The Futenma Postponement: There Are Realistic Options
Published in Asahi Shimbun
(Japan) on 4 August 2010
by (link to original)
(Japan) on 4 August 2010
by (link to original)
Translated from
by Lynn Allmon.
Edited by Hoishan Chan.
It is said that haste makes waste.
Prime Minister Naoto Kan has taken on the weighty problem of the relocation of the U.S. Marine Corps Futenma Airfield in Okinawa prefecture.
Concerning the concrete proposal for an agreed-upon alternative runway to be established in Nago City's Henoko District, both the American and Japanese governments, without whittling down all of the collected written reports into one, are moving in the direction of writing the plans simultaneously, to emphasize both parties' requests. The final decision on the plans will be postponed until the Okinawa prefecture governor election in November is over.
Prime Minister Kan declared, "The intention of the cabinet is to implement the Japan-America agreement," adding, "We aren't thinking of making a decision over [locals'] heads."
We want the dangers of Futenma to be removed as soon as possible. However, as the approval of the citizens of the prefectures cannot be secured, if the implementation of the Japan-America agreement is rushed and inflexible, the situation will turn all the more sour. At present, the two governments' decision has been a wise and pragmatic choice.
Nevertheless, the rigid state of government affairs likely won’t change the Henoko relocation, even though the mayor of Nago City is opposed to the relocation or any kind of construction. If a prefecture governor who opposes relocation anywhere within the prefecture is elected, then this possibility for flexibility will narrow even further.
However, the continuing and burgeoning burden of the military bases, with 75 percent of the American military bases concentrated in Okinawa, will give the impression of "discrimination against Okinawa," and it will be hard to imagine that the strong desire of the prefecture’s public opinion to relocate the base outside the prefecture and country will soften.
In spite of the agreement to a postponement, it would be a misunderstanding to assume that the government is planning to obscure the Futenma problem after the aforementioned prefecture governor election. What the government should do now is aim for the reconstruction of a relationship of mutual trust with Okinawa and advance by measurable steps.
As for the reduction of Okinawa's burden, a satisfying solution to the removal of the danger of the base along with the demand of a security guarantee probably won't be found easily. Even if the government searches for a breakthrough solution, it needs to constantly keep Okinawa’s interests in mind.
Chief Cabinet Secretary Yoshito Sengoku commented on the government's establishment of a consultative body with Okinawa, saying that if the decision to relocate to Henoko becomes a given, it will be unlikely that the decision won't be accepted by residents of Okinawa.
However, the reduction of the burden and measures to correct the disparity with the rest of the country must now be part of the responsibilities the government must tackle, in spite of advances made in correcting the Futenma problem. This is not an article advocating the placement of preconditions and hastiness.
Prime Minister Kan has repeatedly stated that he will tackle the issue of the reduction of the burden for Okinawa. Discussions between Japan and America about the relocation must take priority and the government must devote resources to this implementation.
In response to the problem of noise damage done to the citizens around Futenma, the Futenma explosion lawsuit has gone through the courts twice, and as a result the U.S. Marine Corps was ordered to pay reparations to Japan, though the night and early morning restrictions on aviation incorporated into the noise prevention pact between the Japanese and American governments is becoming a mere skeleton of itself. If it is aiming for the reduction of noise, the government should assertively raise the issue to America.
Also, concerning the relocation of the 8,000 U.S. Marine Corp soldiers in Okinawa to Guam, the American government has, in reality, given up on accomplishing this by 2014. This is because the conditions for acceptance of the relocation in Guam have not been put in order.
How long will the local burden and danger of the base remain? The Japanese and American governments must wring out every bit of wisdom they have from now on to address this.
Prime Minister Naoto Kan has taken on the weighty problem of the relocation of the U.S. Marine Corps Futenma Airfield in Okinawa prefecture.
Concerning the concrete proposal for an agreed-upon alternative runway to be established in Nago City's Henoko District, both the American and Japanese governments, without whittling down all of the collected written reports into one, are moving in the direction of writing the plans simultaneously, to emphasize both parties' requests. The final decision on the plans will be postponed until the Okinawa prefecture governor election in November is over.
Prime Minister Kan declared, "The intention of the cabinet is to implement the Japan-America agreement," adding, "We aren't thinking of making a decision over [locals'] heads."
We want the dangers of Futenma to be removed as soon as possible. However, as the approval of the citizens of the prefectures cannot be secured, if the implementation of the Japan-America agreement is rushed and inflexible, the situation will turn all the more sour. At present, the two governments' decision has been a wise and pragmatic choice.
Nevertheless, the rigid state of government affairs likely won’t change the Henoko relocation, even though the mayor of Nago City is opposed to the relocation or any kind of construction. If a prefecture governor who opposes relocation anywhere within the prefecture is elected, then this possibility for flexibility will narrow even further.
However, the continuing and burgeoning burden of the military bases, with 75 percent of the American military bases concentrated in Okinawa, will give the impression of "discrimination against Okinawa," and it will be hard to imagine that the strong desire of the prefecture’s public opinion to relocate the base outside the prefecture and country will soften.
In spite of the agreement to a postponement, it would be a misunderstanding to assume that the government is planning to obscure the Futenma problem after the aforementioned prefecture governor election. What the government should do now is aim for the reconstruction of a relationship of mutual trust with Okinawa and advance by measurable steps.
As for the reduction of Okinawa's burden, a satisfying solution to the removal of the danger of the base along with the demand of a security guarantee probably won't be found easily. Even if the government searches for a breakthrough solution, it needs to constantly keep Okinawa’s interests in mind.
Chief Cabinet Secretary Yoshito Sengoku commented on the government's establishment of a consultative body with Okinawa, saying that if the decision to relocate to Henoko becomes a given, it will be unlikely that the decision won't be accepted by residents of Okinawa.
However, the reduction of the burden and measures to correct the disparity with the rest of the country must now be part of the responsibilities the government must tackle, in spite of advances made in correcting the Futenma problem. This is not an article advocating the placement of preconditions and hastiness.
Prime Minister Kan has repeatedly stated that he will tackle the issue of the reduction of the burden for Okinawa. Discussions between Japan and America about the relocation must take priority and the government must devote resources to this implementation.
In response to the problem of noise damage done to the citizens around Futenma, the Futenma explosion lawsuit has gone through the courts twice, and as a result the U.S. Marine Corps was ordered to pay reparations to Japan, though the night and early morning restrictions on aviation incorporated into the noise prevention pact between the Japanese and American governments is becoming a mere skeleton of itself. If it is aiming for the reduction of noise, the government should assertively raise the issue to America.
Also, concerning the relocation of the 8,000 U.S. Marine Corp soldiers in Okinawa to Guam, the American government has, in reality, given up on accomplishing this by 2014. This is because the conditions for acceptance of the relocation in Guam have not been put in order.
How long will the local burden and danger of the base remain? The Japanese and American governments must wring out every bit of wisdom they have from now on to address this.