Osprey Exercises: Is It All Up to the US Military?

Low-altitude flight exercises of the MV-22 Osprey over the Shikoku Mountains began on March. This is the first time that the Osprey has officially flown outside of Okinawa Prefecture.

These exercises flew on the Orange Route, based around American military base in Iwakuni (Yamaguchi Prefecture, Iwakuni City) and spans from Wakayama Prefecture to Shikoku.

The Osprey has had four major accidents during development, resulting in 30 deaths. Last year, Marine and Navy crafts of the same type crashed in succession in Morocco and the U.S.

In Okinawa, where the Ospreys are stationed, a vocal opposition raising doubts about its safety continues. For this training exercise, the U.S. military told the Ministry of Defense that it would fly on the Yellow Route over the Kyushu Mountains. Thinking they might be under the flight path, local authorities scrambled for confirmation.

However, the U.S. military altered the route a day prior to the exercise. This time, local authorities on Shikoku were forced to respond. It is no surprise that local authorities in Kyushu felt that they had their “chains yanked by the US military.”*

According to a special law stemming from the U.S.-Japan Status of Forces agreement, U.S. aircraft, including the Osprey, are exempt from Japanese aviation laws. Regarding flight exercises, the U.S. military has no obligations for prior notice, and the Japanese cannot restrict exercises. The U.S. notified the Japanese government only because it was not particularly inconvenient.

The Osprey has been conducting training since last October, and the problems with training have been numerous.

Prior to the exercises, the U.S.-Japan Joint Committee had agreed that “low-altitude flight exercises will be no lower than 150 meters” and will “avoid flying over densely populated areas, schools, and hospitals.” However, with wording like “as much as possible” and “except when necessary,” the maintenance of safety is left to the U.S. military.

In the two-month period from last October to November, there were 318 violations in Okinawa, where flight exercises were conducted over densely populated areas and schools. Okinawa prefecture has sought an explanation from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Ministry of Defense, but there has been no answer yet.

Saying that the Osprey training on the mainland is to “relieve Okinawa of the basing burden,” the government is seeking local authorities’ understanding.

It is true that the basing burden on Okinawa is heavy. If the reason for training and safety can be agreed upon, then the Mainland ought to take on more of the burden. But, with a flight route that is unclear and unguaranteed safety, what local authority would happily agree?

Training exercises that have safety concerns should not be conducted on Okinawa or the mainland. We will seek an end to the training with the Okinawan people. This is the stance that the mainland should be taking.

It is only proper that the Japanese have the right to be involved in U.S. exercises over Japanese skies. Whose skies are these? The Osprey exercises raise such a fundamental question.

Editor’s note: These quotations, accurately translated, could not be verified.