Sabah Sarawak Rights - Australia New Zealand (SSRANZ)

MEDIA REPORTED MA63 INFRINGEMENTS BUT AVOIDED MENTION OF CALLS FOR SARAWAK INDEPENDENCE

KUCHING: The federal government has on numerous occasions infringed the Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63) and the Federal Constitution since the formation of Malaysia, alleged a former state lawmaker, Dominique Ng.

The former Padungan assemblyman said such infringement had brought the people to question the validity of the MA63.

Ng said the federal government did not seek consensus from the State Legislative Assembly (DUN) prior to tabling and passing the Petroluem Development Act 1974 and Territorial Sea Act 2012.

He quoted a scholar from Sabah as saying that the federal government had infringed the MA63 at least 50 times, to date.

“Even if there was only a one-time infringement, it is still an infringement, let alone 50 times. This says a lot about whether the MA63 still has legal force,” he said during a talk organised by the Voice of Sarawak at a restaurant here Saturday night.

Ng asserted that Malaysia should cease to exist if the MA63 had no legal force.

He felt that Sarawakians had nothing to lose given that their home state was never treated fairly or as an equal partner since the formation of Malaysia.

According to him, a team formed by 15 counsels is in the midst of bringing a suit against the federal government in the hope of seeing the state’s rights restored.

He said the Advocates Association of Sarawak (AAS) could be rendering support to the team in filing the case against Putrajaya.

“Suing the federal government is part of the process to determine whether the MA63 still has legal force,” he added.

Former Batu Lintang assemblyman Voon Lee Shan, who was among the speakers at the event, said Sarawak was not treated as an equal partner since the formation of Malaysia.

He claimed that Sarawak had wound up as a ‘colony’ in Malaysia.

Pointing out that the Malaysian Parliament presently has 222 MPs, Voon said the combined number of MPs from Sarawak and Sabah did not even make one-third of the total.

“In other words, if Parliament is to table a bill, the bill can be easily passed without any vote from Sarawak and Sabah.”

He charged that the reason Federation of Malaya welcomed Sarawak and Sabah on board to form Malaysia over five decades ago was because of the natural resources both the Bornean states have, particularly the oil and gas in Sarawak.

He also called upon Sarawakians to reject Peninsula-based political parties; namely Democratic Action Party (DAP), Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR), Parti Amanah Negara (Amanah) and Parti Pribumi Bersatu Malaysia (Bersatu) in the next state election.

Source: Borneo Post

At an end of Chinese New Year dinner and gathering of 300 political activists in Kuching, Sarawak lawyer Dominique Ng reminded the audience that the Sarawak independence movement was launched in 2013. He stressed that 22 July 1963 was officially recognized as Sarawak Independence Day in 2016 by the Sarawak state government.

A senior lawyer Voon Lee Shan talked about the advantages of national independence and ended the evening's talks with a strong call for Sarawak independence.

The evening highlighted talks on the Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA83). It began with Ms Lina Soo President of STAR Reform raising issues on the loss of Sarawak's MA63 rights including Federal control over Sarawak oil and gas resources, issues with Petronas and Sarawak's attempt to regain control with OMO the still current 1958 Mining law.

She outlined the constitutional changes which have illegally altered the terms of MA63 such as the Petroleum Development Act 1974, ACT 354 and the Territorial Seas Act 2012 and diminished Sarawak MA63 rights and powers.

Patrick Anek a senior Sarawak lawyer talked about his experience as a BN member of parliament. He revealed that in 1961 Malaya had to borrow $200 million from Brunei (editor's comment: to administer Malaya which was facing bankruptcy).

A SHELL officer had disclosed to the Tunku that Sarawak held far greater petroleum resources which were not yet explored. (Editor: This fired the Malayan prime minister's long-held desire to take over Sarawak to use its resources to develop Malaya).

Mr Anek also talked about how the Federal Government declared a state of emergency in Sarawak to remove CM Ningkan who was fighting for Borneonization resisting the Malayan takeover which was confirmed in the illegal enactment to the PDA74.

Dominque Ng, also Sarawak lawyer and former State Assembly (DUN) member gave a brief history of how the Sarawak independence movement was launched in 2013 and his legal team's plan to sue the Federal Gov't for multiple violations of MA63.

He said MA63 was void ab initio (invalid from the beginning) for a number of reasons including the fact that Sarawak & Sabah were colonies and not independent states with power or capacity to make treaties like MA63.

Another local senior lawyer and former DUN member, Voon Lee Shan spoke out strongly for Sarawak independence.

He talked about the advantages of independence which he had summed up in a booklet.

He pointed out that if Sarawak controlled its petroleum resources, all Sarawakians would be very rich. This received a round of applause and he ended his talk with a loud call for Sarawak independence.

(Editor's comment: From a historical perspective, the Sarawak independence movement began in 1946 when the anti-cession movement began in opposition to the UK annexation of our country after 100 years of independence. This movement continued into the 1960s as the struggle against Malaysia for Sarawak independence).

The longer the construction at Henoko continues, the more resentment there will be towards the U.S.

By Robert Kajiwara / February 20, 2019

Reading time: 6 minutes.

[Robert Kajiwara is an Okinawan-Hawaiian singer-songwriter and cultural ambassador. He is the director of the Peace for Okinawa Coalition. For more information, visit www.RobKajiwara.com. ]

The construction of a controversial new U.S. military base is sparking increased calls for Okinawa to regain its independence.

The construction is destroying a rare coral reef at a place called Henoko, located toward the northern part of Okinawa Island. The reef contains hundreds of rare and endangered species, and is being called the second-most biodiverse in the world, only behind the Great Barrier Reef. If the base is completed, the reef would be almost entirely destroyed.

The indigenous Okinawan people have long been against this base, but have continually had their voices ignored by both Japan and the United States. The Okinawan government has done everything in its power to stop the construction, including removing all permits for the construction to legally continue, though the U.S. and Japan have ignored these requirements.

Though the governor of Okinawa, Denny Tamaki, has requested meetings with U.S. government officials to discuss the matter, he has been repeatedly denied. The U.S. government maintains a stance that this is a domestic issue between Japan and Okinawa, and that the Japanese government is “committed to working with the people of Okinawa to find a solution,” a claim which Okinawans, as well as supporters from all over the world, find frustratingly ignorant and dismissive.

“We are past our boiling point,” said Gov. Tamaki in his first meeting with a new Okinawa area coordinator for the U.S. military.

A general feeling is that both the U.S. and Japan are tone-deaf when it comes to Okinawa. Because both Japan and the U.S. have repeatedly ignored and violated the will of the Okinawan people and their democratically elected government, calls are increasing for Okinawa to regain its independence.

Okinawa was an independent nation known as “Ryukyu” until 1879, when Japan annexed it. Though Japan would go on to annex many other nations before and during World War II, all of those nations received their independence back after the war; only Ryukyu did not. Instead, it has been used by both Japan and the United States for military bases.

During World War II, as Japan began to lose, it increased its defenses on Okinawa, planning to sacrifice it in order to protect the Japanese homeland. During the Battle of Okinawa, between 120,000-200,000 Okinawans were killed, which was one-quarter to one-third of the population. Thousands of Okinawan civilians were murdered by the Japanese military, who feared Okinawans would turn on them and join the Allies.

A Military Sacrifice?

Many believe that Japan is once again setting Okinawa up to be sacrificed in another potential attack by increasing Okinawa’s military burden. Though Okinawa makes up just 0.6 percent of Japan’s landmass, it contains 70 percent of its military. This inordinate amount of military causes numerous problems for the Okinawan people, including increased crime, pollution, noise, and safety hazards. It also creates a tremendous economic burden for Okinawans. The military contributes just around 5.6 percent to the Okinawan economic, but takes up 15.6 percent of its land, and around 30 percent of its arable land, creating a huge economic deficit.

Many Okinawans see independence — or at the very least greater autonomy — as the only way to reduce or eliminate their base burden.

A survey conducted by the Ryukyu Shimpo, the largest newspaper of the Ryukyu Islands, released in 2017 indicates that less than half of Ryukyuans are satisfied with the status quo of being a prefecture of Japan. In addition to the base issues, many are concerned with the low incomes that many Ryukyuans experience — two issues that are intricately intertwined. The large amount of quality land that the military occupies handicaps the Okinawan economy, preventing Okinawans from using it in more productive ways.

One of the most curious things about this base at Henoko is the question of why it is being built in the first place.

“Independence equals autonomy,” explains Tursi. “Autonomy leads to creativity, protection (emotionally and physically), escape from poverty, and better education. Independence is important to maintain your dignity. People don’t realize that they’re colonized — psychologically colonized, so you’re doing things that you don’t even realize you’re doing.” But under independence, she explains, Okinawans can achieve their own freedom and develop their own ways of doing things.

One of the most curious things about this base at Henoko is the question of why it is being built in the first place. Both the U.S. and Japan have previously stated that the base is not necessary for defense or security purposes. The project is billions of dollars over budget due to serious construction flaws and the softness of the ground at the proposed site. (The sand at the location has been described as “mayonnaise-like” in substance.) The area also happens to be over a major earthquake fault line.

But the base is being built at the urging of Japan’s Prime Minister Shinzo Abe. Abe initially agreed that Japan would cover the costs for the base, though that was before the severe cost overruns, and in any case, the U.S. would still be required to pay for the troops and weapons.

“Even though the Obama administration was well aware of the conflicts created in Okinawa, both political and environmental, through the expansion of U.S. military bases they were consistent in implementing the projection-of-power militarization aspects of Obama’s Pivot to Asia whose cornerstone purpose was to maintain U.S. hegemonic interests while containing a rising China,” said peace activist Jan R. Weinberg.

“In my opinion the naivety of Congress has been exposed through their recent ratification of the Asia Reassurance Initiative Act of 2018(ARIA) which builds on Obama’s Asia Pivot.”

An independent Ryukyu could determine for itself whether or not to allow U.S. or other foreign military bases in its territory, and if so, to what extent. But in all likelihood Ryukyu will demand a gradual removal of all U.S. bases, due to the sheer unpopularity of the U.S. military in Ryukyu.

The current attitude of the U.S. government deferring entirely to the Japanese government, while ignoring the will of Okinawans, certainly isn’t helping America’s reputation. The longer the construction at Henoko continues, the more resentment there will be toward the U.S. This resentment, just like the damage being done to Okinawa’s environment, is likely to be permanent.

Community Voices aims to encourage broad discussion on many topics of community interest. It’s kind of a cross between Letters to the Editor and op-eds. This is your space to talk about important issues or interesting people who are making a difference in our world. Columns generally run about 800 words (yes, they can be shorter or longer) and we need a photo of the author and a bio. We welcome video commentary and other multimedia formats. Send to news@civilbeat.org. The opinions and information expressed in Community Voices are solely those of the authors and not Civil Beat.

Source: Civilbeat

Okinawa is a Japanese prefecture comprising more than 150 islands in the East China Sea between Taiwan and Japan's mainland. It's known for its tropical climate, broad beaches and coral reefs, as well as World War II sites. On the largest island (also named Okinawa) is Okinawa Prefectural Peace Memorial Museum, commemorating a massive 1945 Allied invasion, and Churaumi Aquarium, home to whale sharks and manta rays.

Population: 1.423 million (31 Mar 2012)

Capital: Naha

Governor: Denny Tamaki

Weather: 21 °C, Wind SW at 14 km/h, 82% Humidity

Why America Should Pull Out of Okinawa

America and its allies will be just as safe—or safer—without the Marines on Okinawa. Let’s bring them home.

by Jarek Buss

What is worth fighting for? Which “national interests” are worth American lives? At the end of the day, this is the yardstick for measuring the necessity of U.S. military involvement around the world. In any region where the answer is “none,” U.S. forces should be pulled out. In any region where the answer is “some,” U.S. forces should be tailored to defend those specific interests from likely threats.

Leading with a clear enunciation of real national interests—instead of groupthink, historical precedent, or inertia—opens up an array of locations where the U.S. military can do less without an adverse effect on American security. Okinawa is a prime example.

As U.S.-Japan bilateral defense cooperation continues to improve, not only can the United States reduce its military presence on Okinawa without jeopardizing its interests in East Asia, but doing so will actually bolster the U.S.-Japan alliance.

Source: National Interest

____________________________________________

HISTORY OF OKINAWA

Prehistory (Paleolithic era – Gusuku era)

There are several theories surrounding the origin of the Minatogawa people who are believed to have lived in Okinawa 22,000 years ago, one suggesting China being their origin while others speculating their origin to be Indonesia, Australia, and other regions.

Life was centered on hunting, gathering, and fishing during the Shell Mound era, which lasted until around the 10th century.

During the Gusuku era between the 12th and 15th centuries, life transitioned to revolve around farming, and it can be seen from historical sites that the population grew rapidly during this era.

Sanzan Era

Further into the Gusuku era, the conflict began to erupt among regional chiefs in the 13th century, and the three political spheres of influence, Hokuzan, Chuzan, and Nanzan were eventually formed. All three regions traded with China / the Ming dynasty and embraced the rich culture from the continent.

The three regions were unified in 1429 by Sho Hashi and became the Ryukyu Kingdom, the first unified regime to be established in Ryukyu.

Great Trade Era – Disposition of Ryukyu

The Ryukyu Kingdom actively conducted trades with Japan and China as well as Luzon (now the Philippines) and Siam (now Thailand) in Southeast Asia among other nearby countries and was even recognized by the Europeans as Lequios or Goresu.

In order to entertain the envoys of the Chinese emperor who were dispatched each time the king of Ryukyu changed, the unique culture of the Ryukyu Kingdom, including performing arts, crafts, and food, became more refined.

However, in 1591, the invasion of Satsuma (now Kagoshima) began, and the Ryukyu Kingdom was placed under the control of Satsuma in 1606. While visiting Edo as a subsumption ritual for Japan, Ryukyu continued its tributary trades with China, but in 1875 during the Meiji era, the Ryukyu Kingdom was abolished, followed by orders to terminate the tributary relationship with the Qing Dynasty to comply with the political system of Japan, and Okinawa Prefecture was established.

Before the Wars – World War II

After the establishment of Okinawa Prefecture in 1879, the Japanese central government appointed Naoyoshi Nabeshima to become the first governor. Okinawa underwent modernization during that period, but a fierce ground battle unfolded during World War II that involved the general population, causing severe damage both, in terms of human lives and culturally.

After World War II – Present

In 1945, as World War II came to a close, Okinawa was placed under American rule, and until it was reverted to Japan on May 15, 1972, it went through a different history from that of the Mainland with heavy influence from the United States.

Since then, the G8 Summit (G8 Kyushu-Okinawa Summit) of 2000 and other international events were held, the Gusuku Sites and Related Properties of the Kingdom of Ryukyu were registered under the World Cultural Heritage Sites by UNESCO in 2000, and today, Okinawa is highly received as one of the leading resort destinations in Japan by not only domestic travellers but also international travellers.

Source: Facebook