Relocation of Futenma Air Station: Find Common Ground to Avoid Stalemate
Issues surrounding the relocation of Futenma Air Station can no longer be postponed.
How can an impasse be avoided? By serious discussion of many elements surrounding the issue, the Japanese government should find common ground with the Okinawa government, including on economic promotion policies.
With Okinawa’s 10-year economic promotion plan expiring, the Japanese government has presented its new plan. Its key feature is the introduction of a lump-sum subsidy whose use would be unrestricted.
The Okinawa government has requested that the entire economic promotion budget be converted to a lump-sum payment, as well as an increase in the amount from 230 billion yen to 300 billion yen [approximately $3 billion to $4 billion].
The Japanese government plans to decide on the subsidy and the total budget in its year-end budget discussions for 2012.
The Okinawa Prefecture claims that its economic promotion budget is a separate issue from that of the military base. Although Prime Minister Noda has expressed sympathy, it is hardly justifiable.
The generous economic promotion policy for Okinawa has been a “reward” in exchange for the fact that Okinawa, by hosting U.S. military bases for many years, incurs responsibility for Japan’s security. Now that tax increases and budgetary reductions are necessary for earthquake rehabilitation, if Okinawa is to be given special treatment in its economic promotion budget, then the country must be given a reasonable explanation.
When Okinawa’s future is considered, the handover of U.S. bases to Japan and the effective use of sites that are vacated are closely linked to Okinawa’s economic promotion.
The U.S. government told Japan that “time for a decision is near” on the Futenma base issue. It probably wants to win approval from Congress, which is requesting a significant reduction in the defense budget.
Japan’s Democratic Party has so far been all talk. The real issue is “the Japan-U.S. defense alliance itself,” while the Futenma issues have not been seriously addressed.
It should not be forgotten that, last year, Okinawa Governor Hirokazu Nakaima switched his stance from accepting relocation to Henoko [in Okinawa Prefecture] to requesting relocation outside Okinawa because of the Democratic Party administration’s poor governance and lack of policy on the issue.
Since Prime Minister Noda, in terms of the relocation to Henoko, has expressed that “I will try my best to explain the government’s principles,”* he has to meet his responsibility of convincing Okinawa and making concrete progress, while at the same time expecting the inevitable criticism.
Within the government, there is a developing proposal to submit an environmental impact evaluation of the Futenma base’s alternative location in Nago [in Okinawa Prefecture] to Okinawa by the end of this year and ask for permission to create landfills by June of next year.
If the relocation to Henoko fails, not only will the Futenma base become permanent, but great delays in, or scaling back of, the Marines’ resettling to Guam will also be inevitable. Such an outcome would be an extremely unfortunate one for Okinawa.
The Noda administration, including relevant ministers and the Democratic Party’s key personnel, such as Policy Chief Maehara, must do everything possible to win Okinawa’s approval.
*Editor’s note: Unable to verify quotation.
How can an impasse be avoided? By serious discussion of many elements surrounding the issue, the Japanese government should find common ground with the Okinawa government, including on economic promotion policies.
With Okinawa’s 10-year economic promotion plan expiring, the Japanese government has presented its new plan. Its key feature is the introduction of a lump-sum subsidy whose use would be unrestricted.
The Okinawa government has requested that the entire economic promotion budget be converted to a lump-sum payment, as well as an increase in the amount from 230 billion yen to 300 billion yen [approximately $3 billion to $4 billion].
The Japanese government plans to decide on the subsidy and the total budget in its year-end budget discussions for 2012.
The Okinawa Prefecture claims that its economic promotion budget is a separate issue from that of the military base. Although Prime Minister Noda has expressed sympathy, it is hardly justifiable.
The generous economic promotion policy for Okinawa has been a “reward” in exchange for the fact that Okinawa, by hosting U.S. military bases for many years, incurs responsibility for Japan’s security. Now that tax increases and budgetary reductions are necessary for earthquake rehabilitation, if Okinawa is to be given special treatment in its economic promotion budget, then the country must be given a reasonable explanation.
When Okinawa’s future is considered, the handover of U.S. bases to Japan and the effective use of sites that are vacated are closely linked to Okinawa’s economic promotion.
The U.S. government told Japan that “time for a decision is near” on the Futenma base issue. It probably wants to win approval from Congress, which is requesting a significant reduction in the defense budget.
Japan’s Democratic Party has so far been all talk. The real issue is “the Japan-U.S. defense alliance itself,” while the Futenma issues have not been seriously addressed.
It should not be forgotten that, last year, Okinawa Governor Hirokazu Nakaima switched his stance from accepting relocation to Henoko [in Okinawa Prefecture] to requesting relocation outside Okinawa because of the Democratic Party administration’s poor governance and lack of policy on the issue.
Since Prime Minister Noda, in terms of the relocation to Henoko, has expressed that “I will try my best to explain the government’s principles,”* he has to meet his responsibility of convincing Okinawa and making concrete progress, while at the same time expecting the inevitable criticism.
Within the government, there is a developing proposal to submit an environmental impact evaluation of the Futenma base’s alternative location in Nago [in Okinawa Prefecture] to Okinawa by the end of this year and ask for permission to create landfills by June of next year.
If the relocation to Henoko fails, not only will the Futenma base become permanent, but great delays in, or scaling back of, the Marines’ resettling to Guam will also be inevitable. Such an outcome would be an extremely unfortunate one for Okinawa.
The Noda administration, including relevant ministers and the Democratic Party’s key personnel, such as Policy Chief Maehara, must do everything possible to win Okinawa’s approval.
*Editor’s note: Unable to verify quotation.