Chuuk can dictate its future within the Federation

I am not a Chuuk voter but I do have Chuukese friends--some for secession and some for the status quo. Those of us who would like to see the FSM to remain politically intact as one political unit in freely associated states with the US, here are my wish:

I would like to see Chuuk to remain in the federation, if for anything else, it's because of the uncertainty from the situation as expressed recently by the FSM Ambassador. Even if Chuuk tried to play US against China, it will not work. US will not allow China to enter the region with bad intention, namely, to under the US security interest in the region. The "denial-right" concept is part of the Compact that has no ending except if approved by both the US and the FSM. The Compact negotiations that are coming up or being contemplated do apply to some Articles but not all Articles are subject to negotiations.

FSM is strong and can be stronger and its citizens benefit more if the 4 FSM states were tp stick together. Given its size of population and its large number of Senators in the FSM Congress, Chuuk can play a big influential role on how the FSM is governed.

One of the possible ways for Chuuk to assert its influence on the FSM politics is for the members of the Chuuk independence/secession group to establish a sort of political party. It's mission is to recruit and support Senators to the FSM Congress who share the same concerns--concerns which are the reasons why the movement for independent/secession has coalesced. If Chuuk had enough new Congressmen who are willing to change the priority of the FSM national government from centralized focus to decentralized focus--by providing more attention to the states--that will allow the Federation to grow and promote internal peace among citizens and states' leadership. I think it can be done. The political system, the FSM Constitution, allows it to happen. It's all there for the taking. Just some thoughts.

Comments

  • Mark, as an American, is there really a genuine belief that Chuuk is trying through its Independence Movement to "play China against the US?" Mark, most of the Status commissioners are graduates of US colleges, and they have families who are US citizens or are residing in the US. The truth is that most on the Commission would want a non-aligned military status on the international stage, but economically engaged with all the partners. We should try to suggest changes to the existing world and regional orders that are proven inadequate to our individual situations. A Compact relationship that is primarily based on perpetual US military interest in exchange for shifting and uncertain economic assistance and a self-serving FSM constitutional framework is not enough for Chuuk's perpetual survival.
  • Which of the two military and economic superpowers have no military interests in Micronesia, the Pacific for that matter.
  • All geopolitical powers do have interest in Micronesia and the Pacific: China, Russia, Australia, India, US. However, the US currently has the upper hand. Under the Compact for the 3 Micronesia nations, the US got the island governments to grant the US the exclusive "denial right" to our waters. As such, the US can deny entry by any of the countries' ship to our Micronesian waters.

    This "denial right" is expected to remain in place "indefinitely" or until two countries both agree to terminate the Compact. So if the FSM wants to terminate but the US says no, then, it is no; and vice versa.

    In the case of Palau, it's Compact is for duration of 50 years; so Palau will decide when the 50th year comes around in about 2044 as to whether it would continue to be freely associated with the US or not. Given that many Palauans are living in the US, it's expected that the Palauans will approve another Compact which would give the same rights and access to the US, etc .

    For FSM and RMI, the Compact's Article dealing with economic or financial assistance is subject to negotiations. However, the provisions dealing with US military's right to the region and the principle of "denial right" will remain indefinitely. Long answer to a short question: everybody want a piece of Micronesia and the Pacific, however, the US has beaten everybody to the punch; as it has already gotten UN-observed plebiscites as evidence of our freely chosen self-determination.
  • Taxi, please note that "marc" is a Micronesian, not an American. Thus, his interest in the FSM matters is based on his support for the future of his Pohnpeian children.

    I apologize if I misunderstood something but many posters in support of your Chuuk independence's posts made mention of Chuuk turning to China if the US were to not allow Chuuk to separate from the FSM.

    I still think that given the quality of people in your group, there is no reason that you cannot develop political strategies, including establish a formal political party, that will carry the banner of making changes, radical changes, to the ways that things are being done at the national government. I would bet that if you were to work to change the FSM from within, you will get a lot of people to support your group, including the US government. Just my thoughts.
  • Well said, marc. I agree with you that the FSM CAN change how the four states interact with the national government. As the largest of the four states, Chuuk can take the lead to enact those changes. If necessary, the FSM constitution can be amended and improved with the consent of the voters.
  • Too much talk. Just leave FSM already. Tired of hearing your complaints. For a state that received .50 of every compact dollar, really why are you complaining? It’s not that you’re not getting your share. You really are getting more than your share of compact money. The state’s problem is and has always been corruption and mentality of for me only and not for the collective good of all chuukese. It’s a damn shame if you think about it because the corruption hurts the really poor people of chuuk.
Sign In or Register to comment.