U.S. Armed Services Committee Faces Opposition to Relocation within the Okinawa Prefecture

U.S. Democratic Sen. Carl Levin, chairman of the Committee on Armed Services, and Democratic Sen. Jim Webb, member of the Committee on Foreign Relations and chairman of the Subcommittee on East Asian and Pacific Affairs, will both visit Okinawa during the last third of this month.

The Futenma Air Base relocation problem has run aground and is in a dangerous position. Both Levin and Webb, in order to change the state of affairs, are wanted to exemplify political strength and flexible ideas.

At the March Armed Services Committee public hearing, Mr. Levin said that without a reasonable plan concerning the Futenma Air Base relocation problem and the relocation of the Marines in Okinawa to Guam, the Department of Defense’s budget could not be approved.

I want to take one more step. The relocation of Futenma within Okinawa prefecture is not realistic. It is an American-held policy that the majority of voters oppose; this popular will is something that the statesmen should not ignore.

Many citizens of Okinawa have opposed agreeing to the relocation of Futenma within Okinawa for as many as 15 years. If Okinawa’s prefectural Governor Hirokazu Nakaima were to initiate a discussion, there’s the idea that he could convey the prefectural policy of “opposition within the prefecture” and the popular will.

American President Obama has declared a plan to abate the $4 trillion American budget deficit within 12 years, by 2023. This also includes cutting the defense expenditure by $400 billion (about ¥33.5 trillion).

Mr. Obama wants to start work on “a ‘fundamental review’ of U.S. military missions and capabilities.” This will probably include the restructuring of foreign military bases, including the Okinawa Marines.

Even in the U.S. Congress, the U.S. military’s forward development tactics concerning troops stationed in Japan are “becoming a financial issue,” according to Republican Rep. Ron Paul, and as the U.S. budget deficit swells, the feeling is strong that the U.S. forces in Japan should withdraw. Democratic Rep. Dennis Kucinich also calls the U.S. military in Japan a “part of a bygone era” and said that the U.S. should dispense with plans that make military and relocation a priority.

However, it is imperative that such requests reinforce strong demands within Japan about the increasing burden of U.S. forces’ stationing expenses (the financial support of welfare benefits and allowances to U.S. troops stationed in Japan, called the sympathy budget); increased vigilance, too, is necessary.

Internally, eyes have turned to the great Eastern Japan earthquake reconstruction finances, and even though both the Social Democratic Party and the Communist Party have turned toward decreasing the sympathy budget, the government has not paid attention to them. According to Defense Minister Toshimi Kitazawa, “The Japan-U.S. alliance is the country’s nucleus, and if we were to cut the budget, a conflict in the defense policies would result.”* On the topic of making the earthquake victims’ lives and livelihoods a priority, setting aside reconstruction funds and not viewing the “sympathy budget” funds as sacred precincts should be considered.

Both Mr. Levin and Mr. Webb are not instigators of the relocation of Futenma within the prefecture and the increased cost of stationing troops, and I want to anticipate their constructive roles in the improvement of confidence in both countries’ citizens in relation to the Japan-America alliance.

*Editor’s Note: While this quote, accurately translated, could not be verified, a similar, verified quote by Defense Minister Kitazawa stated: “When the security of the nation is considered, there is no valid reason to cut the budget.”