Dr. Yasukatsu Matsushima

The Association of Comprehensive Studies for Independence of the Lew Chewans (ACSILs)

Before the UNITED NATIONS

1. Introduction
    
My name is Dr. Yasukatsu Matsushima, and I am a Ryukyuan (Okinawan) who was born and raised in the Ryukyus. The Ryukyus consists of 160 islands in the Pacific Ocean surrounded by Japan, Taiwan, China, and the Philippines. It is populated by about 1.4 million people. I am co-director of The Association of Comprehensive Studies for Independence of the Lew Chewans (ACSILs). The object of our association is to conduct academic research, discuss the Independence of the Ryukyus, and promote international cooperation to actualize independence.  
　 
Even though the Ryukyus has been subordinated to Japan, the sovereignty and the right of self-determination of Ryukyuans with their unique history, languages, culture and religious beliefs, should be preserved for Ryukyuans.

2. A Brief History of the Ryukyus

The Ryukyus was an independent country called the Ryukyu Kingdom from the 14 th century until 1879. In 1879, the Japanese Government annexed the Ryukyus by military force and started to rule the Ryukyus as its colony. This was a serious violation of Section 2 Article 51 and Article 52 of the Vienna Convention.
   
The Japanese Government imposed colonialist policies resulting in the dispossession of our lands and the prohibition of Ryukyuan languages in schools in an attempt to efface our languages, culture, and customs.
     
In 1945, the Japanese Government used the Ryukyus as a battle ground even though it was heavily populated by civilians. The number of Ryukyuan fatalities reached around 150 thousand, or about one-fourth of the population of the Ryukyus at that time. Ryukyuans who spoke in their native tongue were slaughtered by Japanese soldiers because it was not understandable to the Japanese and was prohibited during the war. Others were ordered to commit group suicides by Japanese soldiers because they were thought to be a burden to Japanese soldiers.
   
After the Pacific War, the Ryukyus were placed under the direct control of the US Military Government until 1972. The United States Civil Administration of the Ryukyu Islands forcefully confiscated land at gunpoint in order to construct military bases. 
   
In the 1950s, US Marine bases were moved from the Japanese Islands to the Ryukyus. In 1962, following the United Nations Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples and The Charter of the United Nations, the Ryukyuan Legislative body passed a resolution, stating that the US rule over the Ryukyus violated the principles of self-determination and territorial non-aggrandizement prescribed in the Charter of the United Nations. This resolution was sent to all 104 member states of the UN at that time.
    
In 1972, the colonial administration of the Ryukyus reverted from the US to Japan. The strong wishes of the Ryukyuans to remove all US bases were ignored. The military policies on the Ryukyus that have been dictated by the US and Japanese governments unilaterally to ignore Ryukyuan claims. The colonization of the Ryukyus is clearly evident militarily, politically, economically.
   
The large number of US bases are supported economically by the Japanese Government under the auspices of the U.S.- Japan Security Treaty and the Status of Forces Agreement. The power of this Agreement is beyond those of Japanese Constitution.
    
In 1972, the Japanese Government instituted the Okinawa Development Agency, which has made the Ryukyus an economic colony of Japan. This agency has facilitated the destruction of the environment in the Ryukyus. The Japanese Government has also used development funds to force US military bases onto the Ryukyus.
    
In 1996, I participated in the UN Working Group on Indigenous Peoples. In 2011, I was on the UN Special Committee on Decolonization as a member of the Guam Government to lobby for the decolonization and demilitarization of Guam and the Ryukyus. Thus far Ryukyuans have taken part in several UN organizations to decolonize and demilitarize the Ryukyus.
   
In 2006, Dr. Deu Deu Dien, a special reporter from the UN Commission on Human Rights, came to survey military bases on the Ryukyus. He reported that the Ryukyuan situation is abnormal and the Japanese Government discriminates against Ryukyuans. In 2008, the UN Human Rights Committee recognized that Ryukyuans are indigenous peoples and that their own cultural and language education must be promoted. In 2010, the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination stated that US military base problem on the Ryukyus is tantamount to racial discrimination.

3. Towards the Demilitarization of the Ryukyus
  
74% of all US military bases in the Japanese have been concentrated in the Ryukyus, which covers only 0.6% of all Japanese territory. Many military bases are located in small and densely populated islands. That is why there are so many accidents and crimes committed by US personnel.
    
The Government justifies the presence of the bases in the name of “public interest.” However, Ryukyuans argue that they suffer unusually from the consequences of the military bases and military training: permanent noise linked to military air traffic, plane and helicopter crashes, accidents due to bullets or “whiz-bangs”, oil pollution, fires due to air maneuvers, and criminal acts by American military officers. The noise due to airplanes and helicopters is higher than the level permissible by law and causes severe health consequences, including school problems in which children cannot concentrate and lessons are regularly interrupted by military airplanes.
   
We have faced such serious damage as field fires and bomb accidents caused by live ammunition practice, plane and helicopter crashes, deafening noise pollution, traffic accidents, the destruction of environmental and historical sites, erosion of indigenous cultural heritage, infringements upon the daily life of the Ryukyuans and so on. From 1972 to 2010, there have been 5,705 military related accidents and incidents.
   
Two of the most shocking cases are the rape of a 12-year-old school girl by three US soldiers in 1995 and the 2004 US helicopter crash at Okinawa International University. This helicopter belonged to Futenma Air Base. At that time, Okinawa Prefectural police officers were driven out, and they were prohibited from participating in the investigation. Victims received no compensation.
   
The Japanese Government hasn’t changed US-Japan Status of Forces Agreement in spite of the strong outrage amongst almost all Ryukyuans. This Agreement gives the US military personnel special privileges to refuse handing over criminal suspects to Japanese authorities and on-the-spot inspections.
 
According to a poll carried by The Ryukyu Shimpo (a local newspaper) and Okinawa Television Broadcasting,83 percent of respondents oppose relocation of the Futenma base within Ryukyus on May 30,31 in 2015. The Okinawa Prefectural Governor Takeshi Onaga and Nago City Mayor Susumu Inafuku also refuse to accept new bases anywhere in the Ryukyus.
  
We Ryukyuans insist that the militarization on the Ryukyus is a direct affront to the process of decolonization under the UN Special Committee on Decolonization (C– 24).
  
Ryukyuans must have the freedom to exercise their right of self-determination, eliminate discrimination, and protect and promote their human rights as an equal member of the international community according to the two International Covenants on Human Rights, the Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Cooperation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, the Vienna Declaration on Human Rights, and UN Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples.

4. Request for the Inscription of the Ryukyus into the UN List of Non-Self Governing Territories

The Ryukyus are a colony of Japan and US Governments because both have forced numerous military bases onto the Ryukyus for 70 years despite strong protest.
   
We petition that the Ryukyus once again become an independent state in order to be liberated from this colonial situation. We insist that the inscription of the Ryukyus into the UN list of Non-Self- Governing Territories under the purview of C-24 should be done as the obligation of UN.
    
We need the purview of UN Special Committee on Decolonization for Ryukyuans to live on our islands peacefully as human beings by exercising the right of all peoples to self-determination.

Niifaiyou (thank you)

Summary

The recent fluctuations in China's currency typify the best and worst of a globalized world, where developments in one place can instantly change the political and financial calculations of governments in others. For most of human history, the communities, cultures and economies of the world existed independently of one another, separated as they were by vast distances and difficult terrain. It would, for instance, take months or even years for news of China to reach Europe across the great Silk Road trading route during the height of its use some 1,000 years ago. Even then, the communities along that route could hardly be considered entirely coherent.

But that is clearly no longer the case. And now, as China continues to adjust the yuan, markets throughout the world will react accordingly, even as they react differently. 

Analysis

There were several reasons behind China's decision, but it nevertheless came as a surprise to many. In search of stability, China has tied its currency to the U.S. dollar since 1994, usually at a low value relative to the dollar. During the 2000s, the connection helped China keep its exports competitive, with the developed world consuming its output. The West's economic collapse in 2008 meant that this model could no longer function, and China began trying to grow consumption levels so that the domestic consumer might come to fill the hole left by the faded international market.

Changing China

Transforming from an export-led economic model to a consumption-led one could be described as changing from being like Germany to being like the United States, and China has tried to reproduce some of the advantages that the United States has created for itself in the same role. One of those advantages is the dominant position of the U.S. dollar in world trade, which means U.S. consumers can go deeply into debt and global demand for dollars will delay the moment at which this comes to a head by those debts being catastrophically called in. Thus China sought to grow international usage of the yuan, making strides in its attempts to do so. The next step would be for the yuan to be accepted into the International Monetary Fund's "currency," the Special Drawing Right. However, the IMF has said that China would need to liberalize its currency before such a step could take place. The IMF makes the decision every five years, with one originally set for November this year, though the institution recently announced that any changes will not be implemented until October 2016.

Meanwhile, the peg to the dollar aided China's strategy as the strengthening dollar over the past two years enabled the yuan to rise alongside it relative to the world's other floating currencies, empowering Chinese consumers and helping the changeover from an export- to consumption-based economy. But low global demand has not created a good climate for such change, and growth has been unsteady during this period, slipping to 7 percent this year. The baton pass from an export-driven to consumption-driven economy is risky, and exports need to hold up long enough for the Chinese consumer — and building blocks such as the reserve currency — to develop. When export numbers for July showed an 8.3 percent fall year-on-year, all signs seemed to point toward aloosening of controls, which would both please the IMF and, if the Chinese currency continued to weaken as many in the market expected it to, help boost exports. 

The Repercussions

In the globalized world, where every economy is interconnected with every other economy, the effects of a shift like China's can be felt everywhere. The world's largest economies have tended to move in concert throughout modern financial history, with central banks choosing to tighten or loosen interest rates, often in quick succession. But actions over the past two years have diverged from the rule. While one group is now considering raising interest rates for the first time since 2008, another group is still pursuing quantitative easing programs, which are partly designed to devalue currencies and stimulate growth. China's dislocation from the dollar, particularly if the yuan devalues further against the dollar, moves the country from the first group toward the second, with clear consequences: 

The U.S. and U.K.

Following the 2008 crisis, the United States and the United Kingdom were arguably the first to adopt forthright monetary policies to stimulate their economies. Quantitative easing was pursued on both sides of the Atlantic, and, possibly as a result, these two economies have led the recovery in the past few years. Consequently, for the last 12 months the financial world has focused on a key question:When will the U.S. Federal Reserve raise interest rates for the first time since 2008? The Bank of England is wrestling with a similar dilemma. The interest rate rise will be seen as the first step toward "normality" following the extended period of ultra-low rates, and capital has flowed from emerging markets to the United States in anticipation.

Only sporadic growth and low productivity levels, along with stubbornly low inflation figures in both countries, have caused their central banks to delay the rate rise, but recent strong job creation figures led many in the market to expect the United States to make the change in September 2015 (and the United Kingdom in early-to-mid 2016). The U.S. economy does not particularly rely on exports, insulating it from some of the drawbacks of currency strength, which usually hurts exports. But China's latest move creates another currency against which the dollar can appreciate. Now, a rate hike would likely strengthen the dollar even more, to the extent that it might become an issue for the U.S. economy. China's reshuffle, then, may have changed the answer to the biggest financial question of the year; market expectations for the rate rise have slipped back to December and may even move to 2016.

Emerging Markets

Emerging markets have suffered a torrid few years. Commodity exporters in Asia, Africa and Latin America enjoyed a boom period between 2000 and 2008, when China was consuming their raw materials as part of its production machine and Chinese investment sustained prices for a few years after. But global commodity prices have fallen since 2011, with the economies of Brazil, Nigeria,Russia and several parts of Asia suffering the most, as evidenced by their steadily falling currencies. The yuan's depreciation reduces China's spending power, and unsurprisingly emerging market currencies have continued to decline. Every time the yuan weakens, it creates more problems for these countries, as many welcomed Western capital during the good times and now have sizable dollar-denominated loans on private balance sheets that are becoming harder to pay back.

Japan and the Eurozone

Meanwhile, the depreciating yuan has made Japan and the eurozone's currencies float upward. The development is problematic because both have undertaken quantitative easing policies, in part to devalue their currencies. 

Since coming to power in December 2012, Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe has been pursuing a three-pronged strategy designed to shock Japan out of its economic funk of the past two decades. The first of these "arrows" has involved monetary easing, partly to drop the yen's value and stimulate export-led growth and inflation. The plan has not been working. Inflation has remained stubbornly far below its 2 percent target, exports in July were down from the year before, and growth has been highly unreliable, with second-quarter GDP shrinking at an annualized rate of 1.6 percent. Even before China's currency reorganization, talk had begun that the pace of quantitative easing, already redoubled in 2014, would need to be boosted further. Falling Asian currencies relative to Japan will only increase these calls, but there are complications to redoubling quantitative easing.

So-called Abenomics has been losing public support. Even within the administration, Abe and Bank of Japan head Haruhiko Kuroda have been divided on the best way to proceed. The former has pushed for more easing. The latter, perhaps more aware of the complications from the Bank of Japan already owning a sizable portion of the available market in Japanese sovereign bonds, has pushed for fiscal consolidation. This difference of opinion over Abe's decisions, such as to delay a planned consumption tax hike, and other policies regarding Japan's military, have garnered the administration its lowest popularity rating since coming to power (in July it was 38 percent, down from 46 percent in June). Abe's grand experiment is on the ropes, constraining the prime minister's ability to double down both politically and economically. The time may be approaching for Abenomics to be called off. Under such circumstances, it is hard to imagine Abe remaining in his post.

In Europe, the European Central Bank's quantitative easing program has also weakened the currency, improving eurozone economies. Talk about the ECB extending quantitative easing past its scheduled end in September 2016 has already begun. The decision would not technically be as problematic as in Japan, since Europe's quantitative easing has not gone on as long and the ECB could overcome any lack of available bonds by extending its own self-imposed limits to purchase more sovereign bonds. Still, if Europe considers extending its program, there could be difficulties convincing Germany of quantitative easing's merits, potentially creating undue political issues at a time when the Continent is already deeply fragmented.