Prime Minister, Make the Case for U.S. Troops in Japan
Published in Nihon Keizai Shimbun
(Japan) on 5 May 2010
by (link to original)
(Japan) on 5 May 2010
by (link to original)
Translated from
by Haitham Jendoubi.
Edited by Laura Berlinsky-Schine.
One can’t help thinking, “Just as I suspected.” When he took office, perhaps Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama didn’t believe that the U.S. Marines had to remain in Okinawa. But he has now admitted just that necessity.
For the first time since taking office, the prime minister has visited Okinawa and asked for its cooperation in moving the Futenma U.S. base. His admission came at a press conference following the trip.
The dithering over Futenma, that has continued for nearly eight months, is a result of the prime minister’s naïve approach in handling the problem. Why are U.S. Marines in Okinawa? If the prime minister has only just come to understand something so fundamental, it certainly took him long enough.
Due to increasing local opposition, it will not be easy to gain support for a relocation within Okinawa. It will be difficult to reach a resolution by the end of the month, because it would have to be coordinated with the U.S. government.
On the other hand, the reality is that the options — which include relocation in some form to the coast of Camp Schwab — are extremely limited.
The prime minister, who has repeatedly declared that the problem would be resolved by the end of May, bears grave responsibility for this issue. Looking forward, we want him to devote himself to persuading locals and the U.S. through actions, not mere lip service.
What, in concrete terms, ought to be done? For a start, the prime minister ought to explain to the Japanese people, in easy-to-understand terms, why the U.S.-Japan alliance and the presence of U.S. troops in Japan are necessary.
Up until now, the prime minister has made frequent references to the “feelings” of the residents of Okinawa, where U.S. military bases are concentrated, and has championed an alleviation of the burden they bear. However, we have no recollection of hearing a detailed explanation of what the U.S. military is doing in Okinawa.
In Okinawa, the prime minister said that moving Futenma out of the country or out of Okinawa is difficult “from the point of view of deterrence.” But this is abstract and therefore difficult to understand.
The U.S. military stationed in Japan has the mission of protecting Japan, based on the U.S.-Japan Security Treaty. It also has the role of dealing with flare-ups in areas adjoining Japan, such as the Straits of Taiwan and the Korean peninsula.
As a result, the circumstances are such that we cannot swiftly reduce the number of U.S. troops in Okinawa, which is physically close to these hot spots.
The embers of a crisis are smoldering in Japan’s backyard. China, eyeing maritime interests, is expanding its deep-sea navy operations. In an incident in the East China Sea last month, a Chinese ship-borne helicopter made an abnormally close approach to a Japanese Maritime Self Defense Force escort vessel. China has also announced plans to construct an aircraft carrier.
Meanwhile, in the Korean peninsula, North Korean nuclear development continues apace and tensions between the North and South are increasing. The prime minister should not stop at describing “deterrence,” but should ask Okinawans and others to bear the burden after properly explaining the realities of the security situation.
For the first time since taking office, the prime minister has visited Okinawa and asked for its cooperation in moving the Futenma U.S. base. His admission came at a press conference following the trip.
The dithering over Futenma, that has continued for nearly eight months, is a result of the prime minister’s naïve approach in handling the problem. Why are U.S. Marines in Okinawa? If the prime minister has only just come to understand something so fundamental, it certainly took him long enough.
Due to increasing local opposition, it will not be easy to gain support for a relocation within Okinawa. It will be difficult to reach a resolution by the end of the month, because it would have to be coordinated with the U.S. government.
On the other hand, the reality is that the options — which include relocation in some form to the coast of Camp Schwab — are extremely limited.
The prime minister, who has repeatedly declared that the problem would be resolved by the end of May, bears grave responsibility for this issue. Looking forward, we want him to devote himself to persuading locals and the U.S. through actions, not mere lip service.
What, in concrete terms, ought to be done? For a start, the prime minister ought to explain to the Japanese people, in easy-to-understand terms, why the U.S.-Japan alliance and the presence of U.S. troops in Japan are necessary.
Up until now, the prime minister has made frequent references to the “feelings” of the residents of Okinawa, where U.S. military bases are concentrated, and has championed an alleviation of the burden they bear. However, we have no recollection of hearing a detailed explanation of what the U.S. military is doing in Okinawa.
In Okinawa, the prime minister said that moving Futenma out of the country or out of Okinawa is difficult “from the point of view of deterrence.” But this is abstract and therefore difficult to understand.
The U.S. military stationed in Japan has the mission of protecting Japan, based on the U.S.-Japan Security Treaty. It also has the role of dealing with flare-ups in areas adjoining Japan, such as the Straits of Taiwan and the Korean peninsula.
As a result, the circumstances are such that we cannot swiftly reduce the number of U.S. troops in Okinawa, which is physically close to these hot spots.
The embers of a crisis are smoldering in Japan’s backyard. China, eyeing maritime interests, is expanding its deep-sea navy operations. In an incident in the East China Sea last month, a Chinese ship-borne helicopter made an abnormally close approach to a Japanese Maritime Self Defense Force escort vessel. China has also announced plans to construct an aircraft carrier.
Meanwhile, in the Korean peninsula, North Korean nuclear development continues apace and tensions between the North and South are increasing. The prime minister should not stop at describing “deterrence,” but should ask Okinawans and others to bear the burden after properly explaining the realities of the security situation.
Next article![]( "McCain on Shutter Island")
