Opinion letters

Author: Various Authors

What next for PR after Vieques?
by Richard R. Tryon
Humacao

Without Congressional representation to deal with the crisis of Vieques, what will main land Americans tell their representatives to do upon learning of the great success of the united people of PR, who have stopped the U.S. Navy from using its most important training base?

The following AP story below has been widely read in every state of the U.S.
Here is what mainland Americans are reading about PR and Vieques. See commentary that follows:

Navy To Reduce Training on Vieques

The Associated Press Dec 4 1999

"VIEQUES, Puerto Rico (AP) - Hopes for a deal ending the crisis over the U.S. Navy's use of the island of Vieques collapsed when Puerto Rican leaders, in a show of rare unity, rejected a compromise offered by President Clinton.

Clinton's long-awaited decision Friday appeared to constitute a significant concession to Puerto Rico's demands. Clinton agreed to immediately end live
bombings - which had been the root of the crisis - and phase out all operations on the outlying, populated island within five years.

But Clinton insisted that some training - and the use of at least inert bombs - was essential and would resume next spring. ``I understand the long-standing concerns of residents of the island,'' Clinton said in the statement. But he added: ``I cannot send our servicemen and women into harm's way if they have not been adequately trained.'' Emphasizing the importance of the island to military readiness, the Clinton administration dangled a $40 million incentive to try to persuade Vieques' 9,000 residents, who are U.S. citizens, to let the training continue.

A somber group of Puerto Rican leaders headed by Gov. Pedro Rossello - a staunch Clinton ally and supporter of U.S. statehood for the Spanish-speaking
territory - gathered in San Juan to reject the compromise package. Puerto Rican leaders have demanded a cessation of all training and the immediate departure of the Navy from Vieques.

Rossello went so far as to suggest that Clinton had led him astray - causing his office to issue a series of unduly optimistic assessments earlier in the day.
``Personally I feel deceived with the position that's been taken because it doesn't faithfully reflect what we have been discussing with the president,'' Rossello said.

The Navy operations have been a target of occasional protests and legal actions since the 1960s, but the controversy erupted into a crisis after a civilian security guard was killed by stray bombs on the range last April.

The Navy then suspended training on Vieques but has sought a way to resume it. Navy Secretary Richard Danzig reiterated Friday that the island, a key training ground for the ships and aircraft of the Navy's Atlantic Fleet since World War II, offers ``the most rigorous, realistic training'' facility available.

It was not clear what would happen now to the several dozen protesters - most of them independence activists - who have for seven months occupied the Navy range.
Because Clinton delayed the resumption of the exercises for months - and sent the USS Eisenhower battle group, which had been headed here, to train off the U.S. mainland instead - all sides appeared to have bought some time.

Ruben Berríos, the independence party leader and front-man for the Vieques protesters, called Clinton's offer a considerable - if insufficient - step forward and
called on all island leaders to join him at his beach camp to press for their full demands. ``If we maintain the original consensus and civil disobedience we can defeat the Navy,'' he told the AP.

Rossello also won support Friday from an array of island leaders who assembled at his mansion, including opposition leader and San Juan Mayor Sila Calderón, who opposes statehood for Puerto Rico and is running for governor in 2000.
``This unity, outside party lines, (gives us) the power for achieving what we want to achieve,'' Calderón said.

``We will see better times,'' said a somber San Juan Archbishop Roberto Gonzalez Nieves, the island's leading religious figure. ``With love we will achieve this noble goal.''

Polls have suggested most Puerto Ricans back the hard line on Vieques.
However, in recent days some people here have raised concerns about the damage that the apparent inflexibility could cause to Puerto Rico's relationship
with the United States - provider of citizenship, passports, and billions of dollars a year in federal transfers. These issues were of little concern at the protest camps in Vieques.

Organizers handed out new flares, whistles, cellular phones and high-powered spotlights to volunteers standing guard in one-hour shifts - prepared, as has been the case all week, for possible arrests. ``The real triumph will come when we get the full return of the land, the cleanup of the pollution, and the compensation of this people that has suffered so much,'' said Ismael Guadelupe, a protest leader on
the bombing range."

How does this play in the newspapers? Do the papers tell us what we need to know?

Yes, the papers have informed the people of PR about the duplicity of Pres. Bill Clinton. Is this a new twist in his character? No...Deception is his middle name! How unfortunate that as a fellow Democrat, Governor Rosselló had to be a victim of this latest trick.

George Morales, a frequent contributor in the letters section of the Dec. 4, 1999 issue of "The San Juan Star"raises a concern that the media in PR in selling stories of conflict and confrontation that are making enemies in Washington that will threaten his status preference for statehood. His concern is very valid.

Mainland Americans for the most part are ignorant of geography and can't even name states that surround their own! PR is a foreign place somewhere "out there"-like Idaho or New Hampshire.

So, how does the perpetual status issue in PR get involved in the dispute over the tragic accidental death of an employee that failed to take cover inside the block house instead of on top of it last April? Don't ask a mainlander to explain this...all he knows is that if the U.S. Navy is denied the chance to train his sons and daughters to defend America, then something should be done about it! Well what?

Write your Congressman or Senator and demand that the U.S. either support the U.S. Navy or do something to make the problem go away like one of the following:
'
A. Many Americans like simple solutions! Why not just move the people off of Vieques- many mainlanders will tend to think of them as 'natives' who live in squalor and are uneducated, like presumably all people of that foreign place called Puerto Rico. If need be, 'pay-off' these people and then the U.S. Navy can do its thing!That is the "ugly American" solution coming from ignorance. But, the position has power in Congress to support it.

B. Other mainlanders will take the position that 'civil disobedience' in PR, coupled with a recent status vote for 'none of the above' can only mean that PR should not be aided by or connected to the U.S. They will write to demand termination of the status quo and immediate independence for PR. Let 'them' solve their own problems! Bring the U.S. military home and get out of the 'global economy'.

C. A minority of main landers will try to defuse the emotion and to reject the above positions. We will try to educate our fellow mainland Americans that PR Americans are like all of the other PC groups that we love to label- Afro-Americans, Irish-Americans, German-Americans, Hispanic-Americans, Asian-Americans, ad infinitum. But, in spite of this convenient system of classification, we are all of us just individual minorities of one!

If they can accept this premise, then start to analyze and look for a conclusion that is logical and fair.

1. First, try to understand that a large number of the good American citizens of PR are an island people that have not lived in a place as vast as the mainland. Then, remember that their ancestors for 500 years, including the last 101 as a U.S. territory, have lived as a colonial people, subordinated, subdued, supported, and trained to think as dependents of the supporters or leaders of the mainlanders for whom they do not vote.

2. Then understand that almost half of the people of PR have seen the need to break out of the position of subservience. They want to be a state and vote for representation to avoid the lack of control of their destiny so clearly present in the Vieques situation.

3. Next learn that most of the remaining folks of PR are willing to keep the status quo- something they know vs the unknown. Besides, it seems that the bad Uncle Sam is quick to pay for maintaining the status quo. Free money has some appeal! It may well be time to stop giving so much of it away in PR.

4. Finally, learn that a small minority has found a way to make their four percent position become almost that of the entire island.The independents represent an array of support that is hardly uniform. Its supporters include intellectuals at the university and elsewhere that can and do marshal numerous arguments to show that if independent, PR would not only make them its new leaders, but they would also find many ways to improve the lot of the people, as a whole, to be better off than at present. Of course, some of the Independentistas are just militants- angry at real or perceived troubles for which they want to find something, someone, or some entity to blame other than themselves.

The people of PR have always rallied as one when it is perceived that an islander is a victim of some oppression. When 9,300 from Vieques have a spokesman that can speak from the beaches where the imperious Marines used to land in practice. Well that is a position that looks like and does represent real power. That is so when all political parties are applauding "civil disobedience"as an acceptable way to solve political problems.

People on the mainland were mostly trained in the past to believe that this approach to human society's need to control and govern is not called rule by law but by anarchy. Those of us older than say 50 grew up believing that anarchists went to jail and traitors were hung! This was axiomatic in order to save the union!

But, the Clinton age of Americans now believes more in the Ten Entitlements than the Ten Commandments, and inciting civil disobedience is not a crime but a way to act that is protected as an entitlement. It is just an innocent and appropriate way for direct democracy to work! But, for whom does it work?

We must be wary of those that sell the 'siren song' that lets us put them in charge with a way to be the leadership of the mob. The French learned the hard way about this type of democracy a long time ago; and we have seen even recent evidences of similar actions in Indonesia, Kosovo, to name just two.

So, it will not come as a great surprise to this writer to read soon that the U.S. Congress has determined that the status vote has just been recounted....and guess what?  The nationalistic sentiments will destroy the fantasy that PR might become a state or remain with the 'status quo'. They will vote to accept the populist action in Vieques as a vote for independence and hasten to grant it.

Feb. 5, 2000 update:
This story continues to evolve and now the NPP Statehood party has accepted an improved settlement. The governor, however, has been branded as a traitor to the nationalists and this almost includes the leadership of the Populares. But, the mayor of San Juan has listened to her party caucus and has concluded that she probably will stop short of wanting to be on the beach at Vieques when the U.S. government seeks to remove the trespassers with as little struggle as possible.

Meanwhile, some of the leaders of the Roman Catholic Church, joined perhaps by one or more from the Episcopal church may be willing to think and act as 'liberation theologists', rather than as true leaders of the lay parishioners that they claim to represent. This may take them to the beaches in hopes of being arrested, jailed, or even murdered as 'martyrs' of the people- most of whom have not been consulted at all as to why these churchmen want to think that this mission is essential.

In fact, nobody has asked the people of Vieques to vote in a secret vote to express their desires. Sure, the heat has been on to make noise and negotiate for all that they might get in response to the petitions raised. But, will the 9,300 people, not all of whom are registered or old enough to vote, really favor action to lose the jobs of many and the chance to gain more help in one jump than the mainland of PR has provided over the course of many years?

If the Navy surrenders the West end of the island and injects some $90 million to the benefit of a few thousand voters, is the majority going to refuse it just because a few nationalist minded Independentistas and a handful of clergy think they should?

The clergy will say that the vote should be 'No' as a sign of the people's commitment against the immorality of war. Do these same clergy lie down to die when any thief accosts them? Or do they make war to try to live? If making war is immoral, so is suicide by refusal to fight back!

The Independentistas rave about the real or imagined sins of living with the Navy and the possibility that danger lurks right next to each citizen of Vieques every day and night. Really? Is it safer in San Juan? Is the murder rate higher in Vieques? Is it because of the killing by foreign personnel of the U.S. Navy?

The trick for this group is to find ways to demand fast action. They must obtain surrender before the masses of people have time to think and figure out who really wants what and why?

When will be the next chance to get fast action? Clearly when the government takes action to remove the trespassers. If it can be arranged as a media event then those that go to jail will soon be freed and the Navy will be further disgraced.

About that time the U.S. Congress will hear from its voters and move to close all military bases in PR. They might also decide to terminate a few other benefits that voters in states would just as soon see be distributed in their geographic locale rather than in PR, where nobody votes for Congress.

Those in PR who want to avoid this, need to pray for a peaceful way to avoid 'civil disobedience' and its consequences. They may realize that one has to be careful in what you ask for! You might get it.

Feb. 17, 2000 update:
The papers of this date have just about fully executed all that the media can possibly do to insure a spectacular show-down! Articles are carefully assembled to keep fanning the flames of nationalism (very popular in PR), fear of unknown medical concerns (also popular but impossible to prove), comparison harbingers of such wonderful government events as the one in Waco, Texas (designed to conjure up anger), and even the massive rallies planned by the united churches that just want to pray for peace, justice, health, and love for Vieques in a non-violent manifestation of acceptable 'civil disobedience'! All of this is aimed to sound reasonable. It is not!

Radio commentators and talk show 'artists' are throwing many 'loaded' and 'leading' questions at callers to show the listeners that this show is the one to pay attention to! It is the one that is showing how important this coming battle will be- but,first a word from our sponsors!

Unless someone can find a way to show that everyone wants peace, justice, health, and love and that it is not going to help to get any of these by practicing civil disobedience, we are going to see a bloody mess that leads to the independence that 4% of the Puerto Rican people want. Is the U.S. Navy going to just lose? Will President Clinton admit that he is powerless to stop the squatters on the beach?

Can the president of the world's most powerful nation issue a directive that is impossible to enforce? One that gives the people of Vieques the chance to vote on forcing the Navy out within three years while inert bombs are used to train our Navy? Should he withdraw the financial aid to the generally impoverished island so as to not look like he is 'buying' acceptance?

Perhaps that might be a start. But, then somehow the beach tenters have to leave, if not voluntarily, then with gentle persuasion...say, a little tear gas and then a helicopter to remove the Independentista headquarters from the beach?

This orchestrated event shows great promise of a way to lead P.R. to a tragic event. Even if the cause is the right one, this is not the way to win the status argument.


Update of Feb. 20, 2000:

The stage is now set for a massive rally and a march in San Juan designed to show the U.S. president that hundreds of thousands of the people in P.R. simply want fast action now rather than take the time to vote the Navy out within three years.Somehow this march will become a major media event with thousands of marchers thinking that they only want to support peace, justice, love and good health for the people in Vieques. Most will not understand that they have been used by the minority that has reasons to want independence.

If that is what the people want, their marching will certainly help get it! If it turns out that the U.S. Congress instead offers all of the people of P.R. a chance to choose between statehood and independence; or possibly some sort of negotiated associated status granted after PR is first independent, then the results may be worth the risks taken.

But, if PR is setting itself up for a Iranian type of rule by the churches with an alliance to the secular world, then the future may bring a far different life style than is currently known in PR- one without any real support from the U.S.

Update of Mar. 1, 2000:

The forces of nature, politics and the churches have now led to a period of semi-quiet stand-off. Well, not quite. The local press is full of statements from political, religious leaders and ordinary folks.

The political types like Barceló are able to point out that the priests involved in the call for civil disobedience are really pressing for a separatist agenda under the cover of being for ideas known to be acceptable to all- peace, justice, health, and love!

One A.R. Torres of Isla Verde noted the words of Munoz Marín in a letter to the Star:
"The intervention of religion in politics or politics in religion is fatal for religion and for democracy". These are typical of the strong words that come forth when key religious leaders let their love of liberation theology lead them to believe that their mission is to lead a holy war. They, of course, do not want to use violence to achieve their goal, but they seem to be ignorant or unconcerned about the possibility that more people can get hurt by playing this game than have been hurt by any measure of history that can stand the scrutiny of real study.

Sila Calderón manages to walk the fence or a tight-rope, but she is clearly inclined to try to undermine the substance of the Presidents directive. She is not able to escape her erroneous presumption that she and the government of PR are equal to that of what she perceives as a foreign nation of the U.S. With a 50-50 situation, neither party can issue a directive until the other agrees to it. She can't seem to accept that PR has never been part of legal compact that supercedes the U.S. Constitutional basis for the territory of PR not being an independent state. One that is able to stop a presidential directive by simply saying we don't agree with it and we will literally stand in the way of its implementation. Well, not with her body- but with those willing to stand-up for her perception of the rights of people who are first, citizens of PR, and oh yeah, also owners of a valuable status conferred by citizenship in the U.S. She is getting very close to the position of the Independentistas in her quest to undermine the current administration, which she wants to replace with her own leadership.

The popular conception at this time is that she is destined to beat the NPP candidate Carlos Pesquera. She will attend his March 5 event aimed at showing appreciation of U.S. citizenship, probably because she wants to avoid the appearance that her rival stands more for U.S. citizenship than she does! Not so, both want it, one is willing to pay for it via the responsibilities that go with statehood; the other is determined to work for the status quo until that old 50-50 idea can be used to make a permanent status where benefits come, but no taxes go back! A lot of folks like that idea and will vote for it.

The future, however, will be decided when the Congress stops asking that PR try to tell it what is acceptable to the people of PR when the Supreme Court of PR makes that impossible via the "none of the above" routine. The Congress is building up enough resentment to PR over its civil disobedience and other issues that it may finally come to the conclusion that it has to tell PR what choices it has: One possibility will be none! Just cut it loose to be independent and remove all U.S. bases and Federal systems from the Post Office to the federal courts.

A second possiblity would be to advise the people of PR that the time has come to accept independence or vote for statehood without an option called "none of the above". It might include the option of independence with a pre-arranged agreement to accept an associated state status with an array of benefits in exchange for whatever amount of value can be negotiated as the PR side of the equation, assuming that the U.S. would accept same as negotiated by the White House and accepted by the Senate as a Treaty.

Yes, the year 2000 clearly marks the renewal of the status debate along with all other issues in an election year. It is not yet clear if the religious leaders will instruct their constituents on how to vote, but it is clear that some of them seem to have no fear of losing their church members or dividing them in secular arguments that make many vote with their feet by leaving the church. This subject may expand to include the reactions of church authorities in the various faiths. The Roman Catholic Church leaders are appointed and subject to Vatican control; the Episcopal bishop, once elected for life, does not need to report to anyone! His only problem is how to maintain the support of his clergy and laity, who may have no other way to go without forming a new Diocese! The Methodist Church bishops do report to higher church authority and they are appointed, not elected.

Yes, the inclusion of church leaders with the separatists may cause severe disturbances within the local parishes.

Unless the media can publish stories that show the failure of these clergy to understand the facts or the proper democratic process that drives the secular world to a different drum beat than that which comes from places like the Vatican, we can expect to see more efforts to bring the public to that fevered pitch of emotional response that makes a jihad impossible to stop. The one in Iran twenty years ago set that country back and it is just now beginning to push back with political reform.

If the people of PR give these leaders a chance, they will stir a mainland response that will cause Congress to demand independence for P.R. What then for the thousands that marched for “Peace, Justice, Love, and Health” for the people of Vieques?

The clergy and the Independentistas have done their part to insure a confrontation that may result in Congress giving the island of P.R. back to the people as the separatists want! They do not need to do more but sit on the beach at the East end of Vieques and wait. The people of PR must either find a way to move them peacefully, or lose by default, a battle that most do not even know exists!
Perhaps the best way to win a war is to fight without the enemy knowing it is losing by doing nothing.

Update Mar 12, 2000

Neftali Fuster Gonzalez wrote in the S.J. Star to say: “If Puerto Ricans are as proud of calling themselves “A Spanish speaking Latin American Nation”, why should Congress keep bestowing upon them the rights and privileges of American citizenship?” He could have added...”without accepting the responsibilities that go with it?” His warning is clear: “Shape up P.R. and tell Berríos to get off the beach at Vieques, or be prepared to have Congress ship out all of P.R.”

Meanwhile, in the same issue, J.M Garcia Passalaqua takes his space to list the litany that shows how the U.S. Navy has been arrogant and abusive since WWII when in haste, it had to appropriate the land for the Roosevelt Roads naval base and the firing range space on Vieques- an island that was mostly uninhabited at the time. Mostly true, but keep in mind that military types are hired to fight to win, not to negotiate to lose.

A.W. Maldonado, in another piece of the same issue reveals how he can not find any Puerto Rican that can hear and identify with the idea that our nation is the U.S. and it needs to have a Navy that is trained to defend us using the firing range in Vieques. All of his friends are lost and unable to understand because their emotional tie to the idea of PR as a separate nation and culture requires them to seek sanctuary in the idea of Commonwealth. An idea that allows ‘lip-service’ to the commitment to the U.S. because of the convenient and advantageous acceptance of its citizenship.

There you have it!  Pride, Anger, and Greed are permitting the bishops and the independentistas to win the war. Yes, they fervently believe that PR is at war with the U.S. over Vieques. Today, a banner was unfurled in all Episcopal churches in P.R. calling for Paz a Vieques in the name of the Episcopal church of Puerto Rico! War? What war?

We think of wars as being events where lots of people die because soldiers are moving across the landscape, blowing up people, houses, and animals as they move; raping, burning, looting and pillaging as they go until all is conquered! Is that what is going on in Vieques?

Of course not! But, the reason for the banner is that it be seen by mainland Americans who will tell their representatives that they can be voted out of office unless they get rid of P.R.! This mainlander will try to do just the opposite, but it will take some evidence of a Puerto Rican response to the church and the independence party that says, no way! We do not want independence, get the zealots off of the beach, and let the people choose in accordance with the directive of the President of the U.S.- our country.

If the people of PR tell their government to make Berríos obey the law and leave; or go remove him themselves, rather than take the cowardly position of not wanting to tell another Puerto Rican that he is disobeying the law and we do not choose to let his civil disobedience go unchallenged; then the mainland Americans will get the right message. If PR stands back and says, we are afraid to assert the law, only Big Brother from the mainland can do that; then the message will be equally clear. The people of PR are afraid to accept the responsibilities of freedom and U.S. citizenship. They are, therefore, not worthy to be called American citizens.

Some will hide in the notion of a legal idea that since the land belongs to the U.S. Navy, only the Navy has the right to remove the trespassers! How odd. The trespassers will contend that the land belongs to all of P.R., not to any one person or corporation, but to all of P.R. no matter who or what owned it in 1941 when the Navy bought it. If they feel this way, then the only authority that they can respect is that of P.R.

Perhaps the P.R. police lack the authority to arrest, but that doesn’t mean that they can’t capture the trespassers and bring them to San Juan to be charged. What matter that any lawyer can free them by claiming that the police lacked jurisdiction for the land that belongs to the U.S. Navy!

Of course, the best way to remove the protesters would be to shame them. But, they are dedicated to independence and such people will die before admitting wrong. To be a martyr has real appeal to such people. No, they will have to be carried out. We can pray that the TV and radio folks will be elsewhere so as to deny such a propaganda opportunity.

If Sila Caulderón and Carlos Pesquera would lead the delegation to shame them out; or inform them that the government of P.R. has ordered their departure, then the TV would reflect that the few are defying the many. Can you imagine such?

Update of Mar. 26, 2000

The San Juan Star once again built the Sunday issue to bring forth the ‘big guns’ of journalism to bear on the subject of the P.R. ‘Holy War’. Strangely, the church seems a little bit subdued as in the past two weeks it appears that many avenues have been active in holding back on the rhetoric delivered by church leaders. But, J.M Garcia Passalaqua brings forth the interesting historical point that relates to the definite fact that some in P.R. have sought independence way before the U.S. had anyone living in it except the so-called native born Americans or Indians!

The relevance to be understood is a bit obscure. What does it mean when we observe that men who lived 400 years ago on P.R. wanted to be independent of Spain? Did they not die? Oh, perhaps we are to assume that their ideas were in their genes and that these genes related then to circumstances that are identical to those that genes relate to now? A bit far fetched, but ok. So what?

Should all men and women of P.R. join such thinking and praise the notion of a parade in NYC for P.R. that features a way to honor a ‘patriot’ who killed many of his political enemies? Because such attempts to murder U.S. Congressmen and a president in 1952 can be excused as just efforts for freedom from colonial oppression by those who want to believe that oppression was then and is still so bad that no other avenue is available to escape?

Most folks in P.R. sense no inability to leave P.R. or to vote for independence. They just don’t see the reason to do either. Of course, they do leave for travel to any part of the world freely and they do have a right to vote for independence rather than ‘none of the above’, but they don’t. Dominicans die every week trying to get into PR, so it may be better here now than it was 400 years ago or even in 1952?

Once again Alex Maldonado comes in to explain how the Commonwealth option is the best possible choice. He is right! And he notes that every state in the Union would be happy to trade their current status to be the only one with the relationship desired on a permanent basis by the PDP stalwarts. But, one thing is certain as a result of the ‘noise’ over Vieques- and stories about the sound of noise from bombs in Florida will not have any bearing on the positions of Congress- once the natives of America get excited about the civil disobedience in PR.

The Congress does reflect the mood of the people of the states that vote for their representatives. Do not look surprised, if the Congress chooses to consider bills to separate the U.S. from P.R. rather than to define which men, women and children of Vieques will have a vote to determine if the U.S. Navy stays or leaves. The Congress could decide to move the people off of Vieques, as was almost done in 1960, when Marín could not stomach the idea of also moving the dead. If that happens to cause all of PR to rise up in protest, then the Congress will just keep Roosevelt Roads as it does the base at the east end of Cuba called Guantanimó and let the objectors run PR without help from Washington.

Of course, most will pray that Congress will not be so rash or harsh in support of the real people of PR- the ones that do not speak up to tell the trouble makers on the beach to go home! On balance, it appears that Berríos is still winning.

By the end of April the period of calm standoff appears to have ended. The following news items tip the hand...

Navy Ships Head To Puerto Rico

By ROBERT BURNS
.c The Associated Press


WASHINGTON (AP) - Two Navy ships headed toward the Caribbean on Friday in anticipation of an FBI-led operation to remove Puerto Rican protesters from a bombing range on the island of Vieques, government officials said.

No military forces are to be used in the removal operation, which is being planned by the Justice Department in collaboration with the FBI and the Coast Guard. It could happen as early as Monday.

The amphibious warships USS Bataan and USS Nashville were picking up a contingent of about 1,000 Marines from Morehead City, N.C., en route toward Puerto Rico. The two ships left their home port of Norfolk, Va., on Thursday evening, officials said, and could be in the vicinity of Vieques by Sunday.

If the removal of the protesters goes forward, the Marines would secure the perimeter of the bombing range after the protesters are gone, government officials said, speaking on condition that they not be identified.

Navy officials had no comment on the operation.

The Chicago-based Pastors for Peace, a charity group, said Friday it will send a delegation to Vieques on Saturday to set up camp alongside a church-run tent camp of protesters. ``Our faith calls us to civil disobedience,'' said its executive director, the Rev. Lucius Walker Jr.

In Vieques, Mayor Manuela Santiago exhorted protesters not to resist arrest and to avoid violence.

``I don't want anybody in Vieques to receive any injury or blow from resisting the forces that are going to dislodge them,'' she said in an interview with WAPA radio.

In San Juan, Gov. Pedro Rossello refused comment. ``Ask the Navy,'' he responded to reporters' repeated questions about a raid.

At the White House, press secretary Joe Lockhart was asked about the possibility of a violent confrontation with the protesters, who have camped out on the bombing range for a year to block the Navy's use of it. They usually number only a couple of dozen but on weekends their numbers swell to several dozen.

Lockhart would say only that the White House expects Puerto Rico to live up to its agreement to allow the Navy to resume using the range. President Clinton made a deal with Puerto Rico on Jan. 31 that provided an extra $40 million in aid to Vieques, so long as the protesters left and the Navy was allowed back.

``We have reached an agreement, now sometime ago, and I'm just not going to speculate on, you know, any law enforcement aspect of it,'' Lockhart said.

Federal marshals and FBI agents are expected to launch the removal operation next week, possibly as early as Monday, the officials said. Puerto Rican police are to provide crowd control in the vicinity of the range.

While most of the several dozen protesters who are camped out on the bombing range say they won't resist arrest, they do say other demonstrators will replace them. Some promise to scatter into the hills.

They've occupied the range since April 19, 1999, when errant bombs from a Marine Corps jet killed civilian guard David Sanes Rodriguez.

On Thursday, shortly before the Bataan and Nashville got under way, Pentagon spokesman Rear Adm. Craig Quigley said U.S. officials were consulting with Puerto Rican authorities on the Vieques issue but he would not comment further.

AP-NY-04-28-00 1708EDT

Another posting:

Navy Ships Head To Puerto Rico

By ROBERT BURNS
.c The Associated Press

WASHINGTON (April 18) - Two Navy ships headed toward the Caribbean on Friday in anticipation of an FBI-led operation to remove Puerto Rican protesters from a bombing range on the island of Vieques, government officials said.

No military forces are to be used in the removal operation, which is being planned by the Justice Department in collaboration with the FBI and the Coast Guard. It could happen as early as Monday.

The amphibious warships USS Bataan and USS Nashville were picking up a contingent of about 1,000 Marines from Morehead City, N.C., en route toward Puerto Rico. The two ships left their home port of Norfolk, Va., on Thursday evening, officials said, and could be in the vicinity of Vieques by Sunday.

If the removal of the protesters goes forward, the Marines would secure the perimeter of the bombing range after the protesters are gone, government officials said, speaking on condition that they not be identified.

Navy officials had no comment on the operation.

The protesters, watching television and playing dominoes while waiting on the Marines to show up, said they weren't afraid.

''A thousand Marines is nothing. They could put 10,000 Marines in there and they wouldn't stop the protests. They can't stop it,'' said Pablo Hernandez, a 73-year-old Korean war veteran whose hat sported a pin with the Puerto Rican flag saying ''Esta es mi nacion'' (This is my nation).

Added Luis Acevedo: ''If they take out 100 people, 200 people will come. If they take out 200, 500 will come. We have much support. They're not going to have enough room in the prisons for all the people.''

The Chicago-based Pastors for Peace, a charity group, said Friday it will send a delegation to Vieques on Saturday to set up camp alongside a church-run tent camp of protesters. ''Our faith calls us to civil disobedience,'' said its executive director, the Rev. Lucius Walker Jr.

In Vieques, Mayor Manuela Santiago exhorted protesters not to resist arrest and to avoid violence.

''I don't want anybody in Vieques to receive any injury or blow from resisting the forces that are going to dislodge them,'' she said in an interview with WAPA radio.

In San Juan, Gov. Pedro Rossello refused comment. ''Ask the Navy,'' he responded to reporters' repeated questions about a raid.

At the White House, press secretary Joe Lockhart was asked about the possibility of a violent confrontation with the protesters, who have camped out on the bombing range for a year to block the Navy's use of it. They usually number only a couple of dozen but on weekends their numbers swell to several dozen.

Lockhart would say only that the White House expects Puerto Rico to live up to its agreement to allow the Navy to resume using the range. President Clinton made a deal with Puerto Rico on Jan. 31 that provided an extra $40 million in aid to Vieques, so long as the protesters left and the Navy was allowed back.

''We have reached an agreement, now sometime ago, and I'm just not going to speculate on, you know, any law enforcement aspect of it,'' Lockhart said.

Federal marshals and FBI agents are expected to launch the removal operation next week, possibly as early as Monday, the officials said. Puerto Rican police are to provide crowd control in the vicinity of the range.

While most of the several dozen protesters who are camped out on the bombing range say they won't resist arrest, they do say other demonstrators will replace them. Some promise to scatter into the hills.

They've occupied the range since April 19, 1999, when errant bombs from a Marine Corps jet killed civilian guard David Sanes Rodriguez.

On Thursday, shortly before the Bataan and Nashville got under way, Pentagon spokesman Rear Adm. Craig Quigley said U.S. officials were consulting with Puerto Rican authorities on the Vieques issue but he would not comment further.


Comments by Richard R. Tryon
as of April 30, 2000:

These reports of April 28-29 combine with others published in the San Juan Star and much heard elsewhere give this writer to state that the stage is set for another CNN extra! Last week it was Elián. Now it is Vieques, where several dozen protestors in 11-12 separate camps occupy spaces on the bombing range at the East end of Vieques. Think of it, an island 21 miles long by 5 wide, where the East end bombing range some 8-10 miles from the inhabited middle third of the island has been illegally occupied by these groups. Some have been there almost a year, since David Sanes, a native of Vieques died while failing to take shelter during the bombing run that killed him accidentally.

Never mind that Sanes failed to work according to the rules or that his own father refuses to blame the U.S. Navy for his son’s death. The death is only an Icon. A trigger for a more important event...the one that may happen on Monday, May 1 or Tuesday, May 2. From a political point of view as well as a practical one, Tuesday is the better day. It is not the same day in history when other violent revolutionary days have happened, as is the case with May 1!

Elaborate plans have been laid by some of the diverse leaders aimed at maximizing the size of the story, the protest, and the generation of as much outcry of further protest as possible. They have planned such for a year or a lot more, depending upon which group is being considered. The only real common denominator is that all hope to be arrested!

Why do these different groups, that do not communicate much with each other want to be arrested? It is the only way for small radical groups to get attention beyond that which comes from enterprising reporters that come in search of a story where active conflict is hard to find. Of course, those who practice ‘civil-disobedience’, an euphemism for a way to get attention while protesting non violent means of expression, do so for the express purpose of making more political ‘noise’.

Many Americans have concluded that the first Amendment’s right of free speech allows all but the most violent calls for demonstration. Bombing is ok if it is politically motivated to call attention to perceived immoral behavior by others. It may be regretted if some die in the process, but such risks are considered necessary to some.

Church leaders tend to want to avoid calling for such actions, but some do not mind that others can visualize and offer evidence of such threats if it will enhance the chance of being heard; or better of getting some authority to bend to the perceived ideas of the protesters.

What is civil authority to do to minimize the game plan? Well, it doesn’t have to take actions that are easy to publicize in ways that make it look like the government is being ‘heavy-handed’ or violent against peaceful types! So, carrying off numerous persons who show no violence, just signs of protest to be seen on CNN, radio or before the newspaper photographers becomes the modus operendi.

In Vieques, it will be smart to do the following:

1. Send in the Marshalls by helicopter at 5 a.m. with night vision equipment and quickly make the arrests after carefully eliminating the chances for filming of the action. Recorders, cameras, etc. must be captured and removed from points of available use for disinformation purposes. Miranda warnings are mandatory.

2. Those arrested should be taken to the beaches to await U.S. Navy landing craft to arrive with Marines to guard the sites. The prisoners can then be taken to the ships for transportation to a Naval interrogation center away from P.R. Perhaps Guantánamo Bay is close enough for defense lawyers to get to without going to the U.S. mainland.

3. Hospital care should be available for any prisoners stressed by their living in primitive conditions aboard ship en route to Cuba.

4. Ship to shore shelling of the range should follow the removal of the protestors, but not before their campsites are dismantled in a manner that allows personal effects to be returned to the owners in due course.
Conventional ‘boom boxes’ found in some cars should be temporarily disabled in Isabela II to avoid convincing citizens into thinking that Naval shelling is not as loud as the boom boxes that make cars vibrate!

5. Buildings erected illegally, need to be disconnected from the land and then large helicopters need to pick them up and remove them to safe keeping as evidence of the illegal presence, after pictures are taken to document the trespassing. A consecrated church building should ultimately be moved to a proper Navy setting out of harms way where it can serve the cause of Paz a Vieques.

6. Garbage and other trash should be removed and saved as evidence of ecological lack of concern by the trespassers.

7. Statements should be made by the Navy, the White House, the Justice Dept. and by the political party leaders in PR aimed at responding to the simple statement that the actions to remove represent legal actions by those in control of the land owned by the U.S. Navy. Actions taken in a manner consistent with the directive of the President of the U.S. One would hope that both major political parties of PR would respond to show that they approve of law and order and do not approve of civil disobedience. It is somewhat problematical if Sila Calderón can take such a position. Her strong sentiments toward national instinct make her and her party want to side with the independentistas on matters of what they perceive as Puerto Rican sovereignty. Once she takes that position she has to base her position on the mirage of nationhood created in 1952. One that did not give PR a unilateral right to seize land purchased in 1942 from landowners on Vieques. Such status has been clearly shown to all as being a fiction. The U.S. still controls PR as a territory! Its sovereignty is like that of a U.S. state, limited to items of control not specifically delegated to the Federal government or in conflict with it.

8. The Marines that arrive will control the land routes to the bombing range and guard against infiltration of would be second or additional waves of protesters that want to be arrested. Those that do not turn back will be arrested and sent to Cuba for processing with others.

7. The U.S. Navy must quickly follow up these actions with evidence of its desire to move as rapidly as possible to fulfill the presidential directive order for a vote by the people of Vieques that are eligible to vote. At the same time, they must try hard to convince mainland Americans that the dissident elements are not thought to represent a majority of the thinking of the people of PR. Evidence of loyalty to the U.S. will be important to avoid ‘back-lash’ from the mainland against support of PR by Congress.

The White House needs to publicize its determination to get the Congress to consider legislation to resolve the status of PR so that its people can no longer be put in a position of voting for positions that are either not possible choices or to simply call for ‘none of the above’.

It is time for the U.S. to recognize that it must allow the people of PR to choose between statehood and independence. It must be made clear, however, that Congress has no interest in determining under the independence option what name is attached to such a choice. It can be called Commonwealth or anything else. What Congress must decide, however, is that PR will not continue to be a colony or a territory of the U.S.

It is my opinion that only by confronting the people with the need to make such a choice will they be able to decide to be first class citizens in either case, able to recognize that with citizenship goes responsibility. I would hope that the U.S. would try to help all perceive the importance of PR to the nation as a state. One that sits strategically at an important global economy cross-roads!

None the less, the U.S. has every reason to allow the people of PR to be independent, a position favored by at least several dozens of people in the camps illegally built on the property of the U.S. Navy on Vieques. No doubt several thousands more of the 3.8 million people of PR feel the same way. The possibility exists, however, that these will be able to raise the temperature of the Puerto Rican spirit to want to respond to real or perceived pressures in a way that offends the majority of Americans of the U.S.A.

If such is widely perceived for a prolong period, the U.S. Congress will be under strong pressure from the voters to eliminate the statehood option! It will not take any direct action to achieve the same results if Congress just stops taking action to help P.R. obtain the ‘wealth’ portion of ‘Commonwealth’ from the U.S. treasury. Ruben Berríos will be happy with such lack of action.

It would be a fine form of recognition for his year of personal sacrifice on the beach if his campaign can get the Congress to believe that he represents the majority of PR!
If so, the majority will come to wonder..."How did it happen?" Many will say.."I didn't do anything" and they will be right.