A controversial World War II chapter — internment of nearly 120,000 west coast Japanese-Americans and 1,000 Alaskan aleuts some 38 years ago — is in the process of being reopened.
Two anticipated actions in Washington will implement legislation passed by congress last summer:
– Appointment of a seven-member study commission to review the episode and determine whether wrongs were committee against detainees.
– And allocation (expected in the lameduck congressional session) of $1,5 million to finance the one-year study.
– The panel — three members to be appointed by the President and two each by the Senate and the House – will submit in Congress its findings and any recommendations for remedies or compensation.
Its task is awesome. From hearings and official records, it will be expected to put the war panorama in historical perspective. examine the fears and apprehensions, weigh national security acuons against individual rights, and come up with recommendations that are fair and just to past. present and future.
Center of the probe will he executive order 9066 signed by Pres. Franklin D. Roosevelt Feb. 19, 1942, weeks after Japanese military forces attacked Pearl Harbor Dec. 7, 1941, plunging America into war.
The order authorized the Secretary of War to prescribe military areas to which “any and all persons” who represented a threat to national security could be restricted.
Military commanders subsequently relocated Japaneses-American citizens and resident aliens from the three west coast states and part of Arizona to internment camps in Arkansas, California, Utah, Colorado, Arizona, Idaho and Wyoming.
Relocation of the native american aleuts of Aleutian and Pribilof Islands to camps in the North followed Japanese bombing of Dutch Harbor.
The U.S. Supreme Court upheld executive order 9066. Congress did not question it at the time but subsequently approved the Japanese-American evacuation claims acl under which “neariy $38 million” was paid claimants between 1949 and 1960.
The racially-sensitive legislation for the belayed inquiry gained quick passage in congress e by unanimous vote in the senate May 22, and 279 to 109 in the house July 21.
Senate speakers in its behalf, the congressional record shows. were Sens. Daniel K. lnquye, D-Wa., Principal Author; Jackson of Washington, Mathias of Maryland. Hayakawa of California, and Matsunaga of Hawaii. A statement by Sen. Stevens of Alaska was submitted for the record.
House members speaking for the measure were Reps. Danielson, Moorhead, Mineta. Matsui, Lewis, Coelho, Dixon and Waxman of California, Wright of Texas, McClory and Yates of Illinois, Foley of Washington, Heftel of Hawaii, and Young of Alaska.
Only one member of congress spoke out against the bill in floor discussions: Rep. Robert Bauman. R-Md.
Proponents deplored the hasty rntemment, without specific charges or due process and equal protection under the constitution, “of people solely on the basis of their skin color or racial ancestry.”
There were many cases across the nation of persecution at home, And of extensive economic losses. Some speakers branded the entire episode one of the “hlackest” and “saddest” diapters in U.S. history.
Wright, House Majority leader, said “there is no way in which we can repay those proud and loyal americans for having questioned their patriotism” and that the least theU.S. should do is “say we are sorry” and “avow that never again will any group of citizens be subjected to such humiliation…”
Dixon noted; “That otherwise honorable individuals such as President Roosevelt, then Gov. Earl Warren of California, Congress and the Supreme Court could instigate and endorse such an action is dramatic testimony to the degree to which men’s minds, hearts and souls are distorted by the exigencies of war.”
You can view this as a positive argument for the governments position too ‘ the unanimity of leaders of all three branches that such precautionary measures were indeed necessary in the war emergency.
Bauman felt any still-pending claims should be handled through the Japanese-American claims act which, he said, had processed 26,500 claims, awarding neerw $38 million.
Danielson countered that the act “only touched the surface.” Others said claimants were paid only 10 cents or so on the dollar.
No mention of the earlier war claims program was made in the senate. It was Bauman who brought it up in the house.
“War Hystaria” was mentioned by several, but no attempt was made to give specifics that helped influence decisions in early war months.
History shows, for example, that in Europe, Germany’s “blitz-krieg” had crushed several countries. Norway, invaded April 9, 1940, was conquored in two months with the help of Sabotage by a “fifth column” led by infamous Vidkun Quisling.
The attack on Pearl Harbor had crippled U.S. forces. Early weeks brought tears of “Fifih Column” activity here.
On Dec. 9, 1941, military authorities said enemy planes approached the California coast. Japanese subs reportedly invaded coastal waters Dec. Z4 in an attempt to disrupt U.S. shipping.
On Dec. 30, navy secretary Frank Knox reported the attack on Pearl Harbor was aided by “the most effective Fifth Column activity since Norway.”
There were arrests in California for suspected espionage. Two days before Roosevelt’s order 9066, news accounts told of arrest of 17 Japanese nationals “in a renewed drive to prevent sabotage and Fifth Column activity on the West Coast.”
A speaker in Congress discussion of the new bill said Fifth Column and sabotage reports proved false. But in that case, proof apparently wasn’t forthcoming in time.
Now, nearly four decades after the fact, a “wartirne relocation and intemment of Civilians Act” is to investigate.
Hopefully it will delve deeply into the whole picture with sensitivity to all asides. If substantive preparations are considered, it should be remembered that other peoples and groups also have suffered in wars and takeovers – notably the Indians – and that tragedies, suffering and sacrifices in wartime are legion.
A careful, objective, sensitive study can help promote understanding – so vital to a happy, unified, progressive nation. This, in our view, should be a prime purpose of the inquiry.