New Cabinet: Removing Mental Lapses about Futenma Airbase and Safety
Prime Minister Noda’s cabinet has shown that it will continue to support the agreement with the United States over the relocation of Futenma Airbase from Henoko Bay to Nago City. When it comes to policies to guarantee safety, the government can’t help but stop thinking. A majority of Okinawans are seeking for unconditional return of the island or relocation of the base out of the prefecture or country. In reality, achieving such an agreement is impossible with these demands.
If Okinawa adheres to these unacceptable agreements, it will only increase distrust and aggravate relations with the United States. We need to change the discriminatory policy that forces these bases upon Okinawans just because the bases are already there. We should start working towards a feasible plan of relocating the base outside of the prefecture or country.
The Democratic Party publicly promised in 2009 during elections for the House of Representatives that “we will look at revising the current state of U.S. bases in Japan and reorganizing U.S. forces.” However, Foreign Minister Kouichirou Genba and Minister of Defense Yasuo Ichikawa made statements that showed that from the beginning there was no public promise. They stated that there was “a temporary disruption in the U.S.-Japan relationship due to the Futenma Airbase problem”; and, “I would like to tenaciously respond to Okinawans while seeking understanding.” I feel danger, and at the same time, I think sadly upon the current political climate that unashamedly goes back on public promises.
What concerns me is Chairman of Policy Bureau Seiji Maehara’s tendency for concentrating his energy on the Henoko Bay relocation plan. Prime Minister Yoshihiko Noda’s policy is to gain understanding from the chairman of policy bureau each time the government makes a decision. I am worried that these policies that ignore local opinions are being pushed through ever more.
Deputy Chief Cabinet Secretary Tsuyoshi Saito could live up to expectations. In January of 2010, he convened a meeting for opposition to the relocation of the Henoko base inside Okinawa. At that meeting he stated: “It would be preferable for the base to be moved to Guam.” In that same year in October at a symposium, he emphasized that it would be impossible to relocate the base inside the prefecture due the current situation in Okinawa.
What is being asked of Secretary Saito is that he explain the actual situation to the cabinet ministers, not take bureaucrats’ claims on blind acceptance, and attempt to make people think for themselves. If he can get them to use some reason, then they will be able to understand the absurdity that 74 percent of Okinawa land is for U.S.-Japan military use while being only 0.6 percent of all land in Japan.
The U.S. occupied Okinawa at the end of the most gruesome land war. The bases were built after the land was forcibly confiscated. Even after the 1972 reversion of Okinawa to Japan, the occupation situation remains mostly the same (the Futenma Airbase only takes a measly 480 hectares). If the government ever feels like it, then they could surely secure the return of Okinawa without relocation of bases within the prefecture. I hope for a cabinet that fixes its mistakes.
If Okinawa adheres to these unacceptable agreements, it will only increase distrust and aggravate relations with the United States. We need to change the discriminatory policy that forces these bases upon Okinawans just because the bases are already there. We should start working towards a feasible plan of relocating the base outside of the prefecture or country.
The Democratic Party publicly promised in 2009 during elections for the House of Representatives that “we will look at revising the current state of U.S. bases in Japan and reorganizing U.S. forces.” However, Foreign Minister Kouichirou Genba and Minister of Defense Yasuo Ichikawa made statements that showed that from the beginning there was no public promise. They stated that there was “a temporary disruption in the U.S.-Japan relationship due to the Futenma Airbase problem”; and, “I would like to tenaciously respond to Okinawans while seeking understanding.” I feel danger, and at the same time, I think sadly upon the current political climate that unashamedly goes back on public promises.
What concerns me is Chairman of Policy Bureau Seiji Maehara’s tendency for concentrating his energy on the Henoko Bay relocation plan. Prime Minister Yoshihiko Noda’s policy is to gain understanding from the chairman of policy bureau each time the government makes a decision. I am worried that these policies that ignore local opinions are being pushed through ever more.
Deputy Chief Cabinet Secretary Tsuyoshi Saito could live up to expectations. In January of 2010, he convened a meeting for opposition to the relocation of the Henoko base inside Okinawa. At that meeting he stated: “It would be preferable for the base to be moved to Guam.” In that same year in October at a symposium, he emphasized that it would be impossible to relocate the base inside the prefecture due the current situation in Okinawa.
What is being asked of Secretary Saito is that he explain the actual situation to the cabinet ministers, not take bureaucrats’ claims on blind acceptance, and attempt to make people think for themselves. If he can get them to use some reason, then they will be able to understand the absurdity that 74 percent of Okinawa land is for U.S.-Japan military use while being only 0.6 percent of all land in Japan.
The U.S. occupied Okinawa at the end of the most gruesome land war. The bases were built after the land was forcibly confiscated. Even after the 1972 reversion of Okinawa to Japan, the occupation situation remains mostly the same (the Futenma Airbase only takes a measly 480 hectares). If the government ever feels like it, then they could surely secure the return of Okinawa without relocation of bases within the prefecture. I hope for a cabinet that fixes its mistakes.