Was Hawaii illegally stolen? This question has sparked debates and controversies for over a century. The issue revolves around the annexation of Hawaii by the United States in 1893, which many argue was a violation of international law and the rights of the Hawaiian monarchy. This article delves into the historical context, legal arguments, and the ongoing debate surrounding the annexation of Hawaii.
The annexation of Hawaii began with a revolution in 1893, orchestrated by American business interests and supported by the U.S. military. The Hawaiian monarchy, led by Queen Liliuokalani, was overthrown, and a provisional government was established. In 1898, the U.S. Congress formally annexed Hawaii, and President William McKinley signed the annexation treaty, which was later ratified by the Senate.
Opponents of the annexation argue that it was illegal for several reasons. First, the overthrow of the Hawaiian monarchy was a coup d’état, which violated the principles of international law and the sovereignty of the Hawaiian kingdom. According to the Montevideo Convention of 1933, a state must possess a permanent population, a defined territory, a government, and the capacity to enter into relations with other states. The Hawaiian monarchy met these criteria, and its overthrow and annexation by the United States were, therefore, a violation of international law.
Second, the annexation process was characterized by a lack of transparency and due process. The provisional government that took power after the overthrow was dominated by American interests, and the process was heavily influenced by the U.S. military. The annexation treaty was also signed under duress, as Queen Liliuokalani was imprisoned and unable to participate in the negotiations.
Third, the annexation of Hawaii was motivated by economic interests rather than a desire to protect the Hawaiian people. American businesses, particularly sugar plantations, had a significant economic stake in Hawaii, and they lobbied for the annexation to secure their investments. This commercial interest was at odds with the well-being of the Hawaiian population, which was suffering from the exploitation of its natural resources and the loss of its cultural identity.
Despite these arguments, the U.S. government maintains that the annexation of Hawaii was legal. Proponents of the annexation argue that the Hawaiian monarchy had become dysfunctional and that the Hawaiian people were better off under U.S. rule. They also point to the fact that the annexation treaty was ratified by the Senate, which they believe gives it legitimacy.
The debate over the legality of the annexation of Hawaii continues to this day. Some Hawaiian activists and scholars argue for the restoration of Hawaiian sovereignty, while others advocate for a form of autonomy within the U.S. framework. The issue of whether Hawaii was illegally stolen remains a sensitive and contentious topic, reflecting the complex relationship between the United States and its Pacific neighbors.
