U.S. troop build-up on Guam faces opposition from locals

It has been ten months since Secretary of State Hillary Clinton re-signed an agreement with Japan officials to relocate Marine Corps Futenma air base. This agreement includes the relocation of 8,000 Marines from the U.S. military base in Japan to the small island of Guam, a U.S. territory.

The agreement was initially signed in 2006 to reduce U.S. military presence in Japan and lighten the load in the airbase which currently holds more than half of the 47,000 troops in Japan, according to news reports.

In a few months, the Marines will be greeted “Hafa Adai” or “Welcome”, as they set foot on Guam.

Recently, the Public Broadcasting System (PBS) reported on the military build-up and the infrastructural stress such a high influx of people would put on the island’s already-stretched resources. An estimated 18,000 troops and families are set to arrive by 2014, but with a population already exceeding 150,000 residents, Guam’s 212 square miles of land seems barely enough.

Also, with an unemployment rate of 9.3 percent, Guam would need much more than what it is currently receiving from its main economic source, the tourism industry. Reports put an additional $100 million in tax revenue that Guam will receive from the relocation, bringing jobs and revenue to the island. This could generate much needed funding for crumbling infrastructures and for education, not only to support the current population, but the additional military personnel and families as well.

But the troop build-up should be more than just throwing money at the island to make the relocation smoother. Though President Obama has approved $738 million to spend on Guam, with reports of additional tax revenue in the first year, community outreach should also be on the table.

Opening lines of communication between local governments and the military is essential and includes discussions and agreements about land use and preservation, military borders, crime rates, military and local tensions that could arise, as well as further discussions about paying for the troop relocation. Without these, the troop buildup will not move beyond the concerns and issues of crime and safety (for both military and local communities) that were prominent issues in Japan, and could be exacerbated by disenfranchisement and resentment for the relocation.

But such frustrations over the military’s presence on Guam are nothing new.

During WWII, Guam served as a vital military base for U.S. troops in the Pacific and was the site of many battles during the war. Many Chamorros, the island’s indigenous people, fought against the Japanese invasion of the island, but many of their descendants are still fighting for war reparations. Several locals have voiced concern over the military’s continued presence and the tolls it is taking on the island–and that the U.S. have little concern over the people of the island.

Guam remains one of the 16 non-self-governing territories in the world, according to the United Nations, and elects one non-voting delegate to the U.S. House of Representatives. So when changes are made around the island by the federal government, there’s an assumption that not much can be done.

Despite this, Guam maintains one of the highest recruitment rates for the military, according to the PBS report, and pride in the island remains high. The island’s relationship with the U.S. is a long and complex one, bound by history and continues to be shaped by the current wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. But mostly, Guam’s contributions to the nation remain relatively unheard, unknown, and unrecognized, despite its strategic importance to the military.

The island’s cultural treasures remain a secret from the rest of the U.S. and its significance in U.S. history left unwritten in many books. Perhaps this time around, as the island prepares for the build-up to support the nation’s defense plans, Guam would be more than just a footnote in U.S. history.