Independence for US Territories?
25 August 2010
Independence for US Territories?
What about Hawaii?
By Leon Kaulahao Siu
In the process of offering independence to its territories, the US needs to admit to its 1959 deception and allow a fresh chance for Hawaii to exercise self-determination.
Without much fanfare, the U.S. has been conducting educational campaigns in the “US territories” of American Samoa, Guam, Puerto Rico and the US Virgin Islands, to inform the people about the options they have with regard to the future governance of their territories. Among the options being offered is independence.
Is this opportunity being offered to Hawaii also? Apparently no. So why not?
After World War II when the United Nations was formed, it adopted a policy and procedures for helping colonies become independent nations. The colonies of the victors and those of the vanquished, were designated “Non-Self-Governing Territories” (NSGT). Each NSGT was assigned a sort of guardian/benefactor/trustee/ administrator from the winning side (US, Great Britain, France, Russia, Netherlands, Belgium, etc.).
Under the UN Charter and the policies developed by the UN Special Committee on Decolonization, the trustee nations were to help stabilize, prepare and build the NSGTs’ capacity for self-government. When that capacity was reached, the trustee nation would inform the people about the options available to them: 1) remain as a “territory” of the trustee nation; 2) become fully integrated into the trustee nation (such as becoming a “state” of the US); or 3) become a self-governing, independent sovereign nation. The designation of ‘free association’ falls into the category of independence. After considering these options, the people would hold a referendum and choose which they preferred. That is the exercise of “self-determination.”
So, with regard to the NSGTs assigned to the US (the US calls them “US territories”), American Samoa, Guam, and the US Virgin Islands, the US has apparently deemed them ready to exercise their right to self-determination and recently began the process to prepare the people to choose what form of governing status and/or relationship they wish to adopt. [note: Puerto Rico which was removed as an NSGT and made a “commonwealth” of the US in 1957, has invoked the decolonization process. The outcome of their last referendum held in 1998 was to maintain the status quo.]
Historically the process of decolonization has not been smooth. In many cases, violent, bloody conflicts arose, particularly in Africa and Asia. NSGTs (former colonies) eager for “self-determination” took up arms against colonial powers who were reluctant to give up control. Then there were the conflicts amongst internal factions, some still raging today, even after independence. However peaceful or messy, in general, the process worked, bringing the dependent status of former colonies in Africa, Southeast Asia, the Pacific and so forth into that of independent nations. Today over 40 former NSGTs are full-fledged members of the United Nations.
Undoubtedly the most stellar performer in post-World War II reconstruction was the United States. America’s role in the reconstruction of the defeated Axis Powers of Japan, Germany and Italy, along with much of war-torn Europe, was a monumental feat of magnanimity and grace. America was a major force behind the formation of the United Nations to ensure that there could be a peaceful forum for settling international disputes, providing humanitarian aid and… decolonization.
In most respects, America’s role in decolonization was also commendable. The Pacific Trust Territories of Micronesia was a huge NSGT assigned to the US to administer. In the 1980s under the stewardship of the United States, several independent nations emerged out of the Trust Territories: the Federated States of Micronesia, the Republic of the Marshall Islands, the Republic of Kiribati, the Republic of Palau. All chose a form of independence involving a compact of free association with the US.
With the example of Micronesia and the present preparations for American Samoa, Guam, Puerto Rico and the US Virgin Islands underway, the US appears to have acted responsibly in the spirit of the UN Charter and its mandate for decolonization.
But America also has serious skeletons in its closet regarding decolonization. In many instances America got involved in backing colonial powers (its WWII allies) in resisting independence movements in Africa, the Middle East and Asia. In South-East Asia America even assumed the colonial role after the Vietnamese defeated the French at Diem Bien Phu.
There are also flaws within the picture being projected today of the American altruism for freedom through decolonization. What is really behind the sudden prospect of making the four remaining US territories into independent nations? Three of those territories have been held by the US since the Spanish American War 112 years ago, and the US has consistently claimed them to be, and treated them as, US-owned territories. Here’s what I think is happening.
This November (2010) is the United States’ turn to present its Universal Periodic Report (UPR) to the UN Human Rights Commission. This is an extremely significant report and, of course, the US wants to show it is performing well under UN human rights parameters, as well as in the areas of decolonization and self-determination. So, American Samoa, Guam, Puerto Rico and the US Virgin Islands are each being duly courted with the prerequisite preparations for self-determination and paraded before the UN as candidates for decolonization. All this to bolster the US’ image with regard to human rights.
Why the sudden interest by the US in promoting self-determination? I believe the US is trying to deflect attention from the growing commotion over Hawaiian independence, especially since the issue is finally beginning to gain traction around the world. The US is trying to mask a deception it engineered in 1959, ‘pulling the wool’ over the eyes of the Hawaiian and American people, and under the noses of the UN. And the reason for that was to hide the grand deception of the illegal “annexation” of Hawaii in 1898, which resulted from the illegal invasion and usurpation of the sovereign independent nation of Hawaii in 1893. In other words, the US is trying to conceal a monumental 117-year-long fraud, the most recent manifestation of which took place under the UN’s watch when the US made Hawaii a “state” in 1959.
You see, after World War II Hawaii was included on the UN list of Non Self-Governing Territories (NSGT). Alaska too! It’s true! Apparently whoever compiled the UN list considered Hawaii and Alaska not integrated into the US and listed Hawaii and Alaska as NSGTs to be prepared for decolonization and self-determination, just like the Micronesian islands, the African and Asian colonies. So what happened? Why was there no educational program in Hawaii to inform Hawaiians or in Alaska to inform the Alaskans of the self-determination options as required by the UN Charter? Why did the US not even mention to Hawaiians or Alaskans the option for independence?
It was simply because the US was unwilling to give up Hawaii and Alaska — Hawaii for its militarily strategic location and Alaska for its vast natural resources. To avoid a required assessment (progress report) on the status of NSGTs due in 1960, the US hurriedly bundled Hawaii and Alaska together and made them into “states” of the United States in 1959, then reported to the UN to remove Hawaii and Alaska from the NSGT list prior to the 1960 assessment. The UN never questioned or monitored the US’ “statehood” process. The UN simply accepted and adopted the deceptive report filed by the US, not aware that every one of the requirements for decolonization had been ruthlessly violated and co-opted by the US. And certainly the people of Hawaii and Alaska were kept completely in the dark by the US’ machinations.
The US is very worried about their November Universal Periodic Report to the Human Rights Commission. The US State Department has been trying to cover their bases, kissing up to the Native Americans and Native Alaskans by visiting their reservations and inviting their leaders to “consultations” at the White House and fawning over “indigenous rights” at the UN. The US knows that any one of the Native American nations could lower the boom on the US for human rights violations, so like consummate politicians on the campaign trail they are shaking hands and kissing babies. The US state department, and departments of the interior, health, education, etc. have mounted their dog and pony show, going out of their way to tell Indians that their grievances have been heard and “Will all be addressed soon. Give us a little more time. Trust us.”
But most worrisome to the US is the onerous Hawaii situation. The US is terrified that the numerous violations of international law and the perpetration of fraud by the United States with regard to Hawaii, will come home to roost. They are fearful that the question of Hawaiian independence will be brought up at the UPR. In particular, they are scared that they will be asked what UN decolonization procedures and what international laws were followed in 1959 in making Hawaii and Alaska states. Were Hawaii and Alaska provided the opportunity like all other NSGTs for independence?
To answer questions pertaining to Hawaii, the US is going say that Hawaiian issues lie within the domestic purview and policies of the US. They will portray the pending legislation, “the Akaka bill” (that offers federal recognition as an indigenous U.S. tribe; a still-to-be congress-determined tribal governing entity; a still-to-be-determined tribal land base; native Hawaiian entitlement programs, etc.) as their vehicle for addressing the issue of “self-determination” regarding the Native Hawaiian people. But they will not be able to skirt the issue of decolonization because the remedy to the problem of Hawaii’s special situation lies not in the realm of domestic policy of the US, it is in the realm of international law.
If the question of decolonization of Hawaii is raised at the UN UPR, the US will be hard-put to respond. If they say Hawaii became integrated as a state of the US in 1959, they would become vulnerable to questions of why the rudimentary self-determination procedures were not followed. They won’t be able to claim ignorance. Their proper handling of the Trust Territories of the Pacific (Micronesia) and the preparations currently underway regarding American Samoa, Guam, Puerto Rico and the US Virgin Islands, demonstrate that the US fully understands the procedures. Therefore, the mishandling of Hawaii (and Alaska) can only be construed as deliberate and willful violations by the US to deprive and deny Hawaiians (and Alaskans) of their fundamental human rights.
What would the repercussions be? First, the US “statehood” status of Hawaii and Alaska would be rendered null and void. An action based on fraud cannot be entertained as being lawful. Next, Alaska and Hawaii would revert to the list of NSGTs where both Hawaiians and Alaskans can then exercise true self-determination.
This would be relatively simple for Hawaii. Prior to the US takeover in 1893, the Hawaiian Kingdom was a free, progressive, independent, sovereign nation with numerous treaties and over 90 diplomatic legations all over the world. The unlawful takeover by the United States did not extinguish Hawaii’s sovereign character nor its independent stature. It just robbed Hawaiians of the ability to exercise their national prerogatives. The United States’ fraudulent claim to Hawaii, backed by its sheer military might, the imposition and enforcement of US domestic law, has been the singular deterrent to the Hawaiians’ ability to function as a lawful nation.
We believe that with the intervention of the international community and with the international community monitoring closely, the United States will relent and take the right and honorable course to step aside and allow the Hawaiian people to reactivate the lawful Hawaiian Kingdom government, reinstate the lands to the nation and restore their ability to function as free people and self-determine the direction and future of their country.
Alaska’s predicament is similar, but its path to resolution is different in many respects.
The point is, in the process of offering independence to its four remaining non-self-governing territories, the US needs to own up to the fraud it perpetrated 1959 (and continued since) and provide a fresh chance for Hawaii and Alaska to exercise self-determination. If America is at all interested in doing the right thing, this would be the right thing to do.
Leon Kaulahao Siu is the Minister of Foreign Affairs for the Hawaiian Kingdom.
ForeignAffairs@HawaiianKingdom.ws
Replies
Manifest Destiny is a cute talk on Maoliworld, however, if one does not understands it's origin--it is difficult to connect:
"The 1844 campaign centered upon the annexation of Texas and the re-occupation of Oregon. Conflict over the issue of slavery continued to strain the politics of the nation and directly affected the 1844 election. A national feeling of "Manifest Destiny," the belief that the United States should span the continent from the Atlantic to the Pacific Oceans, also spurred political debate. The territory now known as Texas was part of a disputed boundary between the United States and Mexico in 1844. The issue of annexing Texas raised not only the question of war with Mexico, but also the issue of whether Texas would be a free state or slave state. The Oregon Territory was claimed by both the United States and Great Britain. Polk's campaign slogan of "Fifty-four Forty or Fight!" refers to the latitude coordinates of the disputed territory. Polk endorsed both the annexation of Texas and American control of the entire Oregon Territory. Polk also promised if elected not to seek a second term. A third candidate, James G. Birney, ran in the 1844 election extensively as an abolitionist. Birney's presence in the election captured votes which Clay needed. In the election, Polk defeated Clay and Birney to become the eleventh president of the United States."
http://statelibrary.ncdcr.gov/nc/bio/public/polk.htm
On my visit to North Carolina, I made it a point to visit the supposedly birth home of James Polk. My interest was in the Texas and Mexican War. To compare Hawaii and that border dispute, thus, rolled over into the whole of California. In all of this I wanted to know how the Texans won the battle and continue to win the battle as they expanded across the Pacific. I have lots of connecting theories.
My visit to Ensenada was also a true eye opener, I wish I could say more, but it would bring more confusion and stepping away from the 'executive agreements', which are pursuing.
Leon said, "In other words, the US is trying to conceal a
monumental 117-year-long fraud, the most recent manifestation of which
took place under the UN’s watch when the US made Hawaii a “state” in
1959."
As I am trying to say is that there is a missing piece between the beginning of 117 years ago and statehood.
The linking is the Texas and Mexico to all else after that. Will talk later.
By definition attributed to the Manifest Destiny doctrines and how nations relate under those doctrines, it is wise to know that Hawaiʻi was never colonized since it was already a recognized sovereign nation and part of the Family of Nations. Despite the fact that the U.S. applies a double-standard to regard themselves as colonizing Hawaiʻi, no matter how one slices it, the fact remains Hawaii was never colonized as defined by those doctrines but unlawfully and belligerently occupied by the Rogue U.S. nation.
After the unlawful invasion, an act of war, the first sneak attack by another nation, and the belligerent occupation, there was enforced assimilation fostered on the subjects of the Hawaiian Kingdom. It was not colonization but a violation of the law of occupation, law of neutrality, and a major breach of the ratified treaties between the Kingdom of Hawaii and the U.S.A. who were both members of the Family of Nations.
As a recognized nation-state, the people had already expressed their self-determination just as the American colonists had done some fifty years prior. Just because U.S. missionaries arrived in 1820 means nothing when one considers who was the King of the islands and the missionaries could not claim the islands as a colony of the U.S. nor was their U.S. military power to subjugate the subjects of the Kingdom to enforce U.S. colonial rule.
If anything, under the Manifest Destiny doctrines of Discovery and Terra Nullius, the right would have gone to Great Britain and not the Unites States of America. Instead, Hawaii was left alone with the U.S. vying for influence. Hawaiiʻs King did a brilliant thing and made compacts to three major nations to recognize Hawaiʻiʻs sovereign independence. Great Britain, France led the way with the U.S. following. By Kalakauaʻs reign 25 countries mutually ratified treaties with the Hawaiian Kingdom in recognition of its sovereign independence and embraced it as an active member within the Family of Nations. Over 90 consuls and legations throughout the world were in operation at the time of the U.S. sneak attack and belligerent occupation.
Hawaii, therefore, is not a NGO or U.S colonized territory; itʻs a nation under seige and belligerently occupied by a member nation called the U.S.A. There is no treaty of annexation and neither can the U.S. produce a lawful bona fide treaty that proves Hawaiʻi is part of the U.S.A. and its WASP racist society.
The law of occupation and neutrality are still in effect which the U.S. continuously violates.
Tane
Have known each intent and I have read through this postings point of contentions more than once, it's great to reread the argument over and over. What is most important is that we read this piece with our children's children in mind. For they are the reasons why we are here nightly drawing clarity with words may it be jumble sometimes, but through exchanges can be given as voices from our Na Kupuna. And I hear their voices in this posting.
Thank you for posting this piece andI will reread it more in debt.
We are in the fields, at this time and much of what I read can also be incorporated into our community meetings to further Independence for our Na Keiki's and their future.
much aloha
United States has had over 117 years to do the Right Thing with it's dealing with our people. You know that many of our peope have done much to correct the wrongs done by the United States. Only to be Betrayed. Betrayed over and over many times.
117 years of Justice Delayed is Justice Denied.
Long Live The Hawaiian Kingdom, o Pomaikaiokalani, Hawaiian Kingdom National Royalist 1993
Yes I know what you wala au and yet a new day comes. Our young people when wake up and we malama them. Who we are is known, what rights we have are known, the injustice is known. I see my job is to lay the ground work for our future, our keiki our young na koa, our treasure. I believe they must lead us out of our ego's, our short sightedness, our frustration.
Hawaiian Kingdom lives, it lives in the soul of our people. I have failed up to now to get it right. I will not fail in the end and I will learn enough to make the wrong, right, but together as one.
Not as a bumper sticker, but action and faith in our nation who's HA touches all things kai, wai, aina, hoku e lewa.
ALoha nui Uncle
Kai
I too see that many of our people are now Maka Ala to the Thruths.
Many of us have set the ground work and none of us have really failed. As we have gone of record of trying to correct the wrongs in the system of the United States. It is the United States who have failed.
It is only after we have done every thing possible within the American system to correct the wrongs can we now move outside of the American system.
As a Hawaiian Kingdom National I have moved outside of the American system. A move as you well know that puts a lot of pressure on those of us who taken that move outside of the American system.
They say that Actions Speaks Louder then Words. The Actions that we are now taking will soon be fruitful.
Long LIve The Hawaiian Kingdom, your Uncle Pomai
aloha hou Kai