Many people from the mainland may remember the precarious days of
the Cold War. This was the period of fall-out shelters, school bomb drills,
the ultra right John Birch society and bellicose statements about which
economic philosophy would win, communism or capitalism. Those were the days
of the fifties, sixties and seventies when the United States was becoming
entangled in the Vietnam quagmire. It was a time when the Cuban missile
crises almost resulted in atomic war and President Nixon had not yet
engineered the rapprochement with “Red” China. I remember the period well
as my wife and daughter were enroute to Europe by sea when their ship
steamed between the path of Russian freighters carrying missiles for
installation in Cuba and the U. S. naval blockade around that Caribbean
island. Anyone who remembers will recall that was a time when war seemed
imminent. On Saipan the CIA’s Naval Tactical Training Unit was occupied
with  guerrilla warfare training for possible future covert activity in
Asia. Both Guam and Saipan were closed off to all but authorized military
officials.
      I was thinking about that period when it occurred to me that there
must still be many in the Department of State and the Pentagon who could be
considered “hard liners” when it comes to what was once referred to as the
“communist threat.” I wondered if the present problems the Commonwealth is
experiencing with the United States Government over control of immigration
might possibly have something to do with the large community of mainland
Chinese workers in the islands. I am well aware that the expressed concern
over alleged human rights abuses in the Commonwealth has brought the matter
to the attention of certain members in Congress. But is that what’s really
behind the move to strip the CNMI of control over immigration? It may be
that the matter of large numbers of alien Chinese workers caused some
trepidation within the U. S. Department of State.  It seems to me that the
matter of large numbers of alien workers became an issue several years ago
when a memorandum of understanding between representatives of the People’s
Republic of China and the Commonwealth was signed which caused some
trepidation within the U. S. Department of State. Under the provisions of
the Covenant the United States retains responsibility for foreign affairs
involving the CNMI.
     I can just imagine that several State and Pentagon hard liners might
now question what’s happening on America’s Pacific outpost situated on the
doorstep of Asia. The Commonwealth must figure somewhere within America’s
strategic plan for the western Pacific considering that it is only a short
distance from U. S. military assets on Guam. There are the pre-positioned
ships off shore, the Voice of America facility on Tinian and almost three
quarters of the island still held in military retention.
     Those within this conservative, right wing school at State and
Defense, and there must still be a few “cold warriors” left, must be
astonished to witness the increase in mainland Chinese workers in the CNMI
along with several substantial investments and see in the alleged abuses of
some workers an opportunity to use the issue of human rights as
justification to impose U. S. immigration laws when in reality the real
reason may lie elsewhere. Also, I can’t believe it is entirely an
imbalanced ratio of U. S. citizens to aliens that has raised concern.
      Indeed, one notes in the June 1st edition of the Variety that CNMI
immigration authorities have imposed a ban on the future entry of Chinese
workers along with several other Asian nationalities. How this will effect
the Tinian Dynasty and other businesses one can only speculate. The ban is
probably the result of difficulty in repatriating workers now unable to
transit Guam or Japan upon return to their country of origin. They seem to
be “stuck” in the CNMI at least for awhile.
     At any rate, recalling the period when Covenant negotiations were
taking place no one outside the discussions knew what American military
plans were for the islands if, indeed, anyone knew except a select few in
the military - and they weren’t talking. The only thing the rest of us were
aware of at that time was that the U. S. exercised the so-called “denial
policy” which kept all investors out of the then Trust Territory by
exercising Article 8 (1)  the “favored nation clause” in the United Nations
Trusteeship Agreement.
      The United States as the administering authority interpreted this
provision in the agreement in such a manner to be an effective tool to
prohibit all foreign investment.  This policy precluded any investment
other than that from the United States which, at the time, was minimal. The
result being that no foreign enterprise was permitted to conduct business
in the Marianas or in any other other island within Micronesia. It was
largely through the efforts of Joe Screen, Vice President, J. C. Tenorio
Enterprises, David M. Sablan, Microl Corporation and the Saipan Chamber of
Commerce at a meeting held at the Royal Taga Hotel in December, 1972 that
finally convinced the U. S. Department of Interior and presumably the State
Department of the need to relax its policy and open the islands to foreign
investment.
     I explored the internet to determine if there was any indication of
America’s current foreign policy toward China and discovered the following:
U. S. concern over human rights, non-proliferation of nuclear material,
America’s trade deficit with the country, the PRC’s relationship with North
Korea, the security of Taiwan, American concerns for democratic freedom in
Hong Kong, the Tibet issue and even the trafficking in human organs. So it
appears there are some contentious issues between the two powers. To state
that the presence of mainland Chinese workers in the Commonwealth
introduces an awkward conundrum for the United States isn’t very diplomatic
or polite (or is the word “politic”) for a country that appears to want to
make the world over in its 250 year old democratic image and all the while
maintain good relations with China.
     From what I have observed working under almost every conceivable
political environment including a monarchy, benevolent dictatorship,
military government, socialism, democracy and anarchy - a country has to be
incredibly wealthy to afford the waste, (pork) that is inherent in a
democracy. If you are not rich - you can’t afford it. I mentioned this in
1985 to the deputy director of China’s investment agency and his reply was,
“Bill, we say the same thing in China.”
     Of course, diplomacy dedicates that the hard liners can’t come right
out and say something to the effect, “we’re suspicious about the large
numbers of mainland Chinese and their economic philosophy residing under
the American flag in the Commonwealth.” So the human rights card is played
to disguise the issue for the U. S. assuming control of immigration in the
islands.
     Mind you, I don’t know this to be the case - I was just wondering if
the concept has any merit. Thinking out loud - you might say with no proof
of the contention. Just exercising the freedom of thought - something the
U. S. would like to see China allow more of among its citizens.
      For more than four hundred and fifty years the islands’ geography has
been far more prominent in the affairs of western nations than their size
and resources would appear to warrant. At least this has long been the
prevailing belief among some islanders as well as American negotiators who,
back in the seventies, successfully convinced policy makers at the
Department of State of the Northern Marianas’ importance to American
security in the Pacific and as a result received millions from the U. S.
government as a result of the current relationship.
     One final thought, and at the risk of being accused a renegade, if it
turns out that the CNMI loses domestic control of immigration perhaps
consideration should be given to attempting to make a deal with U. S.
authorities to the effect that the CNMI would agree to follow the method
adopted with the Internal Revenue Service, namely, that the Commonwealth
will adopt and administer U. S. immigration laws but under local U. S.
citizen administration. That way the U. S. achieves its goal of having U.
S, immigration laws in effect and the CNMI retains at least some semblance
of self government. Either way the economy suffers but it may be the lesser
of two eventualities in a “worst case scenario.”
     Make no mistake about it, lose control of immigration and you lose
most of the non resident worker population and the economy reverts back to
a level around that of 1990 if not earlier. Even if government employment
was reduced by one half to around 2,500 people there would still not be
enough workers available to meet the needs of the non garment private
sector. There-in lies the paradox. The federal government on one hand
advocating private enterprise and the concept of capitalism and thwarting
the effort on the other hand by stifling growth by placing a cap on the
introduction of workers needed for a growing economy in the future.

Back