Wikileaks shows US concern over Tokelau claim

*****

A diplomatic cable made public by the Wikileaks organisation shows that comments by a Tokelau politician about the status of an American Samoan island concerned the US government.

Koluei O'Brien, the Ulu or leader of Tokelau, had said in 2007 that if the three atolls gained self government in a referendum, the new government might address the ownership of Swain's Island, which some Tokelauans regard as part of their territory.

A US diplomat met with New Zealand's administrator of Tokelau, who assured him that the New Zealand government regards the status of Swain's Island as settled, and that Tokelau does not have a claim on it.

The 2011 United Nations Working Paper on Tokelau provides background on the referendum process:

Referendum Process

.....

8. In 2003, the General Fono took a formal decision, with the support of all three Village Councils, to “endorse self-government in free association with New Zealand as the choice to be actively explored with the New Zealand Government”. During a visit to Tokelau in August 2004, the then New Zealand Prime Minister welcomed decisions by Tokelau on its future political status and assured Tokelau of the ongoing friendship and support of New Zealand as it moved towards an act of selfdetermination.

9. In August 2005, the General Fono approved a draft constitution as the basis for the proposed act of self-determination, as well as the text of a draft treaty of free association between Tokelau and New Zealand. In November 2005, the New Zealand Cabinet gave its formal approval. The so-called “referendum package”,

consisting of the draft treaty and the draft constitution, was to form the basis for the referendum on self-determination. In line with a decision by the General Fono, an overall majority of two thirds of the valid votes cast was required for a change to the status of Tokelau.

10. The first referendum on self-determination was held sequentially in Apia and on the three atolls from 11 to 15 February 2006 (see A/AC.109/2006/20). The outcome of the referendum fell short of the required two-thirds majority, with 60 per cent of valid Tokelauan votes cast in favour of self-government in free association with New Zealand. The United Nations, which formally monitored the referendum, deemed the process credible and reflective of the will of the people of Tokelau. A representative of the Special Committee accompanied by a Political Affairs Officer of the Department of Political Affairs of the Secretariat also observed the referendum process.

11. In August 2006, the General Fono voted to hold a second referendum on Tokelauan self-determination in late 2007. The proposed constitution and the draft treaty, commonly referred to as the self-determination package, were to be the same and the legal threshold for acceptance of the proposal would remain at a two-thirds majority.

12. The second referendum was held from 20 to 24 October 2007. The result, with 64.4 per cent in favour, was again below the two-thirds threshold, thereby leaving the status of the Territory unchanged (see A/AC.109/2007/19). As with the first referendum, the United Nations formally monitored the voting, with representatives of the Special Committee on Decolonization and the Department of Political Affairs

present as observers.

13. Following the results of the second referendum, the General Fono requested the Government of New Zealand to keep on the table the entire self-determination package (i.e., the draft treaty and draft constitution that had been agreed on and had served as the foundation for the previous ballots). The Council of Ongoing

Government noted that Tokelau could in the future change the two-thirds majority threshold for the referendum, but should put in place measures to ensure that a threshold was supported by a clear majority in each village to guarantee unity. The Council of Ongoing Government also noted Tokelau’s strong commitment to selfdetermination and its wish to have a constitution, albeit one that did not encompass the free association self-government provisions.

14. The outcomes of the referendums, neither of which reached the threshold of support set by Tokelau’s General Fono for a change of status, have been acknowledged and accepted by New Zealand. As a follow-up to the 2007 referendum result, the then Prime Minister of New Zealand met with Tokelau’s leaders in February 2008, to discuss the next steps in the New Zealand-Tokelau relationship. It was agreed that a “pause” should be taken in Tokelau’s selfdetermination efforts, and that in the meantime Tokelau would focus on meeting its basic needs.

*****

Dutch Territorial Sea increases following partial integration of Bonaire, Saba, Statia

*****

Volkskrant: "More tropical sea for the Netherlands. "

Dutchnews.nl

http://www.dutchnews.nl/features/2011/03/volkskrant_more_tropical_sea_f.php

Coral reefs, sea grass beds and mangrove woods: the bio diversity of the Netherlands has suddenly and imperceptibly become a lot more exotic. The constitutional reforms of the Dutch Antilles have resulted in the Netherlands acquiring a massive amount of tropical sea: the territorial waters of Bonaire, Sint Eustatius and Saba and the islands’ 24 mile zone and Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), some 83,000 square kilometres in total, writes the Volkskrant.

That is more than the North sea and the Wadden sea put together (61,000 square kilometres). It contains important ecosystems, such as the Saba bank, a large submarine atoll south of the island. It is more than sixty kilometres long, fringed with coral which functions as the nursery of numberless species of fish in this part of the Caribbean.

Responsible

The management of these marine ecosystems now falls directly to the Netherlands. As of October 10, the Dutch kingdom is no longer comprised of the Netherlands, The Dutch Antilles and Aruba but of the Netherlands, Curacao, Aruba and Sint Maarten. The three so-called BES islands, Bonaire, Sint Eustatius and Saba now have a status comparable to that of an independent local authority within the Netherlands.

Dutch marine researchers are using this territorial extension to combine forces. The Royal Dutch Institute of Marine research and marine research institute Imares in Wageningen have this week set up a common knowledge platform called AgroporaNet which will gather all Dutch research into marine biology.

Research and education

The platform will be aimed at research and education in marine biology, says platform coordinator Johan Stapel. Stapel also hopes to establish a research base on one of the islands. A scientific expedition may also be on the cards.

(This is an unofficial translation)

Reflections on the late Cyril E. King, second elected Governor of the U.S. Virgin Islands

*****

by Dr. Carlyle Corbin

(first published in 2008)

April 7 is the birthday of the second elected governor Cyril Emanuel King who passed away while in office in January of 1978. King’s distinguished career was chronicled in the excellent publication “Profiles of Outstanding Virgin Islanders,” and is required reading for those interested in Virgin Islands history. King graduated with a bachelor's degree in public administration from American University in 1951. He had been appointed in 1949 as an assistant to U.S. Senator Hubert Humphrey, and was the first person of African descent to serve in the office of a U.S. senator.

King was later appointed in 1957 by the Organic Act Committee of the Virgin Islands as its deputy in Washington, D.C. to organize the lobbying effort in the U.S. Congress to gain amendments to the Virgin Islands Organic Act. In 1961, President John F. Kennedy appointed him Virgin Islands Government Secretary which was similar to the present Secretary of State position in Puerto Rico, and forerunner of the post of Lieutenant Governor in the US Virgin Islands. He was elected to the US Virgin Islands Legislature in 1972, and was subsequently elected governor for a four-year term in 1974. He served three years of what was to become his only term.

As a young writer and advisor on international affairs to Governor King, I was honored to have had the opportunity to work for this most formidable leader whose dynamism, charisma and persistence dominated the political landscape of the day. Working for Governor King trained me in how to perform under pressure. In later years when I would address various United Nations organizations on behalf of the government, I would call on that discipline he instilled to successfully deal with the challenges of representing the territory in the international arena. Without a doubt, Governor King was a most formidable boss who commanded excellence of those who worked for him. In turn, we gained valuable experience which would serve us well later in our careers.

Of the many experiences I had in working under Governor King, one particular instance remains vivid. It was an early September morning in 1977, around 6:30 AM or so, when my phone rang in my residence in Scott Free, St. Thomas. I had only recently relocated from St. Croix to write for the governor. On the other line was Governor King who was calling to inform me that I was to meet him in St. Croix that morning. I could heard the loud roar of the Antilles Airboat engines in the background. “Meet me in St. Croix,” Governor King said, “and don’t be late.”

I didn’t know which event he was attending in St. Croix. All I knew was that I was to meet him there – on time. Quickly showering and dressing, I leaped out the front door, briefcase in hand, into my Volkswagen bug, drove quickly through the narrow Scott Free Road and down Crown Mountain Road. I made the sharp left turn onto the highway towards town, to see if I could get on the next airboat to St. Croix. Luckily there was an available seat (or someone was bumped, I can’t remember which), and I was shortly on my way to St. Croix. I now had to find out where Governor King was going – and I couldn’t be late. As luck would have it, Education Commissioner Gwendolyn Kean was on the same flight and she advised me that the governor was scheduled to speak to an assembly of new teachers that morning. I caught a ride with Commissioner Kean and St. Croix District Superintendent Gloria Canegata who were both officiating at the event.

After twenty minutes, we were pulling into the courtyard of an elementary school at mid-island where the event was taking place. Just ahead, I could see the taillights of Governor King’s official black Buick Electra pulling up to the curb. The Governor emerged momentarily from the car and headed towards the foyer of the school. I thanked Mrs. Kean and Mrs. Canegata for the ride, jumped from the car, and headed towards the school.

Governor King had been quickly surrounded by teachers and administrators who he took the time to patiently greet before he delivered his remarks. He had a certain presence which drew people around him. Even as he would silently enter a room from the rear, people would seem to sense that he was there, and instinctively turn around. As he stood in the center of this group of educators, he glanced around the room and spotted me nearby with my legal pad in hand taking notes. He gave me a quick nod in recognition that I arrived – and that I wasn’t late. Had I not been there, he may not have asked me to accompany him on the next “mission.”

It was my job at such events to draft the press release for the Governor’s outstanding Press Secretary Richie Allen for review and delivery to the media. I also had to get the names of the people who were photographed with the Governor. These complimentary pictures would be proudly displayed in many Virgin Islands homes. The Governor’s expert photographer, Leland Bertrand, was quite prolific in the number of pictures he would take of Virgin Islanders of all persuasions, and we had some interesting times linking the pictures with the names on my legal pad.

Governor King always had time for people, and he was famous for his impromptu stops along the roadside to talk to construction workers, sanitation workers, businesspersons, students and just about everyone else. Quite unexpectedly, he would walk out of Government House with his administrator Levron (Pops) Saraw and head down the hill to Main Street to hear the concerns and ideas of the people. He especially had a lot of time for the youth and often stopped to watch young people play baseball and other sports in the various athletic leagues around the territory.

Governor King was also an avid regionalist, and developed close relations with his counterpart Premier Robert Bradshaw of St. Kitts-Nevis-Anguilla during the first two years of his term. He always recognized the progressive role of nationals of the Eastern Caribbean in the economic development of the US Virgin Islands. King became the first governor of the territory to make an official visit to the region, traveling to St. Kitts on several occasions. He also welcomed Premier Bradshaw on official visits to the territory. He was the first to participate in a meeting of CARICOM when he attended the Second Conference of the Heads of Government held in Basseterre, St. Kitts in December of 1975. Serious issues on the status of CARICOM nationals residing in the US Virgin Islands were addressed at that meeting.

He was also the first governor to speak before the United Nations on the evolution of the constitutional status of the US Virgin Islands. This 1975 speech served as the precedent for the participation of successive governments in the United Nations review process of the constitutional development of the territory. By 2008, the territory still exists pursuant to a federal “Organic Act” in lieu of a local constitution – never mind, addressing the deficiencies in the prevailing political status of an unincorporated territory. As early as 1975, Governor recognised the prevailing situation as an anachronism.

Governor King’s policies promoted innovation, implementation, self-help and the necessary political autonomy for the territory to engage the wider Caribbean and the world. He was clearly ahead of his time. His perspectives are largely unknown to later generations. Efforts should be made to heighten public awareness of the philosophies and opinions of this important leader in Virgin Islands and Caribbean history.

*****

Governor Cyril E. King Day Proclaimed in US Virgin Islands

*****

UNITED STATES VIRGIN ISLANDS

OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE April 6, 2011

Gubernatorial Proclamation - Governor Cyril Emmanuel King Day

Governor John P. de Jongh, Jr. has proclaimed April 7, 2011 as “Cyril Emmanuel King Day” in the Virgin Islands to recognize the outstanding public service of this notable Virgin Islander. Cyril King was born on St. Croix on April 7, 1921 and was the second elected governor of the territory.

A PROCLAMATION

BY THE GOVERNOR OF THE UNITED STATES VIRGIN ISLANDS

TO PROCLAIM GOVERNOR CYRIL EMMANUEL KING DAY IN THE VIRGIN ISLANDS

WHEREAS, April 7th of each year has been set aside, pursuant to Act. No. 5147, as "Cyril Emmanuel King Day" to recognize the outstanding public service of this great Virgin Islander; and

WHEREAS, Cyril Emmanuel King was born on St Croix on April 7, 1921, received his early education at St. Ann's Catholic School at Barren spot and graduated from St. Mary's Catholic School in Christiansted, St. Croix; and

WHEREAS, Cyril E. King served with United States Army Pacific Theatre troops in Hawaii, attaining the rank of Sergeant; and

WHEREAS, upon being discharged from the military, Cyril King entered American University, where he obtained his Bachelor of Science Degree; and

WHEREAS, upon graduation, Cyril E. King was employed as an aide to Senator Hubert Humphrey of Minnesota, the first blackman to serve on the staff of a United States Senator, serving for twelve years and subsequently attained the position of Senior Staff Member; and

WHEREAS, Cyril E. King was appointed by President John F. Kennedy to serve as Government Secretary of the Virgin Islands Government in 1961; and

WHEREAS, in 1969, Cyril E. King was appointed as Acting Governor of the Virgin Islands and in 1972 elected Senator from the St. Thomas-St. John District; and

WHEREAS, in 1974, Cyril E. King became the second elected Governor of the Virgin Islands; and

WHEREAS, King received numerous awards for his outstanding community service including Commander First Class of the Order of Danneborg and the Silver Cross by H.M. Queen Margrethe II of Denmark, and honorory Doctor of Laws Degree from Roger Williams College in Bristol, Rhode Island and the first Hilbert College, Buffalo, New York award for his outstanding humanitarian work; and

WHEREAS, the airport on St. Thomas was renamed "The Cyril E. King Airport" in honor of this outstanding native son; and

WHEREAS, through the dedicated efforts of Governor Cyril E. King, the social, political and economic standards in the Territory were enhanced;

NOW, THEREFORE, I, John P. deJonqh, Jr., Governor of the United States Virgin Is1ands, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Revised Organic Act of 1954, as amended, do hereby proclaim Thursday, April 7, 2011, as "Governor Cyril Emmanuel King Day" in the Virgin Islands in honor of the outstanding public service of our second elected Governor. I call upon the residents of the Virgin Islands to join with me in this observance.

In addition, pursuant to Title 1, Section 187, I am directing the Commissioner of Education to conduct appropriate ceremonies in the Territory's School in honor of Governor Cyril E. King, including dissemination of biographical information of this outstanding native son.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and cause the Seal of the Government of the Virgin Islands of the United States to be affixed at Charlotte Amalie, St. Thomas, Virgin Islands, this 1st day of March, 2011, A.D.

John P. de Jongh, Jr.

Governor

*****

Cayman Islands Declines to Host UN Decolonisation Seminar following British Invitation to United Nations

*****

Mac turns down UN invite

Cayman News Service

(CNS): The Cayman Islands’ premier has turned down an invitation to host the United Nation’s Special Committee on Decolonisation annual seminar here, his office revealed on Tuesday. Despite a release from the United Nations stating that the meeting would be held in Cayman next month, officials from the premier’s office said that McKeeva Bush had written to committee chairman, Francisco Carrion-Mena, on Tuesday morning stating that it would not be possible for his government to host the meeting. Although no reasons have been given as to why Cayman is refusing the invitation, officials said the CIG had never agreed to have it here in the first place. The UN “had jumped the gun” when it said the meeting would be held in Cayman, officials added.
 
OTR Editor's Note: According to United Nations (U.N.) sources, the U.N. Special Committee on Decolonisation formally decided to accept the invitation from the United Kingdom (U.K.) to hold the U.N. Caribbean Regional seminar on decolonisation. It was unclear whether the Cayman Islands Government had been informed in advance by the U.K. that it was going to extend the invitation to the U.N. According to an international decolonisation expert, the last seminar held in a U.K.-administered territory was in Anguilla in 2003, even as the U.K. had withdrawn its formal cooperation from the committee in 1986. The expert went on to note that the French facilitated the Pacific Regional Seminar on decolonisation in its territory of New Caledonia in 2010.
 
In his letter to the UN committee’s chair the premier reportedly offered his appreciation and gratitude for the invitation to host the annual meeting but turned it down without explanation.
 
The UN had released the information at the weekend indicating that the Cayman Islands had been selected following consideration of a number of factors in selecting the venue, including the political situation and logistics of several countries in the Caribbean. CNS has contacted the UN Decolonisation Committee to ask why it believed the CIG had already accepted the invitation and where the apparent miscommunication occurred and is awaiting a response.
 
The news that the meeting was planned to be held here had received a warm welcome from local activist group, the People for Referendum, which pointed to the importance of holding these meetings in the remaining colonies or non-self governing territories (NSGT).
 
The local group, which supports the idea that the Cayman Islands should move away from its current colonial status, said the matters discussed by this committee directly relate to the governance relationship between the territories and their respective administering power. The group said that holding seminars in the territories helps to educate the people about the governance options that the UN resolutions obligate all administering powers make available to the people in the territories.
 
The group said the decision not to hold the committee's seminar in the Cayman Islands after all will deprive Caymanians of a valuable educational opportunity on governance. “Whether we like it or not, in 1945 and again in 1960 it was the UK that put the Cayman Islands on the UN Non-Self-Governing Territories list; the UK was one of the six member states that drafted the establishment of the UN Special Committee on Decolonisation and they also drafted the governing rules between the Administering Powers and Non-Self-Governing Territories,” the PFR said.
 
“One of these rules requires annual reports on each territory; these annual regional seminars are part of that reporting process when each territory's government, civil society organizations and individuals have an opportunity to talk with the members of the UN.”
 
The group added that it was still important that Caymanians understand how their future is being discussed at these multinational meetings and that the public exercise their right of free speech.

*****

Colonialism and Decolonization in Guam; Governor Initiates Community forums on Self-Determination

*****

Guam is a Colony

Michael Lujan Bevacqua

"Guam is a colony. Anyone who says otherwise simply doesn't want to confront the truth."

(The impetus for this post came from the letter to the editor of the Marianas Variety below written by Ed Benavente, former Maga'lahi of the group Nasion Chamoru and also former director of the Decolonization Commission for the Government of Guam. The letter was written in response to several columns by UOG professor Ron McNinch who has a piece every Thursday in the paper). One of the mistakes that people often conveniently make when discussing the veracity of Guam's contemporary colonial status is making the assumption that in order to call something colonial, it must be the worst and most horrible thing in the world. Make no mistake, Guam is a colony and it is an unjust and immoral fact, but it is not the worst place in the world because of it. But interestingly enough so many people attempt to argue that Guam isn't a colony, just because it it's political status today isn't that bad. They argue that because it's better than before or because it's not as bad as forms of colonialism from time's past, you can't call it a colony.

Part of the problem with this is the simplicity through which people are arguing for something. Simplicity and plain-spokenness is one of the easiest ways to appear to be speaking the truth or speaking of something in both a profoundly important and real sense, while also making your argument appear to be obviously, commonsensically true. So many who argue Guam isn't a colony will say to look at other places which have decolonized and how horrible and disgusting they are, and you shouldn't call Guam a colony because it's better to be a pathetic footnote to the United States, then your own sad sovereign basket case of a story. Others will argue that because Guam has so many privileges and is such a great place that it can't be called a colony. While these sorts of things could be evidence for making an argument about what sort of colony Guam is, or what its experience of colonialism is, they have no effect on saying that Guam is not a colony.

For many years, editor and columnist for the Pacific Daily News Joe Murphy pioneered this way of speaking about Guam's political status. It was a way of not really addressing the issue, while asserting that you were summing up the entire issue in such a commonsensical and clearly obvious way because of how plainly you were speaking about it. Alot of times this happens through references to what "the people" or "most people" think or want. Whenever you use this sort of phrase, it is a way of trying to root what you are saying in something real or true. The folks, the populace, the real people, or the majority of the people, or the people that actually matter and not some troublesome minority feel this and therefore it must be true.

I find this rhetorical tactic interesting. You are shrouding your lack of analysis through the aura of people believing or feeling something. It is similar to the way in which people argue very wrongly that the buildup will be good for Guam because for a long time so many people seemed to support it. The idea that alot of people think something is good is still very far away from something actually being good. It could be an indicator that something is good or it could just be an indicator of what people think or feel and nothing more. It could be more an indication of how stupid and detached from reality people are just as much as how in tune with it they are.

Defining colonialism is not about whether or not people like their situation or whether or not it is the worst or the best situation, it is instead a simple matter of stating what level of self-determination or sovereignty self-government a community has. It is a category which indicates that a community, a polity exists in a fundamentally unequal relationship with another. Where one community holds a gross amount of power over another and there is an absence of any formal and uncoerced acceptance of that situation that is colonialism. It doesn't have to be brutal or nasty, it can be banal and naturalized, and in fact that it is precisely what every colonizer wants, to hold excessive power over a place from which their restrictions or limitations pale in comparison. To have a place where your control which does not make any rational or moral sense over the land or the people there is justified.

One of the main ways in which you can perceive Guam's colonial status today is through the Insular Cases and much Federal-Territorial case law which has developed over the years. The initial decisions of the Insular Cases which argued that the territories of the United States have no inherent rights other than that which the US Congress gives them continue to be the law of the land for the US as of today. The Insular Cases has an interesting way of expressing the most basic way of perceiving colonialism. The Insular Cases do not argue that the people of the territories should be treated well, and neither do they argue that the people in the territories should be treated like crap. What they fundamentally argue is that it is not up to the people of the territories what happens to them, but the Federal Government of the United States. It is the choice of the Federales what they want to do. If they want to treat the people of the territories like they are regular garden-variety Americans, they can do that. If they want to segregate them or treat them differently they can. One of the things which makes this muddier now is the fact that people who are from the territories with the exception of American Samoa are US citizens, and so there remains an unresolved issue of whether or not this absolute authority extends to both the land and the people or only the land.

What we do know is that in terms of fixing Guam's colonial status, meaning the island finally undergoing a process of decolonization, Presidents and Cabinets and Congresses for decades have been very clear in how they would "allow" this to happen. That although territories are not fully within the circle of American political belonging, this exceptionalism is not supposed to afford them any extra rights, not even in terms of their decolonizing. This is where we can see colonialism in the way it usually appears in Guam's case, as a stupid joke. Guam is allowed to decolonize so long as it always remains within the authority over the colonizer, it is not allowed to decolonize in anyway which extends beyond what the colonizer wants or is willing to allow. This is of course hypocritical, immoral, wrong and all of those things and in the case of Guam all of the nice things or great feelings of Americaness that people feel do nothing to affect this simple fact. Guam is a colony and it will remain so until this is changed, and making excuses that colonialism doesn't exist or is somehow the best thing for Guam doesn't do much except implicitly articulate that Guam is one of those unique places in the world which should not have any control over its future.

It is interesting how the arguments against a place such as Guam being decolonized are built upon a quiet and unspeakable assumption that huge swaths of the world would be better off colonized and that it was a mistake for them to be decolonized. When I say unspeakable it is something which so many people feel (in both the former colonized and colonizing world), but thankfully has come to the point where it cannot really be spoken of since the arc of the moral universe has been bent to the point where it can be universally accepted as being wrong. The world is still gray on whether or not colonialism was right, since even those who have suffered feel like their identities or their existence is impossible without the violent disruptions of colonialism, but all can agree that it should not exist anymore. A contemporary colony such as Guam, while being in the periphery of the current world order, nevertheless feels the full weight of the center of this imperialist nostalgia. I find it interesting that when the topic of decolonization is proposed or discussed in Guam, even amongst so-called learned and intelligent people, it is still nearly difficult for a learned or intelligent conversation to take place. The weight of that unspoken belief that the world was better when it was colonized and that when people were under the heavy or imperceptible thumb of another things were more prosperous and more stable it inundates life in Guam even if people don't know it or feel it. The spectre of third world chaos and of not having access to the dreams the colonizer has long dangled before the widening eyes of those it has colonized feel more strongly than ever.

When people refuse to talk about decolonization or demonize it, they feel this pressure and therefore make their arguments (or lack thereof) as if they are doing the public good. Decolonization is a dangerous proposition which can only lead to Guam no longer being a Third World colony of a First World country, but simply a Third World country. The subordination and the rank dependency is a necessarily evil in order to keep Guam from joining the league of disastrous economies and tragic societies that is the formerly colonized and eternally developing world. But as I said earlier, even if many people believe this, you cannot really say it out loud. It is a thinking based on racism, not reality. It doesn't matter what pathetic little tokens you can point to which colonization brought to this society or that. Colonies were hardly as rich, as secure or as nice as people remember them to be, on both ends of the spectrum. They were and are always in some way sites of racism, imperialism and exploitation.

In the case of Guam's colonization, if the United States came to Guam in 1898 and set forth a proposal to the Chamorro people that they were going to colonize their island, deprive them of any rights for 50 years, attempt to dismantle their language and culture and then later transform their island into what they hope to eternally be their tip of the spear in the Pacific, it is safe to say that very few Chamorros, if they were given the choice, would have taken the offer. This is why you can rarely, openly argue in favor of colonialism, even if so much of the rhetoric about it as a system is that it is ultimately good for the people who are oppressed by it. It is, on its surface so commonsensically wrong, and so that is why it becomes so difficult to even find a way to nicely articulate it, which doesn't sound like you are saying that non-white people should forever be shackled to white countries in order to civilize and take care of them. Guam suffers from the fact that you can make that argument proactive, presumptively, and can argue in favor of colonization, without mentioning it, but by only invoking the specter of savage and hopeless decolonization in order to prop it up.

Even if you love the United States and want Guam's relationship with it to be permanent you still cannot deny that Guam is a colony, and in the long run it does Guam no good to think otherwise. Those who deny the clearly obvious nature of Guam's colonial status are doing the dirty work of those who would want to argue that the world was better off when the majority of it was colonies run by colonizers. They may not make this argument clearly, but they draw from the same well of racial logic.

***********************

Politics and Status

Ron McNinch

(Marianas Variety)

Following WWII, America experienced a “baby boom” between 1946 and 1964. Guam was no different, we had a lot of children born following the occupation. This crop of new young people actually led to the establishment of the College of Guam in 1952. By 1950, planners realized that this post-war population was creating a need for trained teachers. So a teachers college was established. By 1968, this baby boom population group was turning 18 and this pushed policy makers to upgrade the College of Guam to the University level. This week we celebrated our Charter Day at UOG and this point can be overlooked. Biba UOG!

Our society is based on competition. We have two or more political parties. We have all sorts of ideas that compete. Even this very newspaper broke the ice in recent years for print media. The contrast is very nice. We love variety, no pun intended. We avoid mediocrity. It is in the nature of America to always be dissatisfied with something. Education is a constant point of dissatisfaction.

One of the great things about the military buildup is that like it or not, our leaders have finally realized that for many years we have been pretty much ignored by Washington DC. The bottom line is simple. To improve our relationship and communications with the federal government, we have to improve our political status. So this buildup has created a marketplace of competitive ideas just as the post war population pushed education policy.

If you have been reading my column for a while, people get upset with me all the time. It is a part of my nature I guess. For many years, Guam has claimed to have a “decolonization” effort. To be frank, I don’t really think Guam is a colony. We pretty much have a self-government with little negative interference by the federal government. While the Government of Guam is often effete and self-defeating, it is our government. And Guam’s leaders are our leaders. But they have chosen not to compete. Instead of being gladiators in the arena, we often elect a cowardly crowd to serve us.

The military buildup is just a temporary distraction to blame any problem on, now and in the future.

But if we wanted to, we could change our political relationship with the United States. We could adopt an off the shelf Organic Act based constitution. We could upgrade our relationship to a higher more effective level. Of course, to do these things we have to try. And perhaps fail a few times. If we stumble in this process, we need to get back up. And try again.

Independence and free association are not very good options for Guam. Nearly every new nation since WWII, with the exception of Singapore has ended up in the Third World. We could likely make a good argument for a Federal District. Perhaps the Federal District of Guam. Part of the district status would be a voice in the US Senate.

On Guam as a Colony

Letter to the Editor

by

Eddie L.G. Benavente

Mangilao, Guam 

(Marianas Variety)

I found Dr. Ron McNinch’s recent column, “Politics and Status” quite interesting. (Marianas Variety Guam March 10, 2011.) I just find it amusing that he would use one issue, although significant, to be the wake- up call for our leaders to realize we’ve been ignored for a long time. The political reality is that Washington historically has always ignored grievances expressed by our political leaders, since the early 1900s.

Dr. McNinch argues that Guam is not really a colony. Like his predecessors of the same affinity, he paints a rosy picture that Guam is pretty much self-governing. I initially thought perhaps the professor didn’t understand the concepts of colonization, non-self-governing territories, full self-government, de-colonization and self-determination in the context of international definition and application. However, his credentials at the University speak for themselves.

His “bottom line simple approach” in resolving our problems with the federal government gives the impression that achieving a new political status is pretty much petty and for the moment. I thought the professor had a profound approach for the administering power to finally comply with treaties so our people can finally have the opportunity to exercise their right to self-determination.

But this was not the case.

Instead, like others before him, he tends to ridicule and put the blame on our self-defeating government and cowardly local leaders.

Moreover, McNinch suggests perhaps we should move toward an organic-act constitution, (the old “cart before the horse” which literally means “let’s forget about political status and settle for a constitution”). He then concludes by asserting that independence and free association are not very good status options.

Wow! That leaves statehood as the only option, as opposed to the three choices in the Treaty. He defends this assertion by saying that with the exception of Singapore all other nations have become “Third World.”

I couldn’t believe these suggestions were coming from a learned individual who teaches in Guam’s highest institution of learning. What does this all mean? Does it mean that independence is only good for some nations and not for others? Are nations who choose independence not entitled to evolve? How and who measures what constitutes “Third World?”

Would Belau or the Republic of the Philippines, for example, fall under his definition of Third World? Or are the people who hold this mindset just making these absurd assertions to maintain the status- quo?

Could it be that the political science professor is not aware of the Treaty signed and ratified by the United States back in December, 1946?

Is McNinch aware that the Treaty of 46’ requires the United States Mission to the United Nations to submit reports annually to the Secretary General and other entities within the United Nations regarding Chamoru political, social and economic development?

If we were truly self-governing why would the administering power continue to report to the UN on Guam’s political development? He said it himself, that when he writes, it is in his nature to agitate some people. I welcome any intellectual discourse on the subject of self-determination, but reject any notion that “all is good” in a colony.

A detractor to the process of de-colonization and someone who advocates perpetual hegemony of a people is no different than a slave master who opposes the emancipation of blacks.

I truly feel that these political experts should stop coming up with unrealistic solutions. There is a system already in place that was conceived by the United States and 50 other nations back in 1946. Over a hundred nations within the United Nations have gone through this process. There are only 16 Territories remaining that have yet to de-colonized, Guam being one of them.

__________________________

Community Forum to Focus on Self Determination

Press Release

 
Forum the first in a series of gatherings to address federal-territorial issues

 

Governor Eddie Bazo Calvo and Lieutenant Governor Ray Tenorio invite the public to a community forum addressing federal-territorial issues Friday (11th April). 

The forum is the first in a series of forums meant to gather public input on the Guam government’s dealings with the federal government. These include all matters ranging from the military buildup to longstanding federal-territorial issues, such as war reparations and compact impact reimbursements.

These forums will run for two hours, and will focus one topic at a time. All senators, mayors, other elected officials, Chamorro rights groups, business organizations, U.S. servicemen and women, veterans, and other associations are encouraged to attend. Everyone is welcome to express their views and listen to others.

“We want to hear what you have to say,” Governor Eddie Baza Calvo said. “Leadership is listening to the people, then making decisions. I know there are diverse views. We need to come together, listen to all views and strive to come to a consensus on federal-territorial issues. This way, we can truly have a Team Guam approach when I’m dealing with the federal government.”

The Governor, who will chair these forums, believes the single-most important issue to federal-territorial relations is the inalienable right of the Chamorro people to exercise self-determination. It is for this reason that self-determination will be the focused issue in this Friday’s community forum.

Commission on Decolonization Executive Director Ed Alvarez will present the commission’s issues and the administration’s plans to move forward with a vote on self-determination. The floor will be open to hear the people’s ideas, questions and suggestions after that.

The forum is scheduled for Friday, between 9 a.m. and 11 a.m. in the Cabinet Conference Room, Bordallo Governor’s Complex.

 



Anguilla Chief Minister Sees Independence as Logical Alternative following British delay on budget

*****

"I feel very disillusioned and frustrated with British administration for Anguilla. My commitment now is to press on with my programme for self determination."

THE Valley, ANGUILLA, CMC – Chief Minister Hubert Hughes said that Britain's approval of his December 2010 budget is a little too late and signalled his intention to seek independence for the British Overseas Territory.



"We lost out on so much revenue, we have lost out on the deal we had with the European Union, on the EDF 10 fiscal package, we have lost out on support from the Caribbean Development Bank because these institutions will not do business with Anguilla as long as Anguilla cannot produce a proper, credible budget." Hughes told the Caribbean Media Corporation (CMC).

Governor Alistair Harrison said that the Queen, through the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, had assented to the island's Appropriation Act which contains the 2011 budget.

He gave no details of the amount contained in the budget, but Harrison also announced that he had approved the legislation introducing the interim Stabilization Levy, as well as amendments to the Customs surcharge and the Petroleum Levy passed earlier by the House of Assembly.

“These three measures constitute the new measures necessary to implement the budget settlement for 2011," Harrison said.

At the start of the year, Henry Bellingham, the UK Minister responsible for the British Overseas Territories in a letter to the Chief Minister indicated that the London would provide two independent experts to assist the local administration with the preparation of its 2011 fiscal package.

The two consultants - paid for by the Department for International Development (DFID) have since presented a number of recommendations to the local government.

“My budget was perfect so says the team of consultants by the Foreign and Commonwealth office sent in on the advice of the Governor of Anguilla to rewrite it. But yet the day after the consultants gave the report to the cabinet, the Governor said he had permission from the Foreign office now to sign the budget and yet it took a month for him to sign it playing the fool because he was ashamed, “ Hughes said.

The Chief Minister said that Britain's action has underscored the need for his government to pursue independence.

"I feel very disillusioned and frustrated with British administration for Anguilla. My commitment now is to press on with my programme for self determination." he added. (CMC)

Déclaration Président du Congrès de la Nouvelle Calédonie

*****

Déclaration Président du Congrès de la Nouvelle Calédonie

(Session extraordinaire du vendredi 1er avril 2011, élection du président)

R.WAMYTAN, candidat du groupe FLNKS

Monsieur le Haut commissaire de la République,

Monsieur le président du gouvernement

Messieurs les membres du gouvernement

Mes chers collègues

Mesdames et messieurs

Avant de poursuivre l’élection pour la mise en place des VP, secrétaires et questeurs du congrès, je voudrais tout d’abord remercier l’ensemble des élus qui ont porté leur suffrage sur ma candidature présentée par le groupe FLNKS. Je voudrais adresser un remerciement tout à fait spécial et particulier aux élus de la mouvance qui défend tout à fait légitimement l’appartenance de la Nouvelle Calédonie à la France. Sachez que ce geste courageux qui vous honore et que j’apprécie à sa juste valeur en tant qu’indépendantiste convaincu est une marque de confiance. Permettez-moi de prendre quelques instants pour vous adresser dans ce sens mes sentiments en tant que nouveau président de notre institution.

En votant pour un indépendantiste vous avez exprimé par cet acte politique fort, une confiance totale en l’accord de Nouméa que nous avons ensemble signé le 5 mai 1998 en présence des plus hautes autorités de l’Etat français et des états du Pacifique. Cet accord demeure notre feuille de route à tous, de même que les conclusions du dernier comité des signataires de Paris en juin 2010. Comme vous le savez cet accord, à la suite des accords de Matignon-Oudinot, nous engage tous sur la voie de la paix, du développement et de l’émancipation sur le chemin de l’acte d’autodétermination que nous devons préparer dès cette année afin que nos populations puissent exercer ce droit dans les meilleurs conditions possibles et en toute connaissance de cause. Vous avez su dépasser la logique majorité/minorité pour adopter une posture que nous indépendantistes attendions depuis longtemps, celle du partage des responsabilités au plus haut niveau institutionnel afin de poursuivre ensemble l’application pleine et entière de l’accord de Nouméa. Nous sommes conscients que ce geste courageux peut vous couter gros, certains élus, tels des requins charognards, ont flairé le possible festin sur lequel surfer pour s’approprier à titre personnel les retombées politiques de ce qu’ils estiment être une manigance ou des manœuvres anti démocratiques.

Pour la première fois depuis 34 ans, le congrès de la Nouvelle Calédonie porte un indépendantiste à sa présidence. Les deux précédents responsables indépendantistes qui ont présidé cette noble assemblée et dont je salue la mémoire ont été Monsieur Yann Célene UREGEI de 1973 à 1975 et Monsieur ROCH PIDJOT, député de la Nouvelle Calédonie de 1964 à 1986 au cours du mandat 1976- 1977. Les années qui vont suivre les présidences de ces deux « vieux » seront sous le signe du réveil kanak, culminant avec les années 1984 à 1988 durant lesquelles la crise identitaire et politique néocalédonienne va atteindre son paroxysme. A 23 ans de distance de la signature de l’accord de Matignon, les esprits se libèrent lentement de la peur pour accéder enfin à un partage plus équitable des responsabilités.

Les calédoniens ne doivent pas avoir peur de voir accéder à ce poste un indépendantiste et qui plus est d’origine mélanésienne kanak du pays Drubea-Kapume cette terre où s’est construite la ville de Nouméa poumon de la vie institutionnelle, politique économique, sociale et culturelle du pays. Je les invite à suivre leurs responsables qui ont permis cet évènement majeur. Ils ont su à leur niveau considérer le devenir du pays en brulant l’arbre du deuil, c'est-à-dire la peur. Ils ont fait le geste, dans la lignée de la poignée de main de 1988, qui consiste à faire un pas l’un vers l’autre, à tenter de se comprendre mutuellement et dans la transparence pour prétendre à la grande ambition que l’on s’est tous donné de construire un pays dans un destin commun.

Le chemin de la compréhension, comme celui de la perfection est long et sans cesse à construire tel le rocher de Sisyphe, il faut à chaque fois remonter ce rocher au sommet de la montagne avant de le voir dévaler et redevaler la pente. Il en est ainsi car nos modes de pensée et d’agir sont fondamentalement différents. La Nouvelle Calédonie vit depuis prés de 160 ans suivant un modèle occidental construit selon un schéma de pensée cartésien dans lequel domine le rationnel et le dualisme décrit par le grand philosophe des lumières W. KANT dans son ouvrage « raison pure et raison pratique ». Suivant ce schéma, la vie appelle la mort, le bien s’oppose au mal, la majorité domine la minorité. Nous océaniens nous sommes dans une représentation de pensée synthétique et englobant dans lequel la pensée mythique prend le pas sur le rationnel pour aboutir à ce que le pasteur LEENHART dans son ouvrage « Do Kamo », appelait le « principe vital ». Dans ce schéma propre aux peuples dits primitifs et plus particulièrement aux océaniens de la Mélanésie, la vie et la mort s’entremêlent et chaque contraire n’est pas « classé » dans une tension permanente comme le fait la pensée occidentale, mais replacé sans cesse dans une complémentarité toujours à rechercher et donc à construire. L’énorme avantage de ce mode de pensée synthétique est que sa logique la conduit à une recherche permanente du compromis et du consensus. Après les luttes et les guerres, c’est à chaque fois le temps de la négociation de la recherche du compromis pour sortir du conflit et donc de la paix pour tenter de retrouver à chaque fois l’harmonie et la cohésion sociale. C’est ce qui a été fait par nous tous calédoniens, depuis les accords de Matignon-Oudinot. Après le temps du conflit et de la guerre est venu le temps de la paix à construire.

Les Kanak ont fait ce pas en 1983 à Nainville les roches en partageant leur droit à l’autodétermination avec ceux ont fait de cette terre, leur terre, et avec qui ils partagent leur vie, ils ont refait le pas aux accords de 1988 et 1998. Le retour coutumier du geste en terme de don et de contre don, les adversaires politiques d’hier l’ont aussi réalisé lors de ces accords et sur la levée du drapeau kanak au coté du drapeau français comme marque de reconnaissance mutuelle des deux légitimités à l’initiative du député FROGIER, Je rappelle pour la petite histoire ou la grande c’est selon… que le 9 juillet 1983 à Nainville les roches, répondant à une question du conseiller Yeiwene YEIWENE qui évoquait les trois revendications importantes pour le FI c’est à dire : que le nom kanak du pays lui soit restitué, qu’il dispose d’un hymne et d’un drapeau, que la perspective de l’indépendance soit inscrite dans le projet de statut, le secrétaire d’état aux DOM-TOM, Mr LEMOINE avait estimé parfaitement possible de juxtaposer hymnes et drapeaux nationaux et territoriaux, se référant notamment à son dernier discours tenu à Nouméa quelques mois avant.

Une fois posés ces principes de base, il est ainsi grand temps de nous remettre au travail après cet intermède de prés de deux mois. Les élus ne donnent pas une bonne image de responsable devant ceux qui nous ont porté à ces postes. Devant l’inconstance de certains, que peut penser l’opinion de la classe politique ? Que nous passons le plus clair de notre temps à nous chamailler et à dépenser l’argent public venant des impôts payés par les citoyens, affichant ainsi une piètre image du genre théâtre de guignol de nous au lieu de nous occuper de leur quotidien : la vie chère, l’éducation des enfants, l’emploi, le logement, la dérive d’une partie de la jeunesse. D’ores et déjà le bureau du congrès a fixé un emploi du temps chargé pour les commissions ad hoc dès mardi 5 avril prochain notamment pour le projet de délibération relative aux relations de travail et interdiction du harcèlement moral et sexuel au travail, la délibération concernant l’assurance vieillesse pour n’en citer que cela. De gros dossiers pointent leur nez à l’horizon ce sont notamment la réforme de la fiscalité locale, les transferts de compétence ou encore l’organisation du grand débat sur les signes identitaires pour aplanir les malentendus et les incompréhensions sur la question du drapeau.

Je demande solennellement à l’ensemble des groupes politiques absents de nous rejoindre afin de répondre aux attentes de nos populations dans la recherche de leur mieux vivre. Rejoignez nous et mettons nous au travail dans un climat de dialogue et de confiance retrouvée. Nous avons les ressources nécessaires au sein de nos identités et de nos histoires respectives pour arriver à concilier les situations paradoxales qui n’ont parfois de contraire que le nom, et nous l’avons maintes fois prouvés dans le passé, mais ceci ce réalisera si nous faisons l’effort nécessaire pour puiser au fond de ce qui constitue notre âme de calédonien dans ses diverses origines, les ressorts permettant un avenir propice et meilleur à nos enfants.

Je vous remercie.

*****

Mayotte bascule officiellement à gauche et fête la départementalisation

*****

MAMOUDZOU, Mayotte
03 avril 2011 (AFP)

Mayotte a basculé officiellement à gauche dimanche, avec trois jours de retard par rapport au calendrier normal, avant une après-midi de festivités populaires célébrant la transformation de la collectivité en département.

(For an analysis on the annexation of the island, recognised by the United Nations as part of the African state of the Comoros, please read: France Seeks Referendum in Mayotte despite UN Resolutions  )


Mayotte, française depuis 1841, est devenue officiellement jeudi le 101e département français, le cinquième d’outre-mer et la première collectivité unique d’outre-mer.

Daniel Zaïdani, DVG, du Mouvement départementaliste mahorais (MDM), 35 ans, a été élu président du conseil général du "Département de Mayotte" par dix voix sur 19, succédant à l’UMP Ahamed Attoumani Douchina, qui dirigeait une majorité UMP-NC-PS depuis 2008.

M. Zaïdani, "plutôt de gauche", qui avait fait campagne sur le thème "le MDM n’est ni à droite, ni à gauche" a réuni sur son nom les voix des "forces progressistes" (2 PS, 7 DVG et un DVD, dont quatre MDM).


M. Douchina a recueilli 9 voix (dont 6 UMP et 1 PS).

Les cinq vice-présidents de M. Zaïdani ont recueilli entre 11 et 12 voix, preuve que des voix de l’autre camp se sont jointes à celles des "progressistes".

La gauche dirige ainsi depuis dimanche les conseils généraux des cinq départements d’outre-mer.

L’élection de M. Zaïdani n’avait pu avoir lieu jeudi dernier faute de quorum, huit élus (cinq UMP, un PS, un DVD et un élu inclassable) devenus minoritaires, ayant boycotté la séance, créant une grande émotion dans la population.

Mme Penchard, en stand-by à La Réunion depuis jeudi par souci, selon ses termes, de "réserve républicaine", a été accueillie à l’aéroport par M. Zaïdani, les deux sénateurs de Mayotte, dont Adrien Giraud, président du MDM, le député, ainsi que 101 femmes mahoraises habillées en bleu, blanc et rouge.

Les habitantes de la collectivité se sont battues pendant plus d’un demi-siècle pour que Mayotte reste sous tutelle de la France et devienne un DOM.

M. Giraud s’est déclaré "satisfait" de l’élection de M. Zaïdani, à laquelle il a beaucoup contribué, en affirmant : "c’est la majorité plurielle aujourd’hui, nous avons copié le président de la République".

Il a confirmé que M. Zaïdani avait choisi le camp "progressiste" parce qu’il lui proposait le poste de président alors que l’UMP lui offrait seulement une place de deuxième vice-président.

M. Zaïdani, présentant la nouvelle majorité comme étant de "centre-gauche", a tenu un long discours rassembleur, à tonalité sociale, devant 8.000 personnes réunies à Mamoudzou sur le parvis du comité du tourisme.

Il a souligné qu’il serait épaulé par des gens "d’expérience", comme Saïd Omar Oili (DVG) ou Ibrahim Aboubacar (PS) repassé à gauche, dans une collectivité de 200.000 habitants environ, dont la population pourrait atteindre les 300.000 personnes d’ici 15 ans, où le taux d’activité est très faible.

Mme Penchard a lu un message du président Sarkozy jugeant "légitime la volonté des Mahorais de voir Mayotte devenir un département de France" en dépit de "l’immensité de l’effort à accomplir".

Selon ce message, la départementalisation ne connaîtra "ni accélérations, ni retards".

"A titre personnel", M. Zaïdani a estimé que les 20 ou 25 ans prévus pour arriver aux mêmes minima sociaux qu’en métropole et dans les autres DOM, pouvaient "paraître longs".

Mme Penchard a affirmé qu’"il faudra regarder la situation économique" du département et veiller à ne pas le "déséquilibrer".

Une chorale de 101 enfants en bleu, blanc et rouge, a entonné la Marseillaise, avant que des danses traditionnelles clôturent la fête.

Cayman 'People for Referendum' Encouraged by UN Seminar to be held in its Territory

*****

PEOPLE FOR REFERENDUM
(STEERING COMMITTEE)
C/O P. O. BOX 900
GRAND CAYMAN KY1-1103
CAYMAN ISLANDS

PRESS RELEASE

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

April 4, 2011

Contact: Dennie Warren Jr.
Phone: 345-926-0716
E-mail address: d@warrens.ky

UN Decolonisation Seminar Set for Cayman Islands 24-26 May

People For Referendum welcomes the announcement from the United Nations Decolonisation Committee that their annual UN Decolonisation Seminar for 2011 will be held in the Cayman Islands May 24 to 26, 2011. Dennie Warren Jr., Chairman of People For Referendum said:

“For many years our organization and all other organizations in the Constitutional Working Group requested government to first work towards ensuring that the Annual UN Decolonisation Seminars be held only in one of the remaining sixteen (16) listed Non-Self-Governing Territories (NSGT’s) and that the Cayman Islands be one of those NSGT’s hosting this very important UN committee. Governance education in the NSGT’s is generally very poor and holding these meetings in the NSGT’s is one way to educate the public on their governance system thereby enabling the electorate to make informed decisions in elections and referendums.”

All matters discussed by this UN committee directly relate to the governance relationship between the territories and our respective Administering Powers. Holding seminars in the NSGT’s helps to educate the people about the governance options UN Resolutions obligate all Administering Powers make available to their NSGT’s:

A) Integration with the Administering Power or,
B) Free association governance relationship with the Administering Power or,
C) Becoming an independent state.

Some UN member states such as New Zealand , France and Holland appear to be compliant with their UN obligations by allowing the electorate in their various territories the UN mandated self-determination right of choosing between the three available options.

Unfortunately for the UK NSGT’s, the UK is historically non-compliant with their UN obligations by repeatedly stating that all of their NSGT’s must take the constitutional relationship the UK decrees or go independent. They retain the power of “Order in Council” in the UK maintains total governance by decree powers in the Colonies, in all governance subjects; in retaining the power of “Order in Council”, the UK refuses to devolve any governance powers to their NSGT’s.

Dennie Warren said:

“In the constitutional negotiations People For Referendum called upon our government and the UK government to hold the constitutional negotiations in the Cayman Islands, to make all meetings open to the public and to make all proceedings freely available on the internet. Some of the negotiation meetings were held in the Cayman Islands but behind closed doors. Since then, and for the first time, proceedings of the constitutional negotiation are now available to the public on the internet.”

People for Referendum is again calling on the UN, the UK and the Cayman Islands government to hold the UN Decolonisation 2011 Seminar in the Cayman Islands open to the public.

For more information visit:

2011 UN Decolonisation Seminar Press Release:

http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs//2011/gacol3217.doc.htm

http://overseasreview.blogspot.com/2011/03/un-decolonisation-seminar-set-for.html

UN Decolonisation website:
http://www.blogger.com/goog_736652239

UN Decolonisation Cayman Islands 2011 Working Paper:
http://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N11/237/29/PDF/N1123729.pdf?OpenElement

Overseas Territories Review:

Constitutional Reform and Political Identity in the Non-Independent Caribbean http://overseasreview.blogspot.com/2010/01/constitutional-reform-and-political.html

Political Analyst Questions Direction of Bermuda - UK Relationship
http://overseasreview.blogspot.com/2011/03/political-analyst-questions-direction.html

Wikileaks Reveals U.S. Perspectives on British Dependent Territories
http://overseasreview.blogspot.com/2011/02/wiklileaks-revels-us-perspectives-on.html

"Colonial situations are completely outdated" - U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon
http://overseasreview.blogspot.com/2011/02/colonial-situations-are-completely.html

Wikileaks Reveals US Synopsis of UK Dependent Territory Developments
http://overseasreview.blogspot.com/2011/02/wikileaks-reveals-us-synopsis-of-uk.html

Anguilla Eyes Complete Internal Self-Government in Wake of British Colonial Pressures
http://overseasreview.blogspot.com/2011/01/anguilla-eyes-complete-internal-self.html

UN Adopts 2011 Decolonisation Recommendations for Island Territories
http://overseasreview.blogspot.com/2011/01/un-adopts-2011-decolonisation.html

UN Member States Formally Commemorate Decolonisation Achievements, Acknowledge Need for Implementation of Mandate
http://overseasreview.blogspot.com/2010/12/un-member-states-formally-commemorate.html

The United Nations Decolonisation Declaration 50th Anniversary
http://overseasreview.blogspot.com/2010/12/united-nations-decolonisation.html

UN Decolonisation Committee Faces Serious Issues
http://overseasreview.blogspot.com/2010/06/un-decolonisation-committee-faces.html

M Oscar Temaru new president of French Polynesia

*****

Special to Overseas Territories Review

The Assembly of French Polynesia (Tahiti Nui) deposed on the 1st of April the government of M Gaston Tong Sang, leader of the autonomous political party TTA (To tatou aia : Our Nation), political party close to president of France Nicolas Sarkozy.

A vote of no confidence handed in by union of political parties UPLD (Union for Democracy) and TMM (Te Mana o te mau Motu: The power of the islands) has been voted by 29 out of 57 representatives of the Assembly.


The pro-independence leader M Oscar Temaru is now president of the government of Tahiti Nui (French Polynesia).

During the debate at the Assembly, M Gaston Tong Sang who reported on his activity as president, strongly criticised the move of the representatives of TMM who rallyed the pro independence parties in this vote of no confidence. After, the debate, the so-called autonomous representatives left the assembly and did not participate in the vote.

The independist leader M Oscar Temaru, in his speech in French and Tahitian, reaffirmed his ideology for sovereignty and his wish to see Tahiti Nui on the UN list of countries to be decolonised.

In a Polynesian metaphore he adresses the autonomous members: 

"We could not let our canoe O Tahiti Nui Freedom in such a desperate state. If you do not know where you are going, we do know where we are going."

The members of TMM and UPLD which now form a new majority at the assembly agreed that French Polynesia should be listed on the UN list of countries to be decolonized as is the case with New Caledonia, the other French non self-governing territory of the South Pacific.

Since 2004, this is the fifth time that M Oscar Temaru comes back to power.

According to an Oceania Flash news report, Temaru indicated that one of the objectives of his government would be to put back on the agenda the question of self-determination for French Polynesia in order to achieve a "sovereign State".

The other pillar of his action would be based on moves to restore a fledging economy, already badly affecter by over five years of chronic instability due to regular changes of governments caused by shifts in alliances and subsequent votes of no confidence motions, according to the news report.


TAHITI POLITICAL PARTY TO LOBBY MELANESIA TALKS

Radio New Zealand
Huiraatira seeks support for UN decolonization

French Polynesia’s pro-independence Tavini Huiraatira Party is to make a fresh push to get the region’s leaders to support its bid to have the territory re-inscribed on the UN list of territories to be decolonised.

The party’s Richard Tuheiava, who is also a member of the French Senate, (recently went) to Fiji...to lobby the Melanesian Spearhead Group.

The MSG includes New Caledonia’s pro-independence FLNKS Movement which has had regional support to be put on the UN list.

Mr Tuheiava has told Tahitipresse that he and his party’s leader, Oscar Temaru, will make their case in the next few weeks throughout the region and also attend the Pacific Islands Forum in Auckland in September.
He says if a resolution is adopted it could be taken to the UN in December.

Mr Temaru’s 30-year decolonisation campaign has been ignored by both France and Pacific Islands Forum countries, including New Zealand, which still has Tokelau on the UN list.

See also:


http://en.tahitipresse.pf/2011/04/oscar-temaru-becomes-french-polynesia-president-again/
http://tahitipresse.pf/2011/04/motion-de-defiance-adoptee-chute-du-gouvernement-tong-sang/

La Agenda Colonial de Obama (Puerto Rico)

*****

La Agenda Colonial de Obama 

Asociación y Soberanía

Orlando Parga Figueroa

El 6 de octubre de 1899 el reverendo Henry K. Carroll sometió a Washington un informe sobre Puerto Rico para el que le comisionó su amigo, el presidente William McKinley. Carroll arribó en enero de 1899, visitó casi todos los pueblos y ciudades de la Isla, se reunió con líderes y portavoces de la sociedad puertorriqueña y sometió al gobierno federal un concienzudo reporte con recomendaciones para administrar la nueva posesión americana.

Aquellas recomendaciones del Informe Carroll corrieron igual suerte a la que posteriormente tuvieron múltiples informes sometidos por comisionados presidenciales y comités del Congreso a lo largo del Siglo XX: se recibieron y se archivaron. La Ley Foraker aprobada en 1900 y la Jones de 1917, en gran medida ignoraron las recomendaciones que Carroll hizo en 1899; la Ley 600 a mitad del siglo pasado nos otorgó facultades de gobierno propio, y nos dejó malcontentos y condenados a un debate sempiterno sobre status político; el Informe del “US-PR Status Commission” de 1966 condujo al plebiscito de 1967, con igual resultado de inacción legislativa y ejecutiva.

Lo trágico y abominable de este peregrinaje histórico es que, 112 años después de sometido el Informe Carroll, Washington nos viene con una copia al carbón de aquella agenda colonial que en 1899 el amigo del presidente McKinley sometía a Washington para administrar la nueva posesión americana.

Con el simple ejercicio de acoplar las recomendaciones sobre comercio e industria, educación, salud, seguridad pública, cultura e idiosincrasia, política y relaciones con los Estados Unidos que el buen Reverendo sometió a finales del siglo XIX, los burócratas del presidente Obama se habrían ahorrado tanta penuria. Queda así una pregunta simple y sencilla. En pleno siglo XXI, ¿debe Puerto Rico someterse a la agenda colonial del presidente Obama?

Amer. Samoa Congressional Delegate to Visit Rapa Nui on Fact-Finding Mission

Press Release

(Congressional Delegate Eni F.H.) Faleomavaega announced today that he will be traveling to Easter Island during the Congressional recess to assess recent developments between the legitimate representatives of the Rapa Nui clans and the Chilean government. Easter Island, or its Polynesian name of Rapa Nui, is one of the world’s most isolated inhabited islands.

“Conflict between the Rapa Nui natives and the Chilean government has existed since 1888 when Chile signed a disputed treaty with the Rapa Nui people,” Faleomavaega said. “At that time, Chile took control of the island and confined the Rapa Nui people to a small area of land, approximately one square mile.”

“In 1933, Chile leased the remaining land to private sheep-herding enterprises and took ownership of all untitled lands. In 1966, Chile passed a law which authorized the President to grant land titles to the Rapa Nui people and prohibited the transfer of lands to non-indigenous individuals. However, land was illegally privatized and sold to mainland Chileans during the Pinochet Dictatorship.”

“Today non-indigenous individuals and corporations possess most of the land, and the Chilean government continues to favor private companies interested in exploiting the Rapa Nui culture for private gain instead of restoring the land to the Rapa Nui people. Within the past five months, Chilean armed forces have been carrying out forced evictions of Rapa Nui natives.”

“In a letter dated February 3, 2011, U.S. Senator Daniel Akaka and I wrote to the President of the Republic of Chile, His Excellency Sebastian Pinera, expressing our deepest concerns about the current situation unfolding in Easter Island and, in response to that letter, I have since met with Ambassador Arturo Fermandois of the Republic of Chile and he has assured me that he is committed to a productive exchange of views and welcomes my visit to Rapa Nui,” the Congressman said.

“I will be traveling to Rapa Nui in my capacity as the Ranking Member of the Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific and also as a Member of the House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on the Western Hemisphere. Prior to my arrival in Rapa Nui, the Government of Chile will be arranging a series of meetings for me in Santiago with Minister of Foreign Affairs Alfredo Moreno, Minister of Planificacion Felipe Kast, Undersecretary for Regional Development Miguel Flores, and Special Advisor for Indian Affairs (SEGPRES) Sebastian Donoso.

While in Easter Island, the Rapa Nui Parliament is arranging meetings with Governor Carmen Cardinali, Mayor Luz Sasso, the Municipal Council, the Elders Council, the MakenuRe’o Rapa Nui women’s organization, the Development Commission and other interested parties.”

“I am pleased by these developments and, once more, I thank Ambassador Arturo Fermandois for making this visit possible and arranging this itinerary. I also thank the Rapa Nui Parliament for its assistance. It is my sincere hope that President Obama will support the indigenous rights of the Rapa Nui people during his planned visit to Chile this week since the United States should be a leader in promoting democracy and human rights. I also hope that the government of Chile will be responsive and allow for the people of Rapa Nui to live in peace on their land,” Faleomavaega concluded.


UPDATE

Radio New Zealand International



American Samoa’s...(Delegate) of the US Congress says he believes Chilean armed police on Easter Island overstepped their authority by shooting peaceful demonstrators from Rapa Nui clans during a violent clash in December.

Faleomavaega Eni Hunkin has met Rapa Nui leaders and Chilean officials in the hope of finding out more about a long-standing conflict over ancestral land rights on Easter Island. He says the dispute is over inconsistent policies set by the Chilean government towards the indigenous people and believes addressing land claims is a priority.

“The gist of my observations in meetings is that I honestly believe that the Chilean carabineros or the police, the armed police, I think they kind of went over their authority to end up shooting people who I understand were unarmed. And that was one of the things that I came back with in understanding that this is what took place and I’m going to continue pursuing this matter with Chilean officials in the government.”


Faleomavaega Eni Hunkin says he has also addressed the matter in writing to the President of Chile, Sebastian Pinera, the President of the United States, Barack Obama, and the US Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton.

UN Decolonisation Seminar Set for Cayman Islands 24-26 May

*****

United Nations Press Release
Special Committee on Decolonization
2nd Meeting (AM)

Special Committee on Decolonization Decides to Hold Caribbean

Regional Seminar in Cape Town (sic), Cayman Islands, 24-26 May

The General Assembly’s Special Committee on Decolonization decided today to hold its Caribbean regional seminar on implementation of the Third International Decade for the Eradication of Colonialism (2011-2020) in Cape Town (sic), Cayman Islands, from 24 to 26 May.

The Committee... also authorized its Chair, Francisco Carrion-Mena (Ecuador), to finalize the composition of the official delegation, as well as the list of experts and non-governmental organizations that will be invited to attend.

Mr. Carrion-Mena told Member States that the official delegation would comprise the Bureau and one Special Committee member from each regional group: Africa; Asia; Latin America and the Caribbean; and Eastern Europe. As such, it would consist of eight representatives, he said, adding that the United Nations would bear the cost of the delegation’s travel. Owing to the shortage of time, he requested that Committee members entrust him with the mandate to complete the list of the formal delegation following informal consultations among the regional groups. He would, he said, duly inform the Committee of the final list.

As in previous years, the Bureau planned to invite three experts and three representatives of non-governmental organizations to speak at the Seminar, all six of whom would be funded by the United Nations. The list of proposed participants would be reviewed by the Bureau and circulated in short order to all Committee members under separate cover.

Mr. Carrion-Mena said that he would request, through the Secretariat, those Committee members who wished to submit additional names for the list of experts to do so. “I think it’s important to have a greater participation,” he stressed, adding that “we shouldn’t just use a list we already have”.

He also informed Committee members that, in determining the venue, a number of factors were considered, including the political situation and logistics of several countries in the Caribbean. Following a request from Cuba, information and statistical data on the Territories had been provided on the Special Committee’s web page. In the end, however, the Committee had followed through with its intention to hold the meeting in the Cayman Islands.

He further noted that all elected and appointed officials of the Non-Self-Governing Territories would be invited, while invitations would also be extended to other Member States, administering Powers, specialized United Nations agencies and some regional organizations.

(For coverage on the last UN Decolonisation Seminar, see: Intensification of Decolonisation Process Discussed at the United Nations )


Following those announcements, the Special Committee also approved the guidelines and rules of procedures, including the seminar’s agenda (document A/AC.109/2011/18), and endorsed English as the seminar’s official language. As in the past, the Special Committee will celebrate the Week of Solidarity with the Peoples of the Non-Self-Governing Territories at the seminar.

After a suggestion by the representative of Saint Lucia, the Committee decided to seek proposals for the themes of the Third Decade, which was declared by the General Assembly at its sixty-fifth session, prior to the seminar to facilitate discussion.

Before closing the meeting, Mr. Carrion-Mena, who was elected Chair at the previous meeting of the Special Committee, paid particular tribute to the outgoing Chair Donatus Keith St. Aimée ( Saint Lucia), as well as the work conducted under his helm. “I hope I can keep up the same pace,” he said, underscoring his commitment to the milestones that had already been set.