 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals was seen as a victory for the nonprofit environmental group Earthjustice. Earthjustice attorney David Henkin said the federal appeals court ruling meant "the Army must cease all Stryker-related activities, including construction and Stryker training, until the court can rule on what activities, if any, will be allowed while a supplemental environmental impact statement is prepared."

Lt. Col. John Williams, Army spokesman, said the Army would continue to abide with "the last legal decision," an apparent reference to a decision made by U.S. District Judge David Ezra last year that allowed the Army to begin the transformation of the 25th Division's 2nd Brigade Combat Team.

Although Williams said he did not dispute Henkin's interpretation, he said Army attorneys "will thoroughly review the court's decision and take action as appropriate."

Williams would not say what steps the Army would take next. However, the preparation of a supplemental EIS followed by public hearings could take several years, based on the Army's record in dealing with these types of environmental studies -- including the Stryker brigade and the continued used of Makua Valley as a firing range.

The ruling could place in limbo at least $693 million in 28 construction projects at Schofield Barracks and the Big Island's Pohakuloa Training Area.

That money does not include what already has been spent in bringing the 328 Stryker combat vehicles to Hawaii and retraining soldiers in the 25th Infantry Division's 2nd Brigade Combat Team.

The cost of each of the Army's seven Stryker brigades has been placed at $1.5 billion.

The Army also agreed earlier this year to pay Parker Ranch $31.5 million for 2,400 acres near the Pohakuloa Training Area to accommodate training for the Strykers.

The federal appeals court decision means the Army has to prepare a second EIS. Moreover, it is two years delinquent on an EIS justifying the continued use of Makua Valley as a firing range that was supposed to have been completed in 2004.

The return of Makua has long been advocated by Hawaiian activists, many of whom were parties in the Stryker court appeal and have filed numerous lawsuits to stop all military training there.

The last time the military used live ammunition in the 4,190-acre valley was August 2004.

The Stryker supplemental EIS has to include a variety of locations for the 3,800-member combat brigade that is being established at Schofield Barracks, the appeals court said.

"The 9th Circuit's decision is not only right on the law," said Henkin, "but also makes Hawaiian organizations -- Ilioulaokalani Coalition, Na Imi Pono and Kipuka -- which have contended that the Army failed to consider other alternatives to stationing a Stryker brigade in Hawaii."

The Army "leaps to the assumption that transformation in Hawaii or no action are the only alternatives," the court said. "This is where the impermissible 'narrowing' takes place. The Army violated NEPA (the National Environmental Policy Act) by not considering alternatives that include transformation of the 2nd Brigade outside of Hawaii."

The federal appeals court also rejected the Army's arguments that Hawaii's strategic location was unique, since there are Stryker units in Alaska and Washington that could have supported the 2nd Brigade. In addition, federal appeals judges were not swayed by Army arguments that Hawaii's jungle terrain justified stationing Strykers in Hawaii, because the combat vehicles are best suited for urban combat.

The appeals judges reversed an April 2005 by Ezra, who sided with the Army.

The Army had hoped to be able to send the 2nd Brigade Stryker Combat Team into war duty next fall.