History of Global Arms Transfer, 18 (2024), pp. 19-44

The Nexus of Militarization and Tourism
in the “American Lake”: Focusing on
Militourism in Hawaiʻi
By KAORI TAKADA*
Hawaiʻi has stood at the intersection of military strategy and tourism development, serving as a principal home port for the U.S. Navy’s Pacific Fleet while
concurrently becoming a sought-after tourist destination since attaining statehoodin 1959. This paper delves into the intertwined dynamics of militarization andtourism in Hawaiʻi, exploring their evolution into an inseparable nexus. Centeredon Hawaiʻi’s pivotal role in Pacific militarization and tourism, the paper examines the concurrent escalation of military fortification and nuclear proliferation
during the Cold War era. It traces Hawaiian transformation from a strategic military outpost following its annexation by the United States in the 19th century to a
focal point of global wartime air networks during World War II. In addition, it analyzes the resurgence of both military and civil aviation sectors during the Korean War and their subsequent impact on Hawaiʻi’s militarization. Attention is directed towards Hawaiian democratization movement following the Korean War,influencing further militarization efforts and shaping the state’s path to statehood.
It focuses on “militourism” in Hawaiʻi, the center of the “American Lake,” offering valuable insights into the multifaceted relationship between military activities
and tourism development in the region.

Introduction
Since the conclusion of World War II, the operational scope of U.S. military activities in
Hawaiʻi, particularly within the confines of Oahu, has steadily expanded. Joint Base Pearl
Harbor-Hickam has served as the principal headquarter for the U.S. Navy’s Pacific Fleet
and the Air Force Pacific Command, and Schofield Barracks as a site for infantry training
center during the Korean War1. The genesis of mass tourism in militarized Hawaiʻi can betraced back to 1959, when it became the fiftieth state and Pan American World Airways(Pan Am), a prominent U.S. airline, launched Jet Clipper between Mainland and Hawaiʻi inthe same year. The advent of the jet age, epitomized by the introduction of the Boeing 707,
engendered a notable decline in airfares in the 1960s and catalyzed the proliferation of
tourism to Hawaiʻi2. How did these incongruous influences of the military and tourism
coalesce into an indissoluble nexus? Throughout the Cold War era, Hawaiʻi functioned as* Professor, Faculty of Comparative Culture, Otsuma Women’s University, and Researcher, Research Institutefor the History of Global Arms Transfer, Meiji University.
1 Kajihiro [2009], pp. 299-328.
2 Mak [2008], p. 16.

19

KAORI TAKADA
the United States’ conduit to the Asia-Pacific region; furthermore, it captivated tourists
with its alluring cultural portrayal as a quintessential Pacific paradise since the earlytwentieth century3. This paper scrutinizes “militourism” in Hawaiʻi.
The concept of militourism, as delineated by Theresia Teaiwa, encapsulates thephenomenon in which military or paramilitary forces facilitate the seamless operation of a
tourist industry and are concurrently obscured by the veneer of said tourist industry. This
paper critically probes the militarization of the Pacific, contextualizing it within the
dynamics of intercontinental relations among Europe, the Americas, and Asia, where theimperceptible within this militarized region. The discourse critically interrogates theerasure of Indigenous communities in the Pacific region. In locales such as Guam, Hawaiʻi,
New Caledonia, and French Polynesia, militarism manifests itself in a manner that bothsustains military installations and fosters tourism, thereby engendering employment
opportunities while simultaneously dispossessing local populations of their land andundermining Indigenous livelihoods. Notably, in Hawaiʻi, the military apparatus has
institutionalized practices such as rest and recuperation (R&R) for servicemembers, and it
oversees not only medical facilities but also a hotel such as Hale Koa Hotel operations4.
Following Teaiwa’s analysis, a notable corpus of research, especially militourism
researches on countries such as Cuba, the Philippines, Guam, Hawaiʻi, and Okinawa haveaccumulated in recent years5. However, studies on militourism typically acknowledge but
do not delve into aeromobilities, namely international civil aviation, which has been
indispensable to global tourism since World War II. This paper endeavors to address thisresearch gap by focusing on the role played by military and civil aviation networks inshaping the postwar international aviation order in World War II era and the subsequent
militarization of the Pacific throughout the Cold War period.
The history of international aviation during the Cold War has gained increasing scholarly
attention since the 1990s. Commencing with the seminal work of Dobson and Engel, which
scrutinized the U.S.–U.K. competition regarding the postwar aircraft industry and theconsequent emergence of international civil aviation during World War II and the Cold
War6, scholars have studied various facets of the interplay between nations. This research
includes examinations of the dispute over the U.S.–Netherlands aviation agreement, theSoviet Union’s withdrawal from participation in the Chicago International Civil Aviation
Conference in November 1944, and t he civil aviation policies of Yugoslavia, whichdeveloped its own air routes amid internal conflicts within the Eastern Block7. Peter Svik’s
insightful analysis, which elucidates the globalization of the Cold War through an
examination of civil aviation policies adopted by both Eastern and Western blocs, is notable
among these studies8. Additionally, research has explored the impact of Cold War militaryand economic aid packages on decolonization efforts and the establishment of air forces
and civil aviation enterprises in regions such as Asia, the Middle East, and Africa. For
instance, Katsuhiko Yokoi’s examination of the Indian Air Force and civil aviation in India
directly addresses the concept of “independence of armes production” in international arms
transfers during the Cold War. Similarly, Waqar Zaidi’s investigates the creation of a
Pakistani air force and Pakistan airlines through the economic and military assistance from
3 Klein [2003], pp. 161-163.
4 Teaiwa [1999], pp. 251-252.
5 See, Gonzalez [2013]; Ginoza [2016]; Lisle [2016]. Also, regarding the linkage between militarism andtourism, See, Special Issue: Tours of Duty and Tours of Leisure, American Quarterly, 68-3 (September 2016).
6 Dobson [1991]; Engel [2007].
7 Van Vleck [2013]; Scott-Smith and Snyder [2013]; Gormly [2013]; Tiemeyer, [2015].
8 Svik [2020].

20

The Nexus of Militarization and Tourism in the “American Lake”
the U.S. His work also underscores the role of inter-allied arms transfers and military andeconomic aid in shaping the development of civil aviation during the Cold War9.
While many of these studies have centered on Cold War alliances, the discourse on civil
aviation in the Pacific has revolved around the overwhelmingly influential U.S. civil
aviation sector. Compared to conventional air transportation studies, analyses of Asia–
Pacific civil aviation have focused on contemporary economic evaluations rather than on
historical inquiries. Despite this, the genesis of Pacific civil aviation during the Cold War
period cannot be divorced from the U.S. occupation of Japan. Transportation activities
were further amplified during the Korean War; in addition to the United States, othernations involved in the occupation of Japan operated Pacific routes to facilitate traffic
between these regions10.
Focusing on Hawaiʻi, which has emerged as a focal point of militarization and tourism in
the Pacific, this paper delves into the process of heightened military fortification andnuclear proliferation in the region during the Cold War era. It scrutinizes the trajectory of
nuclear weapon development from the onset of militarization through infrastructure
construction in the Pacific, the Japan–U.S. rivalry involving Hawaiʻi, and the establishmentof the international aviation order following World War II. This study elucidates theconcurrent escalation of military buildup and nuclearization across the Pacific during theCold War and juxtaposes with the burgeoning development of Hawaiʻi as a sought-after
tourist destination.
Initially, the author explores the United States’ ingress into the Pacific during the 19th
century and the subsequent annexation of Hawaiʻi, which precipitated the state’s
metamorphosis into a pivotal military outpost. Hawaiʻi’s transition as a precedent for theland appropriation and coerced relocation witnessed not only in Okinawa and mainland
Japan after World War II, but also across the broader Pacific region. Subsequently, thepaper analyzes the international uproar sparked by the establishment of a global wartime
air network meticulously maintained and operated by the United States. Within the UnitedStates surfaced among federal lawmakers and high-ranking officials within the Departmentof the Navy, who advocated for the acquisition of strategic overseas bases in foreign
territories in the interest of postwar security. Consequently, the U.S. government formulated
a policy aimed at securing strategic bases overseas and challenging the airspace sovereigntyof the British Empire. This contentious stance precipitated the U.S.–U.K. clash concerning
postwar civil aviation, culminating in the establishment of the Chicago/Bermuda system—
the foundational framework of postwar international civil aviation. While extensive
research has been devoted to studying competition in postwar civil aviation on the Atlantic
front, historical analysis of the Pacific dimension, as highlighted earlier, has lagged interms of scholarly inquiry11.
Thirdly, accounting for the U.S. occupation of Japan post-World War II and the militarypresence in Micronesia, this paper aims to elucidate the rapid demobilization of the U.S.
military, the challenges encountered in transitioning military aviation activities to meet
civilian demands. Fourth, an analysis of the Korean War, which precipitated the resurgenceof the struggling military and civil aviation sectors, will be conducted. Additionally, thepaper will scrutinize the process of Pacific militarization that ensued alongside the shift towartime footing. This militarization encompasses not only the establishment of a networkof U.S. military bases but also nuclear testing and deployment in the Pacific region.
9 Yokoi [2020], pp. 325-354; Zaidi [2020], pp. 355-381.
10 Takada [2020b], pp. 291-324.
11 Dobson [1991], pp. 151-210.

21

KAORI TAKADA
Attention will be directed toward the militarization of Hawaiʻi throughout the Cold War
period. This will include an examination of the development of housing, resorts, andrecreational amenities tailored to military personnel. Furthermore, this paper will explore
the democratization movement in Hawaiʻi following the Korean War and its subsequent
impact on further militarization efforts in Hawaiʻi. Additionally, the process leading to
Hawaiʻi’s attainment of statehood and the onset of mass tourism with the advent of jet
aircraft will be analyzed. Through this endeavor, the study seeks to elucidate the several
factors that led to the formation of Pacific mass tourism in the jet age, with particularemphasis given to Hawaiʻi’s militourism within the context of making the Pacific “theAmerican Lake.”

1. U.S.–Japan Conflict over the Pacific and Hawaiʻi(1) Annexation of Hawaiʻi by the United States of America and its establishment as abase of operations
During the late 18th and 19th centuries, the rivalry between the United States and Europe
for the Pacific Ocean intensified. Following James Cook’s expeditions, British influenceextended over territories such as Australia, New Zealand, and other southwestern Pacificregions, while French dominions prevailed in much of eastern Polynesia. Notably, only theKingdoms of Hawaiʻi and Tonga managed to maintain their sovereignty amid thisgeopolitical contest. During this period, economic activities such as the lucrative fur tradein the North Pacific, whaling ventures across the wider expanse of the Pacific, and the tradeof sandalwood flourished in the Pacific region. European traders introduced firearms to
Pacific Island communities, thus transforming local dynamics. In response to labor
shortages in British-controlled Australia and Fiji, islanders from the Southwest Pacificwere coerced into servitude, leading to a drastic decline in Indigenous populations due todiseases introduced by European contact12.
European influence was instrumental in the consolidation of the Hawaiian Kingdom in
1795. British advisors John Young and Isaac Davis played pivotal roles in assisting King
Kamehameha I, who unified the islands through military prowess and astute leadership. In
recognition of their contributions, Young and Davis were granted land on Oahu. The
Kingdom of Hawaiʻi emerged as a vital hub, providing essential resources such as waterand food to Westerners, and serving as a crucial whaling station for Western ships. Until
the demise of Kamehameha I in 1819, European influence remained confined to thevicinity of the Honolulu harbor. King Kamehameha, I initiated a centralized system ofgovernance and exerted control over foreign trade and other economic activities. He
monopolized the sandalwood trade, amassing substantial wealth through lucrative traderelations with Europe. Kamehameha I also regulated the conduct of foreigners arriving in
Hawaiʻi. Despite efforts to curb the deleterious effects of alcohol, including the prohibitionof its production and the destruction of several distilleries, the influx of rum and spirits into
Hawaiʻi exacerbated tensions between foreigners and Hawaiians, contributing toalcoholism developing among ruling elites and commoners. Following Kamehameha I’s
passing, discontentment with the rule of his successor, Liholiho, mounted, culminating in arebellion over disputes regarding royal authority and land distribution. While most rebels
were quelled, Power in Hawaiʻi became more decentralized. Liholiho’s ascent to the throne
12 Blackford [2017], pp. 16-17. For more on islanders’ kidnapping (blackbirding), see, Takeuchi [2009].

22

The Nexus of Militarization and Tourism in the “American Lake”
as Kamehameha II marked the abolition of the Kapu system, a religious code that governed
Hawaiian society, paving the way for the introduction and spread of Christianity13.
In 1820, American missionaries arrived in the Hawaiian Kingdom, propelled by the
fervor of the Second Awakening, which was sweeping through the United Kingdom and theUnited States. Hailing mostly from New England, these missionaries gradually integrated
into Hawaiian society following the abolition of the Kapu system. Hawaiʻi soon became afocal point for American missionary endeavors and trade. Hawaiian inhabitants, valuing
their associations with the missionaries over the tumultuous presence of violent andinebriated sailors and traders, welcomed the influence of these missionaries, who not only
introduced Christianity to Hawaiʻi but also imparted elements of the United States’ legal
system. Initially, Hawaiian royalty permitted missionaries to reside on land they had
discovered; over time, however these missionaries began to strengthen their position over
Hawaiian land and societal affairs. The Hawaiian population experienced a precipitous
decline due to interactions with Westerners. At the time of Captain Cook’s arrival, Hawaiʻiboasted an estimated population of 400,000; however, by 1823, this figure had dwindled to135,000. By 1893, when the United States orchestrated the overthrow of the Hawaiian
Kingdom, the population had plummeted to a mere 40,00014.
American expansion in Hawaiʻi unfolded against the backdrop of Manifest Destiny on
the mainland. President John Tyler, embroiled in conflict with Congress over domestic
policy and renowned for advocating for the annexation of Texas, prioritized trade relationsin Asia and the Pacific. He championed the expansion of American influence into the
Pacific and extended the Monroe Doctrine to Hawaiʻi, insisting on British non-interferencein the Hawaiian Islands. This policy became known as the Tyler Doctrine. During thesubsequent Polk presidency, the annexation of the Republic of Texas led the United StatesMexican War, resulting in the acquisition of vast swathes in the southwestern United States.
The Oregon Treaty, concluded with the British government, delineated the border between
Canada and the United States. The consolidation of the U.S. West Coast spurred further
expansion into the Pacific Ocean15.
In 1848, the significant alterations were made to the Hawaiian Kingdom’s land tenuresystem. American merchants and missionaries contended that the traditional royal domain
system of the Hawaiian Kingdom hindered Hawaiʻi’s development and advocated for the
adoption of a Western land system known as the Grand Mahele, which facilitated individual
land ownership. Initially, King Kamehameha III and other members of the Hawaiian royalfamily resisted this proposition. However, they were persuaded by an American lawyer
who highlighted the colonization of the continental United States and the Pacific, warningthat the United States would annex the Hawaiian Kingdom if the Grand Mahele was not
implemented. Consequently, in 1850, Hawaiian land became available for sale, with parcels
gradually purchased by white Americans, leading to the land dispossession of Hawaiians
and the expansion of sugarcane plantations by white American planters16.
The white American elite, comprised of missionaries, merchants, and planters,
collectively known as haole, wielded significant political and economic influence within
the Hawaiian Kingdom. Among them, the most influential were the large landowners who
operated sugar plantations that came to be known as the Big Five. In 1873, General John
Schofield and Commander Alexander, posing as travelers, assessed the site for a naval base
13 D’Arcy [2018], pp. 206-219.
14 Hixson [2013], pp. 148-150.
15 Kajihiro [2008], p. 171.
16 Hixson [2013], p. 150.

23

KAORI TAKADA
at Pearl Harbor and extolled, “Hawaiʻi is the jewel of the Pacific.” The haole community,
welcoming the military presence in terms of their own security and seeking to reinforce
their ascendency over Hawaiian politics, staunchly supported the construction of the naval
base by the U.S. Navy. Because of their racial and class similarities, haole and military
officers forged a partnership over the control of Hawaiʻi17.
Upon ascending to the throne as the seventh king of Hawaiʻi in 1874, David Kalakaua
discerned the encroachment upon Hawaiian lands and the imminent threat to the kingdom’s
independence posed by white Americans. Recognizing the colonial expansion underway in
the Asian and Pacific regions under Western dominance, Kalakaua embarked on a
diplomatic tour aiming to seek protection for the sovereignty of the Hawaiian Kingdom.
His objective was to appeal to Emperor Meiji of Japan to forge an Asian federation withJapan at the helm through an alliance between Hawaiʻi and Japan. Both nations sufferedfrom unequal treaties imposed by Western powers. Kalakaua further proposed matrimonial
ties between the Hawaiian royal family and the Japanese imperial family to solidify theirrelationship. Concurrently, an agreement was brokered between the Hawaiian Kingdom
and the Japanese government to facilitate the migration of laborers, resulting in the arrivalof the first official Japanese immigrants to Hawaiʻi in 1885. However, Kalakaua’s vision ofan Asian federation remained unrealized18.
In 1887, just two years after the Japanese arrived, white militias armed themselves andforced Kalakaua to adopt a new constitution. This was known as the “Bayonet
Constitution,” Article 20 of which reads:
The Supreme Power of the Kingdom in its exercise, is divided into the Executive,
Legislative, and Judicial; these shall always be preserved distinct, and no Executive or
Judicial officer, or any contractor, or employee of the Government, or any person in thereceipt of salary or emolument from the Government, shall be eligible to election to theLegislature of the Hawaiian Kingdom, or to hold the position of an elective member ofthe same. And no member of the Legislature shall, during the time for which he iselected, be appointed to any civil office under the Government, except that of a memberof the Cabinet19.
Hence, the Bayonet Constitution effectively stripped power from the king and consolidated
it in the hands of white Americans while removing Asians from positions of authority. The
enactment of the new constitution coincided with the renewal of the 1875 Treaty ofReciprocity between the U.S. government and Hawaiʻi. This treaty included a provision
granting the U.S. military exclusive use of Pearl Harbor, thereby solidifying the Kingdomof Hawaiʻi as a pivotal outpost for the U.S. navy in the Pacific20.
Following the demise of King Kalakaua in 1891, Queen Liliuokalani ascended to thethrone with the aspiration of restoring Hawaiian sovereignty. Queen Liliuokalani faced
staunch resistance against her efforts to nullify the Bayonet Constitution and institute a new
governing framework. Working in concert with the haole elite, U.S. diplomat Stevens
facilitated the landing of U.S. marine corps aboard the U.S. battleship Boston, effectively
quelling the queen’s bid for constitutional reform. Bolstered by the support of the U.S.
military, the haole faction coerced Queen Liliuokalani into abdicating her throne and
17 Kajihiro [2008], p. 172; Kanuanui [2008], pp. 69,
18 Fujikane [2008], p. 18.
19 The 1887 Constitution [https://hooilina.org/collect/journal/index/assoc/HASH01b8.dir/5.pdf].
20 Lind [1984/ 1985], p. 28; Kajihiro [2008], p. 172.

24

The Nexus of Militarization and Tourism in the “American Lake”
subsequently proclaimed the establishment of the Republic of Hawaiʻi in 1893. In response,
U.S. President Grover Cleveland vehemently condemned military intervention as unlawful.
Opposition within the United States to the annexation of Hawaiʻi resulted in two instancesof congressional refusal to ratify the proposed treaty. From the illegal abolition of the
Hawaiian Kingdom to the annexation, Hawaiian royalty continued to protest against theRepublic of Hawaiʻi and its moves toward annexation. However, with the election of
McKinley as president in 1896 and the outbreak of the Spanish-American War in 1898, themovement to annex Hawaiʻi accelerated21.
It was the Pacific submarine cable that made possible the Spanish-American War, fought
over a vast oceanic area. The Legislature of the Republic of Hawaiʻi, occupied by haole,
prepared grants for the laying of the submarine cable between the United States andHawaiʻi. However, members of U. S. Congress, opposing to the annexation of the Hawaiian
Republic, blocked the Pacific Submarine Cable Act. It was the Spanish-American War thatbrought the Pacific submarine cable project to fruition. While fighting the Spanish Navy in
Cuba, the Navy Department in Washington ordered Brigadier General George Dewey,commanding the state-of-the-art Asiatic Fleet, anchored in Hong Kong, to attack the
Spanish Navy in the Philippine archipelago through cable communications. Dewey’s fleet
headed for Philippine waters and defeated the Spanish Navy, winning the battle. Despite
repeated protests by Queen Liliuolaraini, amid the Spanish-American War, Congress passed
a resolution to annex Hawaiʻi in August 1898 22.
After the annexation of Hawaiʻi, a concerted effort to seize land and initiate baseconstruction commenced on the island of Oahu. In 1900, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
initiated construction, culminating in the completion of the Pearl Harbor Naval Base by1902. The naval base was to serve as a frontline base for the Philippine-American War thatbroke out in 1899, when Emilio Aguinaldo, the revolutionary leader of Philippine, haddeclared independence. The U.S. Army’s war for control of the Philippines, supported by
the U.S. Navy, continued intermittently until 1907. In 1909, reclaiming a fish farm in
Waikiki facilitated the establishment of Fort DeRussy, now the largest area in the Waikiki
vicinity. In the lead-up to World War I, a series of extensive land seizures occurred on Oahu
to create bases such as Fort Shafter, Fort Lugar, and Schofield Barracks, which were
nestled in the inland mountains. The haole elite collaborated on the construction of thesebases with the military to reinforce white-centric social structures and advance themilitarization of Hawaiʻi and Oahu. From 1911–1914, the U.S. Army Commander in the
Pacific delineated plans to encircle Oahu with a “ring of steel23.
The militarization of Hawaiʻi traces its roots back to the revelation of its significance as awhaling base by the West. The concept of “Manifest Destiny” embraced by the UnitedStates in the 1840s extended to Hawaiʻi, catalyzing the gradual encroachment of American
missionaries and merchants into the Hawaiian Kingdom. As lands within the Hawaiian
Kingdom fell into the hands of white Americans, annexation further facilitated the acquisition and confiscation of land by the U.S. Army and Navy for the construction of bases on
Oahu, notably the Pearl Harbor Naval Base. Subsequent developments included theestablishment of the John Rogers Air Station adjacent to the naval base in 1927 and the
Army Air Corps installation on adjoining land in 1934. By 1938, the deployment of B-17
21 Poblete [2021], pp. 698-699; Silva [2004], pp. 145-147.
22 Headrick [1991], pp. 99-101; Hagan and Bickerton [2007], pp. 88-89; Silva [2004], pp. 197-203.
23 Hagan [1991], pp. 226-227; Hagan and Bickerton [2007], pp. 94-101. After the conquest of the Philippines,

U.S. naval bases were also constructed in Manila Bay and Subic Bay; Lind [1984/ 1985], pp. 28-29; Kajihiro[2008], p. 172.

25

KAORI TAKADA
bombers solidified Oahu’s status as a pivotal combined naval and air force bases in Pearl
Harbor to deter the Japanese military forces.24
The military officers, lived in haole community created by wealthy white Americans,shared their political views. A common concern of haole and the military officers was theJapanese immigrants in Hawaiʻi. They had come to fear the political influence of theoutnumbered Japanese labor organization movement, and in 1920 the military intelligencestationed in Honolulu reported that the “Japanese problem” was a “racial problem.”Japanese influence in the Asia-Pacific region after the Sino-Japanese War and the Russo
Japanese War, was one of the factors driving the militarization of Hawaiʻi25.
(2) From the Opening Japan to the Pacific War
Around the middle of the 19th century, whaling activities in the Pacific played a significant
role in shaping the relationship between Japan and the United States. The waters stretchingfrom the Ogasawara Islands to Japan, commonly referred to as the “Japan Ground,” served
as a prime location where sperm whales congregated; thus, the area was attractive towhaling vessels from Great Britain and the United States. In response to whaling andAmerican business circles’ anticipation of fostering trade opportunities with Asia, the U.S.
government dispatched the Black Ship Fleet of the U.S. Navy to pressure the Edo
Shogunate to open Japan to the outside world. This strategic move by the United States
aimed to secure a foothold in the Pacific region26.
In 1856, three years after the arrival of the Black Ships, the U.S. Congress enacted the
Guano Act, which authorized the claiming the possession of unoccupied Pacific islands andthe harvesting of bird droppings (guano), which were known for their utility as agricultural
fertilizer. By 1903, the United States had claimed sovereignty over ninety-four uninhabitedislands and atolls in the Pacific. Among these territories, Midway Atoll emerged as a
strategic site for both a military base for the U.S. Navy and a fertilizer source. Conversely,
following Japan’s opening to the Western world, Japan claimed the ownership of the
Ogasawara (Bonin) Islands in 1876. 27.
Following the Meiji Restoration, the influx of Japanese immigrants to Hawaiʻi and the
U.S. West Coast presented a citizenship dilemma for the U.S. government. In 1885,
pursuant to an intergovernmental agreement between Japan and the Kingdom of Hawaiʻi,
numerous Japanese laborers migrated to Hawaiʻi. However, this became a contentious issue
when the United States annexed the islands. Criticism of Japan’s militarism escalated
following its victories in the Sino-Japanese and Russo- Japanese wars, fueling a substantial
anti-Japanese immigration movement in California during the early 20th century. Tensions
reached a peak, resulting in discriminatory practices such as the exclusion of Japanesechildren from schools in California. This situation was eventually resolved throughnegotiations between the Japanese and U.S. governments, culminating in the signing of the
U.S.–Japan Gentlemen’s Agreement in 1907, which was an agreement to refrain from
immigration of Japanese male workers.28.
24 “History of Hickam Field, Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam, Hawaiʻi,” [https://www.15wing.af.mil/AboutUs/Fact-Sheets/Display/Article/376269/history-of-hickam-field-joint-base-pearl-harbor-hickam-Hawai’i/].
25 Lind [1984/1985], pp. 29-31.
26 Goto [2017], pp. 39–47.
27 Poblete [2021], pp. 692–693.
28 As for Japanese immigrants to Hawaiʻi and the United States, Azuma [2005], pp. 49-50; After World War I,
the Japanese government endeavored to secure a racial equality clause in the Charter of the League of Nations.
However, due to the indifference of U.S. President Woodrow Wilson, this aspiration remained unrealized. See,
Shimizu [1998], pp. 137–162.

26

The Nexus of Militarization and Tourism in the “American Lake”
Japan capitalized on an opportunity to expand its influence in the Pacific after Germany’s
defeat in World War I. Prompted by the outbreak of war in Europe, Japan, in alignment
with the Anglo-Japanese alliance, declared war on Germany. This led to the deployment of
naval forces to the Pacific Island region, resulting in the occupation of Micronesia and theestablishment of an archipelago defense force headquarters. Subsequently, Japan asserted
its claim over the occupied German territory of Micronesia, a claim recognized by GreatBritain, Russia, and France. However, President Wilson opposed Japan’s mandate over
Micronesia. Despite this opposition, Japanese rule was acknowledged under the League of
Nations mandate system, and Japan retained its mandate over Micronesia even after
withdrawing from the league. Referring to Micronesia as Nansei Shoto (the South Sea
Islands), the Japanese government encouraged immigration and agricultural developmentin the region. Many of the migrants to Micronesia hailed from Okinawa Prefecture and the
Yaeyama Islands. Japanese immigrants on Rota Island reported that, “Guam is within arm’s
reach of Rota’s ranch,” and “Guam’s residents facing thick American racism29.”
During the interwar period, the Hawaiian ruling class perceived the sizable JapaneseAmerican population to be a challenge. Despite the 1907 U.S.–Japanese Gentlemen’s
Agreement, which did not prohibit the entry of wives, children, picture brides, parents ofJapanese immigrants workers into the archipelago, the number of Japanese immigrants
increased. Japanese immigrant workers organized large-scale strikes, supported by Nisei, todemand higher wages for plantation labor. The 1909 strike aimed to abolish the racial wage
system, while another significant strike in 1920 involved Japanese American and Filipino
workers who sought increased wages. In response to these developments, the local U.S.
military suggested placing Japanese American workers under military control. However, agrowing number of U.S.-born Japanese Americans held U.S. citizenship, posing a challenge
to such proposals. In 1922, the Governor of the Territory of Hawaiʻi urged U.S. President
Harding to address the high percentage of Japanese immigrants in Hawaiʻi, as they
constituted over 40% of Hawaiʻi’s total population of 253,000 in 1920. Efforts were madeto promote tourism as a means of attracting white workers or the white middle class to theislands30.
In the 1920s, Matson Navigation Company and Hawaiian Tourist Bureau, conductedvarious advertising campaigns to the mainland. Hawaiian Tourist Bureau Association ran
an ad about “Honeymoons in the South Seas” in the mainland newspapers and magazines.
It showed local Hawaiian women placing flower leis around the necks of white couples.
Throughout the 1920s, tourism became the third largest economic sector, after sugar andpineapple production. The image of the wealthy white or middle-class mainland Americans
as tourists to Hawaiʻi became widely popularized through magazines and Hollywood
movies. Rather, the presence of Asian residents did not appear there31.
Utilizing the Royal Hawaiian brand, the haole community spearheaded beachdevelopment through the Waikiki Beach Reclamation Project and the construction of acanal between 1921 and 1924. The iconic Royal Hawaiian Hotel opened its doors, followedby the inauguration of the Pink Palace of Royal Hawaiian Hotel in 1927. Despite atemporary setback in tourism caused by the Great Depression of 1929, visitor numbers
rebounded by 1935. Notably, Castle and Cook, a prominent member of Hawaiʻi’s Big Fivelandowners, acquired shares in the Matson Navigation steamship line, which led to the
expansion of its liner service. However, this progress came at the expense of the traditional
29 Ogimi [1934], pp. 135–136 [https://dl.ndl.go.jp/pid/1899980/1/114].
30 Skwait [2010], pp. 83, 94–95.
31 Desmond [1999], pp. 79-80.

27

KAORI TAKADA
Waikiki fish farms, which formed a crucial component of the Hawaiian Legislature32.
In 1929, the haole community established the Hawaiian Inter-Island Airline Company.
Subsequently, the Civil Aeronautics Board, established under the Civil Aeronautics Act of1938, granted the airline a permanent operating certificate in 1939. Originally known as the
Island View Airline Company, it was rebranded Hawaiian Airlines in October 1941. The
airline practiced a significant racial policy: it was racially discriminatory in that it
exclusively served the white population of Hawaiʻi. Consequently, Americans on JapaneseAncestors and other people of color, which made up most of the population, were excluded
from utilizing the airline’s services33.
In the 1930s, Pan American Airways established a Pacific route connecting Hawaiʻi to
the U.S. mainland. Pan Am, renowned for its service between Key West and Havana since
1927, swiftly expanded its operations into Latin America and introduced seaplanes to its
Pacific routes in 1935. Pan Am’s primary Pacific route extended from San Francisco via
Hawaiʻi to Midway Island, Wake Island, Guam, Manila, and Shanghai. The introduction of
air services facilitated an influx of affluent visitors to Hawaiʻi. Celebrity visits to theislands were prominently featured in movies and magazines, thus solidifying Hawaiʻi’s
image as a tropical paradise. Additionally, Pan Am inaugurated a South Pacific route from
Hawaiʻi to New Zealand; however, this route was forced to cease operations following theJapanese attack on Pearl Harbor on December 7, 194134.
In his address urging a declaration of war, U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt branded
December 7th as “a day of infamy.” The attack inflicted severe damage on the battleshipsof the Pacific Fleet moored at Pearl Harbor, while Hickam Air Force Base suffered
substantial destruction, resulting in the loss of numerous military aircraft, including B-17
bombers. The onslaught claimed the lives of 2,402 military personnel, with 1,178 others
sustaining injuries. This brazen attack on Pearl Harbor destroyed the isolationist attitudesof the American populace35.
Japanese victories in the initial stages of the Pacific War posed logistical challenges for
the Allies. However, the Battle of Midway altered the course of the conflict. This
engagement witnessed fierce confrontations between Japanese and U.S. aircraft carriers
coupled with intense aerial skirmishes over the island’s airfields. Japan’s early air
superiority faltered when their main aircraft carriers were sunk at Midway in June 1942,
disrupting the Japanese’s ability to safeguard crucial supply routes. Subsequently, uponsecuring airfields along the islands, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, in collaboration
with civilian aviation firms like Consolidated Aircraft Company’s subsidiary, Conceal,
facilitated the transportation of B-17 bombers and other aircraft to Brisbane, Australia. Thisendeavor, known as operation steppingstone, played a vital role in reestablishing U.S.
military air capabilities in the Pacific36.
The U.S. military placed Hawaiʻi under military control to better manage the JapaneseAmerican population. Governor Poindexter and General Walter Short swiftly initiateddiscussions on the proposed military administration and subsequently implemented martial
law. This decision garnered support from Robert Shivers, head of the FBI’s Honolulu
office. Poindexter communicated with President Roosevelt, citing the presence of JapaneseAmericans as the rationale behind the imposition of a military government. Under this
32 Mak [2008], p. 82.
33 Davies [1972], pp. 316–17; Skwait [2010], p. 165.
34 Blower [2017], p. 456; Davies [1972], pp. 247–256; Konzett [2017], pp. 58–59.
35 Dallek [1979], p. 311.
36 Craven and Cate [1958], pp. 175–177.

28

The Nexus of Militarization and Tourism in the “American Lake”
regime, habeas corpus was suspended, and the courts ceased operations in Hawaiʻi.
However, unlike the mass internment of 110,000 Japanese Americans on the mainland,
encompassing regions such as California, Washington, Oregon, Alaska, Arizona, and otherremote areas, individual Americans of Japanese Ancestry in Hawaiʻi were able to leadnormal lives under the authority of the Hawaiian military government. Of the 1,569
individuals deemed disloyal or dangerous, 1,466 were of Japanese ancestry, constituting
only 1% of the total Japanese American population37.
Delos Emmons, succeeding General Walter Short, assumed leadership of the militaryadministration in Hawaiʻi. Emmons, a graduate of the Army Air Corps Tactical School who
was trained in flight, was appointed by President Roosevelt as chief of the General
Headquarters Air Force in 1939. Known for advocating the use of bombers to bolster
offensive capabilities, Emmons was chosen to head the Hawaiian command at theinsistence of Army Chief of Staff, George C. Marshall, following the Pearl Harbor attack.
Having previously served as an Army Air Corps officer at Fort Shafter from 1934 to 1936,
Emmons possessed intimate knowledge of Hawaiʻi’s demographics, particularly thesignificant role of Japanese Americans in the local economy. Emmons swiftly instituted apolicy of racial tolerance toward ethnic groups, emphasizing the “Americanism” campaign
among Nikkei while staunchly opposing discrimination against Japanese Hawaiians. In
1943, Japanese Americans were permitted to volunteer for military service, resulting in
12,000 Nisei Hawaiians of the 33,000 all Nisei soldiers serving and eventually forming therenowned 442nd Regimental Combat Team. Through their unwavering dedication,
Japanese Americans demonstrated their powerful sense of patriotism38.
Meanwhile, the military government continued its acquisition of land in the Hawaiian
Islands for use by the U.S. Army and U.S. Navy. By 1944, military-controlled land hadreached a total area of 600,000 acres. Among the areas seized was Kahoolawe Island off
the coast of Maui. Initially leased to Angus McPhee and Harry Baldwin’s Kahoolawe
Ranch Company, the southern end of the island was leased to the U.S. military for bombing
and artillery training in May 1941. After the Pearl Harbor attack, the militarycommandeered the entire island. McPhee and Baldwin demanded that the Kahoolawe
Island be returned, claiming that its role as a training ground had ceased and seeking
reimbursement for their investments. U.S. military authorities rebuffed their requests andretained the island for continued use as a bombing and artillery training area. Consequently,
Kahoolawe Island suffered extensive devastation from bombing and shelling operations39.
Hawaiʻi emerged as a pivotal hub for military intelligence operations in the conflictagainst Japan. The commencement of widespread city bombings during World War II
necessitated enhanced aerial intelligence capabilities to refine targeting accuracy. While inEurope, the utilization of aerial photography maps, crafted by the British military,
facilitated operations, analogous resources for the Pacific theater and Japan were notably
deficient. Recognizing this lacuna, the U.S. Army and Navy, traditionally characterized byrivalry, forged a cooperative alliance to develop aerial reconnaissance and bombing target
maps directed towards Japan. Following the pivotal victory at the Battle of Midway in June
1942, senior leaders within the U.S. Army and Navy commenced efforts to optimize
intelligence operations for greater efficacy.
During World War II, Hawaiʻi emerged as a hub for military intelligence operation for
war with Japan. The intensification of city bombings necessiated accurate aerial
37 Scheiber and Scheiber [2016], pp. 39–41.
38 Scheiber and Scheiber [2016], pp. 42–43.
39 Blackford [2017], pp. 34–35.

29

KAORI TAKADA
intelligence, a capability that was lacking for Pacific and Japan. While the British military
had produed aerial photography maps for Europe, similar resources were unavailable for
the Pacific theater. Recognizing the need for collaboration, the previously competitive U.S.
Army and Navy joined forced to develop aerial reconnaissance and bombing target maps ofJapan40.
As various governmental and military entities had initiated intelligence undertakings,
Army Chief of Staff, George C. Marshall, and Chief of Naval Operations, Ernest King,
discerned the decentralized nature of intelligence efforts and advocated for comprehensive
reorganization. Consequently, the Joint Army Navy Intelligence Studies (JANIS) were
established in late April 1943. The Naval Aviation Photography Unit (NAPU), operatingfrom an aircraft carrier as its primary vessel, assumed the critical task of capturing
photographic intelligence over Japanese territories, encompassing the Marianas, theCaroline Islands, the Okinawa Archipelago41.
In parallel, the Naval Aviation Photography Battalion undertook multifaceted
responsibilities encompassing public relations photography and strategic aerial
reconnaissance activities. Notably, among the personnel mobilized for this unit was Edward
Steichen, a luminary figure renowned for his contributions to major fashion publications
and advertising ventures during the 1920s and 1930s. Tasked with military advertising
campaigns, Steichen’s unit spotlighted leisure and tourism, particularly during wartime.
Employing aesthetically pleasing and stylish portrayals of servicemembers engaged indaily routines aboard aircraft carriers, these images served as potent recruitment tools for
the Navy. Depictions of soldiers engaged in leisurely activities such as sunbathing
conveyed a sense of American military superiority in the Pacific theater to the domestic
audience42. Furthermore, photographic documentation extended to the environs of Hawaiʻi,
serving as a strategic base of operations. However, these images depicted idyllic scenes ofpalm-fringed beaches, lush South Seas flora, and captivating sunsets, featuring solely whitesoldiers and American citizens while conspicuously omitting representations of the
Indigenous population. Collectively, these portrayals projected Hawaiʻi as an exclusive
military enclave, underscoring its characterization as a U.S. military “playground.43”
During World War II, Hawaiʻi assumed dual roles as a military base for the Pacific War
and a recreational center for service members. Under military governance, Hawaiʻi’s agrarian economy, centered around crops such as sugarcane, underwent a significant transformation into a military-driven economy. The military also wielded control over wartime tourism, reshaping the image of Hawaiʻi, which had been thought of as an exclusive resort
destination frequented by Hollywood celebrities, as depicted in movies and photomagazines of the 1930s. Soldiers stationed in Hawaiʻi found respite through recreational
activities such as Hawaiian music, hula dancing, and surfing44.
However, the influx of military personnel also exacerbated issues such as prostitution andvenereal diseases, leading to the institutionalization and control of prostitution until 1944.
40 Takada [2020a], p. 89.
41 Kreis [2004], p. 116; Central Intelligence Agency [2009], p. ix; Marchio [1996], pp. 116–119. JANIS reports

were digitized by the Constitutional Archives of the National Diet Library as part of the Strategic Bombing
Survey Mission materials. About thirty-two volumes were produced for Japan, including volumes on Kamchatka,
Sakhalin, Taiwan, the Mariana Islands, and the Caroline Islands. The collection corresponding to the Japanese
mainland was produced from late 1944 to early 1945 due to the difficulty of obtaining photographic intelligence.
https://rnavi.ndl.go.jp/kensei/entry/USB-1.php (Accessed: 2019/12/10).
42 Dod [1999], p. 510.
43 Lisle [2016], pp. 102–112.
44 Skwait [2010], pp. 148–149; Connelly [2021], pp. 232–234.

30

The Nexus of Militarization and Tourism in the “American Lake”
Seaside areas surrounding naval and air bases were developed into beach resorts, further
enhancing the perception of Hawaiʻi as a leisure destination. Haole, in collaboration withthe military, aimed to transform soldiers into tourists, and they used organizations like theUnited Service Organization (USO) promote the slogan “Hawaiʻi is paradise” to boost
morale. In sum, militourism gained traction during World War II, with Hawaiʻi serving as avital strategic base in the Pacific theater while simultaneously providing rest and recreation
facilities for soldiers45.
The imperialist notion of the Pacific as the “American Lake” which has been prevalent
since the 19th century, was revitalized following the attack on Pearl Harbor. Throughout
the war, the U. S. armed forces seized and occupied huge island territories and atolls fromJapan, converting them into military bases. Additionally, between 1945 and 1947, the U.S.
government implemented policies to assert dominance over the Pacific region, including
placing Micronesia, a former Japanese mandate territory, under trusteeship. In the context
of the war against Japan and the broader effort to establish dominance in the Pacific,
Hawaiʻi played a pivotal role as both strategic military bases and a haven for soldiers
seeking rest and relaxation46.

2. Construction of a wartime global air network andresumption of Pacific civil aviation
The United States initiated the development and establishment of a global air network in
1941. Following the enactment of the Lend Lease Act of 1941, Pan Am, operating undercontracts with both the U.S. and British governments, spearheaded the creation of a South
Atlantic and Trans-African air transportation network. This network strategically linked theburgeoning U.S. aircraft industry with British vital bases across Africa and the Middle East.
The endeavor encountered no resistance within the United States and was widely perceived
as an active measure to bolster support for Britain47. On the other hand, the establishmentof an air network in the Pacific region aimed to leverage existing Pan Am routes centeredaround Hawaiʻi, intending to connect Hawaiʻi with Australia and New Zealand. These
endeavors, initially aligned with the provisions of the Lend Lease Act, were suddenly
disrupted by the devastating attack on Pearl Harbor48.
Based on the Civil Aviation Act of 1938, which positioned commercial airlines as a reserve component of the U.S. air force strength, President Roosevelt mobilized all seventeen
domestic airlines of the United States. However, Pan Am, which had been actively expanding routes to Africa and the Middle East, exhibited reluctance towards military mobilization. Pan Am’s pursuit of post-war operating rights in Africa, a matter discovered by the
British government, further exacerbated tensions, and solidified the British resolve tosafeguard their imperial air network. In July 1942, the British government proposed andsigned a memorandum of understanding with the U.S. government to hold bilateral
British-U.S. aviation negotiations as soon as possible on the issue of international civil
aviation and the right to use bases and airport facilities built with the Lend Lease funds.
Shortly thereafter, however, it was discovered that Pan Am had planned and surveyed the
45 Bailey and Farber [1992], pp. 95–130; Lisle [2016], pp. 99–102; Sasaki [2016], pp. 653–654.
46 Dower [1974], pp. 146–206; Takemine [2015].
47 Ray [1975], pp. 340-58; Van Vleck [2013], pp. 148-151.
48 Underwood [1991], p. 171.

31

KAORI TAKADA
construction of an airport in the British protectorate of Muscat-Oman and had applied
directly to the Sultan for the right to use the airport. The British government protested
vehemently to the U.S. government and demanded that Pan Am be excluded from theAfrica-Middle East route. This route was to be operated by the U. S. Army Air Force, Air
Transport Command (ATC) and Pan Am was excluded49.
In response to these developments, the U.S. government established the ATC in June
1942. Tasked with orchestrating a global airlift operation, the ATC, in collaboration withdomestic carriers operating under its purview, initiated extensive airlift missions
worldwide. Pan Am’s involvement in the Africa-Middle East route was terminated in
October 1942, and the company was reassigned to participate in airlift operations acrossthe Pacific in conjunction with the Navy Air Transport Service (NATS). The ATC,
alongside domestic carriers, orchestrated a sprawling airlift service that expanded
significantly over the course of the conflict. By war’s end, the ATC had burgeoned from aforce of 11,000 personnel to a formidable contingent of 300,000 individuals, facilitating thetransportation of 30,000 aircraft to the frontlines in 1942, 72,000 in 1943, and 108,000 in
1944.50
The British government demonstrated foresight in addressing the post-war aviation
challenge. In late 1942, a resolution in the British Parliament voiced apprehension
regarding Pan Am’s integration into the British imperial air network, characterizing theaviation issue as being akin to another “Boston Tea Party.” Harold Balfour, the Air Ministerof Britain, declared that the British government sought to take decisive action on behalf of
the approximately one million workers in the aircraft industry. In response, theInterdepartmental Committee on Aviation Policy, convened by President Roosevelt in early
1943, was tasked to develop U.S. aviation policy. This committee was presided over by
Assistant Secretary of State Adolf Berle and was comprised of military and civilian
aviation experts, including the Assistant Secretaries of the Army and Navy, the Assistant
Secretary of Commerce, and a representative from the Civil Aeronautics Board of the
Department of Commerce. The overarching objective of the U.S. government’s postwar
civil aviation policy was to secure landing rights at as many airports as possible, thereby
facilitating the transition of airlift operations to civilian demand by assigning internationalroutes to commercial airlines, all while maintaining a robust global military aviation
network51.
However, congressional pressure for base acquisition, coupled with the Department of the
Navy’s desire acquire island bases to make the Pacific Ocean “the American lake.” This led
to increased interest in overseas bases constructed and maintained with Lend-Lease funds.
The Joint Chiefs of Staff drafted a plan in 1943 outlining the framework for securing
overseas bases, which became integral to the U.S. national security system52. Meanwhile,the interdepartmental committee submitted a policy proposal to the Secretary of State
advocating for securing immediate rights to use valuable air facilities for postwar aircommerce. This proposal also emphasized the importance of creating an international civil
aviation organization and initiating negotiations with Great Britain53. Disagreements arose
49 Dobson [1991], pp. 128-129; Craven and Cate [1958], pp. 53-54; Foreign Relations of the United States,
1942, volume 4, The Near East and Africa, 1963, pp. 531-534.
50 Craven and Cate [1958], p. 19.
51 Berle and Jacobs [1973], pp. 482–83; Takada [2011], pp. 82–83.
52 Stoler [1982], pp. 303–21.
53 National Archives and Records Administration (NARA), College Park, MD, “Interdepartmental
Subcommittee on International Aviation Preliminary Report as Adapted March 1, 1943,” Record Group 105 Entry
210 Box 123, pp. 8–9.

32

The Nexus of Militarization and Tourism in the “American Lake”
within departments regarding the nature of air agreements: The Department of Commerce
and the Civil Aeronautics Bureau favored bilateral agreements based on airspacesovereignty, while the Interdepartmental Committee recommended a multilateral approach
involving general agreements, including a “fifth freedom” that would allow airlines tooperate beyond right— the right to load and unload cargo and passengers between two or
more countries54.
In the postwar era, international civil aviation was shaped by bilateral aviationagreements between the United States and Britain, which were negotiated at the Chicago
International Civil Aviation Conference in November 1944 and at the Bermuda Conferencein February 1946. At the Chicago Conference, the U.S. advocated for a comprehensive
multilateral agreement that included the “fifth freedom” right for airlines. However, theconference resulted in a commitment to bilateral negotiations. Subsequently, the Bermuda
Agreement, negotiated between the U.S. and Britain in February 1946, became thefoundation for postwar aviation agreements. Although the British government succeeded inlimiting beyond rights of the United State in the conclusion of agreement, the latter
vigorously pursued bilateral air agreements55.
The Bermuda Agreement also addressed Pacific routes. The UK secured the right tooperate a route from Singapore to San Francisco via Hong Kong, Manila, Guam, Wake
Island, Midway Atoll, and Honolulu. Conversely, the U.S. obtained rights to multiple
routes, including one from San Francisco or Los Angeles via Honolulu, Midway, Wake,
Guam, and Manila to Hong Kong, Macau, and various destinations in Asia. Another route
extended from San Francisco or Los Angeles to Dutch Indonesia. Following the Bermuda
Agreement, the British government coordinated with Commonwealth countries and the
U.S. to establish the Pacific route. Hong Kong emerged as a crucial hub between Asia andSoutheast Asia, prompting the UK to develop the Hong Kong Airport to facilitate air travelin the region56.
In response to the dominant air transport capacity of the United States, the United
Kingdom and Commonwealth nations in the Pacific established the South Pacific Airlift
Advisory Committee and launched British Commonwealth Pacific Airlines (BCPA) as a
joint venture. BCPA aimed to operate a trans-Pacific route connecting Australia and theUnited States, thus competing with Pan Am in the Pacific region. The Australian and New
Zealand governments were reluctant to grant fifth freedom rights to U.S. airlines. However,negotiations between these governments and the United States led to the signing of airservice agreements in December 1946 that were like the Bermuda Agreement. Thisagreement paved the way for BCPA to commence operations, flying a route from Australia
and New Zealand to the U.S. West Coast via Hawaiʻi three times a week, starting in 1947.
Meanwhile, Pan Am continued to operate a similar route twice a week57.
After World War II, the rapid demobilization of military airlift units in the U.S. Army andNavy led to significant reductions in personnel and aircrafts. For example, the Army Airlift
54 Dobson [1991], pp. 136–138; Smith [1950], pp. 148-150. On “Five Freedoms of the air” provides (1)innocent passage or over-flight; (2) technical stop for repairs or refueling; (3) the right to pick up passengers
from an airline’s country of origin and disembark them in territory of the other contracting party; (4) the right topick up passengers in the other contracting country and disembark them in the airline’s country of origin; and (5)the right to pick up passengers from the other contracting party and carry them forward to a third-party
destination. The Fifth Freedom is also known as “beyond rights.” See, Dobson [2017], p. 36.
55 Dobson [2017], pp. 52-55.
56 Wang [2022] pp. 45-46; Guyana (Bermuda I) Air Transport Agreement of February 11, 1946,
https://2009-2017.state.gov/e/eb/rls/othr/ata/g/gy/114284.htm.
57 Orders [2003], p. 177–178.

33

KAORI TAKADA
Command, which had 300,000 personnel and 3,700 transport aircrafts on September 2,
1945, saw its force shrink to 60,000 personnel and 1,500 aircrafts within a year. The focusof airlift routes shifted to the North Atlantic, Europe, and the Pacific, with reduced
operations in the latter region limited to routes such as the North Pacific Great Circle routefrom the U.S. West Coast and via Hawaiʻi. Airlift operations in the South and Southwest
Pacific were handled by the Royal New Zealand Air Force Airlift Command, which
operated a smaller fleet of 600 aircraft in 1947. Similarly, the U. S. Naval Airlift Command
faced rapid demobilization and budget cuts and operated only 116 seaplanes in 194758.
As military airlift operations demobilized, efforts were made to convert airlift activities
to meet civilian demand. Bilateral air agreements with countries such as Ireland, Canada,
and the United Kingdom allowed the U.S. to secure landing rights, and the Civil
Aeronautics Board assigned routes to commercial airlines. In the Pacific, Pan Am
established a monopoly before the war. However, post-war routes were allocated tomultiple companies. Pan Am and Northwest Airlines were assigned routes from the North
Pacific Great Circle to Tokyo and continuing to Shanghai and other parts of Asia. Anothercarrier, United Airlines, received permission to fly a route from the U.S. West Coast to
Hawaiʻi. Subsequently, both Pan Am and Northwest were granted permission to fly to
Hawaiʻi, with Pan Am receiving approval in the same year, followed by Northwest in thefollowing year in 194759.
Between 1945 and 1946, the airline industry experienced a brief period of growth andexpansion. Eager to attract new customers, airlines demanded the production of modern
airliners, leading to the introduction of state-of-the-art aircraft such as the Lockheed
Constellation. Transcontinental and Western Airlines even rebranded itself as Trans World
Airlines (TWA) and began operating Lockheed Constellation aircraft. By 1947, the market
dynamics had shifted dramatically due to the rapid demobilization of military airlift forces,
which flooded the market with surplus transport aircraft, notably the DC-3. These usedaircraft, though considered obsolete for military use, found new demand in the civilian
sector as they could be converted into passenger planes at a low cost. This led to an
overproduction of planes and financial challenges for airlines, which was only exacerbatedby stagnant passenger traffic growth and reduced demand for civil aviation60.
The viability of international civil aviation was further complicated by regulatory issues.
While the Civil Aeronautics Board granted permission for airlines such as Pan Am andNorthwest to fly to Japan in 1946, the General Headquarters Supreme Commander for the
Allied Powers (GHQ/SCAP) in Japan was slow to act. It was not until April 1947 that
GHQ/SCAP allowed these airlines to operate flights to and from Japan. GHQ also limited
the use of civilian airport companies to Haneda Airport in Tokyo, which was under U.S.
military control, while other airports, such as Chitose Airport in Hokkaido in northern
Japan, Osaka Airport (Itami), and Fukuoka Airport, were placed under military authority61.
Moreover, to avoid accusations of monopolizing Japanese civil aviation, GHQ/SCAP
permitted other international airlines, including British Overseas Airways Company,
Canadian Pacific, Qantas, Philippine Airlines, and China Airlines to operate flights to andfrom Japan, albeit restricting them to Haneda Airport62.
58 Williams [1999], pp. 15, 18; Orders [2003], p. 175.
59 Davies [1972], pp. 376-377; Mak [2008], p. 15.
60 Bright [2020], pp. 79–80; Hühne [2017], p. 151.
61 NARA, Record Group (RG) 218 Entry UD 4 Box 28, Enclosure, “Appendix A: Discussion,” 11 October

1945, pp. 6–10; NARA, RG 331 UD 1148 Box 386 G4 Files, “Request for Use of International Civil
Communications by Northwest Airlines, Inc., and Pan American Airways, Inc.,” February 18, 1947, pp. 1–2.
62 Davies [1997], p. 464.

34

The Nexus of Militarization and Tourism in the “American Lake”
After World War II, the Pacific Ocean came under significant American influence, withislands that were once fiercely contested now occupied by U.S. forces. Guam, which had
been occupied by Japan during the war, was also reoccupied by U.S. forces. The U.S. Navystrongly advocated for the annexation of the Pacific region, particularly the islands ofMicronesia, which had been under Japanese rule since World War I. However, the State
Department opposed annexation, arguing that it would violate the rights of the island
peoples to self-determination; instead, it supported the idea of establishing a trusteeshipsystem. This difference in opinion between the military and the State Department led tocontroversy within the U.S. government regarding the Micronesia situation63.
While some military officers advocated for the cultural Americanization of Micronesia
through white American settlement, the U.S. used the region as a nuclear test site,
profoundly altering the culture, traditions, living conditions, and ecology of the region’s
Indigenous inhabitants64. Bikini Atoll, located in the northern part of the U.S.-occupied
Marshall Islands in Micronesia, was chosen as the site for the first post-war nuclear tests
due to its remoteness from the Pacific transportation network and its small population, thus
minimizing potential casualties65. President Truman approved the proposal in January 1946,
and preparations were made to conduct the tests. Despite domestic protests andinternational criticism, the first atomic bomb test was conducted on July 1 of that year,
targeting decommissioned U.S. Navy ships and Japanese and German battleships, followed
by a second test conducted on July 25, 194666. The United Nations did not recognize theUnited States’ international trusteeship of Micronesia until 1947, and the U.S. military’s
continued nuclear testing in the region may have been aimed at erasing the political andcultural influence of the Japanese mandate67.
After the atomic bomb tests at Bikini Atoll, the onset of the Cold War became evident inEurope and the Middle East in late 1946 and 1947. In response to the growing threat ofcommunism, President Harry S. Truman announced the “Truman Doctrine” in March 1947,
which aimed to provide military assistance to nations worldwide in resisting communist
expansion. To prepare for the challenges posed by communism, the Truman administration
developed a national security structure, leading to the passage of the National Security Act
of 1947. The National Security Act resulted in the merger of the Departments of the Armyand Navy and the creation of a new branch, the Air Force. Recognizing the criticalimportance of aviation in both military and civilian sectors, Truman established the Air
Policy Commission, also known as the Finletter Commission, led by Thomas K. Finletter,
who had served as a special assistant of Secretary of State, Cordell Hull, and a consultant
at the United Nations Conference on International Organization as San Francisco, toformulate national aviation policy. In December 1947, the Finletter Commission issued its
report titled “Surviving the Air Age,” outlining its recommendations for a comprehensive
aviation strategy68.
The Finletter Commission noted the duplication of the Army and Navy airlift forces andrecommended that airlift forces be integrated with the creation of the Air Force. The
committee also emphasized that the combined transport capabilities of the present Armyand Navy airlift forces and civilian airlift companies were inadequate for strategic airlift
63 Foltos [1989], pp. 317–323.
64 Friedman [1997], pp. 49–70.
65 Teaiwa [1994], pp. 84–109.
66 Graybar [1986], pp. 888–907.
67 The South Pacific was militarized and suffered nuclear testing–induced radioactive contamination. It was

not until the mid-1970s that the area was developed for international civil aviation. Kissing [2014], p. 38.
68 Crackel [1998], pp. 63–64.

35

KAORI TAKADA
operations responsible for rapid logistics in preparation for future wars, and it
recommended that the transport capabilities of civilian airlift companies be enhanced andmobilized to conduct airlift operations as they had been during World War II. The Air
Policy Board recommended that the Military Air Transport Service, which integrated the
Army and Navy airlift forces, oversee airlift activities to meet the needs of the Army, Navy,and Air Force. Based on these recommendations, the Military Air Transport Service(MATS) was established under the Air Force to oversee airlift activities for the Army,
Navy, and Air Force. Secretary of Defense Forrestal issued a decision in January 1948 toconsolidate the Army and Navy airlift forces and establish the MATS. Airlift routes weredivided into three regions: Europe, the continental United States, and the Pacific. Hickam
Air Force Base in Hawaiʻi was designated as the starting point for flights to Tokyo in the
Pacific region, reflecting the strategic importance of Hawaiʻi in post-war military
operations69.
The intensification of the Cold War brought about challenges such as the Berlin
Blockade, during which West Berliners faced shortages of essential supplies like food, fuel,and medicine. The Soviet Union hoped that these difficulties would force Western powers
to withdraw from West Berlin. However, MATS spearheaded a massive airlift operation
known as the Berlin Airlift, which played a crucial role in ensuring the survival of West
Berliners by airlifting supplies into the city. The Berlin Airlift demonstrated thesignificance of strategic airlift operations in the context of the Cold War, highlighting thecapability of the United States to sustain its allies in the face of Soviet aggression.
Following the success of the Berlin Airlift, the outbreak of the Korean War in June 1950
further underscored the importance of airlift operations70. The Korean War led to theestablishment of a close partnership between the military and civilian sectors in conducting
airlift operations. Additionally, the conflict prompted further militarization of the Pacificregion, as the United States sought to bolster its presence and capabilities to counter
communist aggression. Overall, the challenges posed by the Cold War propelled therevitalization of U.S. military airlift capabilities and underscored the critical role of airlift
operations in the strategic defense and support of country’s allies.

3. The Korean War and Militarism and Tourism in the “American Lake”
The Korean War played a significant role in facilitating the establishment of military
alliances in the Pacific region. The approval of Japanese commercial airlines was an
outcome of the San Francisco Peace Conference and the Japan–U.S. Security Treaty, which
provided for the permanent use of U.S. military bases in Japan. Additionally, Australia and
New Zealand, foreseeing competition for operations in the Pacific, strengthened its
relations with the United States as British military power in the region declined. Bothcountries contributed troops to the Korean War as part of the UN’s forces. Emphasizing theimportance of building alliances in the Pacific, the U.S. government signed security treaties(ANZUS) with Australia and New Zealand, further solidifying regional partnerships71.
The war significantly heightened both U.S. military and civilian airlift operations. MATS
and mobilized civilian airlines played an increasingly crucial role in transporting supplies
69 Williams [1999], pp. 22–23.
70 Williams [1999], pp. 25–27.
71 Orders [2003], p. 190.

36

The Nexus of Militarization and Tourism in the “American Lake”
and personnel to Japan, which became a frontline base for the conflict. Prior to the outbreakof the Korean War, the Pacific Division of MATS airlifted an average of seventy tons ofmunitions per month to Japan. However, after the war began, Hickam Air Force Base in
Hawaiʻi saw its role strengthen as MATS’ Pacific Division commenced wartime operations.
Aircraft from various parts of the world, including mobilized civilian planes, landed at
Hickam, which became key military airlift hub on the frontline. In 1952, during the Korean
War, the Air Force established a system for mobilizing commercial airlines for military
purposes. Companies such as Transocean Airlines and the cargo-focused Flying Tigers
were among the first to participate in military airlifts as chartered flights. Additionally,major commercial carriers like Pan Am, Northwest, United, Seaboard & Western, andOverseas National also contributed to military airlift operations between the U.S. West
Coast and Japan. By September 1950, 345 commercial aircrafts had been chartered forthese purposes, although MATS soon faced budgetary challenges72.
A committee was formed within the U.S. government on the request of the Secretary of
the Air Force and the Chairperson of the National Security Resources Administration to
respond to the need to ensure wartime airlift capability. In March 1951, President Trumanissued Executive Order 10219, which mobilized civilian airlines for military service. This
led to a significant increase in trans-Pacific flights, with 40 percent of them being
conducted by commercial airlines. Notably, among the passengers transported were 35 U.S.
soldiers liberated from a North Korean prisoner-of -war camp for whom Hickam Air Force
Base became a symbol of relief and joy73.
Hickam Air Force Base played a significant role in the post-World War II era, serving as
the home base for MATS, which was organized in 1948. In the late 1940s, housingdevelopments were constructed for military families not only in Hickam but also in
garrisoned areas and occupied territories of Japan and Germany. Hickam Base notably
became the site of the first military family housing project in the United States. Various
amenities, such as dormitories for single soldiers, military family housing, restaurants,
gymnasiums, schools, movie theaters, and day care centers, were established on the base.
The housing was designed to resemble suburban housing on the U.S. mainland, featuring
spacious layouts, large gardens, and tropical plants from the South Seas. This initiativereflected the broader aim of creating “Little America” residential areas around the worldthat would mirror typical suburban lifestyles found in the continental U.S.74.
In addition to its role as a residential hub, Hawaiʻi also served as a crucial training base.
In 1951, the U.S. Army established the Infantry Training Center at Scofield Barracks tomobilize and train personnel from various regions, including the mainland U.S., Hawaiʻi,Guam, and American Samoa. The military and the Hawaiian territorial government
anticipated that military personnel visiting Hawaiʻi would contribute to tourism.
Interestingly, the military even referred to trainees as “tourists in military uniforms.”
However, the mobility of military personnel, who often move between bases on themainland and overseas, presents a challenge: it is difficult to accurately account for theirpresence. Consequently, military personnel stationed in Hawaiʻi or visiting for training ortransportation, who may not be officially recorded by immigration authorities, effectively
become transient tourists and consumers during their time in the region75.
72 Crackel [1998], p. 69.
73 Priddy [1994], pp. 12–15; Krejcarek and Chute [1985], pp. 42, 76.
74 Alvah [2007], pp. 21–34; Gillem [2007], pp. 73–121; Krejcarek and Chute [1985], pp. 78–92; Blower[2017], pp. 457-458.
75 Man [2018], p. 80; Morris-Suzuki [2010], pp. 123–124.

37

KAORI TAKADA
The militarization of Hawaiʻi during the Cold War era was intertwined with the dynamics
of local politics and the struggle for democratization. Prior to this period, the political andeconomic power in Hawaiʻi was concentrated among the haole, especially the Big Five,haole sugar plantation owners and landlords, who were Republican. After World War II,
however, there was a shift in power dynamics driven by the emergence of labor unions andthe mobilization of demobilized soldiers. Postwar Hawaiʻi witnessed the organization ofplantation and dock workers into unions that aimed to address economic exploitation.
However, union leaders were often targeted and labeled communists, leading to the
suppression of labor movements. In response, demobilized World War II veterans,
including Japanese and Chinese Americans, began to advocate for full U.S. citizenship andspearheaded the statehood movement. This movement gained momentum, culminating in
the victory of the Democratic Party in the 1954 Hawaiian congressional elections, known
as the “Bloodless Revolution.” The success of the statehood movement led to its admission
as the 50th state of the United States in 1959. However, this outcome disappointed Native
Hawaiians who had sought decolonization and the restoration of Hawaiian sovereignty.
Meanwhile, Asian Hawaiians, who played a significant role in advocating for statehood,valued their relationship with the federal government, particularly the military76.
The facilitation of statehood and alignment with federal interests, including the military,contributed to the process of militarization in Hawaiʻi. As a result, the expansion of
military bases and functions in the Pacific region, including the establishment of new
training bases, became intertwined with the political and social developments in Hawaiʻiduring the Cold War era. Veterans played a significant role in shaping Hawaiʻi’s militarylandscape, given their affinity for the military and military bases. The U.S. government andmilitary extensively expanded Hawaiʻi’s military capabilities, with Oahu alone hosting
sixteen military bases. Substantial portions of the military budget were allocated to
Hawaiʻi, highlighting its strategic importance in Washington’s Asia-Pacific policy77.
Hawaiʻi also emerged as a crucial hub for U.S. nuclear forces in the Pacific, marked bymultiple nuclear tests conducted in the region. Beginning with the atomic bomb test at
Bikini Atoll in 1946, the U.S. conducted 106 nuclear tests, which had significant
environmental and health implications for the region. The Castle Bravo hydrogen bomb test
in 1954, conducted during the Eisenhower administration, had particularly far-reachingconsequences, with radioactive fallout affecting various areas, including Micronesia, Japan,
Australia, India, and Hawaiʻi. The presence of as many as 3,100 nuclear weapons in
Hawaiʻi further proved its pivotal role in U.S. nuclear strategy during the Cold War78.
Moreover, the growing political influence of the Asian population in Hawaiʻi became
increasingly significant in shaping U.S. Cold War policy toward the U.S.-Soviet Union,
especially in the context of Asia’s rising importance. The establishment of the People’s
Republic of China, the end of the Korean War, and the First Indochina War, and theemergence of newly independent Asian and African nations critical of the U.S.–Soviet Cold
War dynamics, highlighted the need for a racially fair approach. In response, commercial
airlines in the United States, such as Pan Am, began reassessing their policies, including
diversifying their workforce to include second-generation Japanese Americans cabin
attendants for the Asia-Pacific routes to accommodate the growing passenger traffic from
Asia, marking a shift toward greater inclusivity and engagement with the region79.
76 Klein [2003], p. 248; Man [2018], pp. 81-82; Skwiot [2010], pp. 161–162.
77 Skwiot [2010], pp. 161-162; Lind [1984/1985], p. 37.
78 Klein [2003], p. 309; Norris, Atkin & Burr [1999], p. 30; Fitzgerald [2022], p. 91.
79 Yano [2011], pp. 2-3.

38

The Nexus of Militarization and Tourism in the “American Lake”
Pan Am ordered the Boeing 707 and Douglas DC-8 jetliners in 1955. Following Pan Am,
many commercial airlines upgraded from using four-cylinder propellor-engine airliners tojet airliners. This was the arrival of the first jet age. The transition to jet aircraft
revolutionized air travel and tourism in Hawaiʻi and the broader Pacific region. While theUnited Kingdom initially led the jetliner market with the de Havilland Comet, a series ofaccidents tarnished its reputation, allowing American manufacturers like Douglas andBoeing to dominate the industry. Pan Am’s introduction of the Boeing 707 marked the
beginning of the intercontinental jet era, with its service reaching Honolulu International
Airport in 1959, coinciding with Hawaiʻi’s statehood80.
Despite the growing political influence of Asian Hawaiians, the economic influence ofthe haole community remained significant. This was evident in the rapid development of
tourist infrastructure, including large hotels like the 650-room Holiday Inn, the 31-story
1,900-room Waikiki Sheraton, and others like the Hawaiian Regent and Hyatt Regency.
United Airlines’ introduction of DC-8s and its efforts to attract more passengers, such assponsoring a Professional Golf Association tournament in Hawaiʻi, further boosted tourist
visits to the islands. The military played a crucial role in the development of Hawaʻi’s
tourism industry, as the introduction of jet aircraft and the expansion of tourist hotels were
often driven by military-related initiatives. This convergence of military and civilianinterests contributed to the popularization of Hawaiʻi’s militourism, or mass tourism, which
had its roots in the facilities and infrastructure established by the military during and afterWorld War II81.
The period between 1950 and 1959 witnessed a significant surge in tourism in Hawaiʻi,with tourist spending increasing by 350% and the number of visitors rising from 34,000 in
1945 to 243,000 in 1959. United Airlines played a role in this growth by introducing
various initiatives, including family fare discount programs and the introduction of thecoach class, which made air travel more accessible to families and individuals alike.
Additionally, military visitors to Hawaiʻi, not accounted for in official tourism statistics,
also contributed to the island’s tourism industry, as MATS was actively involved in military
airlift operations across the Pacific and Atlantic Oceans82.
In 1962, three years after Hawaiʻi attained statehood, the last atmospheric nuclear test in
the Pacific occurred amid heightened tensions between the United States and the Soviet
Union over Cuba. The detonation of nuclear devices led to the forced relocation ofresidents from Bikini Atoll and Eniwetok Atoll in the Marshall Islands. U.S.
servicemembers stationed in the region witnessed these tests from proximity, with somestationed as close as ten miles away. The Atomic Energy Commission portrayed these
nuclear tests as public spectacles, even allowing local families and schoolchildren toobserve tests conducted in Nevada. The 1962 atmospheric hydrogen bomb test conductedon Johnston Island, just west of Hawaiʻi, was visible from the islands and American
Samoa. Witnesses described the sky turning vivid colors, ranging from lime green tolemonade pink and finally red, creating a surreal and alarming sight. Reports detailed how
residents, tourists, and individuals who resembled soldiers watched the test unfold from
Waikiki Beach. This event underscored Hawaiʻi’s inclusion in the broader Cold War
landscape of nuclear testing and geopolitical tensions83.
80 Engel [2007], pp.173–174; Davies [2007], pp. 40–41, 50–52.
81 Allen [2004], pp. 37–40; Mak [2008], p. 16.
82 Klein [2003], p. 245; Lust [2009], pp. 153–159; Williams [1999], p. 37.
83 Nye [1994], pp. 232-234; “Space bomb in color: EERIE Spectacle in Pacific Sky,” Life, July 20, 1962, pp.

25–34.

39

KAORI TAKADA

Conclusion
This paper comprehensively examined the formation of militourism in Hawaiʻi, tracing its
roots back to the annexation of Hawai`i by the United States in the 19th century. It
highlighted how settler colonialism and the overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawaiʻi paved
the way for white American rule and military control in the region. Japanese immigrants in
Hawaiʻi, who were also spreading across the Pacific as part of Japan’s imperial expansion,
became a focal point of concern for the white elite in Hawaiʻi. The U.S. government andmilitary capitalized on tensions with Japan to assert control over Hawaiʻi, further
militarizing the islands and seizing land for military purposes. This expansion of militarycontrol over Hawaiʻi reflected a renewed imperialist conception of the Pacific as the“American Lake” in the 20th century. The Pacific region, including Micronesia, wasbrought under the influence of the U.S. military, with Oahu emerging as a key strategic
base. Pearl Harbor, serving as the home port of the Pacific Fleet, and Hickam Air Force
Base, established in the 1920s, were pivotal in the military’s operations in the Pacific.
Additionally, the expansion of Schofield Barracks during the Korean War further solidified
Oahu’s role as a critical military hub. Throughout World War II and the Cold War, Oahu’s
military base functions were enhanced, underscoring its significance in U.S. military
strategy in the Pacific region.
The aftermath of World War II saw a clash between the United States and Great Britain
over international civil aviation, particularly in the Atlantic Ocean. This conflict led to theestablishment of the Chicago–Bermuda system, which established the framework for the
postwar international civil aviation. Meanwhile, in the Pacific, the United Kingdom sought
to counter U.S. influence through the establishment of the British Commonwealth Pacific
Airlines (BCPA) with the Commonwealth realms. In the Pacific theater, the United States
granted operating rights to Pan Am and Northwest Airlines for routes between the U.S.
West Coast and Japan. United Airlines was also permitted to operate routes between the
U.S. West Coast and Hawaiʻi. However, Pan Am attempted to monopolize the civil aviation
market in postwar Japan, exacerbating tensions in the region. The situation was further
complicated by the outbreak of the Korean War and the subsequent involvement of theUnited States. This geopolitical context heightened competition and strategic maneuveringin the Pacific, particularly in the realm of civil aviation.
The Korean War had significant geopolitical ramifications, particularly in the Pacificregion. This led to the signing of the U.S.– Japan Security Treaty, which transformed Japan
into a strategic ally for the United States and further militarized the region. Additionally,
military alliances with Australia and New Zealand further bolstered the Pacific’s militarycapabilities. Furthermore, the war increased military activities in the Pacific, with Hickam
Air Force Base in Hawaiʻi becoming a crucial hub for airlift operations to Japan and Korea.
Civilian airlines played a substantial role in troop transport during this period, contributing
to their experience and involvement in Pacific routes. Moreover, Hawaiʻi’s military
function was strengthened after World War II, with the islands becoming a center of air
mobility in the Pacific. The development of infrastructure and recreational facilities in
Hawaiʻi catered to the needs of soldiers and their families stationed there, earning it thenickname “America Town.” Political developments within Hawaiʻi, including the growing
influence of Asian Hawaiians of military veterans, emphasized cooperation with federal

40

The Nexus of Militarization and Tourism in the “American Lake”
government and the armed forces. Simultaneously, economic interests, primarily driven by
the haole minority with significant economic power, prioritized tourism, and landdevelopment, including alliances with mainland capital for hotel construction. Hawaiʻi isbeing granted statehood further facilitated the growth of tourism, which was heralded by
the introduction of jet service by passenger airlines such as Pan Am.
This paper scrutinized the intricate relationship between Hawaiʻi’s transformation into a
tourist destination and its role as a key U.S. military base in the Pacific. The militarizationof Hawaiʻi, particularly through bases like Pearl Harbor Naval Base and Hickam Air Force
Base, played a significant role in shaping the island’s tourism industry. Military personnel
stationed in Hawaiʻi, although not traditionally counted as tourists, contributed to the local
economy and tourism sector. The military’s presence in Hawaiʻi, especially after the Pearl
Harbor attack, led to the development of tourism infrastructure and activities catering tosoldiers and their families. This dynamic would have persisted during subsequent military
engagements, such as the Vietnam War, further underscoring the symbiotic relationshipbetween militarization and tourism in Hawaiʻi. Further research on this topic could provide
valuable insights into the complex interplay between military activities, tourism
development, and local economies in regions with significant military presence. This could
pave the way for a more comprehensive understanding of the multifaceted impacts ofmilitarization on tourism and society at large.
[This work was supported by JSPS Kaken Grant Number 23K01499 and was based on the
Panel Presentation in the American Historical Association Annual Conference, 2024, San
Francisco. RIHGAT supported the author for travel grant to participate in the AHA Annual
Conference, 2024.][The author would like to thank to the anonymous reviewers for their insightful comments
on earlier drafts of this article.]41

KAORI TAKADA
References
Donna Alvah [2007] Unofficial Ambassadors: American Military Families Overseas and the Cold War,New York University Press.
Eiichiro Azuma [2005] Between Two Empires: Race, History, and Transnationalism in Japanese America,
Oxford University Press.
Beth Bailey and David Farber [1992] the First Strange Place: Race and Sex in World War II Hawaiʻi,
Johns Hopkins University Press.
Beatrice B. Berle and Travis B. Jacobs, eds. [1973] Navigating the Rapids, 1918-1971: From the Paper of
Adolf A. Berle, Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
Mansel G. Blackford [2017] Pathway to the Present: U.S. Development and its Consequences in the
Pacific, The University of Hawaiʻi Press.
Brooke L. Blower [2017] “Nation of Outposts: Forts, Factories, Bases, and the Making of American
Power,” Diplomatic History, 41-3.
Charles D. Bright [2020] The Jet Makers: The Aerospace Industry from 1945 to 1972, University Press of
Kansas.
Sean Connelly [2021] “Our City as Ahupua’a: For Justice- Advancing Futures,” in Noelani GoodyearKa’ōpua, Craig Howes, Jonathan Kay Kamakawiwo’ole, Osorio, Aiko Yamashiro, eds., The Value of
Hawaiʻi 3: Hulihia, the Turning, The University of Hawaiʻi Press.
Theodore Joseph Crackel 1998] A History of the Civil Reserve Air Freet, Air Force History & Museum
Program, Washington D. C.
Wesley F. Craven and James L. Cate [1958] The Army Air Force in World War II: vol. 7: Service around
the World, The University of Chicago Press.
Robert Daley [1980] An American Saga: Juan Trippe and his Pan Am Empire, Random House.
Robert Dallek [1979] Franklin D. Roosevelt and American Foreign Policy, 1932-1945, Oxford University
Press.
Paul D’Arcy [2018] Transforming Hawaiʻi: Balancing Coercion and Consent in Eighteenth-Century
Kānaka Maoli Statecraft, Australia National University Press.
R. E. G. Davies [1972] Airlines of the United States since 1914, Smithsonian.
R. E. G. Davies [2007] A History of Airlines of the Jet Age, Rowman & Littlefield.
Jane Desmond [1999] Staging Tourism: Bodies on Display from Waikiki to Sea World, University of
Chicago Press.
Alan P. Dobson [1991] Peaceful Air Warfare: The United States, Britain, and the Politics of International
Aviation, Oxford University Press.
Alan Dobson [2017] A History of International Civil Aviation: From Its Origins through Transformative
Evolution, Routledge.
John W. Dower [1974] “Occupied Japan and the American Lake,” in Mark Selen and Edward Friedman,
eds., America’s Asia, Vintage Books.
Karl C. Dod [1999] United States Army in World War II: The Technical Service: The Corps of Engineers:
The War Against Japan, United States Government Printing Office.
Jeffrey A. Engel 2007] Cold War at 30,000 Feet: The Anglo-American Fight for Aviation Supremacy,
Cambridge University Press.
David Fitzgerald 2022] Militarization and the American Century: War, the United States and the World
since 1941, Bloomsbury.
Lester J. Foltos [1989] “The New Pacific Barrier: America’s Search for Security in the Pacific, 19451947,” Diplomatic History, 13-3.
William M Franklin and E. B. Perkins [1963] Foreign Relations of the United States, 1942, volume 4, The
Near East and Africa.
Hal M. Friedman [2000] Creating an American Lake: United States Imperialism and Strategic Security in
the Pacific Basin, 1945-1947, Bloomsbury.
Hal M. Friedman [1997] “‘Races Undesirable from a Military Point of View’: United States Cultural
Security in the Pacific Islands, 1945-1947,” The Journal of Pacific History, 32-1.
Candace Fujikane and Jonathan Y. Okamura, eds. [2008] Asian Settler Colonialism: from Local
Governance to the Habits of Everyday life in Hawaiʻi, University of Hawaiʻi Press.
Mark L. Gillem [2007] America Town: Building the Outposts of Empire, University of Minnesota Press.
Ayano GInoza [2016] “Space of ‘Militourism’: Intimacies of U.S. and Japanese Empires and Indigenous
Sovereignty in Okinawa,” International Journal of Okinawan Studies, 3-1.
Vernadette Vicuna Gonzalez [2013] Securing Paradise: Tourism and Militarism in Hawaiʻi and the42

The Nexus of Militarization and Tourism in the “American Lake”
Philippines, Duku University Press.
James Gormly [2013] “The Counter Iron Curtain: Crafting an American-Soviet Bloc Civil Aviation Policy:
1942-1960,” Diplomatic History, 37-2.
Atsushi Goto [2017] Wasure Rareta Kurofune: America Kita Taiheiyou Senryaku to Nihon Kaikoku[Forgotten Black Ships: America’s North Pacific Strategy and the Opening of Japan], Kodansha Sensho
Metier.
Lloyd J. Graybar [1986] “The 1946 Atomic Bomb Tests: Atomic Diplomacy or Bureaucratic Infighting?”
The Journal of American History, 72-4.
Kenneth J. Hagan [1991] This People&s Navy: The Making of American Sea Power, Free Press.
Kenneth J. Hagan and Ian J. Bickerton [2007] Unintended Consequences: the United States at War,
Reaktion Books, 2007.
Daniel R. Headrick [1991] the Invisible Weapon: Telecommunications and International Politics, 18511945, Oxford University Press.
Walter L. Hixson [2013] American Settler Colonialism: A History, Palgrave.
M.C. Hühne [2017] Pan Am: History, Design & Identity, Callisto Pub Gmbh, 2017.
Kyle Kajihiro [2008] “The Militarizing of Hawaiʻi: Occupation, Accommodation, and Resistance,” in
Candace Fujikane and Jonathan Y. Okamura, eds., Asian Settler Colonialism: from Local Governance tothe Habits of Everyday life in Hawaiʻi, University of Hawaiʻi Press.
Kyle Kajihiro [2009] “Resisting Militarization in Hawaiʻi,” in Catherine Lutz, ed., The Bases of Empire:
The Global Struggle against U.S. Military Posts, Pluto Press.
J. Kēhaulani Kanuanui [2008] Hawaiian Blood: Colonialism and the Politics of Sovereignty andIndigeneity, Duke University Press.
Christopher Kissing [2014] “Networks Enabling Air Transport Services in the South Pacific: 40 Years ofChange,” in Davil Timothy Duval, ed., Air Transport in the Asia Pacific, Routledge.
Cristina Klein [2003] Cold War Orientalism: Asia in the Middlebrow Imagination, 1945-1961, Universityof California Press.
John F. Kreis, ed. [2004] Piercing the Fog: Intelligence and Army Air Forces Operations in World War II,
University Press of the Pacific.
Capt. Kevin K. Krejcarek, eds. [1985] Sgt. Paul J. Chute, Hawaiʻi, Hickam: The First Fifty Years, Public
Affairs Division 15th Air Base Wing Hickam AFB.
Delia Malia Caparoso Konzett [2017] Hollywood’s Hawaiʻi: Race, Nation, and War, Rutgers University
Press.
Ian Y. Lind [1984/1985] “Ring of Steel: Notes on the Militarization of Hawaiʻi,” Social Process in
Hawaiʻi, 31.
Debbie Lisle [2016] Holidays in the Danger Zone; Entanglement of War and Tourism, the University of
Minnesota Press.
Daniel Lust [2009] Flying across America: The Airline Passenger Experience, University of Oklahoma
Press.
James Mak [2008] Developing a Dream Destination: Tourism and Tourism Policy Planning in Hawaiʻi,
University of Hawaiʻi Press.
Simeon Man [2018] Soldiering through Empire: Race and the Making of the Decolonizing Pacific,
University of California Press.
James D. Marchio [1996] “Days of Future Past: Joint Intelligence in World War II,” Joint Force Quarterly.
Robert S. Norris [1999] William M. Atkin & William Burr, “Where They Were,” The Bulletin of the Atomic
Scientists, 55-6.
David E. Nye [1994] American Technological Sublime, The MIT Press.
Ogimi Chotoku [1934] Waga Touchichi Nanyo Gunto Annai [Guide for our mandated Micronesia islandgroups], Kaigai Kenkyu Jo, 1934 [https://dl.ndl.go.jp/pid/1899980/1/114].
P. G. A. Orders [2003] Britain, Australia, New Zealand and the Challenge of the United States, 1939-1946,
Palgrave Macmillan.
Joanna Poblete [2021] “The American Island Empire: US Expansionism in the Pacific and the Caribbean,”in Kristin Hoganson and Jay Sexton, eds., The Cambridge History of America and the World: Volume II
1820-1900, Cambridge University Press.
Ronald N. Priddy [1994] A History of The Civil Reserve Air Fleet in Operations Desert Shield, Desert
Stom, and Desert Sortie, Volpe National Transportation Center.
Deborah Wing Ray [1975] “The Takoradi Route: Roosevelt’s Prewar Venture beyond the Western
Hemisphere,” The Journal of American History, 62-2.

43

KAORI TAKADA
Christen Tsuyuko Sasaki [2016] “Threads of Empire: Militourism and the Aloha Wear Industry in
Hawaiʻi,” American Quarterly, 68-3.
Harry N. Scheiber and Jane L. Scheiber [2016] Bayonets in Paradise: Martial Law in Hawaiʻi during
World War II, University of Hawaiʻi Press.
Giles Scott-Smith and David J. Snyder [2013] “A Test of Sentiments”: Civil Aviation, Alliance Politics,
and the KLM Challenge in Dutch American Relations,” Diplomatic History, 37-5.
Naoko Shimizu [1998] Japan, Race and Equality: The Racial Equality Proposal of 1919, Routledge.
Noenoe K. Silva [2004] Aloha Betrayed: Native Hawaiian Resistance to American Colonialism, Duke
University Press.
Henry Ladd Smith [1950] Airways Abroad: The Story of American World Air Routes, The University of
Wisconsin Press.
Christine Skwait [2010] The Purposes of Paradise: U.S. Tourism and Empire in Cuba and Hawaiʻi,
University of Pennsylvania Press.
Mark A. Stoler [1982] “From Continentalism to Globalism: General Stanley Embick, the Joint Strategic
Survey Committee, and the Military View of American National Policy during the Second World War,”
Diplomatic History, 6.
Tessa Morris- Suzuki [2010] Borderline Japan: Foreigners and Frontier Controls in the Post War Era,
Cambridge University Press.
Peter Svik [2020] Civil Aviation and the Globalization of the Cold War, Palgrave.
Kaori Takada [2020a], “A Total War for Mapping Japan: US Map-Making of Japanese Targets in WorldWar II” [in Japanese], Otsuma Hikaku Bunka, 21.
Kaori Takada [2011] Open Sky Diplomacy: The US Military-Civil Aviation Policy, 1938-1946 [inJapanese], Yushisha.
Kaori Takada [2020b], ed., The Century of Aviation: Airmindedness, World Wars, and the Cold War [inJapanese], Nihon Keizai Hyoronsha.
Seiichiro Takemine [2015] Marshall Islands: Living with Endless Nuclear Damage [in Japanese],
Shinsensha.
Mahito Takeuchi [2009] Imperfect Machinery? Missions, Imperial Authority, and the Pacific Labour
Trade, c. 1875-1901, VDM Verlag Dr. Mueller.
Teresia Teaiwa [1994] “Bikini and Other S/pacific N/oceans,” in Setsu Shigematsu and Keith L. Camacho,
eds., Militarized Currents: Toward a Decolonized Future in Asia and the Pacific, University of Minesota
Press, 2010 [originally published in The Contemporary Pacific, 6-1, pp. 84-109].
Teresia Teaiwa [1999] “Reading Paul Gauguin’s Noa Noa with Epeli Hau ‘ofa’s Kisses in the Nederends:
Militourism, Feminism, and the “Polynesian” Body,” in Vilsoni Hereniko and Rob Wilson, eds., Inside
Out: Literature, Cultural Politics, and Identity in the New Pacific, Rowman and Littlefield.
Phil Tiemeyer [2015] “Launching a nonaligned Airline: JAT Yugoslav Airways between East, West, andSouth, 1947-1962,” Diplomatic History, 41-1.
Jeffery S. Underwood [1991] The Wing of Democracy: The Influence of Air Power on the Roosevelt
Administration, 1933-1941, Texas A & M University Press.
US Department of State [1948] Foreign Relations of the United States, 1942, volume 4, The Near East andAfrica, GPO, U.S. President’s Air Policy Commission, Survival in the Air Age, a Report, GPO.
Jenifer Van Vleck [2013] Empire of the Air: Aviation and the American Ascendancy, Cambridge University
Press.
John D. Wang [2022] Hong Kong Takes Flight: Commercial Aviation and the Making of a Global Hub,
1930s-1998, Harvard University Asia Center.
Nicholas M. Williams [1999] Aircraft of the United States’ Military Air Transport Service, Midland
Publishing.
Christine R. Yano [2011] Airborne Dreams: “Nisei” Stewardesses and Pan American World Airways,
Duke University Press.
Katsuhiko Yokoi [2020] “The Formation of National Air Power in Cold War India.; in Kaori Takada, ed.,The Century of Aviation: Airmindedness, World Wars, and the Cold War [in Japanese], Nihon Keizai
Hyoronsha.
S. Waqar H. Zaidi [2020] “Pakistani Civil Aviation and U.S. Aid to Pakistan, 1950 to 1961” in Kaori
Takada, ed., The Century of Aviation: Airmindedness, World Wars, and the Cold War [in Japanese],
Nihon Keizai Hyoronsha.

44