Japan: U.S. Base Should Stay on Okinawa

Decision Narrows Rift Between Obama Administration and New Japanese Government

(AP)  Japan's new government appeared to bow to intensifying pressure from visiting top U.S. military officials, saying Friday it supports keeping a major U.S. Marine airfield on the southern island of Okinawa.

The move narrows — but doesn't close — a rift between the two alliance partners ahead of President Barack Obama's visit in three weeks. The new Tokyo administration, elected in a landslide in August, is eager to assert a more independent stance with Washington — but doesn't want to unduly strain ties with its chief ally and key trading partner.

The government of Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama has suggested it would like to make changes to a 2006 agreement that would realign the 47,000 U.S. troops in Japan, including moving 8,000 Marines to the U.S. Pacific territory of Guam.

A major sticking point has been the future of Futenma airfield, which under the pact would be relocated to a less crowded part of Okinawa. However, Hatoyama has suggested he would like the airfield moved off the island entirely.

U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates, visiting Tokyo earlier this week, insisted the Futenma — a busy Marine Corps air base — must be relocated on the island, calling any other options "politically untenable and operationally unworkable."

Admiral Mike Mullen added to that pressure Friday during meetings with Foreign Minister Katsuya Okada and other officials, urging them to quickly resolve the issue.

After his meeting with Mullen, Okada said moving Futenma airfield off the tiny island "is not an option" — although it would be difficult to resolve the location of the new site before Obama's Nov. 12-13 visit.

"Starting from scratch on other ideas would not serve the best interests of the people of Okinawa," he said.

While the plan would lighten Okinawa's share of hosting American troops, local opposition has stalled progress on choosing a new site. Many residents say they're worried about base-related crime, cost and environmental issues. The Camp Schwab area, in a less populated part of Okinawa, remains the most likely candidate. Kadena Air Base, which is also on the island, is another possibility.

Washington has grown concerned that Tokyo was balking at key elements of the agreement, which took more than a decade of negotiations with Japan's previous conservative administrations. Mullen said he understood Hatoyama's desire to review the pact, but was concerned further delays could derail the overall timeline.

"We're barely on track with what was laid out in 2006," Mullen told reporters, adding that "from a purely military perspective, it is very important that we move ahead with previous agreements."

Hatoyama has repeatedly said he did not intend to rush to a decision, although he said Friday that the matter should be resolved "sooner than later."

Okada, however, acknowledged the issue needs to be addressed urgently.

"We should not spend too much time on this," he said after meeting Mullen. "Our time is limited."

The Hatoyama government has also signaled that it plans to end its naval mission in the Indian Ocean — tankers that have been used as refueling pit stops for Afghanistan-bound allies. Instead, Tokyo is considering reconstruction projects in Afghanistan.

During his visit, Gates told Okada that the refueling mission provides important support for the U.S. coalition forces, though whether to continue the mission is Japan's decision. He urged Japan to continue providing support for Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Futenma is used by helicopters, transport planes and other aircraft as the primary air support base for the more than 10,000 U.S. Marines based on Okinawa. U.S. officials have argued that it must stay somewhere on Okinawa to be close to the Marines on the ground.

Okada was keen to avoid perceptions that the two nations are increasingly at odds.

"I don't think we have any disputes or serious problems between us," he said after meeting with Mullen. "There is no need to overreact. I believe that the United States understands that we cannot simply accept everything just because an agreement is already made."

[watchdogtexas]

It is not about protection, it is about the U.S. pumping millions of dollars of our tax payers dollars into their economy.

[GrampaJerry]

I served at Kadena in the 1960's. It's called "The Keystone of the Pacific" because of it's extremely necessary location. We are not protecting Asian countries alone with our presence here. Think California, Alaska and the whole rest of our country and sphere of influence and responsibility. Peace.

[dontknowitall]

Several years ago Okinawans demonstrated against US troops . Now with a threat from North Korea....it's okay.

[Ms_enza]

No. It's still not okay. This "base should stay" comment cost the US taxpayers MILLIONS in under-the-table payoffs.

[dontknowitall]

Ms_enza Are you daffed ? I didn't okay squat. Clean your spectacles and read again.

[bubbadubba]

Now why is the US spending all that money to protect Asian countries?
Who are we protecting?
Vietnam? Cambodia? China? Japan? Korea?
From who, space aliens?
Japan is a rich country, let them protect themselves and the same goes for South Korea.
I am getting really sick of my tax money and my military being based to defend other countries that don't want us there.
ENOUGH US Imperialism!

[Ms_enza]

Tams,

call it Der Fatherland...

[ToolMangler1]

by TamsinBlight October 23, 2009 3:46 PM EDT
by Ms_enza October 23, 2009 4:39 PM EDT


The 'in-depth' analysis by you two leaves me greatly 'underwhelmed'..

(If you are standing in the place an enemy would hide to attack you, then he will have a very hard time surprising you, RIGHT!!)

[hagar39]

Why not? We are a war nation. We build planes, ships, rockets and all kinds of weapons while Japan, China and other nations build, TV's, all kinds of eletronics, and make sporting goods, clothes/shoes, cars, cameras, etc.
Then we complain about about everything being made over seas.
Our war budget is 631 billion. China war budget is 62 billion. They are the same land size as the USA and twice the population.
Of course they are not tying to conquer the Middle East.

[thesevenveils]

Why have international companies parked their manufacturing plants in China? Cheap Labor. Real cheap.

What costs the US military to have made in the US costs China 1/10th because cheap labor and they are really good at cooking the books, including history books.

[Sloughfoot]

Go blow your smoke elsewhere with over 3.5 million personel in uniform and a budget of over 70 billion which does not include research, foriegn forces and a host of other exemptions the Chinese are not a weak kneed force. But that wasn't the meat of the story now was it.

[Ms_enza]

48 cents...

48 cents of every tax dollar in the US goes to DoD.

[ToolMangler1]

by Ms_enza October 23, 2009 4:40 PM EDT
"48 cents of every tax dollar in the US goes to DoD. "



You made the claim, now back it up with Facts and URLs.