French Nuclear Test Site Mururoa Atoll in Danger of Collapse

Report kept secret for 2 years By Raiatea Tahana-Reese Epoch Times Staff This picture taken in June 2000 shows a landing stage at Fangataufa atoll, French Polynesia, with a board reading in French and Tahitian 'Military zone, entry forbidden'. There have been concerns that part of the Mururoa Atoll could collapse into the sea due to atomic tests from the 1960s to the late 1990s. (Eric Feferberg/AFP/Getty Images) The French government, since 2010, has kept secret that Mururoa Atoll, the site of French nuclear testing in the Pacific, is in danger of collapsing, according to Mururoa e Tatou (MET), the Nuclear Association in French Polynesia. MET President Roland Oldham told ABC’s Radio Australia Pacific Beat program that the issue was detailed in a leaked report from the French Ministry of Defence and should have been made public long ago. Mr Oldham said if the atoll were to collapse, radioactive material would be released into the Pacific Ocean, and could cause a 15-metre tsunami. A picture taken in 1971 shows a nuclear explosion in Mururoa atoll. (/AFP/Getty Images) “Just in that little area, there is over maybe 12 underground tests in that area, and we have to remember that France have done altogether 193 nuclear test explosions in Mururoa,” he told Pacific Beat. “In the soil of Mururoa, if something happens there is about 150 holes containing very dangerous radioactivity.” MET, an organization working to secure restitution for victims of French nuclear testing in Tahiti, has been trying to raise the issue with the French government and public, Mr Oldham said. He was disappointed the French government hadn’t released the report earlier. He said the implications if only one part of Mururoa collapsed were “really frightening” and would impact the international community as well. “I think it would be a really big problem to the environment if this nuclear radioactivity is to be diluted in the ocean and from there we have no control over what would happen next,” Mr Oldham said in the Pacific Beat interview. There have been concerns that part of the Mururoa Atoll could collapse into the sea due to atomic tests from the 1960s to the late 1990s. Back in 1997, one year after the final, highly controversial nuclear test, an official report referred to the risks, Newsweek UK online reported. Yet, the leaked report, Mr Oldham says, makes no mention of radioactivity. “In this report we got not too long ago, they’re not even talking about radioactivity,” he told Pacific Beat. “The way they present it, it’s like it’s not very dangerous.” In a video recorded last month with Breaking the Nuclear Chain, Mr Oldham was cited as saying that Mururoa and other atolls were the site of atomic explosions up to 170 times stronger than that used in the bombing of Hiroshima . Commission admits underground tests damaged Moruroa WELLINGTON, New Zealand (Radio New Zealand International, Aug. 9, 2012) – A report on the state of Moruroa Atoll in French Polynesia from the French Ministry of Defence has prompted calls for independent scientists and safety measures amid suggestions that it could collapse. Moruroa and Fangataufa atolls were sites for French nuclear weapon testing from 1966 through to 1996. The 2011 French Atomic Energy Commission report admits that underground nuclear tests have weakened the atolls. A collapse would result in a 15-20 meter wave, release radioactive waste and prompt regional tsunami threats. The president of Moruroa e Tatou, Roland Oldham, says his group only got the report this year, prompting concerns that it is not being kept in the loop. Mr. Oldham says independent researchers would allow preparations for a worst-case scenario. "We are very worried about the situation because the French government is still keeping the information very secret and we don’t get much information about it. [We need] to have independent inquiries by independent scientists. We are the people concerned, we live in this area of the Pacific Ocean and we don’t have any information." Leaked Report Points To Fears Of French Nuclear Atoll Collapse Murorua collapse would release radioactivity into Pacific MELBOURNE, Australia (Radio Australia, Aug. 10, 2012) – A leaked report has raised new fears that Murorua Atoll, the site of French nuclear testing in the Pacific, is in danger of collapsing. Murorua e Tatou says the issue was detailed in a leaked report from the Ministry of Defence to the French government dated March 2010. The Nuclear Association's president, Roland Oldham, told Radio Australia's Pacific Beat program that radioactive material could be released into the Pacific Ocean if the atoll were to collapse. "Just in that little area there is over maybe twelve underground tests in that area and we have to remember that France have done altogether 193 nuclear test explosions in Murorua," he said. "In the soil of Muroroa, if something happens there is about 150 holes containing very dangerous radioactivity." The association says if the atoll were to collapse it could also trigger a 15 metre tsunami. 'Hidden information' Mr Oldham is concerned the government didn't make the report available to the public earlier. "This information was very discrete, I mean we only got this information now," he said. "I mean the report is from 2010, why wait so long? "So the public is not very aware of this situation." Mr Oldham says the report doesn't properly emphasise the serious threat posed by the buried radioactive material. "In this report that we got not too long ago, they're not even talking about radioactivity," he said. "The way they present it it's like it's not very dangerous." Raising public awareness Mr Oldham says the association has been trying to raise the issue with the government and public. "We've been trying to raise the consciousness of the people - our own people and our government and all the rest about this really frightening thing that could happen if actually one part of Murorua would collapse," he said. The association want independent experts to be allowed to conduct a study to provide more information about the danger of the atoll collapsing. Mr Oldham says if the atoll collapses there could be international ramifications. "We have to warn everybody because the problem will not only concern some of the atolls that are only 100 kilometres from Murorua," he said. "But I think it will be a really big problem to the environment if this nuclear radioactivity is to be diluted in the ocean and from there we have no control over what would happen."

Hawaiian Kingdom files protest and demand at United Nations

Hawaiian Kingdom Protest and Demand filed with United Nations General Assembly against the United States and 172 member-States of the United Nations

PRESS RELEASE

For immediate release 

Contact: Dr. David Keanu Sai, Ph.D

Telephone:  (808) 383-6100

E-mail: interiorhk@hawaiiankingdom.org

NEW YORK, 11 August 2012 — On Friday afternoon, August 10, the Ambassador-at-large and Agent for the acting Government of the Hawaiian Kingdom, H.E. Dr. David Keanu Sai, Ph.D., filed with the President of the United Nations General Assembly at United Nations headquarters in New York a Protest and Demand against the United States of America concerning the prolonged occupation of the Hawaiian Islands since the Spanish American War of 1898, and 172 member-States of the United Nations. All the named States in the Protest have treaty relations with the Hawaiian Kingdom either as States or as successor States to their predecessor. There are forty-six (46) States and one hundred twenty-seven (127) successor States that have treaty relations with the Hawaiian Kingdom.

The Protest and Demand was filed with the General Assembly in accordance with Article 35(2) of the United Nations Charter, which provides, “a State which is not a Member of the United Nations may bring to the attention of the Security Council or of the General Assembly any dispute to which it is a party if it accepts in advance, for the purpose of the dispute, the obligations of pacific settlement provided in the present Charter.” The Hawaiian Kingdom is a non-Member State of the United Nations.

The Protest and Demand calls upon the United Nations General Assembly:

1.      To ensure the United States of America comply with the 1893 Lili‘uokalani assignment & Agreement of restoration, 1899 Hague Convention, IV, the 1949 Geneva Convention, IV, and international law, as hereinafter described;

2.      To ensure that the United States of America establishes a military government, to include tribunals, to administer and enforce the civil and penal laws of the Hawaiian Kingdom pursuant to the 1893 Lili‘uokalani assignment and Article 43 of the 1907 Hague Convention, IV, as hereinafter described;

3.      To ensure that all member States of the United Nations shall not recognize as lawful the United States of America’s presence and authority within the territory, territorial seas, exclusive economic zone and airspace of the Hawaiian Kingdom, except for its temporary and limited authority vested under the 1893 Lili‘uokalani assignment and Article 43 of the 1907 Hague Convention, IV, as hereinafter described;

4.      To ensure full reparation for the injury caused by the serious breach of obligations and internationally wrongful acts in the form of restitution, compensation and satisfaction, whether singly or in combination.

The Ambassador-at-large and Agent for the Protest, Dr. Sai, served as lead Agent for the acting Government of the Hawaiian Kingdom in arbitral proceedings before the Permanent Court of Arbitration, Larsen v. Hawaiian Kingdom, 119 International Law Reports 566 (2001).[1] The Arbitral Tribunal in the Larsen arbitration comprised of Professor James Crawford, SC, Presiding Arbitrator, who at the same time was a member of the United Nations International Law Commission and Special Rapporteur on State Responsibility (1997-2001); Professor Christopher Greenwood, QC, Associate Arbitrator, who now serves as a Judge on the International Court of Justice since February 6, 2009; and Gavan Griffith, QC, Associate Arbitrator, who served as former Solicitor General for Australia. 

The jurisdictional basis of the Permanent Court of Arbitration in Larsen v. Hawaiian Kingdom was a dispute between a State and a private person. Dr. Sai also served as Agent for the acting Government when a a Complaint was filed against the United States of America with the United Nations Security Council on July 5, 2001, under the Presidency of China.[2]

The Hawaiian Kingdom will withdraw States named in the Protest and Demand, with the exception of the United States of America, when these States shall declare, whether individually or collectively, that they will not recognize as lawful the United States of America’s presence and authority within the territory, territorial seas, exclusive economic zone and airspace of the Hawaiian Kingdom according to Article 41(2), Responsibility of States for International Wrongful Acts (2001), except for the United States’ temporary and limited authority vested by virtue of the 1893 Lili‘uokalani assignment, Article 43 of the 1907 Hague Convention, IV, and international law.

The Protest was received and acknowledged by Dr. Hanifa Mezoui, Ph.D., Special Coordinator, Third Committee and Civil Society, Office of the President of the Sixty-Sixth Session of the General Assembly. The Protest was also received and acknowledged by the Executive Secretary of the G-77 at the United Nations, and the Executive Secretary of the Council of Presidents, a think tank of former Presidents of the United Nations that advise the sitting President of the General Assembly. One hundred twenty (120) of the named States are members of the G-77.

The Hawaiian Kingdom achieved the recognition of its independence as a sovereign State on November 28, 1843 by joint proclamation from Great Britain and France and by 1893, the Hawaiian Kingdom maintained over ninety (90) Legations and Consulates throughout the world. The Hawaiian Kingdom has been a Member State of the Universal Postal Union since January 1, 1882, which is currently an agency of the United Nations.

This case arises out of the prolonged and illegal occupation of the entire territory of the Hawaiian Kingdom by the United States of America since the Spanish-American War on August 12, 1898, and the failure on the part of the United States of America to establish a direct system of administering the laws of the Hawaiian Kingdom. There are currently 119 United States military sites throughout the Hawaiian Islands encompassing 230,622 acres of land under the command and control of the United States Pacific Command whose headquarters is situated on the Island of O‘ahu. These military sites have been illegally established within the territory of the Hawaiian Kingdom and have consequently placed the Hawaiian State and its population in grave danger from military attack by foreign States, e.g. Japan’s military attack of United States military sites on the Island of O‘ahu on December 7, 1941, and the threat of missile attacks from China, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, and the Russian Federation.

The United States disguised its occupation of the Hawaiian Kingdom as if a treaty of cession annexed the Hawaiian Islands. There is no treaty. For the past 114 years, the United States of America has committed a serious international wrongful act and deliberately misled the international community that the Hawaiian Islands had been incorporated into the territory of the United States. It has unlawfully imposed its internal laws, by Congressional legislation, over Hawaiian territory, which includes its territorial seas, its exclusive economic zone, and its airspace, in violation of its treaties with the Hawaiian Kingdom, the 1907 Hague Convention, IV, the 1949 Geneva Convention, IV, and international law.

The Protest and Demand and Annexes will soon be available on online at:

http://hawaiiankingdom.org/

---

[1] Bederman & Hilbert, “Arbitration—UNCITRAL Rules—justiciability and indispensable third parties—legal status of Hawai‘i,” 95 American Journal of International Law 927-933 (2001).

[2] Patrick Dumberry, “The Hawaiian Kingdom Arbitration Case and the Unsettled Question of the Hawaiian Kingdom’s Claim to Continue as an Independent State under International Law,” 2(1) Chinese Journal of International Law 655-684 (2002); and David Keanu Sai, “A Slippery Path towards Hawaiian Indigeneity: An Analysis and Comparison between Hawaiian State Sovereignty and Hawaiian Indigeneity and its Use and Practice in Hawai’i today,” 10 Journal of Law and Social Challenges 68-133 (Fall 2008).

Third Annual Curacao North Sea Jazz Festival set for August

Carlos Santana to Headline Third Annual Curaçao North Sea Jazz Festival

Ruben Blades, India.Arie, Maná and More to Perform Labor Day Weekend in Curaçao

WILLEMSTAD, Curaçao--(BUSINESS WIRE)--The highly-anticipated third annual Curaçao North Sea Jazz Festival will kick off with world-famous Santana headlining this year’s event, August 31- September 1, 2012. The Festival returns for the third year with world renowned performers including Maná, Ruben Bladés, Sergio George’ All Star Salsa Friends, Dizzy Gillespie All-Star Big Band lead by Paquito D’Rivera, India.Arie, Jill Scott, and more, for a first-class jazz and blues concert series, incorporating the best mix of salsa, Latin, and pop! The Festival will be held at the World Trade Center Curaçao in Piscadera Bay.

“The third annual Curaçao North Sea Jazz Festival will draw a huge crowd as our line-up features world famous Award-winning artists, including Santana, and many more to be announced shortly”

“The third annual Curaçao North Sea Jazz Festival will draw a huge crowd as our line-up features world famous Award-winning artists, including Santana, and many more to be announced shortly,” says Curaçao Tourist Board CEO Ghatim Kabbara. “This incredible line up is one not to miss! Travelers from all over the world will be joining us for this celebration of music, heightening awareness of Curaçao as the hottest and most cultured Caribbean island.”

Guitar legend, songwriter, ten-time Grammy Award winner and three-time Latin Grammy Award winner, Carlos Santana will headline the festival along with his band, kicking off the weekend with a performance on Friday, August 31. The guitar superstar made his debut in music in the 60s and 70s when his band Santana pioneered with a fusion of rock, salsa and jazz. The legend is renowned for his distinctive and highly-respected guitar playing skills and exceptional music.

Maná, the adored Mexican rock band, will perform Saturday, September 1 during the Festival. The legendary band has been playing since 1975, gaining huge success as they released more albums. From the late 90s onwards, their fame spread into the US and the rest of the world with the debut of their third album. The band has four Grammy Awards, seven Latin Grammy Awards, and five MTV Awards-Latin America, among others.

Other performers at the Festival include Jill Scott, Sergio George’ All Star Salsa Friends, Buika, Caro Emerald, Dizzy Gillespie All-Star Big Band lead by Paquito D’Rivera, Randy Crawford & Joe Sample Trio, Waylon, Paquito D’Rivera Septet, India.Arie, Joshua Redman with Aaron Parks, Matt Penman and Eric Harland: James Farm, delivering an impressive line-up of jazz, soul, rock and Latin music.

In the week before the Festival, concerts are held on various locations on the island, including the popular party spot, Mambo Beach.

Last year’s Curaçao North Sea Jazz Festival, was a spectacular success for the island, attracting crowds of locals and visitors during the two days of the Festival. Memorable performances from artists Sting, Dionne Warwick, Earth, Wind & Fire and Juan Luis Guerra, and more wowed the audience.

Travelers heading down to Curaçao for the Festival can expect lively pop-up concerts and events by local Curaçaoän performers during the full week prior to the Festival. There’s no question that Curaçao knows how to throw a good party, having been recently highlighted for its music and excellent night life in “Curaçao After Dark” by The New York Times.

Day tickets for the 2012 concerts start from only $195 and are on sale NOW! For more information on the Curaçao North Sea Jazz Festival, please visitwww.curacaonorthseajazz.com.

For more information on Curaçao or to book your trip to the 2012 Curaçao North Sea Jazz Festival, please visit Curacao.com.

About Curaçao

Selected as the ‘Favorite Caribbean Destination’ by About.com, ‘Top Destination 2012’ by Frommer’s, one of the ‘Top 21 Places We’re Going in 2011’ by Fodor’s, one of the ‘Hottest Destinations for 2011’ by AOL Travel and one of the ‘Destinations to Watch in 2011’ by SmarterTravel, Curaçao is a unique Caribbean island paradise, boasting 35 uncrowded beaches, and an eclectic mix of history and culture. Explore the vibrant, culturally diverse capital city of Willemstad – a UNESCO World Heritage site – with its distinctive architecture, museums, monuments and world-class shopping. Indulge in Curaçao’s vast selection of flavorful restaurants, with a mix of sophisticated international and tasty local cuisines. Discover Curaçao’s abundant natural beauty, pristine dive sites and spectacular snorkeling at secluded beaches – including Cas Abao Beach, selected as one of the ‘Top 10 Beach Destinations for 2011’ by SmarterTravel. Curaçao offers idyllic weather, situated outside of the Hurricane Belt. To learn more about the island of Curaçao visit Curacao.com.

For Curacao Tourism Board

Hill + Knowlton Strategies

Caroline Davis, 212-885-0300

March for Self-Determination set for Sint Eustatius on Aug. 12

SEE ALSO: 

Self-Determination after partial integration: Sint Eustatius

Call for Statia referendum at constitutional seminar

Tokelau surpasses Aruba in 100-percent sustainable energy

Amigoe

ORANJESTAD/NUKUNONU — The Polynesian archipelago Tokelau will probably be the first ‘country’ in the world to run almost entirely on sustainable energy, namely by building solar panels that are to produce almost 100 percent of the energy demand on the islands. International media worldwide reported the news.At the moment, the electricity is being generated by diesel generators. The fuel for the latter (2000 barrels per year) is imported by boat and costs approximately 800,000 dollars per year.  Three huge solar panels are soon to produce approximately one megawatt of electricity and batteries for electricity when there’s no sun. For that matter, one megawatt is more than sufficient for the average electricity demand so the population can expand without problems. The director of Powersmart, the company that installs the solar panels, informed the media in New Zealand that the panels will recover their cost within five years and that the panels will last approximately twenty years without major repairs. Officially the archipelago falls under New Zealand and has a population of approximately 1700 citizens. Our country also strives for 100-percent sustainable energy. To accomplish this, the government entered into a partnership with the Carbon War Room (CWR), an initiative of Sir Richard Branson. The ambition of the partnership is to arrange that Aruba becomes the first entirely sustainable energy-economy of the world. The United Nations consider Tokelau as a ‘non-self-governing area’.

International Day of the World's Indigenous Peoples - 9th August

"On this International Day, I pledge the full support of the UN system to cooperate with indigenous peoples, including their media, to promote the full implementation of the Declaration."

Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon

A participant during the opening of the eleventh session of the UN Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues in May 2012. (UN Photo/Devra Berkowitz)

2012 Theme: "Indigenous Media, Empowering Indigenous Voices"

The International Day of the World’s Indigenous People (9 August) was first proclaimed by the General Assembly in December 1994, to be celebrated every year during the first International Decade of the World's Indigenous People (1995 – 2004).

In 2004, the Assembly proclaimed a Second International Decade, from 2005 – 2015, with the theme of “A Decade for Action and Dignity.”

The focus of this year’s International Day is"Indigenous Media, Empowering Indigenous Voices".

The theme aims to highlight the importance of indigenous media in challenging stereotypes, forging indigenous peoples' identities, communicating with the outside world, and influencing the social and political agenda.

A special event at UN Headquarters in New York on 9 August will feature speakers and videos of indigenous media organizations, with a live webcast. On Twitter, use #UNIndigenousDay for regular updates and for sending questions to panel members in the days leading up to and during the event.

Read full agenda here.

THE DECOLONISATION PAPERS: The right of self-determination of the Chamorro people

Occasional papers on the self-determination/decolonisation process

_______________________________________________________

TAOTAOMONA NATIVE RIGHTS

GMF - P.O. Box 24295                                                           Email:  trinit@ite.net

Barrigada, GU 96921                                                               Tel:  671-969-8551

______________________________________________________________________________

                                                                       July 11, 2012

Statement by Ms. Trinidad Torres, Pilong Maga’Haga 

of Taotaomona Native Rights

representing 

Taotaomona Native Rights, Chamoru Nation of Guahan, and Chamoru

Cultural Development and Research Institute

5th Session of the Expert Mechanism 

on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples

Mr. Chairperson, Members of the Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, distinguished government delegates; and honorable representatives of indigenous peoples and organizations:

Thank you for allowing me to speak here for my Chamorro people. We Chamorros are the aboriginal, indigenous native inhabitants of the United States’ un-incorporated, non self-governing territory in the Pacific, the Island of Guahan, known as Guam. In other words, Guam is a colony of the United States, and we Chamorros are U.S. subjects! Guam has been a colony of the U.S. since it was ceded in 1898 after the Spanish-American War.

We are pursuing our self-determination with more vigor at the present time. However, we are people of a small island inundated with a large influx of people from other areas and other countries. These large numbers of people are allowed by the U.S. to emigrate to Guam and to settle without our sayso or informing us, and with this colonization process have resulted in overwhelming our native population, making us a minority in our own homeland and displaced a lot of our people in jobs and from our lands.

The U.S. imposed its Organic Act of Guam of 1950 which created the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of its colonial government without the consent of our people. We do need all the help of the United Nations. We need the presence of the United Nations and its participation towards the exercise of our self-determination and to act as active observers during our plebiscite when we choose our political status in determining our relationship with the United States either with the option for statehood, or freely associated with the United States, or independence. Our situation in pursuing our self-determination means we are going up against the strongest, most powerful nation -- the U.S. -- which has continuously been blocking us in the exercise of our self-determination.

We believe that by the United Nations taking a firm and more proactive stand for the rights of indigenous peoples, it will be also helping to put back its member States, most especially the United States back to its rightful position as one of the original creators of the United Nations body to carry out its commitment, to right the injustices and inequalities and unnecessary human sufferings that indigenous peoples are enduring and living through day by day. And, we also all need to work in the spirit of humankind. When it comes to unnecessary human sufferings -- enough is enough!

Thank you. Saina ma’ase’.

U.N. Council Approves Support to Non Self-Governing Territories

26 July 2012

Economic and Social Council ECOSOC/6544

Department of Public Information • News and Media Division • New York

Economic and Social Council

2012 Substantive Session

46^th & 47^th Meetings (AM & PM)

ON PENULTIMATE DAY OF SUBSTANTIVE SESSION, ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COUNCIL ADOPTS TEXTS ON SOCIAL, HUMAN RIGHTS ISSUES SUBMITTED BY SUBSIDIARY BODIES

Adopts by Recorded Votes Text on:

United Nations Support to Non-Self-Governing Territories

***** 

Turning to the implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples, the Council had before it a resolution on support to Non-Self-Governing Territories by the specialized agencies and international institutions associated with the United Nations (document E/2012/L.22). 

Before action, Italy’s representative said his delegation was not in a position to accept the text. “We were expecting that this was not going to be approved by consensus”. 

The United States’ delegate requested a recorded vote.

By a vote of 32 in favour to none against, with 18 abstentions, the Council adopted the resolution.  By its terms, the Council recommended that all States intensify their efforts within the United Nations specialized agencies and organizations to ensure the full implementation of the Declaration.  The specialized agencies were requested to review conditions in each Non-Self-Governing Territory so that they could take measures to speed economic and social progress.

Speaking after the vote, Ecuador’s representative thanked delegations that had voted in favour of the resolution.

Argentina’s delegate said the text must be implemented in line with the decisions and resolutions of the General Assembly and the Special Committee on Decolonization.   Argentina reserved its position on the Food and Agriculture Organization’s (FAO) work with the 16 non-autonomous territories relating to the protection of the coastal environment, subject to additional information Argentina had requested from the FAO.

The representative of the United States noted that the resolution was virtually identical to those considered by the Council in recent years.  She had abstained in the vote, despite agreeing in principle that United Nations agencies, funds and programmes could provide support to Territories, so long as administering Powers allowed it.  The administering Power was to decide the participation of Territories in the United Nations.  The United States Federal Government had the sole responsibility for United States foreign relations.  She was concerned that the language of the text infringed on internal constitutional arrangements and thus could not support the resolution.

The resolution also urged those United Nations agencies and organizations that had not yet done so to provide assistance to the Territories as soon as possible. For their part, the administering Powers were requested to facilitate the participation of appointed and elected representatives of those Territories in relevant meetings of the United Nations specialized agencies and organizations.

Rum parting the ways between US and the Caribbean

By Sir Ronald Sanders Sir Ronald Sanders is a business executive and former Caribbean diplomat who publishes widely on small states in the global community. Reponses to: www.sirronaldsanders.com The rum industry in the non-US countries in the Caribbean is now under serious threat. At risk are the jobs of 15,000 workers directly employed in the industry and another 60,000 jobs that benefit from it. Apart from employment, non-US Caribbean countries face the loss, annually, of US$700 million in foreign exchange and over US$250 million in tax revenues at a time they can ill afford it. There is evidence that Barbados is already being adversely affected and the Dominican Republic, Guyana, Jamaica, and Trinidad and Tobago are under immediate threat. As I pointed out in a commentary in May this year, the problem has not arisen out of direct action by the US government. It has originated in Puerto Rico and the US Virgin Islands (USVI) both of which have been long-time rum producers in competition with other Caribbean manufacturers. Now, these two US affiliates are taking advantage of US government refunds to them of excise taxes on rum to subsidize rum production and marketing for huge multinational companies. The vast increase in rum exports to the US mainland, at a subsidized cost, will squeeze-out other Caribbean rums; and subsidized marketing will make it virtually impossible to compete. The scale of the subsidies is huge, making it impossible for other countries to compete. In 2011, US$452 million and US$133.5 million were provided to Puerto Rico and the USVI respectively.  The USVI subsidies alone will result in the addition of 28 million proof-gallons of new rum capacity which is about 80% of current US consumption. This new production for sale into the US market will be at little or no cost.  Legal opinion suggests that these subsidies violate the US government’s international obligations as a member of the World Trade Organization (WTO). Indeed, at a meeting between officials of Caribbean governments and the office of the US Trade Representative (USTR) on June 14, there was no indication that the US disagreed with the legal analysis. However, they gave no indication that they could resolve the issue. They offered only to consult within the government and report in due course. But, time is not on the side of the Caribbean rum industry. While the US government officials consult amongst themselves and no action is taken to halt subsidized production and marketing from the USVI and Puerto Rico, non-US Caribbean rum sales in the US market are beginning to suffer and, as the multinationals ramp up their activities over the next few months, they will effectively establish themselves unfairly, squeezing out other Caribbean rums. Already, Caribbean producers have had supply contracts cancelled because they cannot match or beat the price of subsidized competition coming from Puerto Rico and the USVI. These contract cancellations have started in the price sensitive bulk rum market which is central to the economics and financial well-being of Caribbean rum industry. The industry in much of the Caribbean Community (CARICOM) countries is structured in such a way that exports are vital to its survival given the small size of most domestic markets.  Over time, the USVI and Puerto Rico effect will spread to suppliers of bottled products as well.  Unless these unjustifiable subsidies are stopped, they will force the closure of many Caribbean distilleries and create serious injury to the fragile economies of the region.  The Caribbean countries have no problem with the rebate of the rum taxes to Puerto Rico and the USVI which have been in place for some time and were being used for infrastructural and other development projects. The Caribbean concern is with the use of the rebate to subsidise rum production and marketing and so distort trade to the detriment of non-US Caribbean rum producers. What is to be done? Caribbean governments have agreed to write from a high level to various officials of the US government including President Barack Obama. The letters are necessary, but are unlikely to yield positive action. Elections for the US Presidency are around the corner. No one should realistically expect the US administration to touch this issue before February of next year unless it is compelled to do so.  More needs to be done, and this should include sensitizing the media in the US to the problem, and, crucially, submitting it to the Dispute Settlement Body of the WTO. The longer that Caribbean governments wait to lodge this issue with the WTO, the longer will be the process of reaching a resolution.  The settlement procedures at the WTO require a period of consultation that is itself drawn out, after which an Arbitration Panel has to be agreed by disputing parties, or appointed by the Director-General if they fail to reach agreement on the panellists. All of this is passing time during which the multinationals in the USVI and Puerto Rico will have cornered the market with subsidized rum and marketing. Therefore, the quicker the process starts the better, and the longer action is delayed the worse it is for non-US Caribbean producers. It should be clear that the only thing that will compel the US government to focus on this issue is the matter being taken to the WTO. The Dominican Republic (DR) government is showing the way. While its representatives are talking with the US government, reports indicate that it has also contacted the Advisory Centre on WTO Law for an opinion. The DR government has not been shy to seek redress at the WTO on other trade violations, and it will undoubtedly move to safeguard its rum production.  Other Caribbean governments would do well to join the DR in WTO action now, for only those countries that are party to the Dispute Settlement process can expect any kind of compensation should they successfully take the matter to arbitration.  Delaying urgent action now would consign non-US Caribbean rum production to collapse in the face of what are clearly unfair and patently trade-distorting subsidies to Puerto Rican and USVI rum production and marketing. Both jobs and revenues are at stake.

Self-Determination after partial integration: Sint Eustatius

The future self-determination of Sint Eustatius was the subject of a constitutional forum organized by the civil society organization Brighter Path Foundation. The keynote speaker of the forum was International Governance Expert Dr. Carlyle Corbin whose presentation was entitled “The Application of self-determination after 10-10-10.”

   International Governance Expert Meets with St. Eustatius Island Council

The date 10th October 2010 was when the erstwhile five-island ‘autonomous country’ of the Netherlands Antilles was dismantled. This resulted in two separate ‘autonomous’ countries of Curacao and Sint Marten, respectively. At that time, also, the three remaining islands of Bonaire, Saba and Sint Eustatius (Statia) became “public entities,” of the Kingdom of the Netherlands.

Corbin’s presentation focused on issues relevant to the self-determination process beginning with the political and constitutional composition of the non-independent Caribbean. He explained some of the various dependency, integrated and autonomous models presently in place across the globe, and assessed them against the internationally recognized standards. 

He explained the international legal mandate for self-determination beginning with the League of Nations almost a century ago, and subsequently with the Charter of the United Nations. International human rights instruments establishing the right to self-determination were also discussed, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICCPR). 

Other international instruments were also discussed in the presentation including the Helsinki Final Act, the Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, and the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. References were also made to the work in self-determination of other international bodies such as the International Court of Justice, Human Rights Council, and the Human Rights Committee. 

The presentation also examined the relevant United Nations resolutions including the text of the original list of non self-governing territories adopted by the UN General Assembly in 1946, and subsequent resolutions through to present day on defining genuine self-government with absolute political equality. In this regard, the presentation made specific reference to the Decolonization Declaration of 1960 which established the self-determination process leading to decolonization, and which stressed the importance of the transfer of powers in advance of a genuine act of self-determination. 

A highlight of the presentation was the reference to UN Resolution 1541 (XV) of 1960 which defined independence, free association and integration as the three legitimate models of political equality recognized under international principles. In this connection, the presentation went on to define the minimum standards for the three options, and to indicate where political changes have occurred over time in the Caribbean consistent with these standards. 

Corbin provided a thorough explanation on self-governance indicators which had been derived from the extensive mandates of the United Nations from its inception, and which are being used as a measure to determine whether the present governance models meet international standards of full self-government. For integration, he identified the indicators according to the degree of political equality including equal status and rights of citizenship; degree of fundamental rights and freedoms without distinction; and the extent of political participation and representation in the metropole. 

Regarding autonomous free association, Corbin referred to the extent of mutual consent and level of unilateral authority of the cosmopole over the associated country. He indicated that a determination should be made as to whether there exists the unilateral application of laws and treaties of the cosmopole to the autonomous country. He further noted that the extent of ownership and control of natural resources including marine resources is an important consideration. Freedom of the autonomous country to modify the political status and to determine its internal constitution without external interference was also identified as an important indicator. The degree of economic dependence on the metropole, and the nature of any military activities in the autonomous country were also cited. 

Corbin proceeded to present current models of integration in place in island countries including the French department model of integrated department in the French West Indies, and the U.S. integrated model in place in Hawai’i in the Pacific. He compared these models to the present partial integration arrangement in Bonaire, Saba and Sint Eustatius which do not meet the minimum standards of integration with full political and economic rights. He noted that a full assessment of these models would be useful. 

Regarding the autonomous models, Corbin provided information on the French, New Zealand and US models in the Pacific including Ma’ohi Nui/Fr. Polynesia and Wallis and Futuna, the Cook Islands and Niue, and Marshall Islands, Northern Mariana Islands, Palau and Micronesia, respectively. The models of the former West Indies Associated States with the United Kingdom, and Puerto Rico with the US, were also examined. He also examined the Dutch models of Aruba, Sint Maarten and Curacao, along with the emerging French collectivity models in St. Barts and French St. Martin. Of particular note was the explanation of the autonomous model of Greenland vis a vis the Kingdom of Denmark. 

Corbin ended his presentation with a number of observations including the view that “any interest in a change of status suggests moving forward to a status of full political, economic and social equality.” 

“These can be achieved,” he said “via independence, full autonomy or full integration.” 

He emphasized that "full political integration, or an autonomous association, are acceptable models as long as the elements form a political arrangement of absolute political equality.” In the specific case of autonomy, he emphasized that it should be “on the basis of mutual consent between two equal partners without unilateral power of one party over the other.” 


“Political, cultural and economic implications of these options of political equality differ depending on the choice,” Corbin said, and “the elements of each option should be studied closely so the people could make an informed decision.”