Thu, 06 Jul 2000 http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/news/local/html98/trah06m_20000706.html Codetalker G.I. Joe speaks volumes My wife has a new toy. I heard the news from my sons who informed me that she had bought the toy - at a toy store, no less - and that they were not allowed to play with it. There it was: The Codetalker G.I. Joe doll. My wife is Navajo and she grew up knowing her grandfather was a codetalker during World War II. She picks up the box and demonstrates, pulling the string as we hear a phrase that's roughly written in English as "jo'kayed'joh'be'al'doh'cid'da'hi'coh." G.I. Joe just said "request mortar fire." The doll really tells an American story. It's about a nation that once tried to erase the Navajo language through government boarding schools. Yet when war came, this same language was found to be useful. Some historians say that the more than 400 codetalkers and their unbreakable code were the key to Marine Corps success in the Pacific theater. This wasn't even the first time the military turned to Native American people and languages during a time of conflict: This has occurred from the beginning of this country, including during the "Indian" wars when tribal scouts fought wearing soldier blue. It is in this context that I am so galled by a recent story from The Spokesman-Review in Spokane. The newspaper reports that the Republican Party passed a resolution at its state convention calling for the end of tribal governments. A briefly debated resolution calls on the federal government to "take whatever steps necessary to terminate all such non-republican forms of government on Indian reservations, and compensate those citizens who have wrongly suffered loss due to denial of their constitutionallyguaranteed rights to be governed by a republican form of government." (No words about compensating tribal members for stripping their property rights.) In other words: pay the non-Indian residents of reservations, tell tribal governments to roll up and go away, and move on. But what if that doesn't work? Sponsor John Fleming told the Spokesman-Review it probably could be done peacefully, but if tribes fight back, "then the U.S. Army and the Air Force and the Marines and the National Guard are going to have to battle back." Political termination of tribal governments is a policy that's been tried been tried before - and it failed. Only a few decades ago, the Colville Confederated Tribes in this state barely survived termination attempts by the Congress. That tribe is stronger today - economically, politically and culturally - because it convinced its own membership, and then the greater community, that the U.S. ought to continue to honor its word. This position is mainstream Republican. It was, after all, President Nixon who told the Congress that termination had been a mistake. But that is a political argument; one I am passionate about, but certainly one worthy of discussion. That is not true when someone raises a military solution. Flemming's very point is dishonorable and unreasonable and ought to be repudiated by every Republican who cares about justice and fair play. Pick a war, any war, and I'll draw up a list of American Indian veterans. Native people are among the first to enlist in any conflict. Visit any reservation community and you'll easily discover displays of American flags that are as woven into the culture as a beadwork pattern. My wife didn't know what her grandfather did during World War II, other than being a codetalker. He would not talk about it. He was sworn to keep the secrets inside his head. His family never knew what had happened during the war. But a legacy was created, and the relationship between Navajos and Marines continues (a nephew is now serving). Our two boys can also look to the G.I. Joe doll as a reminder of how their ancestors contributed to freedom, too.