Farewell Oahu: Hawaiian Secession
Recent elections in Hawaii have revitalized the possibility of the state seceding from the United States, returning to the status of a kingdom and allowing its native people to politically regain control of their island. After a series of hearings in 2014, the United States interior department, based on Hawaiian consensus, decided to offer the state “procedures for re-establishing a formal government-to-government relationship.”
The creation of these procedures has led to upcoming elections for candidates wishing to be a part of a convention, also known as an “aha,” that “will meet in February to discuss the necessity of a Native Hawaiian government and how to approach its formation.” The possibility of Hawaii regaining its kingdomship is not a sudden event; Hawaiian nationalist movements have been growing rapidly since 2011. While the number of Hawaiian nationalists continues to grow, it is still far from encompassing the majority of Hawaiians—does this make Hawaiian secession a valid concern?
Hawaii’s ability to sustain itself is questionable without the support of the United States. Becoming an independent nation could open new partnerships with countries unaffiliated with the United States, but Hawaii would still lose one of the world’s strongest economic foundations. When a hurricane strikes, there is no U.S. federal aid. In the event of an attack on the island, a military does not exist. Islanders must also consider what kind of health care system they would develop. Before Hawaii can sustain itself as an individual nation, infrastructure must be addressed. If there are no specific changes regarding these aspects of the political structure, it becomes questionable as to why Hawaiians seek secession in the first place.
Those looking for secession aim to protect Native Hawaiian rights, including favorable housing loans, a land trust program, health care and educational and cultural grants. But these only pertain to ‘Native’ Hawaiians, and according to the state’s census in 2014, only ten percent of the population are considered Native Hawaiian. This creates more tension in the discussion of a Hawaiian government, particularly regarding the diversity in a Hawaiian government. A government that is formed to become a voice of a body of people but only represents ten percent of the population begins to lose its sense of democracy. Yes, this will give the minority a necessary voice, but it is a drastic change that leaves out the majority of the population. Like most political dilemmas, there is a need for a solution somewhere in between.
The first step in easing Native Hawaiian-American relations is to address their pseudo-illegal annexation into the United States. Hawaii was never officially annexed into the United States by a treaty. Unlike every other addition to the United States, such as the Louisiana Purchase and the Republic of Texas, Hawaii joined the U.S. by a coup that overthrew the established constitutional monarchy. The coup leaders hoped for President Grover Cleveland to immediately create a treaty, but that never materialized. In technicality, Hawaii is an occupation of the U.S., meaning it has equal right to call itself a part of the U.S. as well as call the U.S. a part of it. Going through the formality of a treaty may not have an effect on the functionality of Hawaiian politics, but it would show recognition of Hawaii’s political identity.
Opening negotiations for a proper treaty would allow Hawaii to introduce their political concerns to the federal government. A treaty could be a platform for which Native Hawaiians voice their desire for secured rights and assurances as the original settlers of the islands. This will then allow Native Hawaiians to negotiate certain assurances similar to those the U.S. has given to Native Americans. Rather than taking an extreme approach to secure benefits of being an original islander by seceding from a nation that generously supports it, introducing written standards and laws regarding the status of Native Hawaiians would remedy concerns in a mutually benefitting fashion. The Hawaiian minority’s requests are acknowledged while the majority of the population remains generally unaffected except by the formalities regarding the statehood of their residence.
This plan is by no means unrealistic; in fact, because of current leadership in Washington, Hawaii has not seen a better time in the past fifty years to fight for its recognition. President Barack Obama, born and raised in Hawaii, has been a supporter of Hawaii’s attempts to gain Congressional recognition throughout his presidency. Although most efforts have been redirected through the Executive Branch due to lack of Congressional cooperation, if Hawaiians seriously invest into their concerns, the Obama administration is willing to listen and act.