|
db_j
|
Posted: 13.04.2005, 12:02
|
registered: Jul. 2002
Posts: 25
Status: offline
last visit: 24.12.05
|
A few weeks ago when Al Stayman visited the RMI, he was asked by Giff Johnston of the Marshall Islands Jounral what he thought if the Kwajalein landowners do not sign a new LUA by 2016. His response was that if the US is not welcomed in the RMI they would pack up and leave by 2016. In a later issue of the MIJ, Ambassador Morris clarified the US position on the Kwajalein issue. According to the Ambassador, under the new MUORA under Compact II, the US will stay in the RMI until 2066 and the option to go on for 2086. What happens to the Land Use Agreement expiration in 2016? Is it an issue or not?
Two different positions from representatives from the US administration and the US Congress.
What do you think?
|
|
|
|
| |
|
ajeltake96960
|
Posted: 13.04.2005, 16:32
|
registered: Apr. 2005
Posts: 44
Status: offline
last visit: 07.09.05
|
db_j:
thank you for raising this issue about LUA and MUORA. There seem to be conflicting positions on the part of the U.S. Administration and the Congress. Likewise, RMI Government and Kwajalein Landowners are gridlock on the same issue. It's important to note, however, that while Al Stayman's statement made in the MI Journal might represent views of those in the Congress, the official position of the U.S. Government (thru Ambassador Morris) is that they expect the RMI Government's commitment to extend the Land Use Agreement with the landowners beyond 2016 as agreed to with the coming into force of the Compact as amended.
As you may probably know, the landowners have refused to extend the LUA without increase in rental for use of their lands. The RMI Government ignored the increase request and concluded a new MUORA with the US. Now the MUORA is the agreement between the RMI and the US, and the LUA is the agreement between the RMI and landowners. MUORA is, for all practical purpose, null and void without a LUA.
The RMI Government might excercise its right of eminent domain. That's the Constitutional authority of the Government to seize lands for public use. Of course, that might be the last resort but it seems and feels that we're heading there. The important question is this, if the RMI Government is able to exercise this power on Kwajalein, would that set precedence for it to exercise this power elsewhere in the RMI? What happens then is anyone's guess. Interestingly, the Constitution also recognizes that lands are privately owned in the Marshall Islands.
Like Senator and Iroij Mike says, if you want to talk about Kwajalein, you better talk to him!
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
OurSuccess
|
Posted: 14.04.2005, 01:03
|
registered: Oct. 2003
Posts: 219
Status: offline
last visit: 21.08.10
|
I see history repeats itself. Back in the late 70’s and mid 80’s when the interim use agreement for the land lease of Kwajalein expired, the landowners occupied the lands with no avail. Even if their prominent land chiefs and senators led their people, the government of the RMI declared eminent domain.
ajeltake96960:
You quoted Sen. and Iroij Kabua as saying, “If you want to talk about Kwajalein, you’d better talk to me.” My question is how did the chief negotiator of the Compact of Free Association representing the RMI (Bob Muller) got away with his meetings exclusively behind doors?
We all know that the RMI government is the only recognized constitution and entity that the government of the United States is willing to deal with on a government-to-government basis. On the same token, the government of the United States cannot and will not negotiate with the landowners nor will it negotiate with the chiefs, in this case, Mike Kabua. Remember what happened during the negotiation of the second term? Were the landowners or the paramount chiefs invited behind doors? I could be wrong, but that’s my view.
edited by: OurSuccess, Apr 14, 2005 - 01:05 AM
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
db_j
|
Posted: 14.04.2005, 09:58
|
registered: Jul. 2002
Posts: 25
Status: offline
last visit: 24.12.05
|
OurSuccess: During the compact II negotiations,the KNC (Kwajalein Negotiation Commission) established by the Iroijs, Alabs and a strong majority of landowners from Kwajalein to champion the needs and concerns of the Kwajalein landowners and the resident of Kwajalein Atoll attempted to point out the position of the people of Kwajalein. With the assistance of Washington D.C. lawyers (Bennett Johnston & Associates), the Kwajalein Iroijs like Mike Kabua were part of the talks from day one. And you are right, the US government did not recognize a second party to the RMI government i.e. the KNC. What could have greatly helped is if the RMI government had put its arms around the concerns of the Kwajalein people and stand with them and truly represent them and their interests while they were (rightfully) negotiating with the US.
The 177 issue was another matter. Representatives from nuclear affected areas and representatives from Kwajalein early in the compact II negotiations advised the RMI negotiators that these two areas were very sensitive to the point that the RMI government should demand more time to discuss these issues.
Early in the compact II talks, the message the Marshallese people received from the RMI government was that discussions would only focus on Title II of the Compact or economic issues. In the end, a significant part of the compact was altered including Title III which included the use of Kwajalein and related defense issues.
You draw your own conclusions but be assured that this issue and whether we could have done better will continue in our hearts and minds for a long, long time.
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
OurSuccess
|
Posted: 14.04.2005, 12:41
|
registered: Oct. 2003
Posts: 219
Status: offline
last visit: 21.08.10
|
db_j:
I agree with you 100%. We could have done better all along only if we had worked together in harmony and were more patient. The RMI government could have embraced its partner (KNC) and invited it to the final negotiation.
I also agree with you that the representatives of the four atolls should have been included in the final negotiation as well.. This would have been our chance to correct the mistakes made by our early administration when they rushed and accepted the carrot ($150m) as lump sum and final payment which would end all future claims and lawsuits. Now we have this CCP issue. Interesting topic. You seem to be very knowledgeable. We would like to hear more from your corner. Thanks for the input.
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
pettittm
|
Posted: 14.04.2005, 12:42
|
registered: Jul. 2002
Posts: 1530
Status: offline
last visit: 02.09.10
|
I think all positions and views pretty well set at this point.
Only position I am really certain of is that US Government will only negotiate with the RMI Government and not with any other group, including the landowners, about USAKA.
The US will do nothing until at least 2009. After that, maybe, if there is still a need for the missile range and if the new US Government Administration still wants to have one, a new deal might be considered. I strongly doubt it but possible.
Personally, I think the writing is on the wall. Cost of the War on Terror, increasing deficits, and continuing technology advances will, I believe make closure of the Range more likely. Stated opposition by landowners and others to our remaining will add to the likelihood of US departure.
Check out, as example, this article on new radar system, just developed Washington Times article. Note the statement that this radar can be towed to anywhere in Pacific to support missile testing.
Plenty of places in the US would WELCOME a new missile range or expansion of current missile testing operations. New Mexico, Hawaii, and Alaska are all trying to capture additional missile testing and the dollars they bring, not chase them away.
I think the landowners will likely get their wish. If they do, I just hope there is a plan for how to use and capitalize on the facilities and infrastructure the US will leave behind so that there may be some continuing benefit for all Marshallese.
The French will not offer to replace the US, the US will not offer a big "settlement" for "repatriation" of Ebeye residents, and no one else is going to jump in with a big bucks offer that tops the current payment (plus jobs, plus Job Corps Training Center and schools access, plus outreach like Yokwe Yuk Womens' Club, etc.). Any successful transition of USAKA will require imagination, selfless and skilled management, a cadre of unpaid volunteers to for basic grounds and buildings maintenance (until new occupants found), and significant initial investment of Marshallese private and Government money to attract outside investment. There will be no quick and easy replacment.
No decision is a decision. . .No action is an action.
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
weslynn
|
Posted: 14.04.2005, 17:31
|
registered: Jun. 2004
Posts: 104
Status: offline
last visit: 06.12.07
|
Pettittm,
I beleived that you've stated the position of the US once again, regards to the statement published on the MIJ by Hon. Ambassador Morris. Now this is really getting nowwhere but a lot of confusing statement been said about Kwajalein future. I know for fact though that the landowners are willing to extend the LUA, but there are certain criterias that the US and the RMI needs to address before the LUA can sign. So what is all these about the new towable radar? Have we forgot that US has invested a lot of money on Kwajalein? I don't think that the US will however leave Kwajalein after 2009 or 2016, but I beleived that the US and the RMI has the 2009 set for another round of talks, as Min. Zackious said. pettittm, also mention that the landowners need to have a plan in place, in case the US leaves the island. I have no doubt that there's no plan in place. I would like to live to that day when I see all these come to a final resolution.
Correct me all, if I'm wrong.
Kune2
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
bikinijack
|
Posted: 14.04.2005, 17:35
|
registered: Mar. 2003
Posts: 930
Status: offline
last visit: 31.08.10
|
Mike is right on all accounts.
I have said it before, but I think it is worth saying again: The Kwaj landowners should take the deal that is on on the table. I agree that they should have been more involved in the negotiations than they were, but so what, in the end analysis the offer is tremendous. They should swallow their pride, considered one of the 7 deadly sins I might add, and sign on the dotted line.
If the landowners think the US is going to come groveling up to them to raise the future Kwaj rental fees beyond what is stated in the negotiated agreement, they are deluded.
If this is the way the landowners are determined to play this, they are welcome at my poker game any day of the week...
edited by: bikinijack, Apr 14, 2005 - 05:36 PM
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
weslynn
|
Posted: 14.04.2005, 19:12
|
registered: Jun. 2004
Posts: 104
Status: offline
last visit: 06.12.07
|
bikinijack,
You beleived that the landowners should take the deal? Let me ask you this? How often have you travel to Ebeye lately? Have you seen the living condition of these landowners on Ebeye? How are the different than the Bikinians? I mean, the way your people are and our Kwajalein landowners are? Have you not seen Ebeye lately? Let me remind you that these people are been taxed by the RMI. Why not the Bikinians too? They suffer everday to make all Marshallese gain. Isn't it ture? Again all correct me on that.
Kun2
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
ajeltake96960
|
Posted: 14.04.2005, 22:59
|
registered: Apr. 2005
Posts: 44
Status: offline
last visit: 07.09.05
|
Here are my views, and mine alone...Before there was a testing site on Kwajalein, the landowners were poor (material or otherwise) but they were happy because they were free to do whatever they want on their lands. This freedom is no longer enjoyed since Kwajalein is an off-limit military installation and at times islands in the mid-corridor are also off-limit.
The increase that the landowners are asking for is peanut compare to what the U.S. gain as a result of the testing. I believe the U.S. currently enjoys its prestige as the world's only super-power because of missle testing on Kwajalein and Nuclear testings conducted in the Marshall Islands. How did the U.S. respond to this great sacrifice on the part of the Marshallese people?
By pressuring the RMI Government into rushing the compact as amended including its subsidiary agreements (MOURA/LUA&Section 177). Changed Circumstances Petition is yet another unfolding unfulfilled commitment. We already know the administration does not believe there are grounds for the RMI Petition for changed circumstances.
Today, the U.S. continues to fight terrorism in Afghanistan and Iraq, and elsewhere where they are not wanted, yet they spend billions and billions of dollars like never before. Easily too. What I can't understand is if the United States Government is giving away all these billions to Iraq and Afghanistan, why is it hard for them to raise the rental payment for Kwajalein, and once and for all, provide compensation, health program and rehabilitate the islands affected by their nuclear testing programs?
I believe the U.S. will still want to maintain its presence in the western pacific for economic and strategic reasons. So pettim raise the point earlier on the new towable radar technologies now exist which will enable the U.S. launch missle tests from anywhere and that states like Alaska, Hawaii and others are lobbying hard to capture these additional fundings from the testings. Let me ask Mike this, are North Koreans or the Mainland Chinese no longer threat to the U.S.? These continues to be a brewing tensions in the China Strait where the U.S. is committed to provide defense to the island of Taiwan in case of preemptive strike from the Chinese mainland. Both Guam and Kwajalein will play vital roles should that happen. Don't forget Kwajalein technologies or whatever the U.S. installed on Kwajalein are the best they have closest to these hotspots. So I would not downplay the importance of Kwajalein and its strategic values to the U.S. just yet.
As a Marshallese, I am proud of what the Kwajalein landowners are doing for they seek equality and justice -- to be treated as equals, as they would extend the same courtesy to their American brothers.
Peace to all!
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
micro80
|
Posted: 14.04.2005, 23:52
|
registered: Mar. 2003
Posts: 77
Status: offline
last visit: 16.11.09
|
The U.S. military is streamlining its operation in remote areas. I have witnessed the removal of hundreds of MinuteMen missile silos, numerous support facilities, a large Air Force housing development and related structures, a bomb scoring station for B-1 bombers in just the past few years. My community here in the U.S. has lost a tremendous amount of revenue and population due to those reductions in military establishments. Kwajalein is a unique situation, but given its remote location, a climate that makes it especially expensive to maintain sensitive electronic equipment and the cost involved in supplying staff with the amenities that they would expect in a state-side facility, it may soon price itself out of existence.
It may be wise to change the focus of attention to creative alternatives should the U.S. choose to abandon the facility. There are many other possibilities and perhaps problem solving efforts could find a forward thinking solution that would successfully utilize the existing facility in a new and profitable way. Good Luck! Anij ippami.
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
DavidStrauss
|
Posted: 15.04.2005, 00:23
|
registered: Aug. 2002
Posts: 215
Status: offline
last visit: 11.10.08
|
"Who is Right?"
This is amazing. I agree with EVERY post. You are ALL right.
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
db_j
|
Posted: 15.04.2005, 10:02
|
registered: Jul. 2002
Posts: 25
Status: offline
last visit: 24.12.05
|
Micro 80 you hit the point when you said 'creative alternatives'. I think a lot of outside people truly underestimate the Marshallese people especially the Kwajalein people. This is not a high stake poker game as Bikinijack allude to. It is a chess game being played on the world chessboard. Times are changing and true threats are emerging from the Pacific Rim especially Korea and China. I doubt very much that the US foreign policy today will be the same in two or three years time. This is the world of globalization and terrorism and technology and instant communication--anything can happen at any time.
So to suggest that the landowners should take the US offer and enjoy it and disregard their legitimate claim to their property because there is no other alternative as suggested by Bikinijack is a outright insult to the wisdom and intelligence of the Kwajalein landowners. Pettim and Bikinjack like the rest of us do not even know what will happen tomorrow, let alone the day after tomorrow on the world stage.
This I know, the landowners are not crazy enough not to take advantage of the facilities on Kwajalein once the US departs. Like any good plan, there should be a plan B or even and plan C in the event Kwajalein is returned to them. What is this plan B and this plan C, only time will tell!
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
bikinijack
|
Posted: 15.04.2005, 17:30
|
registered: Mar. 2003
Posts: 930
Status: offline
last visit: 31.08.10
|
I just want to say to those who think I am wrong, I sincerely hope they are right because if they are not there is an awful lot to lose. And once it is gone, it will be gone for good. Only time will tell "who is right."
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
kjsam
|
Posted: 15.04.2005, 18:14
|
registered: Feb. 2005
Posts: 25
Status: offline
last visit: 08.05.05
|
bikinijack
I hope you're right! Guess what? Kwalalein people has been left behind for number of years. Not only that but we are crazy enough not to care about the future of the Marshall Islands. Let me ask you one simple question. Did you really care about what has been happening to Kwajlein people? Do you really care about what is happening to us right this minute as we speak or tomorrow? Or you only just care about what will happen if Kwajalein landowners do not accept the LUA? I have suggestion to make.
|
|
|
|
|
| |
