The sinking of the Ehime Maru on that sunny day last February will long be a stain on the history of the U.S. Navy. Even so, the determination and sensitivity with which the Navy conducted its recovery operations can be of some comfort to the families of the nine men and boys who lost their lives in the accident. It removes much of the tarnish that had marred the Navy's image. Navy redeemed itself
with recovery effortThe issue: The Navy
transcends its initial stumbling by
recovering the Ehime Maru.In the days after the USS Greeneville struck the Japanese fishing training vessel during a demonstration of emergency surfacing procedures, the Navy stumbled in its handling of the tragedy and greatly distressed the victims' families and the Ehime Maru's home town of Uwajima.
In the recovery effort the Navy excelled, using its technical resources and knowledge to raise the Ehime Maru, an unprecedented feat that involved 425 dives by 60 Navy divers and the six Japanese civilian divers it invited to help. They reclaimed nearly 2,000 personal items lost in the sinking. More importantly, it recovered and returned the bodies of eight of the nine missing Japanese, which was crucial for the victims' families.
The Navy, aware of the need for cultural sensitivity, wisely consulted experts on Japanese customs and philosophy before beginning the project. Rear Adm. William Klemm, who headed the operation, was concerned that the effort could be a technical success but could offend the Japanese families through an inadvertent act.
The Navy, at its own expense, brought the families and members of the Uwajima community to Hawaii for the inquiry into the accident as well as the recovery operation. It has reacted diplomatically and delicately to their needs and kept them informed throughout the process. Apologies were properly made by high-profile officials, including the vice chief of naval operations. The Navy has spared no expense in doing the right thing. The cost as of Sept. 30 was $60 million and is expected to grow.
Money aside, the Navy has been single-mindedly focused on getting the job done. Even after the September 11 terrorist attacks, when it could have begged off, it surprised some Japanese by staying the course.
The Japanese have responded to the kindness and respect. The Ehime prefectural government has received permission to erect a memorial at Kakaako Waterfront Park in a tribute to the victims. It will consist of an Ehime Maru anchor and nine granite blocks facing the ocean, appropriately with a view of the site of the sinking.
PROPONENTS of a ban on smoking in restaurants have failed again to win City Council approval and now are desperately looking to the public for a vote on whether to impose such a ban. However, the public already has voted on the issue and continues to do so every time people decide where to dine out. Restaurant owners are cognizant of the tally in the form of revenue and decide whether or where in their establishments to allow smoking. Restaurant smoke ban
should be snuffed outThe issue: A ballot initiative on
a restaurant smoking ban is not
needed, because people "vote"
every time they go out to eat.The Council voted 5-4 this week to reject a restaurant smoking ban. Present law prohibits smoking in most offices, but the Council previously has refused to extend the ban to hotels, restaurants, bars and nightclubs. Most restaurants have separate smoking and nonsmoking areas.
Council Chairman Jon Yoshimura, who voted against the ban, suggested that its proponents consider putting the question to voters in a ballot. The City Charter allows initiatives to be placed on the ballot after being proposed with a petition carrying at least 10 percent of the registered voters.
Clifford Chang, leader of the Coalition for Tobacco Free Hawaii, says his organization will look into that possibility but worries that such an effort "won't be cheap." Taxpayers are currently footing the bill for such a campaign through television commercials sponsored by the state Department of Health in concert with Local 5 of the Hotel and Restaurant Employees Union. A ballot initiative would be inappropriate amid all the propaganda.
If smoking created a health hazard for restaurant employees or patrons, a ban would be appropriate. However, studies that have reached such a conclusion have drawn scientific criticism. The Environmental Protection Agency was embarrassed by the flawed conclusion that its own study supported the need for such a ban. Whether secondhand smoke presents a health risk remains open.
The potential harm to restaurants is debatable. Restaurant owners have complained that a ban would threaten their businesses, especially those that cater to tourists from Japan, where smoking is widely tolerated. A recent -- but pre-September 11 -- study showed that international tourism was flourishing in two mainland localities with mandatory smoke-free restaurants.
Most restaurant owners here would prefer not to gamble on a smoke-free ban, especially when Japanese tourism is sharply down. R. Paul Bowskill of the Hawaii Food and Beverage Association told the Council that his members are willing to work out a compromise with those seeking a smoking ban.
Published by Oahu Publications Inc., a subsidiary of Black Press.Don Kendall, Publisher
Frank Bridgewater, managing editor 529-4791; fbridgewater@starbulletin.com
Michael Rovner, assistant managing editor 529-4768; mrovner@starbulletin.com
Lucy Young-Oda, assistant managing editor 529-4762; lyoungoda@starbulletin.comRichard Halloran, editorial page director, 529-4790; rhalloran@starbulletin.com
The Honolulu Star-Bulletin (USPS 249460) is published daily by
John Flanagan, contributing editor 294-3533; jflanagan@starbulletin.com
Oahu Publications at 500 Ala Moana Blvd., Suite 7-500, Honolulu, Hawaii 96813.
Periodicals postage paid at Honolulu, Hawaii. Postmaster: Send address changes to
Star-Bulletin, P.O. Box 3080, Honolulu, Hawaii 96802.
