Some Japanese-Americans Hit Internee Redress : Say Civil Liberty Can’t Be Bought; Would Reject Payment for WWII Detention

Eunice Sato is taking a stand that most Japanese-Americans who were interned during World War II would never dare try. The former mayor of Long Beach is openly opposing monetary compensation from the government for the forced detention, a view that has been branded “anti-Japanese” by many who share her ancestry.

But Sato, 66, believes that she represents a “silent majority” of Japanese-Americans who say that their civil liberty cannot be bought at any price, even the $20,000 that would be paid to each of the surviving 60,000 internees under legislation pending in Congress.

“I think it is demeaning to think you can pay off with dollars,” she said. “Paying any sum of money won’t erase the fact that (the internment) took place and people were hurt and deprived and lost their basic lives.”

Little Opposition

Since redress legislation was introduced three years ago, the compensation package has faced virtually no public opposition by Japanese-Americans. On the contrary, many prominent Japanese-Americans have generated heavy media coverage and widespread congressional support by offering dramatic testimony about being rounded up and detained in barbed-wire camps.

Recently, however, a small but growing number of internees have voiced their opposition to the money that the $1.5-billion bill would provide. Some fear that it could further anti-Asian sentiment, which was prevalent in the United States well before World War II and has persisted despite Japanese-American roots that, for many families, reach back four generations in this country.

Opponents of the measure have received scant publicity. This is partly because their arguments focus on mundane matters such as the fiscal impact of the measure and because many Japanese-Americans who are critical of the monetary award have been reluctant to speak out.

Nor do many opponents want the publicity. Rep. Howard Coble (R-N.C.), fearing political fallout from the highly sensitive issue, refused to explain why he voted against the bill recently when it was approved, 28 to 6, by the House Judiciary Committee. Although his district has no organized Japanese-American constituency, a spokesman said Coble “does not want to comment and (would prefer to) let the ‘no’ vote speak for itself.”

Several Japanese-Americans declined to testify during hearings held by the federal Commission on Wartime Relocation and Internment of Civilians in the early 1980s “because of the tremendous pressure put on those who dared to disagree,” said Rep. Daniel E. Lungren (R-Long Beach), who was vice chairman of the panel and opposes the compensation portion of the bill.

Issue One of Pride

But for Sato and other Japanese-Americans like her, the issue is one of pride, not politics. Although they support all of the provisions in the bill that would heighten public awareness of the internment, they remain steadfastly opposed to individual payments.

Sato said she believes that many first- and second-generation Japanese-Americans who lost their homes, their businesses and their dignity are offended by the proposed payment.

One former internee who supports her views is Harry Kubo, 64, president of the 1,400-member Nisei Farmers League in Fresno. “Receiving $20,000 is totally shortsighted. It is here today, gone tomorrow. I don’t want to close the books on this for $20,000. This is a negotiated settlement. I cannot sell my freedom, my rights for that kind of money,” he said.

Fresno County Judge Mikio Uchiyama, 65, said the $20,000 award has the “onus of a payoff.” Similarly, Ken Masugi, a political scientist and writer in Washington, said the payment “represents sort of a cynical cashing-in on the injuries of 40 years past.”

Sen. Spark M. Matsunaga (D-Hawaii), who introduced the redress legislation, declined to comment on those Japanese-Americans who are critical of the compensation portion of his bill. He noted that the measure, which has picked up its 75th sponsor in the Senate, provides internees the option to refuse the money.

‘At Best, a Compromise’

“It is not news to find people who would choose not to receive compensation,” Rep. Norman Y. Mineta (D-San Jose) said in a prepared statement. “But there are also many, many individuals who believe this is, at best, a compromise.”

The internment was triggered by government concerns that Japanese-Americans would engage in acts of espionage or sabotage on the West Coast after the Dec. 7, 1941, bombing of Pearl Harbor. Decades later, the federal Wartime Relocation Commission concluded there was no evidence of any disloyalty among Japanese-Americans.

If enacted, the legislation would implement recommendations approved by the commission. These include paying a total of $1.2 billion to individuals of Japanese ancestry who were interned between 1941 and 1946, establishing a fund to educate the public about details of the internment and issuing a formal apology to all Japanese-Americans on behalf of U.S. citizens.

Instead of compensating individuals, Kubo has suggested that Congress establish a $500-million fund to build museums in four major West Coast cities and pay for textbooks so that American students will never forget the injustices their country forced on citizens of Japanese ancestry.

But many Japanese-American leaders have testified before Congress that neither an official apology from the government nor an educational program is enough. They said the $20,000 payment is the only “meaningful” form of redress.

‘To Make Amends’

“The payment is not to repair what cannot be repaired, but to make amends,” Grayce Uyehara, an official with the Japanese American Citizens League, testified at a recent Senate hearing. “. . . Without this symbolic action, there is no remedy.”

The strong bipartisan support garnered for the bill 45 years after the internment represents the growing influence wielded by the Japanese-American community. Once a reserved group of citizens who rarely discussed the internment openly, Japanese-Americans have told their personal stories before television cameras and packed committee chambers on Capitol Hill over the last several years--and with startling results.

The four Japanese-American members of Congress also receive credit for building momentum in the House and Senate in favor of the legislation. They are Senate Democrats Matsunaga and Daniel K. Inouye of Hawaii and House Democrats Mineta and Robert T. Matsui of California.

Served in Combat Unit

Inouye and Matsunaga served in a Japanese-American infantry combat unit and were wounded, with Inouye losing an arm. Mineta has recalled wearing his Cub Scout uniform as friends in San Jose saw his family off on a train to a remote corner of Wyoming. Matsui, who was 5 months old at the time of the evacuation, broke into sobs last year as he told a House subcommittee of his family’s sudden relocation from Sacramento to a remote camp in Idaho for three years.

“The sponsors of the bill have done a masterful job of gaining co-sponsorship by going to individual members and sitting down with them and being very persuasive,” Lungren said. “. . . I think there is a much stronger possibility today than there ever has been that it will go through and the money will be paid out.”

Retained Compensation

As the legislation moves through the House and Senate this summer, debate is certain to focus on the proposed $1.2 billion to be paid to Japanese-Americans. The House Judiciary Committee rejected an effort by Lungren to scrap the compensation. Lungren said he “cannot say it is more appropriate to give $20,000 to every person who went through this experience 45 years ago than it is to fund people who are in a lesser socio-economic group.”

Japanese-Americans opposed to the monetary compensation, in the meantime, are not likely to join forces and lobby against the bill.

“You hear the activists because they are very vocal,” Sato said. “The rest of us, we are not out there campaigning for anything. We tend to stay in the background.”