Our political status

There exists a misconception about our CNMI. Many people believe that because we are a commonwealth, we belong to the United States, as if we are a property or territory of the U.S. Wrong. We don’t belong to the U.S.A. Neither the U.S. Congress, nor the U.S. President, has yet to agree that we are a U.S.-owned territory. The CNMI is not U.S. soil. If we are a U.S. territory, then Delegate Greg Kilili would be a U.S. congressman with voting power. But we don’t have that distinction. We’ve been existing for thousands of years, long before Magellan came to the scene. Man Chamoru hit, man Refaluasch hit. Man metizo hit, all kinds. Man U.S. citizen hit. Lau i tanota tisiña ma designa na U.S. owned-territory sa ti linagak i nina-siñan i tanota ni ginagagau na katgu. Man danña hit yan America gi pot gobietnamento yan pot nesisidat, lau ti tano gobietnon America i tano ta. Anai ta fitma i documenton alianza (Covenant), dos ha na asunton nai mangon fotmi hit, Foreign Policy yan Defense Echelons. Political Union via the Covenant. We are not incorporated into the political framework of the United States to be a U.S. territory. Now, the lands leased by the U.S. under the Covenant—the document of political alliance—are controlled by the U.S., but they do not belong to the U.S., no different than the leases made by outside investors. They have leasehold interest, they control the land for the lease term but do not own them That interest has a finite term, subject to renewal. The landowner owns the land or the interest in the land. The lease terms are finite. They end at a certain time, according to the signed agreement, subject to renewal. I say that “if” we are a U.S.-owned territory, like Guam, then the U.S. doesn’t need to lease. Bu we not have Guam’s political status, the Organic Act of 1950. We are a commonwealth of 1976. It is a type of political status, a give-and-take situation. But you don’t own me, not yet. That issue belongs to the U.S. Congress and the President of the United States, and not by any subservient agency or Tom, Dick, and Harry. President Truman said “no.” We had our friends in Congress maneuver the document through the subcommittee to get our Covenant approved. One such friend was Rep. Phil Burton. Commonwealth. It is the term conveniently deemed by the U.S. as the one with which it can maintain control over these islands. Wait, we did give the U.S. control but for two very specific reasons, foreign affairs and defense only. Hmmm, something’s amiss. Well, we are American citizens, oh, but that’s because we agreed that the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution will be applied here. That, along with 13 other amendments and a couple of section under articles 1 and 4, a select few, not all. We cannot even vote for President. Now I know that Trump’s not my president. Really, no joke.

Moving on, people might argue that the CNMI is an unincorporated territory like Guam and Puerto Rico. That is wrong. These islands belong to the people of the Northern Mariana Islands, along with the waters surrounding these islands up to 200 miles. That was until the U.S. took possession of our waters up to the shoreline. Then they returned from the shore out to 12 miles. At one time, one former Covenant negotiator was asked after the fact why our negotiators did not fight for our waters. His response was, “Because it was ours. We didn’t have to bring it up in the negotiation.” So, the question which begs a straight answer then is, why would the U.S. do what it did? Does it have absolute control over the NMI? Well, if it did, then it did not have to lease the lands on Tinian, Saipan, and Farallon de Mendinilla, right? Guam is a possession of the U.S., so did the U.S. lease Andersen Air Force Base along with Naval Station from the people of Guam? Get my point?

Okay, back to basics, we are a commonwealth. What does that really mean? One definition reads: “Commonwealth “ is a state or a nation in which the people possess sovereignty.” Well, we’re neither a state nor a nation and we lost our sovereignty when we entered into our political union with the U.S. Wait, we were sovereign once, how did we lose our sovereignty? Did we give that up willingly or did the U.S. Covenant negotiators finagle our CNMI negotiators into agreeing to something they did not fully understand? Maybe our Covenant was not such an honorable accord, huh? Perhaps Mr. Willens can explain this deal about our political status. And sovereignty, of course.

Last, the federal takeover of our immigration control was not an accident. It was not because of the so-called labor abuses during our garment industry days, it was a deliberate action by the federal government. Can it do that over a group of islands it does not own? Can it do the same to another country, say like the Philippines which it also does not own? Well, more on that later. The U.S. should return our immigration system to us.

That’s how the U.S. is controlling our life, all phases of it.

Rudy M. Sablan
Garapan, Saipan