Independence Task Force Faces Criticism Over Guam Status Plans

The ongoing discussions surrounding Guam’s potential independence have drawn significant scrutiny, particularly directed towards the Independence Task Force of the Commission on Decolonization (COD). Critics argue that the Task Force has failed to provide a clear and practical vision for what an independent Guam would entail, often resorting to vague assertions of its benefits.

The Independence Task Force has been vocal about its commitment to informing the public regarding the advantages and freedoms Guam would gain as a sovereign nation. According to the COD, the aim is to counter misconceptions about independence and to promote an understanding that it does not imply isolation from the global community. They state, “becoming a sovereign nation means we can live in the way we want to live today and into the future.” Yet, critics have pointed out that the Task Force has not detailed any specific advantages or addressed prevalent myths regarding independence.

Several myths have emerged in public discourse, prompting concerns about the feasibility of independence. One significant claim suggests that Guam would be able to charge the U.S. military billions of dollars in rent for its bases. However, historical precedent indicates that the U.S. federal government, which owns the land, is unlikely to relinquish control over these sites, as evidenced by the experience with Guantanamo Bay.

Another assertion claims that nations around the world would engage diplomatically with an independent Guam. Critics question this logic, noting that Guam lacks substantial natural resources that would incentivize foreign nations to establish relationships. The absence of valuable exports raises doubts about the potential for meaningful international partnerships.

Furthermore, the notion that independence would allow Guam residents to live freely and make autonomous decisions has been challenged. Opponents argue that many advocates of independence have not addressed the economic realities of sustaining an independent nation. The question arises: are residents prepared to abandon the federal subsidies that currently support many government services and social programs?

In a broader context, the Independence Task Force has faced criticism for its fiscal management, having reportedly spent nearly $30,000 in taxpayer funds on educational initiatives without producing substantial outcomes. Critics argue that this expenditure, lacking tangible results, represents a misuse of public resources.

Addressing the Hard Truths

To enhance its credibility, the Independence Task Force must confront several hard truths regarding Guam’s political landscape. First, many residents have yet to engage in the foundational work necessary for independence. As noted by COD Director Melvin Won Pat-Borja and Task Force leader Michael Lujan Bevacqua, political status change cannot proceed without a successful petition to the United States Congress, as outlined in the 1898 Treaty of Paris. Despite decades of advocacy, tangible progress remains elusive.

Moreover, critics contend that Guam has not demonstrated the political maturity required for self-governance. The absence of a developed local constitution and reluctance to separate from the U.S. tax code are seen as indicators of political immaturity. This raises questions about the public’s confidence in local leaders to manage an independent government effectively.

Financial sustainability is another pressing concern. The economy of Guam relies heavily on federal funding, with over 60% of government revenues derived from U.S. expenditures. Comparatively, Puerto Rico’s government revenues constitute only 10% of its economy, illustrating the challenges Guam faces in achieving economic independence. The lack of a robust independent economic base raises doubts about the viability of a self-sustaining Guam.

Lastly, any decision regarding Guam’s future must involve all residents, not just a select few. Critics argue that limiting voting rights to descendants of the indigenous population, as proposed by the COD, undermines the democratic process and excludes many legal residents from participating in this critical decision.

In conclusion, while the Independence Task Force emphasizes the potential benefits of Guam’s sovereignty, critics emphasize the need for clarity, transparency, and thorough preparation. The ongoing discussions about independence require an honest appraisal of the challenges ahead, ensuring that all voices in the community are heard and considered in the path toward self-governance.