Futenma Airbase Problem: Leaving It Up to Bureaucrats Will Not Produce a Solution

At the inauguration press conference on Sept. 2, Prime Minister Yoshihiko Noda explained his policies on diplomacy and national security saying, “Our focus will be on the U.S.-Japan relationship,” and that “we will further develop and deepen [that relationship].”

At the press conference, the prime minster didn’t touch on the pending problem of the relocation of the Futenma Airbase.

Foreign Minister Kouichirou Genba has very little experience in diplomacy and U.S.-Japan security issues. Also, Defense Minister Yasuo Ichikawa admitted that he is a “novice on national security.”

Looking at the past career of Prime Minister Noda, Foreign Minister Genba, and Defense Minister Ichikawa, it is difficult to say that they are knowledgeable about the Okinawa military base problem. Because of that, their level of dependence on fellow bureaucrats might be high in this regard.

After carefully following talks with government officials that support the relocation to Henoko Bay, I have found that there seems to be two assumptions regarding relocation.

First, Prefecture Governor Hirokazu Nakaima is considering relocation within the prefecture more and more. With economic stimulus packages that he is hoping for and a lot of persuasion, he could change his mind to support intra-prefectural relocation. The United States is hoping that Governor Nakaima will change his mind.

Second, the Futenma Airbase, which is located in a densely populated area, will be returned and a replacement facility will be built at Henoko Bay, which will certainly reduce the burden on the island from the perspective of noise pollution and dangerous accidents.

Both of these assumptions still have many unresolved issues. For example, the relocation problem will only worsen when considering the financial burden that will be placed on the city.

The current situation mirrors that of the Japanese Empire during World War II; it would draft theoretical strategies based on what they wanted to see, all the while ignoring inconvenient reports and the actual battle situation.

First, Governor Nakaima made clear his intention on “No to Henoko” in his speech for peace at the citizens rally on “Irei no Hi” (June 23, the day fighting on Okinawa during World War II ceased). Nago City is locally the main support for the Liberal Democratic Party and New Komeito in the prefecture and the seat of the prefectural assembly. They will be evaluating the prefectural Governor’s stance on the issue. It isn’t possible to backtrack anymore.

Second, the relocation to Henoko Bay, symbolized by the deployment of the MV-22 Osprey, which has vertical takeoff and landing capabilities, should be viewed as a new base with novel functions, not a replacement facility.

In the midst of an increase of Japanese National Defense Force aircraft at Naha Airport and the continued use of the enormous Kadena Airbase in the middle of the island, the building of a new base in Henoko Bay is starkly in contrast to burden reduction plans for Okinawa.

The base relocation to Henoko Bay can only be seen as introducing a permanent burden, as opposed to alleviating the burden of the U.S.-controlled base under which Okinawa suffers.

Chairman Carl Levin of the United States Senate Committee on Armed Services proposed that the plan be revised, while pointing out that the plan to relocate to Henoko Bay is “unrealistic.” He cited severe economic conditions as the reason.

Japan has very little resources to work with since the earthquake disaster. There are rumors that there will be an increase in taxes to help with reconstruction efforts. In connection with this, but on a different note, a consumption tax increase is also being considered to support social security.

At this time, will we allow a great sum of money to be thrown into the Henoko Bay relocation plan that hardly reduces burdens? If we leave this to bureaucrats, there will be no solution to the Futenma problem. Parliament should exhibit greater power to check itself.