Background:

Moments of war and conflict inherently create an “us versus them” mentality, where someone or something is considered the enemy threat that must be overcome. As different groups have been targeted during times of war throughout U.S. history, different historically marginalized and oppressed communities have stood up for one another, challenging the assumption and creation of an enemy in those considered “other.”

Essay:

Often, war and conflict require picking one side over another. This results in heightened paranoia and patriotism which can give way to the targeting of those who are considered “other.” Under the guise of national security, a primary concern, times of national crises can result in increased racist and xenophobic sentiments and violence, government surveillance of its citizens and residents, and worse. In these instances, those being targeted do not have much power to prevent the infringement of their rights.

For many communities of color in the United States, being in solidarity with oppressed groups is complicated given the history of racism, xenophobia, and white supremacy. Solidarity could put them at risk for increased racism, xenophobia, and surveillance. Yet, communities have risen to the challenge. Throughout U.S. history, there have been many instances in which U.S. militarism and policies have been challenged through displays of solidarity with the oppressed group.

In 1898, the United States took control of Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Philippines as a result of the Spanish-American War. The Philippines had been seeking independence from Spain, its previous colonial authority, and revolted against American authority, leading to the Philippine-American War (1899-1902). As U.S. troops were sent to the Philippines, the Black community was divided in its feelings about the war. On one hand, some members of the Black community believed Black people fighting for the United States abroad would further their own fight for racial justice at home. Yet, others supported Filipino independence and didn’t think people of color should support U.S. colonial expansion.

Four Black army units, known as the Buffalo Soldiers, served during the war and some of these Black Americans began feeling sympathetic to the Filipino cause. Additionally, Filipinos created propaganda specifically targeting Black soldiers and encouraging them to desert by citing the racist treatment enacted against them and their communities in the United States. As a result, an estimated fifteen to thirty Black soldiers deserted the U.S. army to join Filipino insurgents in their fight for independence. One of these deserters, Private David Fagen (1875-?), became known as “Insurecto Captain.” He became a guerrilla leader and was so successful that the United States placed a bounty on his head. The Philippines ultimately lost the war, but the refusal of Black soldiers to support the United States in a racial, colonial war was a significant act of solidarity between two communities oppressed by the United States.

In 1941, after Japan attacked Pearl Harbor in Hawai‘i, the United States officially entered World War II (1939-1945). In 1942, President Franklin D. Roosevelt (1882-1945) signed Executive Order 9066 to incarcerate over 120,000 Japanese Americans – about two-thirds of whom were U.S. citizens. The attack by Japan led the United States to view nearly all Japanese Americans, especially those on the West Coast, as possibly disloyal and untrustworthy due to their perceived allegiance to Japan over the United States.

Japanese Americans were forcefully removed from their homes with very little notice and no idea where they would be sent or for how long they would be detained. They were spread across ten different incarceration camps and lived in poor and harsh conditions. No official charges were brought against them and they did not receive hearings before being incarcerated – this was a violation of their constitutional rights to due process and equal protection.

Most mainstream media leading up to the war was heavily anti-Asian in sentiment, creating the “yellow peril” narrative that further vilified Chinese and Japanese people in the United States. Such messages were used to justify the incarceration of Japanese Americans. Yet, there were still those who publicly challenged and opposed this treatment of Japanese Americans. Some Black and Jewish Americans described the incarceration as a violation of Japanese Americans’ rights and as highly undemocratic.

Black communities viewed the treatment of Japanese Americans within the larger context of a society that historically oppressed people of color. For example, The Chicago Defender, a Black newspaper, related their own mistreatment in the country to the targeting of Japanese Americans and recognized that the color of their skin – more than actual concerns of national security – had driven their incarceration.

Some Jewish Americans, especially those on the West Coast, similarly recognized how the panic caused by the attack on Pearl Harbor and the war created a target out of Japanese Americans. On the day following the attack on Pearl Harbor, two rabbis, Samuel Koch (1874-1944) and Irving Reichert (1895-1968), expressed concerns about the anger and resentment targeted against Japanese Americans and urged the public not to panic.

The Jewish American community could also relate to Japanese Americans as they became increasingly targeted by rising antisemitism in the 1930s. However, as the war progressed and the Jewish population of Europe faced genocide, many Jewish Americans began to focus more on the war effort than the incarceration of Japanese Americans.

Still, both the Black and Jewish communities played a significant role in publicly challenging the national security narrative employed to incarcerate Japanese Americans.

As a result of the wartime incarceration, many members of, and organizations within, the Japanese American community became strong, vocal allies for other groups facing similar moments of injustice. On September 11, 2001 (referred to as 9/11), the United States was attacked with airplanes hijacked by Al-Qaeda, an Islamic terrorist group. Shortly after 9/11, many South Asian, Arab, Muslim, and Middle Eastern Americans faced racial profiling, hate crimes, and other discriminatory acts. They were targeted as scapegoats for the attack, and many people in the United States began to question the “American-ness” and loyalty of these individuals and communities.

The attacks and resulting fear led to heightened security and anti-immigrant policies. For example, the USA PATRIOT Act, passed in October 2001, was designed to stop and punish terrorist acts in the United States. It allowed for the legal surveillance of certain communities, including immigrants. In practice, this act weakened and, in some cases, violated privacy rights by allowing government access and interference without probable cause.

Post-9/11 programs and surveillance were dedicated to collecting information about people in the United States that would illuminate suspicious activity or reveal domestic terrorist plots. This included planting FBI informants who were Muslim - or pretending to be Muslim - and allowing local police departments to spy on mosques, community organizations, and other spaces. It also created stricter rules for screening foreign visitors from twenty-five countries - all but one of which was a Muslim-majority country. Individuals were detained and even deported through these programs despite the lack of actual terrorism charges being brought against them.

In this moment of intense Islamophobia, Japanese Americans took a stand for the rights of South Asian, Muslim, Arab, and Middle Eastern Americans. Prominent Japanese American leaders such as Fred Korematsu (1919-2005) and Yuri Kochiyama (1921-2014), both of whom had been impacted by wartime incarceration, spoke in support of Muslim American rights. They urged the U.S. government and the public to not allow the fundamental liberties of these communities to be targeted like Japanese Americans had suffered during World War II.

In Los Angeles, the Japanese American community joined the Muslim American community in protesting the forced registration of Muslim men under the National Security Entry-Exit Registration System, and the surveillance of communities by the Los Angeles Police Department.

These instances highlight how easily a minority group’s civil liberties and rights can be violated in moments of conflict and amidst concerns of national security. In these moments, the vocal and vigilant support of other communities is of utmost importance as the basis of safeguarding the civil liberties of all people.