Earlier there was a posting on facebook about the retirement pay differences between the average member of the Legislative Branch of our government and the military. The difference was quite staggering. But this did not really show the gross unfairness of the pay system that is employed by our government across all areas, not just retirement, and it goes back many, many years.
In the 1960s, during the period when young men were sent to Vietnam, the average pay of an E-3 (Private First Class in the Army and Marines), was something in the neighborhood of a bit over $100 a month! With combat pay, that amount increased by about $50 or so. An E-5 (Sergeant) made a bit over $200 a month, and a 2nd Lieutenant made around $300! So, all in all, an average serviceman made anywhere between $2000 to $4000 a year! For this amount he spent a miserable year in Vietnam facing hostile fire and horrible living conditions. Almost 60,000 returned in body bags and thousands upon thousands were maimed and wounded, and countless lives were destroyed and had to be rebuilt. During that same period, the salaries of our Congressmen and Senators went from $30,000 a year to $40,000 a year. The military received barely any raises at all! There is something terribly wrong when young men who are asked to go and lay their lives down for their country barely earned enough money to keep them in beer and cigarettes, while the Congressmen and Senators who sent them in harms way earned 100% to 200% more!
It is not surprising that during that period most servicemen preferred to be assigned overseas where the dollar went a lot further! At most overseas posts and bases, the same PFC that barely could keep himself "afloat" back stateside, was in pretty good financial shape overseas. For married enlisted men and junior grade officers in particular, overseas assignments were a pretty good deal. Depending on the country, they could hire maids and even afford to eat out once in a while. By mid 1970s, after the end of Vietnam, a lot changed when the dollar lost its value against foreign currencies. The enlisted personnel in particular were in dire financial straits overseas! It was embarrassing for the United States! At some posts in Germany the local town's people had to help out the American servicemen's families who were in financial trouble! Back home (even to this day!) many lower ranking enlisted men's families had to go on food stamps! Food stamps for families of our military that protect this country! Meanwhile, the Congressional and Senatorial salaries continued to climb!
Today, the annual pay of Congressmen and Senators begin at around $180,000. But that doesn't tell the whole story. They also get all sorts of allowances and special pay. On the average, for 2015 that is estimated to be around $1,266,909.00 for each member of Congress and Senate! That money is to pay for staff salaries and other expenses. Since the 1990s, the annual amount averaged around $944,671.00 and climbed every year! So, using the 2015 amount, an average Congressman or Senator is paid around $1,435,909.00 a year! In contrast, an average E-5 in the military today makes $26,175.00 a year. With housing and other allowances, that pay may go up to around $35,000 a year, roughly a bit over 2% of what the Congressmen and Senators make! Yet, this same E-5 is called upon to disrupt their normal life, family life if they are married, and deploy to Afghanistan or other region and place their life in danger.
I have a solution to this terrible inequity! Cut the Congressional and Senatorial allowances in half and use the proceeds to increase the pay for the military! Better yet, take the whole amount and use it for the military. The Congress and the Senate have not done anything lately except to constantly bicker and carry out partisan politics. What have they done lately, domestically or internationally, to improve our or the world's situation? For that matter, what have they done in the last decade, two or three decades, to deserve all that pay! But of course, I am just being sarcastic, something like that will never happen, after all, it is Congress that controls the funding! That is why they are able to keep giving themselves raises while everyone else sits begging!
We have a system that is broken and is barely limping along. Somebody, someone, has to fix it. The Congress and Senate won't do it, they are too busy fighting over partisan politics and coming up with pork barrel legislation. Unfortunately, we have not had a president in a long, long time who could control the Legislative branch, so I guess it will be business as usual, until something does happen to cause a change.
Monday, March 30, 2015
Friday, March 27, 2015
Patriotism
With the recent announcement by Pentagon that Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl has been declared a deserter, there have been quite a few comments posted on facebook pages. I have earlier written in a blog that in my opinion he was a deserter and should be treated as such. However, recent comments on facebook tell me that not everyone feels the same way. There are those who insist that he should be given benefit of doubt and every avenue should be explored before a decision is made as to his guilt or whether he is indeed a deserter. Others seem to feel the same as I do, that he is a deserter since he walked off his post in a combat zone.
According to the military definition, one does not have to be in a combat zone to be classified as a deserter for leaving their post. Anyone leaving their post of assignment without permission from a higher authority is considered absent without leave or AWOL. The AWOL status remains until 30 days have expired, at which point the missing serviceman becomes a deserter. In this way, there were many servicemen who became deserters when they failed to return to their units after authorized leave of absence, if their absence was more than 30 days.
There were many deserters during Vietnam who fled to Canada and Sweden, as well as those who just stayed hidden within the U.S. Of course there were also those rare cases where someone left their post in combat and ended up with the NVA. There have been deserters even during peacetime, when there were no wars being fought.
To me, the definition is quite simple, less than 30 days absence without permission is AWOL, over 30 days is desertion. That is how I understood it while I was in the service, and that is how I still understand it. Perhaps it is simplistic and I need to think in more detailed and complicated terms such as: What caused the person to leave his post? What were extenuating circumstances that caused him to leave post? Was there a physical or medical reason? There could be a multitude of questions. But I don't see it that way because the military does not either. It isn't that the military is necessarily right, but it is their rule, their regulation, and it cannot become embroiled in complicated reasons and details. Like everything else in the military, it should be kept simple, clear cut. So, to be a deserter you don't have to have left your post without permission in a combat zone. Even in peace time, if you leave your post without permission for more than 30 days, you are classified a deserter.
We don't shoot deserters anymore, in fact, many of the deserters of Vietnam era never even spent a day in prison! They were given amnesty! There were over 21,000 deserters during World War Two and only one was executed. The last American deserter to face a firing squad was during World War Two, an Army Private Eddie Slovik, and it was questionable whether he really deserted or it was just stupidity! Private Slovik did not leave his post in a combat zone, he simply failed to report to his unit and was gone for more than 30 days without permission!
How times change. Poor Slovik was killed by a firing squad for a "questionable" desertion. Yet a bunch of soldiers who deserted during Vietnam some 25 years later were all forgiven. At least during World War Two deserters had to serve some prison time! By the way, Vietnam era deserters for the most part did not leave their post in combat, they simply did not return to their units after furlough! Today, in an era of political correctness, a soldier walks off his post in a combat zone, leaves a note to his CO explaining how he hated the army and was leaving (he also sent a detailed email to his parents, outlining his reasons for desertion) for parts unknown and is captured by Taliban. He spends five years with Taliban, initially making anti-US videos (yes, I know, he claims he made the videos under duress, but Tokyo Rose also made radio broadcasts under duress and she spent 15 years in prison and she was not even in the army!), and some folks are not comfortable with the fact that he has been declared a deserter? I can't quite understand that.
The definition or understanding of the meaning of patriotism seems to have changed dramatically, or so it seems. Perhaps it started with all of those anti-war protests during Vietnam. But for whatever reason, there seems to be two schools of thought on the subject today, and I don't mean the Tea Party's version and the Democrats version. I am simply referring to the fact that patriotism is no longer viewed the same way by some as it used to be in the past.
I remember during Vietnam, I knew a particular Lieutenant who was exceptionally "gung-ho" and was itching to go to Vietnam and "earn his stripes" so-to-speak. He spent a tour in Vietnam and saw some heavy action. He was reassigned to Okinawa, and when he was ordered back to go to Vietnam, he refused! He told the press that he was against the war in Vietnam, that he saw it as a racist war and that U.S. had no business being in that country. He said he was not going to risk his life for something that he did not believe! He was not a member of the minority and he was also a West Point graduate, so his remarks and action were not only surprising but embarrassing to his unit, the Army Special Forces! No member of the Special Forces had ever refused to go back into combat! There were many officers and enlisted men in the Special Forces who did not particularly agree with our policies or execution of the war. But, they all served honorably, to the best of their ability. The Lieutenant was court martialed but never imprisoned, just drummed out of the army. That was it, he disappeared, only to resurface in California briefly and write some anti war articles for a leftist publication.
In contrast, my very good friend "Doc" Barnes was badly wounded in Vietnam and almost released from the army on medical grounds. The army insisted that his wounds would not allow him to serve actively. Doc campaigned vigorously to be reinstated and finally got his wish and was put back on active duty and immediately volunteered to return to Vietnam. I had many talks with Doc, he was a highly intelligent, well read individual. He had studied to become a priest but chose to leave the seminary and enlist in the army! He was offered a commission but turned it down and chose to remain an NCO. He was one of the best read persons I had ever met. Doc did not agree with our policies and the war in Vietnam. But, as he told me on a number of occasions, he was a soldier and did what he was ordered to do. Besides, he said that he was an American soldier, and if America was at war, then he was going to support its effort. As long as his orders did not ask him to do anything illegal, he was going to do it to the best of his ability. Doc was a patriot, the Lieutenant was not and neither is Bergdahl, in my opinion.
Very simply put, Bowe Bergdahl is a deserter. The fact that he gained his freedom in exchange for five Taliban prisoners is a travesty! He won't face a firing squad like poor Eddie Slovik, and chances are he won't even face any prison time. There is no doubt that his lawyer will convince everyone that he had suffered enough at the hands of the Taliban. But at the very least, he should be stripped of his rank to private (he should have never been promoted in the first place!) and declared a deserter, once and for all!
According to the military definition, one does not have to be in a combat zone to be classified as a deserter for leaving their post. Anyone leaving their post of assignment without permission from a higher authority is considered absent without leave or AWOL. The AWOL status remains until 30 days have expired, at which point the missing serviceman becomes a deserter. In this way, there were many servicemen who became deserters when they failed to return to their units after authorized leave of absence, if their absence was more than 30 days.
There were many deserters during Vietnam who fled to Canada and Sweden, as well as those who just stayed hidden within the U.S. Of course there were also those rare cases where someone left their post in combat and ended up with the NVA. There have been deserters even during peacetime, when there were no wars being fought.
To me, the definition is quite simple, less than 30 days absence without permission is AWOL, over 30 days is desertion. That is how I understood it while I was in the service, and that is how I still understand it. Perhaps it is simplistic and I need to think in more detailed and complicated terms such as: What caused the person to leave his post? What were extenuating circumstances that caused him to leave post? Was there a physical or medical reason? There could be a multitude of questions. But I don't see it that way because the military does not either. It isn't that the military is necessarily right, but it is their rule, their regulation, and it cannot become embroiled in complicated reasons and details. Like everything else in the military, it should be kept simple, clear cut. So, to be a deserter you don't have to have left your post without permission in a combat zone. Even in peace time, if you leave your post without permission for more than 30 days, you are classified a deserter.
We don't shoot deserters anymore, in fact, many of the deserters of Vietnam era never even spent a day in prison! They were given amnesty! There were over 21,000 deserters during World War Two and only one was executed. The last American deserter to face a firing squad was during World War Two, an Army Private Eddie Slovik, and it was questionable whether he really deserted or it was just stupidity! Private Slovik did not leave his post in a combat zone, he simply failed to report to his unit and was gone for more than 30 days without permission!
How times change. Poor Slovik was killed by a firing squad for a "questionable" desertion. Yet a bunch of soldiers who deserted during Vietnam some 25 years later were all forgiven. At least during World War Two deserters had to serve some prison time! By the way, Vietnam era deserters for the most part did not leave their post in combat, they simply did not return to their units after furlough! Today, in an era of political correctness, a soldier walks off his post in a combat zone, leaves a note to his CO explaining how he hated the army and was leaving (he also sent a detailed email to his parents, outlining his reasons for desertion) for parts unknown and is captured by Taliban. He spends five years with Taliban, initially making anti-US videos (yes, I know, he claims he made the videos under duress, but Tokyo Rose also made radio broadcasts under duress and she spent 15 years in prison and she was not even in the army!), and some folks are not comfortable with the fact that he has been declared a deserter? I can't quite understand that.
The definition or understanding of the meaning of patriotism seems to have changed dramatically, or so it seems. Perhaps it started with all of those anti-war protests during Vietnam. But for whatever reason, there seems to be two schools of thought on the subject today, and I don't mean the Tea Party's version and the Democrats version. I am simply referring to the fact that patriotism is no longer viewed the same way by some as it used to be in the past.
I remember during Vietnam, I knew a particular Lieutenant who was exceptionally "gung-ho" and was itching to go to Vietnam and "earn his stripes" so-to-speak. He spent a tour in Vietnam and saw some heavy action. He was reassigned to Okinawa, and when he was ordered back to go to Vietnam, he refused! He told the press that he was against the war in Vietnam, that he saw it as a racist war and that U.S. had no business being in that country. He said he was not going to risk his life for something that he did not believe! He was not a member of the minority and he was also a West Point graduate, so his remarks and action were not only surprising but embarrassing to his unit, the Army Special Forces! No member of the Special Forces had ever refused to go back into combat! There were many officers and enlisted men in the Special Forces who did not particularly agree with our policies or execution of the war. But, they all served honorably, to the best of their ability. The Lieutenant was court martialed but never imprisoned, just drummed out of the army. That was it, he disappeared, only to resurface in California briefly and write some anti war articles for a leftist publication.
In contrast, my very good friend "Doc" Barnes was badly wounded in Vietnam and almost released from the army on medical grounds. The army insisted that his wounds would not allow him to serve actively. Doc campaigned vigorously to be reinstated and finally got his wish and was put back on active duty and immediately volunteered to return to Vietnam. I had many talks with Doc, he was a highly intelligent, well read individual. He had studied to become a priest but chose to leave the seminary and enlist in the army! He was offered a commission but turned it down and chose to remain an NCO. He was one of the best read persons I had ever met. Doc did not agree with our policies and the war in Vietnam. But, as he told me on a number of occasions, he was a soldier and did what he was ordered to do. Besides, he said that he was an American soldier, and if America was at war, then he was going to support its effort. As long as his orders did not ask him to do anything illegal, he was going to do it to the best of his ability. Doc was a patriot, the Lieutenant was not and neither is Bergdahl, in my opinion.
Very simply put, Bowe Bergdahl is a deserter. The fact that he gained his freedom in exchange for five Taliban prisoners is a travesty! He won't face a firing squad like poor Eddie Slovik, and chances are he won't even face any prison time. There is no doubt that his lawyer will convince everyone that he had suffered enough at the hands of the Taliban. But at the very least, he should be stripped of his rank to private (he should have never been promoted in the first place!) and declared a deserter, once and for all!
Wednesday, March 25, 2015
Rising Iran, the New Power in the Middle East
For some reason, we have never been able to successfully establish control or develop solid ties with countries in the Middle East other than Israel. No doubt part of it has to do with the dominant religion in that area, but there is much more to that, religion is not the only thing. Israel has been the only country with which we had a long, sustained relationship over the years, but even that is on shaky grounds today as a rift appears to have developed!
Two of the biggest and supposedly influential countries in the region are Egypt and Saudi Arabia, both incidentally are predominantly of Sunni faith. Turkey is another country that is mostly Sunni, but Turkey does not have a state religion and is generally considered to be outside of the Arab world. We have maintained more or less friendly relations with all three of those countries for several decades, but the rest of the countries seem to go from one extreme to another. One day they are our "allies" and the next they are our enemies!
Iran has been a thorn at our side for several decades, ever since the country was taken over by Ayatollah Khomeni and his revolutionary guard in 1979. Ironically, Iran was our strongest ally in the region under the old Shah regime! But that was not to be the case with the new Iran.
We suffered through humiliation in the eyes of most of the world while our embassy staff was held hostage for a year, and we sat around doing nothing, or so it seemed. It was obvious that the new Iranian government didn't give a damn about international law regarding diplomatic immunity and played by their own rules! The United States, the "great satan," along with Israel had been identified as the sworn enemies of Iran in particular and Islam in general. They openly stated that their goal was to obliterate both the "great satan" and the "Zionists" from this world! That had been Iran's avowed policy since 1979 and it has not changed!
It was extremely important for us to keep Iran's influence in the region to a minimum, otherwise all other countries might swing in that direction! The old "domino theory" that we used to worry about during the old days of communism is very much alive in this case. It was obvious right from the start when Khomeni took over Iran that much like communists of old, they were going to export their ideology and try to get as many "converts" as they could.
Iran's first surrogate was born in 1982 when about 1500 Iranian Revolutionary Guards went to Lebanon and established a movement that was called Hezbollah. Today, Hezbollah has about 65,000 guerrilla fighters and are now a part of the Lebanese government and wield a lot of influence in that region. Hezbollah has also moved in to Syria and are now a part of that civil war! Hezbollah has also united with Hamas of Palestinian Authority. Hamas had reached out and proposed a united front.
From the start, both Hezbollah and Hamas had sworn to eliminate Israel from this earth. They were both created specifically to fight Israel!. Like Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas is now a part of the Palestinian Authority government. Do you wonder why there is such a problem with negotiations between Israel and Palestinian Authority? Israel would be committing suicide if it agreed to a Palestinian state with a government that has Hamas in it!
It now appears that Iran's second successful surrogate is the Shiite Houthie rebel group that has just overtaken the Yemeni government and is in the midst of a power struggle with Al Qaeda and ISIS elements in that region. Although we were very heavily involved in supporting the old government and fighting Al Qaeda in the region, we have completely pulled out of Yemen, so it is now Iranian, for all practical purposes.
Our participation in nuclear talks with Iran has given Iran tremendous boost in prestige in the region. After all, if Iran can bring the world's most powerful nation to the negotiating table, they must be an "important" country, not some saber-rattling, rag-tag revolutionary group! To countries that are seeking "respect" and recognition, it is vitally important to have the United States recognize them as an equal and negotiate directly. That is why Kim Jong Un and North Korea is constantly acting up, insisting that the United States be the major player at all talks! Not everyone sees things the same way as we do. In some cases, what we see as failure is seen as success in some cultures!
Now, with Iran's very visible presence in Iraq fighting ISIS at our invitation, their stock has soared! To compound the situation for us, Iran is viewed as a more successful participant in the fight against ISIS than the U.S.! The Iranian "advisors" are actually participating in combat, side by side with the Iraqis, their involvement is very "visible" to the population, to the Arab press in particular. Our "advisors" are forbidden to engage in combat, so they are unseen and regarded as ineffectual. The lack of visibility of U.S. troops in combat is also seen as America's unwillingness to sacrifice American lives and instead use Iraqis in harms way. Of course that is not true, our advisors are in harms way even though they do not participate in direct combat. But, that is how it is perceived by the people in the region and the Iranians are not doing anything to dispel that view. Like I said, things are perceived different in that part of the world.
No doubt both Egypt and Saudi Arabia are feeling very nervous about the current situation. They don't want Iran to spread its influence, they don't want to be surrounded by a powerful Shiite coalition, which Iran could create. What a mess! That region has been a mess for a long, long time, and it isn't about to change any time soon. Unfortunately, it seems we have inadvertently helped make the region into even a bigger mess with the rise of Iran. Iran, it seems, will be the new power in the Middle East, unless someone stops their rise, which is unlikely to take place in this political climate.
Two of the biggest and supposedly influential countries in the region are Egypt and Saudi Arabia, both incidentally are predominantly of Sunni faith. Turkey is another country that is mostly Sunni, but Turkey does not have a state religion and is generally considered to be outside of the Arab world. We have maintained more or less friendly relations with all three of those countries for several decades, but the rest of the countries seem to go from one extreme to another. One day they are our "allies" and the next they are our enemies!
Iran has been a thorn at our side for several decades, ever since the country was taken over by Ayatollah Khomeni and his revolutionary guard in 1979. Ironically, Iran was our strongest ally in the region under the old Shah regime! But that was not to be the case with the new Iran.
We suffered through humiliation in the eyes of most of the world while our embassy staff was held hostage for a year, and we sat around doing nothing, or so it seemed. It was obvious that the new Iranian government didn't give a damn about international law regarding diplomatic immunity and played by their own rules! The United States, the "great satan," along with Israel had been identified as the sworn enemies of Iran in particular and Islam in general. They openly stated that their goal was to obliterate both the "great satan" and the "Zionists" from this world! That had been Iran's avowed policy since 1979 and it has not changed!
It was extremely important for us to keep Iran's influence in the region to a minimum, otherwise all other countries might swing in that direction! The old "domino theory" that we used to worry about during the old days of communism is very much alive in this case. It was obvious right from the start when Khomeni took over Iran that much like communists of old, they were going to export their ideology and try to get as many "converts" as they could.
Iran's first surrogate was born in 1982 when about 1500 Iranian Revolutionary Guards went to Lebanon and established a movement that was called Hezbollah. Today, Hezbollah has about 65,000 guerrilla fighters and are now a part of the Lebanese government and wield a lot of influence in that region. Hezbollah has also moved in to Syria and are now a part of that civil war! Hezbollah has also united with Hamas of Palestinian Authority. Hamas had reached out and proposed a united front.
From the start, both Hezbollah and Hamas had sworn to eliminate Israel from this earth. They were both created specifically to fight Israel!. Like Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas is now a part of the Palestinian Authority government. Do you wonder why there is such a problem with negotiations between Israel and Palestinian Authority? Israel would be committing suicide if it agreed to a Palestinian state with a government that has Hamas in it!
It now appears that Iran's second successful surrogate is the Shiite Houthie rebel group that has just overtaken the Yemeni government and is in the midst of a power struggle with Al Qaeda and ISIS elements in that region. Although we were very heavily involved in supporting the old government and fighting Al Qaeda in the region, we have completely pulled out of Yemen, so it is now Iranian, for all practical purposes.
Our participation in nuclear talks with Iran has given Iran tremendous boost in prestige in the region. After all, if Iran can bring the world's most powerful nation to the negotiating table, they must be an "important" country, not some saber-rattling, rag-tag revolutionary group! To countries that are seeking "respect" and recognition, it is vitally important to have the United States recognize them as an equal and negotiate directly. That is why Kim Jong Un and North Korea is constantly acting up, insisting that the United States be the major player at all talks! Not everyone sees things the same way as we do. In some cases, what we see as failure is seen as success in some cultures!
Now, with Iran's very visible presence in Iraq fighting ISIS at our invitation, their stock has soared! To compound the situation for us, Iran is viewed as a more successful participant in the fight against ISIS than the U.S.! The Iranian "advisors" are actually participating in combat, side by side with the Iraqis, their involvement is very "visible" to the population, to the Arab press in particular. Our "advisors" are forbidden to engage in combat, so they are unseen and regarded as ineffectual. The lack of visibility of U.S. troops in combat is also seen as America's unwillingness to sacrifice American lives and instead use Iraqis in harms way. Of course that is not true, our advisors are in harms way even though they do not participate in direct combat. But, that is how it is perceived by the people in the region and the Iranians are not doing anything to dispel that view. Like I said, things are perceived different in that part of the world.
No doubt both Egypt and Saudi Arabia are feeling very nervous about the current situation. They don't want Iran to spread its influence, they don't want to be surrounded by a powerful Shiite coalition, which Iran could create. What a mess! That region has been a mess for a long, long time, and it isn't about to change any time soon. Unfortunately, it seems we have inadvertently helped make the region into even a bigger mess with the rise of Iran. Iran, it seems, will be the new power in the Middle East, unless someone stops their rise, which is unlikely to take place in this political climate.
Saturday, March 21, 2015
People Without Representation - Okinawans Part 3
Today's Japanese may not feel quite so discriminatory against Okinawans as the pre war generation, but nevertheless, discrimination still exists. The post war generation, especially those born in the last 30 years or so, tend to be more liberal in their attitudes and have been exposed to diverse cultures much more than the older generation. The younger generation no longer uses such derogatory terms as sankoku-jin (three country person, meaning Chinese, Koreans and Taiwanese) but the prejudices still persist. Anyone with a darker complexion is looked down upon by many and myths still exist that you can't trust people with darker complexion for they are somehow untrustworthy. Filipinos have always been discriminated against, considered even lower than sankoku-jin!
Despite much improved attitudes by Japanese, sadly, even today, Okinawans face discrimination. I know personally of young Okinawans who eagerly moved to Tokyo only to return after several unhappy years living among yamato people. In the late 1960s I knew the General Manager of Toyota Motors on Okinawa very well, a man in his early 50s at the time. In one of our conversations I mentioned that I had recently left the U.S. Army and he asked me how I felt about serving in the U.S. military and if I was discriminated against. I told him that although there may have been individuals who were prejudiced, the system as a whole treated me as an equal to everyone else and I did not experience any problems. He shook his head and said that he too was a beterano (veteran), that he served in the Japanese Imperial Army during World War Two. But, he added, he was treated like crap! Despite his university education, he was never promoted above the rank of private and he served in a "work battalion" that was made up of Okinawans, Koreans, and Taiwanese, in other words, sankoku-jin who became cannon fodder in many cases!
At this time there was a lot of discussions between U.S. and Japan on reversion and Okinawan papers were full of articles on the subject. He said that he did not favor reversion. He felt that the Japanese would take over and relegate Okinawans to lesser positions! He said that despite cries by many Okinawans to return to "motherland," most Okinawans had forgotten what it was like under Japanese rule. I said that perhaps the Japanese people changed after the war. He said yes, no doubt the defeat had changed Japanese people, but, he added with a smile, not enough to change their basic attitudes! He was right in many ways. As soon as reversion took place, all key positions on Okinawa were taken over by mainland Japanese. To this day, key positions in the government are held by naichi (mainland Japan) people. Of course there are Okinawans in high positions, starting with the Governor, but there are enough career government positions filled by mainland Japanese that everything is still controlled by Tokyo!
They say that if you want to learn about a culture or people, other than going and living there, the best way is to read their literature. Okinawans have produced some very good and interesting literature that is very revealing of their feelings about treatment by mainland Japanese. There are a number of literary works that deal with the this subject, but the ones that have been translated the most into English are short stories that were written anywhere between the early 20th Century into late 20th and beginning 21st Century. Many of these stories won literary prizes, so they are very well written. A short story called "Officer Okuma" was written in 1922 and it is about a young Okinawan who becomes a police officer on Okinawa. However, he has to deal with discrimination by his bosses who are all from naichi (mainland Japan) and although he tries very hard, he knows he will never be accepted by the Japanese. Another short story written in 1931, "Mr. Saito of Heaven Building" is about a successful businessman in Tokyo who carefully hides his Okinawan background and is ruined when it is discovered that he is an Okinawan and not a Japanese from Tokyo.
In the more recent, post reversion period, "Silver Motorcycle" (1977) is about an unhappy woman who is widowed by an American soldier killed in Vietnam. The story actually depicts Okinawans as being "Americanized" in some ways and being "different" from mainland Japanese. Another story, "Love Suicide at Kamaara" (1984) also depicts Okinawans as being "Americanized" and distinctly different from mainland Japanese. It was interesting to see how the authors were trying to promote a different identity for Okinawans, separating them from Japanese!
All these stories and more, show clearly that Okinawans are not happy under Japanese rule, whether it was before the war or after 1972! Of course these are views from the authors' perspectives. No doubt average Okinawan may not feel that way at all. But, it is quite apparent that there were and are Okinawans who are acutely aware that they are not Japanese and will never be accepted as such by Japanese! The distinction that Okinawans make by calling themselves uchina and the mainland Japanese yamato is not just regional pride, but born of Japanese discrimination.
Despite much improved attitudes by Japanese, sadly, even today, Okinawans face discrimination. I know personally of young Okinawans who eagerly moved to Tokyo only to return after several unhappy years living among yamato people. In the late 1960s I knew the General Manager of Toyota Motors on Okinawa very well, a man in his early 50s at the time. In one of our conversations I mentioned that I had recently left the U.S. Army and he asked me how I felt about serving in the U.S. military and if I was discriminated against. I told him that although there may have been individuals who were prejudiced, the system as a whole treated me as an equal to everyone else and I did not experience any problems. He shook his head and said that he too was a beterano (veteran), that he served in the Japanese Imperial Army during World War Two. But, he added, he was treated like crap! Despite his university education, he was never promoted above the rank of private and he served in a "work battalion" that was made up of Okinawans, Koreans, and Taiwanese, in other words, sankoku-jin who became cannon fodder in many cases!
At this time there was a lot of discussions between U.S. and Japan on reversion and Okinawan papers were full of articles on the subject. He said that he did not favor reversion. He felt that the Japanese would take over and relegate Okinawans to lesser positions! He said that despite cries by many Okinawans to return to "motherland," most Okinawans had forgotten what it was like under Japanese rule. I said that perhaps the Japanese people changed after the war. He said yes, no doubt the defeat had changed Japanese people, but, he added with a smile, not enough to change their basic attitudes! He was right in many ways. As soon as reversion took place, all key positions on Okinawa were taken over by mainland Japanese. To this day, key positions in the government are held by naichi (mainland Japan) people. Of course there are Okinawans in high positions, starting with the Governor, but there are enough career government positions filled by mainland Japanese that everything is still controlled by Tokyo!
They say that if you want to learn about a culture or people, other than going and living there, the best way is to read their literature. Okinawans have produced some very good and interesting literature that is very revealing of their feelings about treatment by mainland Japanese. There are a number of literary works that deal with the this subject, but the ones that have been translated the most into English are short stories that were written anywhere between the early 20th Century into late 20th and beginning 21st Century. Many of these stories won literary prizes, so they are very well written. A short story called "Officer Okuma" was written in 1922 and it is about a young Okinawan who becomes a police officer on Okinawa. However, he has to deal with discrimination by his bosses who are all from naichi (mainland Japan) and although he tries very hard, he knows he will never be accepted by the Japanese. Another short story written in 1931, "Mr. Saito of Heaven Building" is about a successful businessman in Tokyo who carefully hides his Okinawan background and is ruined when it is discovered that he is an Okinawan and not a Japanese from Tokyo.
In the more recent, post reversion period, "Silver Motorcycle" (1977) is about an unhappy woman who is widowed by an American soldier killed in Vietnam. The story actually depicts Okinawans as being "Americanized" in some ways and being "different" from mainland Japanese. Another story, "Love Suicide at Kamaara" (1984) also depicts Okinawans as being "Americanized" and distinctly different from mainland Japanese. It was interesting to see how the authors were trying to promote a different identity for Okinawans, separating them from Japanese!
All these stories and more, show clearly that Okinawans are not happy under Japanese rule, whether it was before the war or after 1972! Of course these are views from the authors' perspectives. No doubt average Okinawan may not feel that way at all. But, it is quite apparent that there were and are Okinawans who are acutely aware that they are not Japanese and will never be accepted as such by Japanese! The distinction that Okinawans make by calling themselves uchina and the mainland Japanese yamato is not just regional pride, but born of Japanese discrimination.
Thursday, March 19, 2015
People Without Representation - Okinawans Part 2
With the signing of the 1952 San Francisco Treaty, Japan became an independent nation once again, no longer under U.S. military occupation, but Okinawa was left in a gray area. Okinawa was essentially sacrificed by Japan for the sake of getting U.S. protection from the Soviet and Chinese threat. No Okinawan representative was present when the island chains future was discussed and decided. Instead, a Government of Ryukyu Islands (GRI) was established in 1952 with hand picked Okinawans to fill the posts. A United States Civil Administration of Ryukyus (USCAR) was set up, headed by a U.S. High Commissioner, an Army General, and staffed with US State Department officers. USCAR dictated what GRI could or could not do. So, in reality, Okinawa did not have a government, it was the U.S. that controlled everything. Okinawan people held "partial" Japanese citizenship, since under the 1952 Treaty, Japan had "residual sovereignty" over the Ryukyu Islands while the U.S. had a "trusteeship" of sorts.
Needless to say, Okinawans were not happy with this status. They were neither "fish nor fowl," neither Japanese nor U.S. subjects. At the same time, actually even before the 1952 Treaty, the Okinawan Communist Party was established around 1950. It was started by the Japanese Communist Party which continued to have a very strong influence on Okinawan "nationalist" movement. The Okinawan communists were the first ones to start pushing for reversion to Japan. The main interest of Okinawan communist party (as with Japanese communist party) was to get rid of U.S. presence.
When reversion talks started to take place in earnest in the late 1960s and early 1970s, there was a lot of unrest on Okinawa. Okinawa was experiencing an increase in violent crimes committed by American G.I.s, supposedly those who returned from Vietnam. Some of the violence that was attributed to the G.I.s was actually committed by others, most notably the yakuza which had started a war of its own. The Japanese gangs were trying to move in on Okinawa and violence erupted over territorial disputes. At the same time there were demonstrations, pro and con reversion. In Koza, the largest "entertainment" district for American G.I.s, many bar owners held anti reversion demonstrations and they clashed with those who demonstrated for reversion! Anti reversionists started to make their voices heard.
Genwa Nakasone, a respected politician stated that Okinawa made far more progress in several decades under American rule than several centuries under Japanese rule! Those were pretty strong words! Chotoku Ogimi, the founder of Rykyuan Nationalist Party suggested that conditions for Okinawans would be much worst under Japanese, that they would be treated as second class citizens. Ogimi even suggested that Okinawa should push to become a U.S. protectorate and possibly a territory in the future. He wanted to establish mandatory English language classes starting in kindergarten! Akira Arakawa, another noted politician went so far as to say that Japan's only interest in Okinawa was its land, which they could trade with U.S. for its military protection. Arakawa said that Okinawans would be relegated to the bottom of Japanese society! Interestingly, during this entire period when reversion talks were taking place between Japan and the U.S., there was not a single Okinawan representative involved! Japanese government had adamantly opposed any participation by Okinawans in the discussion of their future! Incredible! It seems that even before the reversion took place, Okinawans were already treated as an underclass!
Perhaps the most telling point was the comments made by Okinawa's most respected and famous politician, Junji Nishime. Nishime was one of the rare Okinawans who succeeded in Japan before reversion despite discrimination against Okinawans. He graduated from Todai (Tokyo University), a school that is almost a "must" if you want to succeed in Japanese government. He served in various high posts in Japanese government including in the Diet (Parliament) and was a Mayor of Naha and three time Governor of Okinawa (1978 - 90). He was a true Okinawan success story. Yet, he stated that despite all his achievements, he failed to assimilate Japanese identity! He said he always felt acutely his menzokushugi, Okinawan identity, nationalism!
Despite proclamation by mostly young Okinawans today that they are Japanese, Okinawans refer to themselves as uchina, while anyone from the main islands of Japan are called yamato. Although the Okinawan language (dialect) is not used as widely as before, it is still used in the villages, and the Japanese used on Okinawa is different from Japanese spoken on the main islands.
Recently, UNESCO questioned why there was no attempt by Japanese government to preserve Okinawan culture and language, which is distinctive. The Japanese government has been trying to preserve the Ainu culture and language, but no attempt has been made to do so with Okinawan culture. Okinawans themselves have tried to preserve some of their culture on their own. Apparently the Japanese government does not feel it is important.
The most recent controversy over U.S. bases has to do with the USMC Air Facility in Futenma. It is located in a very crowded area in Ginowan City and has been a bone of contention ever since it was established. The U.S. has agreed to move the facility and Japanese government chose Henoko, in north central Okinawa, just outside of the huge USMC facility, Camp Schwab. The problem is that the new facility is to be built on a piece of land that juts out into the sea, and the runway is to be built over an existing coral reef. The building of the runway will destroy much of the coral reef that is now home to the sea life in Henoko Bay. In January, when Takeshi Onaga, a new socialist Governor of Okinawa was elected, construction was halted. Onaga had run for offie on the platform that he would stop any new base construction. However, Tokyo government ordered that the construction be resumed and it started again on the 16th of this month! In short, the Tokyo government simply overruled the local government, without consultation or any discussion. As local papers said, "Tokyo runs roughshod over Okinawa!"
Okinawa may be a prefecture of Japan and Okinawans Japanese citizens, but it seems that the government in Tokyo thinks otherwise. Okinawa's representatives in Japanese government are apparently powerless to do anything, they are representatives in name only and Okinawan people really do not have any representation!
Needless to say, Okinawans were not happy with this status. They were neither "fish nor fowl," neither Japanese nor U.S. subjects. At the same time, actually even before the 1952 Treaty, the Okinawan Communist Party was established around 1950. It was started by the Japanese Communist Party which continued to have a very strong influence on Okinawan "nationalist" movement. The Okinawan communists were the first ones to start pushing for reversion to Japan. The main interest of Okinawan communist party (as with Japanese communist party) was to get rid of U.S. presence.
When reversion talks started to take place in earnest in the late 1960s and early 1970s, there was a lot of unrest on Okinawa. Okinawa was experiencing an increase in violent crimes committed by American G.I.s, supposedly those who returned from Vietnam. Some of the violence that was attributed to the G.I.s was actually committed by others, most notably the yakuza which had started a war of its own. The Japanese gangs were trying to move in on Okinawa and violence erupted over territorial disputes. At the same time there were demonstrations, pro and con reversion. In Koza, the largest "entertainment" district for American G.I.s, many bar owners held anti reversion demonstrations and they clashed with those who demonstrated for reversion! Anti reversionists started to make their voices heard.
Genwa Nakasone, a respected politician stated that Okinawa made far more progress in several decades under American rule than several centuries under Japanese rule! Those were pretty strong words! Chotoku Ogimi, the founder of Rykyuan Nationalist Party suggested that conditions for Okinawans would be much worst under Japanese, that they would be treated as second class citizens. Ogimi even suggested that Okinawa should push to become a U.S. protectorate and possibly a territory in the future. He wanted to establish mandatory English language classes starting in kindergarten! Akira Arakawa, another noted politician went so far as to say that Japan's only interest in Okinawa was its land, which they could trade with U.S. for its military protection. Arakawa said that Okinawans would be relegated to the bottom of Japanese society! Interestingly, during this entire period when reversion talks were taking place between Japan and the U.S., there was not a single Okinawan representative involved! Japanese government had adamantly opposed any participation by Okinawans in the discussion of their future! Incredible! It seems that even before the reversion took place, Okinawans were already treated as an underclass!
Perhaps the most telling point was the comments made by Okinawa's most respected and famous politician, Junji Nishime. Nishime was one of the rare Okinawans who succeeded in Japan before reversion despite discrimination against Okinawans. He graduated from Todai (Tokyo University), a school that is almost a "must" if you want to succeed in Japanese government. He served in various high posts in Japanese government including in the Diet (Parliament) and was a Mayor of Naha and three time Governor of Okinawa (1978 - 90). He was a true Okinawan success story. Yet, he stated that despite all his achievements, he failed to assimilate Japanese identity! He said he always felt acutely his menzokushugi, Okinawan identity, nationalism!
Despite proclamation by mostly young Okinawans today that they are Japanese, Okinawans refer to themselves as uchina, while anyone from the main islands of Japan are called yamato. Although the Okinawan language (dialect) is not used as widely as before, it is still used in the villages, and the Japanese used on Okinawa is different from Japanese spoken on the main islands.
Recently, UNESCO questioned why there was no attempt by Japanese government to preserve Okinawan culture and language, which is distinctive. The Japanese government has been trying to preserve the Ainu culture and language, but no attempt has been made to do so with Okinawan culture. Okinawans themselves have tried to preserve some of their culture on their own. Apparently the Japanese government does not feel it is important.
The most recent controversy over U.S. bases has to do with the USMC Air Facility in Futenma. It is located in a very crowded area in Ginowan City and has been a bone of contention ever since it was established. The U.S. has agreed to move the facility and Japanese government chose Henoko, in north central Okinawa, just outside of the huge USMC facility, Camp Schwab. The problem is that the new facility is to be built on a piece of land that juts out into the sea, and the runway is to be built over an existing coral reef. The building of the runway will destroy much of the coral reef that is now home to the sea life in Henoko Bay. In January, when Takeshi Onaga, a new socialist Governor of Okinawa was elected, construction was halted. Onaga had run for offie on the platform that he would stop any new base construction. However, Tokyo government ordered that the construction be resumed and it started again on the 16th of this month! In short, the Tokyo government simply overruled the local government, without consultation or any discussion. As local papers said, "Tokyo runs roughshod over Okinawa!"
Okinawa may be a prefecture of Japan and Okinawans Japanese citizens, but it seems that the government in Tokyo thinks otherwise. Okinawa's representatives in Japanese government are apparently powerless to do anything, they are representatives in name only and Okinawan people really do not have any representation!
Wednesday, March 18, 2015
People Without Representation - Okinawans
The title of this blog may seem strange, especially in view of the fact that Okinawa Prefecture with its five districts has representatives in the Japanese Diet (Parliament, House of Representatives). After all, Okinawa had been a Japanese prefecture since 1879 when it was annexed and allowed to send representatives to Tokyo government. However, even as a prefecture, Okinawa and Okinawans were always treated less than equal by the government as well as people of Japan.
Although after annexation, Okinawans were put under Japanese rule and system, they were more of a colony than a bona fide prefecture, part of Japan. Children were taught Japanese from kindergarten onward. The education system was based on what was nationwide in Japan. Yet, it was inferior to that of "mainland" Japan, and graduates of Okinawan high schools had a tough time getting into the top notch Japanese universities. Okinawans in general were treated as second class citizens. Those who chose to go to "naichi" (main islands) ended up working in the bottom strata of the Japanese work force. They were placed almost in the same category as Chinese, Taiwanese and Koreans (Taiwan and Korea had been colonized by Japan). The Japanese referred to these people as sankoku-jin (three country people, referring to China, Taiwan and Korea). They were at the bottom of the Japanese society and the Okinawans were relegated to the same level! At times, sankoku-jin meant China, Korea, and Okinawa, since many Japanese considered Taiwanese as Chinese!
During World War Two, Okinawans were drafted into the Japanese military but were not allowed to serve in regular units. They served in "work battalions," usually as simple laborers or ammunition bearers. Unlike Koreans who had a proclivity for military service, few if any Okinawans distinguished themselves in combat, mainly because they were not allowed to serve in that capacity! It was a strange way of treating people who were supposedly from a region that was a part of the country. But then again, we too weren't exactly progressive with our segregated military!
Despite the horrors of World War Two where Okinawa lost about a quarter of its civilian population, most people on Okinawa had hopes that things would be better. There was no clamor for return to Japan. Of course the Okinawans were in no position to demand anything at the end of the war. These are people who had been harshly treated by the Japanese for centuries, even after they supposedly became Japanese. So, it was not in their DNA to protest or make any demands.
The U.S. on the other hand, immediately started building bases and became the occupier of Okinawa. Initially, as a defeated nation, Japan had no say so as to what took place on Okinawa. But, after the signing of the 1952 San Francisco Treaty, when U.S. Occupation of Japan officially ended, the subject of Okinawa came to the forefront. In fact, it was one of the key issues discussed during the hammering out of the agreement for the treaty!
Japan was anxious to reduce U.S. military bases and presence in Japan to get started on the road to recovery. However, at the same time, Japan was very nervous about Soviet Union and Communist China. Korean War was still raging and Japan saw how the Chinese had been fighting UN forces to a standstill in Korea. They knew that Chinese memory was long and that WWII had only ended seven short years earlier. Japan wanted protection from the U.S. and Okinawa was a perfect place to have the U.S. military built-up! As far as Japan was concerned, it was out of sight and out of mind. After all, Okinawa was not "real" Japan! It was better to have all those bases and military personnel there than in their own backyard! Poor Okinawans had no say so what so ever!
Okinawa's status was unclear. It was in pseudo trusteeship, not officially, but for all practical purposes. As kids - teenagers, most of us who lived on Okinawa during the 1950s and 60s really had no idea of the true status of Okinawa. We lived in an insular society, on military bases and housing areas that were microcosms of typical American community, and starting in 1958, even the currency was the U.S. dollar! But life outside of U.S. bases was quite different. Unemployment was high, and a young graduate of Ryukyu University really did not have much of a future. The best paying jobs were working for the U.S. military as a clerk or other low level position, not something that a new university graduate looked forward to!
Okinawa has always been an agricultural society. The bulk of the population engaged in farming of one sort or another. The island of Okinawa is hilly, and flat areas were always considered premium land for farming. When the U.S. military started appropriating land for bases, naturally, flat areas were the ones that were taken first. Think about it. Except for housing areas that have hilly land, the bases themselves are flat, premium farm land. U.S. bases currently take up about 18% of the total land mass on Okinawa. At its peak in the 1950s and 60s, with all the housing areas included, it was more like 25% of total land mass. Since only about 50% of the land on Okinawa is flat and arable, you can figure out how much of the farm land has been taken up by U.S. bases.
In the mid 1950s the U.S. and the Japanese government discovered that about 250,000 Okinawans were displaced by U.S. bases. They had no land to farm. So a plan was hatched by both governments to encourage Okinawans to emigrate to South America. Deals were struck with South American countries to accept Okinawan immigrants, there was a lot of back door politicking and illegal funds passed. The plan was to resettle the 250,000 or so Okinawans in Bolivia, Peru, Brazil, and even Mexico. Between 1954 and 1962, approximately 17,000 Okinawans emigrated. Some were successful in establishing farming communities, like Colonia Okinawa in Bolivia. Others simply joined existing Okinawan/Japanese immigrant communities in Brazil and other countries. Many also perished in harsh conditions in Amazonian jungles and others returned after several years. Of course you can't really blame the Japanese government. Post war Japan was crowded and with few opportunities for employment. The government had to do something to relieve the situation and Okinawa was just a part of it.
By the 1960s there was some serious dialogue between the U.S. and Japan about Okinawa's reversion to Japan. Japan had recovered from the war and was becoming an economic power. Naturally, their politicians began to think of ways to increase Japan's territory and regaining Okinawa was one of them. It is ironic, because back in 1952 during the signing of the San Francisco Treaty, Japan was willing to let U.S. have trusteeship over Okinawa and eventually make it into a protectorate. This, the Japanese politicians thought, would guarantee that U.S. would always be present near by to protect Japan! How times change! Within a decade, after economic recovery, Japan was no longer thinking the same way. Now they "wanted their cake and eat it too!"
However, what really surprised many of these Japanese politicians was some of the reactions from Okinawans when reversion talks began in earnest. There were prominent Okinawan politicians who did not want the reversion to take place! Naturally, it was assumed that those who made their living off U.S. military presence, like those involved in various "entertainment" industries, would be against reversion, and indeed they were! But the objections of respected politicians and scholars really surprised the Japanese. However, most of this information was kept out of the Japanese press!
In the next blog I will discuss some of the interesting views of prominent Okinawans like Chotoku Ogimi, Akira Arakawa, and Genwa Nakasone.
Although after annexation, Okinawans were put under Japanese rule and system, they were more of a colony than a bona fide prefecture, part of Japan. Children were taught Japanese from kindergarten onward. The education system was based on what was nationwide in Japan. Yet, it was inferior to that of "mainland" Japan, and graduates of Okinawan high schools had a tough time getting into the top notch Japanese universities. Okinawans in general were treated as second class citizens. Those who chose to go to "naichi" (main islands) ended up working in the bottom strata of the Japanese work force. They were placed almost in the same category as Chinese, Taiwanese and Koreans (Taiwan and Korea had been colonized by Japan). The Japanese referred to these people as sankoku-jin (three country people, referring to China, Taiwan and Korea). They were at the bottom of the Japanese society and the Okinawans were relegated to the same level! At times, sankoku-jin meant China, Korea, and Okinawa, since many Japanese considered Taiwanese as Chinese!
During World War Two, Okinawans were drafted into the Japanese military but were not allowed to serve in regular units. They served in "work battalions," usually as simple laborers or ammunition bearers. Unlike Koreans who had a proclivity for military service, few if any Okinawans distinguished themselves in combat, mainly because they were not allowed to serve in that capacity! It was a strange way of treating people who were supposedly from a region that was a part of the country. But then again, we too weren't exactly progressive with our segregated military!
Despite the horrors of World War Two where Okinawa lost about a quarter of its civilian population, most people on Okinawa had hopes that things would be better. There was no clamor for return to Japan. Of course the Okinawans were in no position to demand anything at the end of the war. These are people who had been harshly treated by the Japanese for centuries, even after they supposedly became Japanese. So, it was not in their DNA to protest or make any demands.
The U.S. on the other hand, immediately started building bases and became the occupier of Okinawa. Initially, as a defeated nation, Japan had no say so as to what took place on Okinawa. But, after the signing of the 1952 San Francisco Treaty, when U.S. Occupation of Japan officially ended, the subject of Okinawa came to the forefront. In fact, it was one of the key issues discussed during the hammering out of the agreement for the treaty!
Japan was anxious to reduce U.S. military bases and presence in Japan to get started on the road to recovery. However, at the same time, Japan was very nervous about Soviet Union and Communist China. Korean War was still raging and Japan saw how the Chinese had been fighting UN forces to a standstill in Korea. They knew that Chinese memory was long and that WWII had only ended seven short years earlier. Japan wanted protection from the U.S. and Okinawa was a perfect place to have the U.S. military built-up! As far as Japan was concerned, it was out of sight and out of mind. After all, Okinawa was not "real" Japan! It was better to have all those bases and military personnel there than in their own backyard! Poor Okinawans had no say so what so ever!
Okinawa's status was unclear. It was in pseudo trusteeship, not officially, but for all practical purposes. As kids - teenagers, most of us who lived on Okinawa during the 1950s and 60s really had no idea of the true status of Okinawa. We lived in an insular society, on military bases and housing areas that were microcosms of typical American community, and starting in 1958, even the currency was the U.S. dollar! But life outside of U.S. bases was quite different. Unemployment was high, and a young graduate of Ryukyu University really did not have much of a future. The best paying jobs were working for the U.S. military as a clerk or other low level position, not something that a new university graduate looked forward to!
Okinawa has always been an agricultural society. The bulk of the population engaged in farming of one sort or another. The island of Okinawa is hilly, and flat areas were always considered premium land for farming. When the U.S. military started appropriating land for bases, naturally, flat areas were the ones that were taken first. Think about it. Except for housing areas that have hilly land, the bases themselves are flat, premium farm land. U.S. bases currently take up about 18% of the total land mass on Okinawa. At its peak in the 1950s and 60s, with all the housing areas included, it was more like 25% of total land mass. Since only about 50% of the land on Okinawa is flat and arable, you can figure out how much of the farm land has been taken up by U.S. bases.
In the mid 1950s the U.S. and the Japanese government discovered that about 250,000 Okinawans were displaced by U.S. bases. They had no land to farm. So a plan was hatched by both governments to encourage Okinawans to emigrate to South America. Deals were struck with South American countries to accept Okinawan immigrants, there was a lot of back door politicking and illegal funds passed. The plan was to resettle the 250,000 or so Okinawans in Bolivia, Peru, Brazil, and even Mexico. Between 1954 and 1962, approximately 17,000 Okinawans emigrated. Some were successful in establishing farming communities, like Colonia Okinawa in Bolivia. Others simply joined existing Okinawan/Japanese immigrant communities in Brazil and other countries. Many also perished in harsh conditions in Amazonian jungles and others returned after several years. Of course you can't really blame the Japanese government. Post war Japan was crowded and with few opportunities for employment. The government had to do something to relieve the situation and Okinawa was just a part of it.
By the 1960s there was some serious dialogue between the U.S. and Japan about Okinawa's reversion to Japan. Japan had recovered from the war and was becoming an economic power. Naturally, their politicians began to think of ways to increase Japan's territory and regaining Okinawa was one of them. It is ironic, because back in 1952 during the signing of the San Francisco Treaty, Japan was willing to let U.S. have trusteeship over Okinawa and eventually make it into a protectorate. This, the Japanese politicians thought, would guarantee that U.S. would always be present near by to protect Japan! How times change! Within a decade, after economic recovery, Japan was no longer thinking the same way. Now they "wanted their cake and eat it too!"
However, what really surprised many of these Japanese politicians was some of the reactions from Okinawans when reversion talks began in earnest. There were prominent Okinawan politicians who did not want the reversion to take place! Naturally, it was assumed that those who made their living off U.S. military presence, like those involved in various "entertainment" industries, would be against reversion, and indeed they were! But the objections of respected politicians and scholars really surprised the Japanese. However, most of this information was kept out of the Japanese press!
In the next blog I will discuss some of the interesting views of prominent Okinawans like Chotoku Ogimi, Akira Arakawa, and Genwa Nakasone.
Monday, March 16, 2015
"Plain Jane"
In Snap Shots there are 27 stories about various interesting people that I encountered during my globe-trotting days, both before and after Foreign Service. However, those 27 stories are far from all of the pieces that I have written and published through the years. One story that I published about 10 years ago in a hunting magazine had an interesting twist and deserves to be retold. The story was titled "Plain Jane" and it was about a somewhat mysterious (at least to me, and at that time!) woman that I met while duck hunting in northern California.
In the mid 1970's, when I was working at Chico State and we lived in the town of Gridley, I used to frequent the Gray Lodge Wildlife Management Area (5 minutes from my house!) to hunt ducks. Gray Lodge is a huge federally managed wildlife area that is open to waterfowl hunting during the season for a fee. It is a well known area for duck hunting in California and very popular with California as well as out of state duck hunters.
Many duck hunters came from afar (not everyone lived 5 minutes away like me!) and would camp out in the parking lot. There were quite a few out of state hunters as well as those from big cities like San Francisco and Los Angeles. Some would even go so far as to pitch tents, but most simply drove up and slept in their campers. Jane was one of those "campers" from LA area and drove up in her Toyota Chinook camper, one of those neat little jobs that I used to dream of owning. What made her unusual was that she was alone, accompanied only by her two dogs. Back in those days, it was highly unusual to see a woman hunting by herself, let alone camping! But Jane drove up from southern California a couple of times during the season and camped and shot ducks over the weekend with her two dogs.
What first caught my attention were her two dogs. They were unusual. Most hunters had their Labs or Goldens, some had their Chesapeaks or spaniels. In other words, they were common duck retrieving dogs. But Jane had a pair of Wire-haired Griffons. The Wire-haired Griffons look a lot like the German wire-haired pointer (Drathaar), except that they tend to be shorter and stockier with a lot longer hair. I had only seen Griffons in photographs before, but when I saw Jane walking the two dogs around the parking lot, I immediately recognized them. So I approached her and struck up a conversation. I introduced myself and she responded by simply saying, "I am Jane." She seemed surprised and pleased that I recognized the breed of her dogs. She commented that most people thought they were German wire-hairs.
Jane looked to be in her mid fifties or so. Actually, I couldn't tell, for all I knew she could have been in her mid forties! She was a very attractive, striking woman, despite her baggy men's clothing that she wore for duck hunting. She wore no jewelry or make-up, but had a men's old Omega Sea-Master wristwatch. As we chatted, she told me that she came up from LA area a couple of times a season to hunt ducks. She said there was no place quite like Gray Lodge in southern California.
When she noticed how I was drooling over her Toyota Camper, she opened the rear door and invited me to look inside. It was a luxurious interior, compared to my bare-bones camper shell on my Ford pick-up. I knew how much these Toyota Campers cost and I certainly couldn't afford one on my salary from Chico State. I would have been tempted to rob a bank to get one, if I thought I could get away with it!
Jane's shotgun was inside and I noted that it was an unusual gun. It was unusual in a sense that it was a model that was not very common. Also, duck guns tend to be hefty and rugged pieces, since they are normally treated somewhat roughly and have to fire stout loads. Jane's gun on the contrary was a light piece, usually used for upland shooting of smaller birds like quail. She saw the surprise on my face when I saw the gun. She smiled and said that she didn't need a cannon, that she hunted for pleasure and not to punish herself with a heavy gun and heavy recoil! That made sense, but I didn't say anything.
I saw Jane a few more times after that. She was always alone, and most male hunters who appeared to know her were very polite but kept their distance and she did not befriend them. One of the old timers, a regular at Gray Lodge told me that she had been coming to Gray Lodge for over 20 years, that she used to come with her husband, but she was now a widow. That was all that I knew about her.
Much later, and quite by accident, I found a shotgun in a southern California gun shop that reminded me of Jane's gun of long ago. When I asked the gun shop owner where he had gotten the gun, to my surprise he said he bought it from a woman that he knew for many years, a widow of a Hollywood big shot! I asked what her name was, and he surprised me even more when he said that it was Jane!
I learned more about Jane from the gun shop owner. It turned out that Jane came to Hollywood, from somewhere in the Midwest, to try her luck at the movies when she was young. It must have been in the 1940s. She had gotten a few bit parts, but before her acting career could develop, she met and married a wealthy Hollywood movie studio executive. Her husband was an avid hunter and the two, who were childless, went about hunting all over the state as well as foreign countries. Then sometime in the 1950s, her husband was killed in a plane crash and Jane became a widow.
Jane continued to live in the house that they owned in Beverly Hills, and became somewhat of a recluse, except for her hunting trips. Her avid interest in hunting and for hunting dogs which she had shared with her late husband became her sole passion in life. Apparently she died sometime in the mid 1990s. According to the gun shop owner, he knew her for quite sometime. Jane brought several shotguns and sold them to him when she decided that she wasn't going to hunt anymore. She told the gun shop owner that she had no heirs, so she had no one to pass on the shotguns and other belongings, so she was either giving them away or selling them. As he put it, "she was a real lady!"
I only knew her as Jane, plain Jane. I learned of her last name from that gun shop owner some 25 years after I had met her. The last name just didn't seem to go together for me, having known her for all those years without it, so to me she will always be "Plain Jane."
In the mid 1970's, when I was working at Chico State and we lived in the town of Gridley, I used to frequent the Gray Lodge Wildlife Management Area (5 minutes from my house!) to hunt ducks. Gray Lodge is a huge federally managed wildlife area that is open to waterfowl hunting during the season for a fee. It is a well known area for duck hunting in California and very popular with California as well as out of state duck hunters.
Many duck hunters came from afar (not everyone lived 5 minutes away like me!) and would camp out in the parking lot. There were quite a few out of state hunters as well as those from big cities like San Francisco and Los Angeles. Some would even go so far as to pitch tents, but most simply drove up and slept in their campers. Jane was one of those "campers" from LA area and drove up in her Toyota Chinook camper, one of those neat little jobs that I used to dream of owning. What made her unusual was that she was alone, accompanied only by her two dogs. Back in those days, it was highly unusual to see a woman hunting by herself, let alone camping! But Jane drove up from southern California a couple of times during the season and camped and shot ducks over the weekend with her two dogs.
What first caught my attention were her two dogs. They were unusual. Most hunters had their Labs or Goldens, some had their Chesapeaks or spaniels. In other words, they were common duck retrieving dogs. But Jane had a pair of Wire-haired Griffons. The Wire-haired Griffons look a lot like the German wire-haired pointer (Drathaar), except that they tend to be shorter and stockier with a lot longer hair. I had only seen Griffons in photographs before, but when I saw Jane walking the two dogs around the parking lot, I immediately recognized them. So I approached her and struck up a conversation. I introduced myself and she responded by simply saying, "I am Jane." She seemed surprised and pleased that I recognized the breed of her dogs. She commented that most people thought they were German wire-hairs.
Jane looked to be in her mid fifties or so. Actually, I couldn't tell, for all I knew she could have been in her mid forties! She was a very attractive, striking woman, despite her baggy men's clothing that she wore for duck hunting. She wore no jewelry or make-up, but had a men's old Omega Sea-Master wristwatch. As we chatted, she told me that she came up from LA area a couple of times a season to hunt ducks. She said there was no place quite like Gray Lodge in southern California.
When she noticed how I was drooling over her Toyota Camper, she opened the rear door and invited me to look inside. It was a luxurious interior, compared to my bare-bones camper shell on my Ford pick-up. I knew how much these Toyota Campers cost and I certainly couldn't afford one on my salary from Chico State. I would have been tempted to rob a bank to get one, if I thought I could get away with it!
Jane's shotgun was inside and I noted that it was an unusual gun. It was unusual in a sense that it was a model that was not very common. Also, duck guns tend to be hefty and rugged pieces, since they are normally treated somewhat roughly and have to fire stout loads. Jane's gun on the contrary was a light piece, usually used for upland shooting of smaller birds like quail. She saw the surprise on my face when I saw the gun. She smiled and said that she didn't need a cannon, that she hunted for pleasure and not to punish herself with a heavy gun and heavy recoil! That made sense, but I didn't say anything.
I saw Jane a few more times after that. She was always alone, and most male hunters who appeared to know her were very polite but kept their distance and she did not befriend them. One of the old timers, a regular at Gray Lodge told me that she had been coming to Gray Lodge for over 20 years, that she used to come with her husband, but she was now a widow. That was all that I knew about her.
Much later, and quite by accident, I found a shotgun in a southern California gun shop that reminded me of Jane's gun of long ago. When I asked the gun shop owner where he had gotten the gun, to my surprise he said he bought it from a woman that he knew for many years, a widow of a Hollywood big shot! I asked what her name was, and he surprised me even more when he said that it was Jane!
I learned more about Jane from the gun shop owner. It turned out that Jane came to Hollywood, from somewhere in the Midwest, to try her luck at the movies when she was young. It must have been in the 1940s. She had gotten a few bit parts, but before her acting career could develop, she met and married a wealthy Hollywood movie studio executive. Her husband was an avid hunter and the two, who were childless, went about hunting all over the state as well as foreign countries. Then sometime in the 1950s, her husband was killed in a plane crash and Jane became a widow.
Jane continued to live in the house that they owned in Beverly Hills, and became somewhat of a recluse, except for her hunting trips. Her avid interest in hunting and for hunting dogs which she had shared with her late husband became her sole passion in life. Apparently she died sometime in the mid 1990s. According to the gun shop owner, he knew her for quite sometime. Jane brought several shotguns and sold them to him when she decided that she wasn't going to hunt anymore. She told the gun shop owner that she had no heirs, so she had no one to pass on the shotguns and other belongings, so she was either giving them away or selling them. As he put it, "she was a real lady!"
I only knew her as Jane, plain Jane. I learned of her last name from that gun shop owner some 25 years after I had met her. The last name just didn't seem to go together for me, having known her for all those years without it, so to me she will always be "Plain Jane."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)