When's a Palace an Emblem of Democratic Aspirations?
The Arizona Memorial at Pearl Harbor remains a moving experience, and the National Park Service does an excellent job of expediting the overflow crowds through the roughly seventy-five minute film and tour. Before the short boat ride to the Memorial, the Park Service seeks to create an atmosphere of reverence and respect amongst the restive tourists with the screening of a twenty-minute film which places the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor within historical context. With the large number of Japanese tourists visiting the Memorial, there is no overt racism in the cinematic narrative. Japan is clearly portrayed as the aggressor in the Pacific, but this is neither due to the Japanese people nor Emperor Hirohito. Rather, the blame for the war is placed upon Japanese militarists, such as Premier Togo, who gained control of the government, invading China and allying with Hitler. On the other hand, Admiral Yamamoto becomes the noble man of the Japanese military, opposing the assault upon Pearl Harbor but executing his mission with precision.
The Americans are depicted as champions of democracy who seek to defend Hawaii, as well as the Philippine Islands and Vietnam, from Japanese conquest. There is no suggestion that the American military presence in Hawaii and the Philippines was motivated by any other concerns than promoting democracy. Of course, the history of American involvement with Hawaii and the Philippines is much more complicated. The U.S. military cooperated with American business interests to overthrow the Hawaiian monarchy, while U.S. Marines fought ferocious battles against Filipino insurgents following American acquisition of the Philippines from Spain in the 1898 Treaty of Paris ending the Spanish-American War.
Visitors to Pearl Harbor are not encouraged to question the reasons for the American presence in the Pacific. A more nuanced interpretation would introduce a note of ambiguity, with which many Americans are uncomfortable, into the perception of American innocence. It is no sign of disrespect to the fallen at Pearl Harbor to seek a better understanding of American foreign policy and the origins of World War II in order to avert future conflicts. It is fair to describe the Japanese as the aggressors at Pearl Harbor, but it misleading to depict the United States as having no economic or political ambitions in the Pacific.
This myth of Pearl Harbor exacerbates the sense of American purity which makes it difficult for many citizens to comprehend the complexities of the modern world. For example, many equate Pearl Harbor and 9/11 as manifestations of assaults upon an innocent America. One does not have to subscribe to the simplistic rhetoric and conclusions of Ward Churchill to recognize that it is crucial for Americans to examine the world view of those who wish to attack the United States. While the 9/11 victims were innocent, the history of American expansionism is more complicated. For example, the post World War II legacy of the U.S. supporting undemocratic regimes has its origins in the Truman Doctrine, for the litmus test of anticommunism all too often placed the United States in alliance with some unsavory bedfellows such as Saddam Hussein or the Shah of Iran.
This more conflicted history of America’s presence on the international stage is provided for Hawaiian tourists who stray from the beaten path and visit the ‘Iolani Palace. Here, visitors are cautioned about demonstrating proper reverence for the past, except this time the respect is for Queen Lili’uokalani whose monarchy was toppled in 1893 by American businessmen in cahoots with the United States Navy. As tourists move through the beautiful palace in their padded booties, they are informed that in 1895 the Queen was placed on trial, in her own throne room, for treason against the newly-constituted Republic of Hawaii, which represented the aspirations of American businessmen, such as Sanford Dole, rather than the indigenous Hawaiian people. The Queen was placed under house arrest for almost a year in a second floor bedroom of the Palace, where she worked on a quilt reflecting themes of Hawaiian sovereignty. Meanwhile, many of the royal furnishings were sold at public auctions by the new government. Lili’uokalani appealed to President Grover Cleveland to oppose a treaty of annexation and restore her monarchy. He said he was appalled by the takeover but five years later the United States backed the conquest of Hawaii. In the favorable expansionist atmosphere fostered by the Spanish-American War, Hawaii was accepted as an American territory, although statehood was not conferred until 1959. Lili’uokalani never regained her throne, and she died in 1917. The ‘Iolani Palace remains a symbol of Hawaiian nationalism and pride.
The narrative of Pearl Harbor is well known, and the Arizona is a worthy memorial and tourist destination. But the story of Lili’uokalani and the ‘Iolani Palace remains off the beaten path. Disregarding the troubled history of the Hawaiian monarchy distorts the American presence in paradise. History never takes a holiday, and an unquestioning acceptance of the American myth of innocence in Hawaii may cloud perceptions of the complicated international milieu in which we live and work.
comments powered by Disqus
Robert Michael Ebanez - 9/19/2007
Thank you very much for writing about our struggle for Independence .
It seems most people don't care what America did to this State or is it by design by the powers of America. Is it okay for America to steal a Nation called Hawaiian Kingdom in 1893 and make it a State in 1959?
America allowed the military to vote for Statehood in 1959 knowing that the majority of the voters were Americans and people friendly to the Americans because of business associations.
There is an underlining growing anger towards America today by Hawaiians and non- Hawaiians who lived here for generations.
If America continues to bully Hawaii's people and steal more land, the bubble will burst.
We Hawaiians are divided because of the temptation to benefit, if we listen and not make any waves for America.
They want us to vote for the Akaka Bill. A nation within a nation like the Indians. The Akaka Bill will be controlled by the U.S. Dept of the Interior, so the Hawaiian government formed will not be free to choose its own agenda and express its free will.
That is not freedom as we know it.
How would people feel if a foreign government went to their home and land and force them to get out? It now belongs to the new foreign government.
How would you feel if your people and family members were dying from a disease that the white people brought in the early 1800's and the American doctors gave vaccines to only Americans and people they trust?
So much wrong was done to our people and this Land in the past. How do we correct Americas injustice to the Hawaiian people?
We need to have a solution or things will fester and get ugly in the future.
Who is the real terrorist in this world?
America in this case.
- Joan Peters’s legacy assessed by one of her fiercest critics, Norman Finkelstein
- West Point historian says if his cadets can understand the history of war, so can Congress
- Australian historian Alan Atkinson wins $100,000 literary prize
- From his perch in Saudi Arabia, Princeton’s Mark Cohen says Jews and Muslims should remember they used to get along
- Duke honors historian John Hope Franklin with year-long series of events