U.S. Base Closure Deepens Dispute With Japan

[Ryan Ruck]

U.S. Base Closure Deepens Dispute With Japan

December 29, 2009

When the U.S. took over a Japanese airfield here in the closing days of World War II, it was surrounded by sugarcane fields and the smoldering battlegrounds of Okinawa. It is now the focus of a deepening dispute that is testing Japan's security alliance with the United States and dividing its new government in Tokyo.

A large city has grown up around the base, and helicopters and cargo planes from the U.S. Marine Corps facility buzz so low over Futenma No. 2 Elementary School, whose playground fence borders the facility, that the windows rattle and teachers stop class until the aircraft are on the ground.

"It's just too much," said the school's vice principal, Muneo Nakamura. "I understand the political role the U.S. bases in Japan play. But we have to live here."

That Marine Corps Air Station Futenma must go is not the dispute. U.S. military officials agree the base must be moved. The problem is where.

The United States says that Futenma cannot be shut down until a replacement is elsewere on Okinawa, an idea that most Okinawans oppose. They have the ear of a new left-leaning Japanese government that took office in September and is reassessing the U.S.-Japan alliance.

The standoff has clouded relations between Tokyo and Washington, delayed a plan to restructure America's military presence in Asia and divided Japan's political leadership. It comes as China's rising military strength and North Korea's nuclear program are changing the security landscape in Asia, underscoring the importance for the U.S. and Japan of keeping the issue from creating a major rift.

In Ginowan, the city of 92,000 where the base is located, patience is wearing thin.

The Futenma facility, home to about 2,000 Marines and one of the Marines' largest facilities in the Pacific, is surrounded by urban sprawl.

The population density outside the base is roughly equivalent to downtown Tokyo. Intense training by helicopters and planes off a 9,186-foot (2,800-meter) runway has prompted residents to dub Futenma "the most dangerous base in the world."

The base takes up roughly a quarter of the city's land. Residents must drive around it, causing traffic jams, delays and frustration. Sewer and water lines have been detoured around its perimeter.

"This base violates so many regulations and safety rules that it would be illegal to operate it in the United States," Yoichi Iha, the mayor of Ginowan, told The Associated Press. "The situation has just been left to fester for too long, and no one has been willing to accept responsibility to do anything."

He also accused the Marines of regularly ignoring agreements on when and where they can fly. The city is installing a 2 billion yen ($20 million) radar system next year to keep tabs on them. A Japanese court ruled last year the noise levels are unacceptable, and ordered the Japanese government to compensate residents. An appeal is ongoing.

Lt. Col. Douglas Powell, a spokesman for the Okinawa Marines, said no flights are conducted after 11:00 p.m. and the airstrip is closed on Sundays.

"Night training flights are limited to the minimum required to fulfill assigned missions and maintain aircrew proficiency," he said. "Flight patterns can vary due to weather conditions such as wind velocity and wind direction. Marine Corps pilots make every effort to minimize overflight of civilian population centers, but, first and foremost, must ensure safe flight operations."

Progress on the Futenma issue has generally only occurred after major incidents have sent Okinawans into the streets in protest.

Following a public uproar over the rape of a local schoolgirl by two Maines and a sailor, Tokyo and Washington agreed in 1996 to close the base. The deal bogged down in the details, including finding an alternative site both sides could agree on.

After a helicopter from Futenma crashed on the Okinawa International University campus near the base in August 2004, another agreement was announced in 2006. The university was closed at the time and no one was killed on the ground.

That "strategic roadmap" included moving the facility farther north to a less crowded area and reducing the U.S. presence in Okinawa by transfering 8,000 Marines from Futenma and other bases to Guam, a tiny U.S. territory in the Pacific.

It would be the most sweeping realignment of the 47,000 U.S. troops in Japan since the Vietnam War.

But the decision to replace the Futenma base with another on the outskirts of Nago, another Okinawan city, sparked intense protests.

The new base would likely require bulldozing beaches near an existing Marine facility, Camp Schwab.

"We are not going to let them destroy our ocean to build another military base," said Hiroshi Aratomi, the co-leader of a group that has held a daily sit-in for the past five years. "We will be glad to see Futenma go, but not at the price of simply substituting it with another base in our backyard."

The protests by Nago residents have effectively thwarted efforts to finally settle on a site and have the sympathy of Okinawans in general, who would prefer that no replacement facility be built on their island at all.

The United States insists the base must stay somewhere on Okinawa so that the Marine units remain cohesive.

Japan's new government is listening to the protesters, at least for the moment .

In large part, that reflects domestic politics. Mizuho Fukushima, head of the Social Democratic Party, has threatened to pull her party out of the ruling coalition if the base remains on Okinawa.

Her threat is seen as a major factor behind Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama's reluctance to make a decision on the issue.

"I am optimistic something can be done to move the base off Okinawa or out of the country," Fukushima said after a meeting with Okinawa's governor, Hirokazu Nakaima, this month. "We must do our best to see that it is closed soon."

[vector7]

Japan ends refueling mission for US forces

Fri, 15 Jan 2010 06:14:41 GMT

Japan's Democratic party-led government in an unprecedented decision has ended its nearly a decade-long refueling mission of the US-led forces in Afghanistan.

Incoming reports say Defense Minister Tishimi Kitazawar ordered all naval ships and their hundreds of personnel to return home after nine years of helping supply oil to vessels used by foreign forces that are engaged in a controversial war in landlocked Afghanistan.

Kitazawar is also expected to issue an official order that will totally terminate refueling operation in the Indian Ocean on Friday.

Japan's Maritime Self-Defense Force has been refueling the US mission since the Afghan war began in 2001.

Reports say Japanese ships have provided more than 500,000 liters of oil to vessels from 12 countries, including the US, France, Britain and Pakistan since last December.

A defense ministry tally shows the fuel cost has gone above 26 million dollars.

Japan has promised to change the old way things worked between Tokyo and Washington.

The new Japanese government, which is against a military solution for the conflict, has pledged up to five billion dollars in civilian aid to Afghanistan.

In addition, Tokyo's relations with Washington have been strained over a number of issues since Japanese Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama took office last year.

Diplomatic ties between Japan and the US have recently witnessed a low over a previously signed deal to relocate an American base on Okinawa.

The premier has suggested that the US military bases should be moved off the island of Okinawa or even outside of Japan altogether.

Hatoyama says he will press for more equal ties with the United States.

[Ryan Ruck]

This alienation of the US by Japan is a situation that bears much more scrutiny than it is being given in the MSM. It has serious implications in the dynamic of the Asia Pacific region, especially if Japan is neutralized by or (God forbid) becomes friendly with the TAA. Remember, Japan has a lot of our military tech...

[vector7]

You know my thinking on this.

[vector7]

This has nothing to do with the base closure but does not help relations either.

Most American's are still oblivious to the change beginning to occur in the "Land of the Rising Sun".

Suing Toyota? Take a number and get in line

CHICAGO (Reuters) - Law firms across the United States are scrambling for a chance at the mother lode: a lawsuit against embattled, but cash-rich Toyota Motor Corp (7203.T).

It has been just over two weeks since the world's largest automaker announced an recall of 8 million vehicles because of a sticky gas pedal, but already at least 30 class-action lawsuits have been filed against the Japanese automaker.

"This is just the beginning," said Mark Bunim of New York-based mediation firm Case Closure LLC. "There's going to be one of these cases in every town."

"And why not? When you've got a lot of victims and a lot of money, it's only to be expected," he added.

San Diego law firm Steiner & Associates already has a website up and running (www.ustoyotalaw.com) that asks: "Have You or Loved One Been Injured or Killed in an Accident Due to A Defective Gas Pedal or Floor Mat? You may be entitled to substantial compensation!"

On its website, the national plaintiff lawyers trade group the American Association for Justice (www.justice.org) has a blurb that reads: "Coming soon... Toyota Sudden Acceleration Litigation Packet."

In essence, this will be the lawsuit version of "Plug and Play," where all plaintiff lawyers will need to do is enter names and data into a boilerplate lawsuit, lawyers say.

"This is going to a little cottage industry all of its own," said Matt Cairns, president-elect of DRI, the Voice of the Defense Bar, the largest U.S. civil defense attorney association.

The likely lawsuits that Toyota will face include everything from death and injury cases to those alleging the automaker concealed the truth.

The legal mess could take years to resolve and will ultimately come down to a business decision on Toyota's part on whether it is better to settle or to fight it out in trial in dozens of cases.

COMING STORM

Cases related to injuries and deaths are the most obvious of the cases that will be brought against Toyota.

Up to 19 U.S. crash deaths over the past decade may be linked to accelerator-related problems at Toyota, congressional officials have said. There have also been an unknown number of injuries that could yet result in lawsuits.

"As this issue gets more attention, Toyota owners who had accidents in the past few years are going to wonder if those accidents were caused by unintended acceleration," said Frank Pitre, a plaintiff lawyer at Cotchett, Pitre & McCarthy, who in the past decade successfully fought cases against Bridgestone Corp (5108.T) unit Firestone and Ford Motor Co (F.N) over rollover incidents.

Class-action lawsuits are a predominantly U.S. phenomenon, involving a large group of people bringing a collective claim to court. Critics argue that while the individual plaintiffs only get small amounts of compensation in these cases, plaintiff lawyers can walk away with millions of dollars.

The possibilities for these kinds of cases are vast even if the risk of death and injury is low.

"There is a very minuscule percentage of vehicles actually experiencing unintended acceleration," said Jeffrey Thomen, a Hartford-based product liability partner at McCarter & English. "But that will not prevent people from filing lawsuits against Toyota."

The cases will range from those alleging that the recall has hurt the resale vehicle of Toyota models or that selling faulty vehicles was in breach of warranty.

Or, in the case of a lawsuit filed in Colorado on February 2 by Burg Simpson Eldredge Hersh & Jardine, alleging that Toyota knowingly hid its acceleration problem from the public.

"We believe Toyota knew about the problem but misled people and concealed the truth," said Mike Burg, the firm's founder. "There are many people out there who would never have bought Toyotas if they'd known about the unintended acceleration issue."

Auto insurers are also likely to pursue cases against Toyota over accidents that may prove to have been caused by faulty vehicles.

Experts predict a flurry of lawsuits over the hybrid Prius model, which may also become part of the recall.

"At some point, Toyota may have to decide to settle out of court," Pitre said. "It's far more expensive to go to court and would prolong the pain for Toyota and many families."

In the meantime, the Japanese automaker will need to beef up its outside counsel, lawyers say.

"If I were Toyota, if I hadn't already hired the best automotive defect defense lawyers in America, I'd be tracking them down right now," said DRI's Cairns.

--------------------------------------------------------------

Toyota: China Not Affected By Prius, Lexus Hybrid Recall

Japan tells G7 Tokyo focusing on China

-------------------------------------------------------

Toyota and the Union-Backed, Government-Led Witch Hunt

by Brian Johnson

Toyota, which employs over 35,000 workers in the United States with factories in eight states, is the target of a government-led and union-supported attack due to recent recalls.

In the U.S., it is estimated that 15,000 Lexus HS250h and 133,000 Prius models will be recalled due to gas pedal issues, with another 500,000 Prius and other gasoline-electric hybrids needing anti-brake software modification. As unfortunate and inconvenient as recalls can be, this not the first, or last time an automobile will need to be brought back to the shop for a quick fix.

One might think this is the first auto recall in decades from the way government officials and Congressional Committees have pounced on Toyota. However, as recent as last month, Honda announced a recall of 646,000 Fit models (or Jazz in some markets) due to a faulty master switch that could allow water to enter the electrical components resulting in fires.

Ford, less than one year ago, was forced to recall more than 4 million cars based on 550 vehicle fires. The recall concerned cruise-control deactivation switches that were installed in 16 million Fords. Part of the recall included nearly 1.1 million 1995-2003 Ford Windstar family van models.

There was no government outcry and no demand for Congressional hearings over these recent recalls. So why has Toyota suddenly become the target of a government-led witch hunt?

Toyota’s U.S. operations are extremely successful, not saturated by inefficient union monopolies, and are in direct competition with the now government-owned General Motors.

From their first U.S. factory in 1988, the Japanese company’s success in the U.S. is extraordinary. In 2003, the Camry became the best-selling car in the U.S. and still is. In 2005, Fortune magazine stated: “By nearly every measure, Toyota is the world’s best auto manufacturer. It may be the world’s best manufacturer, period.” In 2006, Toyota became the third-biggest seller of cars and trucks in the U.S. In 2007, Toyota captured second place in the U.S. market, replacing Ford, which had held the No. 2 position since 1931. In 2008, as GM declined and temporarily avoided bankruptcy, Toyota surpassed their unionized competitor becoming the largest automaker in the world.

Toyota’s ability to ascend, while others plummeted, lies in their philosophy based on efficiency and productivity called “The Toyota Way.” This corporate philosophy is not anti-union, rather based on the principle of “kaizen” which means “continuous improvement.” This principle seeks complete quality management by improving local work environments and raising productivity. It empowers executives and plant employees, who are famously authorized by Toyota to stop the assembly line to quickly solve any problems based on their own discretion. Such practices are never heard of and often forbade in other highly unionized automobile facilities.

In fact, the differences in efficiency and productivity (and why the unions are determined to penetrate Toyota’s workforce), do not stop there. When GM fired over 35,000 employees between 2006 and 2008, Toyota laid off zero. GM loses almost $2,500 in profitability per vehicle where Toyota makes almost $1,500 per vehicle. This is largely due to GM’s forced union contracts. GM’s union, the United Auto Workers (UAW) mandates that GM pay, on average, each non-skilled line worker about $33 dollars per hour.

This inflated wage includes workers who are “idle,” meaning they don’t have a specific job that day, but can still come to work, sit in a special facility and collect a pay check.

These artificially inflated costs, bound by forced union contracts, are sinking other US auto industries. Toyota has managed to rise above that, not by being anti-union, but by believing in and enforcing a corporate-wide model based on efficiency and improvement.

Now, the agents of the government, which controls GM, are publicly castigating Toyota in an attempt to smear the company and increase their own profitability. As a direct competitor with Toyota by way of involvement with GM, the assault against Toyota represents one of the most public conflicts of interests the business world has experienced.

Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood, told owners of a recalled Toyota to “stop driving it” and take it to a dealer to get it fixed. As a appointee of President Obama, who supported the government takeover of GM, LaHood’s comments should be viewed as a violation of the government’s own “non-compete” commitment. In publically condemning Toyota, which is now a competitor of a government owned corporation, LaHood is using his position to drive down the market share of Toyota and advance the interests of GM.

LaHood’s comments and the call for House Congressional Hearings into Toyota, led by members with union-heavy districts whose interests appear to be self-serving, has led to a public outcry from a bi-partisan group of Governors whose constituents rely on Toyota for employment. Led by Gov.

Mitch Daniels (R-Ind.) who says, “Let’s recall. Let’s fix it…If a fine is in order, then fine, but they have gone so far beyond that. It’s very, very suspicious in view of the government conflict of interest.” Daniels added, “These Congressmen running this committee have their own agenda and it is a discriminating agenda in this case. They didn’t do this the last several hundred recalls.”

The government, in this case backed by the union saturation of GM, has a clear conflict of interest in owning companies that are in direct competition with Toyota. The problems have been determined, the solutions are in process. Sec. LaHood and the union-supported Democrat heads of the committees holding hearings on this matter should step back and allow the private sector to function without biased interference.

[vector7]

Japan rethinks relations with US

FEB 25 — The Hatoyama government is keen to end the US military presence in the country and chart a new foreign policy course with focus on Asia.

After the ouster of the long-ruling Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) from power last year, relations between Japan and the United States do not seem as cosy as they used to be.

The new Prime Minister, Yukio Hatoyama, and his Democratic Party of Japan (DPJ) swept to power on the promise of reorienting the country’s domestic and foreign policy.

On the campaign trail, the opposition focussed particularly on the continued presence of the US military on Japanese territory and the continuance of unequal treaties dating to the Second World War.

The DPJ promised to end decades of “passive” behaviour in dealings with the US Hatoyama, after taking over as Prime Minister, showed that he was serious about Japan following an Asia-oriented foreign policy.

His government is giving special emphasis to a strong relationship with China, India and other Asian countries.

On Jan 19, the 50th anniversary of the Japan-US security treaty was commemorated in Tokyo.

Japan and the US signed the military pact in 1951, and it was revised in 1960. The 1951 treaty had a clause that allowed the US to intervene in case of “large-scale internal riots and disturbance in Japan”.

The revised treaty removed the clause but retained many of the controversial “secret clauses”, including the sailing in of nuclear armed American navy ships into Japanese territorial waters despite the fact that Japan’s Constitution bans the presence of nuclear weapons on its territory.

One of the clandestine clauses made Japan pay for the maintenance of US bases.

On the occasion of the anniversary, Hatoyama stressed the importance of the security pact for peace and stability in the region even as hectic behind-the-scenes diplomatic activity went on to decide the fate of the US’ Futenma air base in Okinawa. Indications are that the Hatoyama government is keen to end the US military presence there.

The Obama administration has taken a tough stance on the issue, insisting that US presence in Okinawa is crucial for the security of the East Asian region.

Okinawa is home to 75 per cent of the 53,000 US troops based in Japan.

The Obama administration signalled that it could backtrack on an earlier US$26-billion (RM88 billion) deal involving the transfer of 6,000 US troops from Okinawa to Guam if the Hatoyama administration decided to close the air base. The deal, agreed four years ago, also involved handing back to Japan valuable real estate in thickly populated Okinawa city.

In November last year, US Defence Secretary Robert Gates warned Japan that it would face “serious consequences” if the new government did not honour the commitments on the bases given by the former government.

During his visit, Gates loudly lobbied for an extension of the military bases agreement. The Japanese media were openly critical of Gates, describing the Defence Secretary as a “bully”. But since then, both sides have adopted a more diplomatic stance.

On the occasion of the 50th anniversary of the security treaty, a joint statement was issued by the US Defence and State Secretaries and the Japanese Defence and Foreign Ministers.

The statement “endorsed ongoing efforts to maintain the deterrent capabilities in a changing strategic landscape, including appropriate stationing of US forces, while reducing the impact of bases on local communities, including Okinawa, thereby strengthening security and ensuring the alliance remains the anchor of regional stability”.

However, since then, popular sentiment in Japan seems to have shifted irrevocably against the US military presence. A plan to relocate the Okinawa base on Japanese soil received a setback in the last week of January. The former LDP government had proposed four years ago that the base be shifted to the northern city of Nago, also on the island of Okinawa.

But in the recent municipal elections in Nago, the candidate opposed to the relocation of the US air base won a resounding victory. He has since said there was no question of the base being relocated to Nago.

Hatayoma has diplomatically indicated that the ideal thing for the US to do is to shift the base out of Japan altogether. The DPJ’s key coalition partner, the Social Democratic Party (SDP), insists that the US base must be located outside Japanese territory. It has even threatened to withdraw from the government if the government does not support its position.

The recent revelations of secret security pacts with the US have inflamed public opinion. The Japanese Foreign Minister has appointed a team of scholars to delve into the Foreign Ministry’s archives to track down secret documents relating to security ties with the U.S.

The issue has become an emotive one after it became clear that the Japanese state used its enormous powers to punish for perjury a journalist who had, in 1971, exposed the secret military clauses in the leading Japanese newspaper The Mainichi Shimbun. The reporter, Takichi Nishiyama, now 79, was the first to reveal the existence of four secret pacts. In 1978, the Japanese Supreme Court held Nishiyama guilty of obtaining state secrets.

By 2000, the U.S. itself had started declassifying documents relating to the secret agreements. And four years ago, a senior Japanese diplomat who had testified against Nishiyama confessed that he had lied under oath. Japanese Foreign Minister Katsuya Okada said his government was determined to find out the truth about the secret pacts.

He said the move should not be construed as anti-American. He emphasised that it was “extremely important” for democracy that people be aware of the truth. Exposing the truth and rectifying past wrongs, he said, could strengthen the alliance with the U.S.

Japan-China ties

It is not only the “bases issue” that gives the US reason to worry about Japan’s future course. Since Hatoyama became Prime Minister in late 2009, ties with China, painted as a traditional rival of Japan by the West and right-wing Japanese politicians, have been strengthened. Visits by high-level delegations from both countries have been taking place virtually every month.

There is talk of Hatoyama planning a visit to Nanjing for the anniversary of the 1937 massacre of civilians under Japanese occupation. Previous Japanese governments tended to gloss over the incident. According to reports, if such a visit materialises, Chinese President Hu Jintao will reciprocate with a visit to Nagasaki, where he would pledge his country’s peaceful intentions.

However, not everybody in Hatoyama’s Cabinet shares his vision of an Asia-centric policy. Defence Minister Toshimi Kitazawa is said to be in favour of maintaining the close security links with the U.S. He recently appointed Yukio Okamoto as an adviser in the Ministry. Okamoto, known for his pro-American views, was a key adviser to several Prime Ministers of LDP governments.

He recently said China was not “a friendly country” in military matters and that the threat from North Korea should be taken seriously. Many Japanese still seem to favour retaining the “nuclear umbrella” the US has provided for the last 60 years.

But in the past four months, some of the decisions taken by the DPJ-led government have not been looked upon favourably in Washington. These include the withdrawal of Japan’s naval forces from the Indian Ocean, where they were deployed to provide non-combat support for US troops in Afghanistan.

At the same time, Tokyo announced a US$5-billion aid plan for Afghanistan. The new government has talked about plans for setting up an East Asian community. No role is being contemplated for the US in this Asian version of the European Union.

It is obvious that there is a serious rethink under way in Japan on the rationale for continuing with the unequal relationship with the US. America’s military blunders in West Asia and Afghanistan, coupled with its economic decline, have no doubt forced this reappraisal in Japan and among other close allies of the US. — www.frontline.in

* This article is the personal opinion of the writer or publication. The Malaysian Insider does not endorse the view unless specified.

[vector7]

Okinawans rally for US base to be moved off island

Updated April 25, 2010
Associated Press
TOKYO

TOKYO (AP) — Tens of thousands of Okinawan residents and leaders demanded a U.S. Marine base be moved off the island at a mass rally Sunday, inflamed by speculation the government may finally ac...

TOKYO (AP) — Tens of thousands of Okinawan residents and leaders demanded a U.S. Marine base be moved off the island at a mass rally Sunday, inflamed by speculation the government may finally accept a plan to merely relocate it to another part of the southern Japanese island.

Okinawans have long complained of the burden of hosting most of 47,000 American troops in Japan under a security pact. Okinawa was under U.S. occupation until 1972 and many residents resent the U.S. military presence as legacy of Japan's World War II defeat.

Tokyo and Washington agreed in 2006 to move sprawling Futenma Marine Corps air field to a less crowded part of Okinawa and to move 8,000 of its Marines to Guam. But when Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama took power last September he said he would not honor the deal struck by his political rivals and promised to find a site off Okinawa for the troops.

"We will not allow the base to stay here," Okinawa Gov. Hirokazu Nakaima told the cheering crowd. "We want the Hatoyama government to keep its promise."

Hatoyama has delayed a decision in the face of rejection by potential relocation sites.

About 90,000 people from across the island gathered in the town of Yomitan, carrying banners and placards with anti-U.S. military slogans and demanding Hatoyama keep his promise and move the Futenma base outside the island.

The protesters were particularly upset as media reports said earlier Sunday that Foreign Minister Katsuya Okada had told U.S. Ambassador John Roos last week that Tokyo was moving to accept much of the 2006 deal.

Okada acknowledged he met with Roos, but denied he made such concessions as reported.

"No to a new base! No to a relocation within the island!" Nago Mayor Susumu Inamine said, criticizing Hatoyama's government for "playing with the Okinawans' feelings."

Hatoyama's attempt to please both Washington and Okinawa has apparently frustrated both. His perceived lack of leadership and indecisiveness have caused support for his Cabinet to fall to around 30 percent in recent public polls, down sharply from around 70 percent last year.

Hatoyama has also faced growing pressure from Washington to observe the 2006 agreement, which U.S. officials say is the only "viable" option.
But he has been unable to obtain consent for any potential sites or even enter talks with local officials. Hatoyama on Saturday denied accepting the earlier agreement and that he would closely monitor Sunday's rally.

Hatoyama, who has promised to resolve the dispute by the end of May, told Friday's parliamentary session that he would "stake his job" to do so. Opposition leaders have demanded his resignation if he fails to meet the deadline.

Reported options include a temporarily transfer of some of Futenma's heliport functions to nearby Camp Schwab or reclaiming land off the U.S. Navy's White Beach facility on Okinawa.

The government is also considering Tokunoshima island, north of Okinawa, but residents held a massive protest this month and local officials rejected Tokyo's request for talks.

[American Patriot]

Japan having second thoughts suddenly due to North Korea???? - RD

Japan PM points to North Korea to explain U.S. base plan

Linda Sieg
TOKYO
Mon May 24, 2010 2:54am EDT




Related News

• Okinawans angry over U.S. base plan, PM at riskSun, May 23 2010
• Q+A-Japan PM tries to solve US base feud as poll nearsSun, May 23 2010
• Japan, U.S. agree on base plan but hurdles ahead: reportSat, May 22 2010
• Japan, U.S. stress tight ties despite airbase feudFri, May 21 2010
• Japan, US stress tight ties despite airbase feudFri, May 21 2010

TOKYO (Reuters) - Japanese Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama said on Monday tension on the Korean peninsula underlined the importance of tight U.S.-Japan ties and was key to his decision to keep a controversial U.S. airbase on Okinawa.


Politics | Japan


Analysts said, however, that while Pyongyang had given the struggling Japanese leader a good excuse for backtracking on a pledge to try to move the Marines' base off the southern Japanese island, the plan faces huge hurdles given harsh local opposition.


Voter perception that Hatoyama has mishandled the row has frayed ties with Washington and eroded government support, threatening the ruling Democratic Party's chances in a midyear upper house election it must win to avoid policy deadlock.


Apologizing for breaking his word, a subdued Hatoyama told Okinawa's governor on Sunday he had concluded the Futenma base should be shifted to the Henoko area of the northern Okinawa city of Nago -- largely in line with a 2006 U.S.-Japan deal.


But Okinawa's governor said it would be tough to accept the plan, which also flies in the face of demands by a tiny coalition partner to shift Futenma off the island.


"I decided that it is of utmost importance that we place the Japan-U.S. relationship on a solid relationship of mutual trust, considering the current situation in the Korean peninsula and in Asia," Hatoyama told reporters on Monday.


BEARING THE BURDEN


In the campaign that swept the Democrats to power last year, Hatoyama had raised hopes the Marine base could be moved off Okinawa, host to about half the U.S. forces in Japan.


But Washington sought to stick to the 2006 deal to move the facility from the crowded central city of Ginowan to Nago.


Hatoyama later backtracked, saying some Marines had to stay to deter threats. During a visit to Beijing on Monday, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton commended Hatoyama for making "the difficult but never-the-less correct decision."


Chief Cabinet Secretary Hirofumi Hirano on Monday held out hope that Okinawans, many of whom resent bearing a big share of the burden for the U.S.-Japan alliance, could yet be persuaded to accept the deal.
Shifting Futenma's functions elsewhere is a condition for moving up to 8,000 Marines to the U.S. territory of Guam.


"There will be criticism of course. But if the actual burden is reduced, we will have achieved something for the Okinawan people," Hirano said. "If people understand this was done for the sake of Japan's security ... this will be seen as progress."


Analysts said, however, it was far from clear whether the plan could be implemented, whatever Washington and Tokyo agreed.


Anti-base activists plan a rally to oppose the plan on May 28, the same day media say the two governments will announce a bilateral deal and Hatoyama will hold a news conference to explain the deal to the public.


"The easiest part to solve is between the U.S. and Japanese governments," said Keio University professor Yasunori Sone.


"But the coalition problem remains, and most difficult of all is (persuading) the people of Okinawa," he said. "The situation is far more difficult than it was last year and it will be almost impossible to persuade the Okinawans."

[vector7]

US to move 4,700 Marines from Japan to Guam: reports



Tokyo and Washington have agreed to move 4,700 Marines from the Japanese island of Okinawa to Guam in a bid to revive a stalled plan for the realignment of US forces in Japan, according to reports.

The two countries in 2006 agreed to the transfer of around 8,000 Marines from Okinawa to the US territory of Guam and the relocation of an air base on Okinawa but the move has been delayed as Tokyo struggles to convince Okinawans to accept the deal.

The US Defense Department is now considering shifting the remaining 3,300 Marines to elsewhere in the Pacific, such as Hawaii, Australia and the Philippines, Kyodo News reported on Sunday, citing unnamed diplomatic sources.

Senior Japanese and US foreign and defence officials will meet in Washington on Monday, with the two governments expected to announce details of the transfer on February 13, Kyodo and the Asahi Shimbun daily said.

Tokyo has struggled to convince Okinawans to accept the plan to relocate the Marine Corps Air Station Futenma, part of the realignment package.

Many Okinawans, angry at having for decades shouldered the burden of hosting more than half of the 50,000 US troops stationed in Japan, oppose the plan which would relocate the US base to another part of the island.

They say another part of Japan should take the base, instead of Henoko on the east coast of Okinawa, where Tokyo and Washington have agreed to build a giant runway-on-stilts in the sea.

The move to transfer Marines to Guam may compromise Tokyo's position because Japanese government officials had used it as leverage to convince Okinawa to accept the base relocation, the Asahi said.

The new development in the realignment programme may possibly end up leaving the airstrip where it is, in a crowded urban area of the island near dozens of schools and hospitals, the Asahi said.

[Ryan Ruck]

Sounds like Guam is getting crowded. They'd better be careful or else it might tip over!

[American Patriot]

Islands can't tip over, they can only sink or blow up (eg Atlantis).

LOL

[Ryan Ruck]

Well, sure they can! An esteemed member of Congress said so. And since he's a member of Congress that means he is much smarter and better than me so, it must be true.

YouTube: Hank Johnson Guam Tip Over

[American Patriot]

hehehehe

It's pretty obvious that us chickens are well guarded by the Foxes in Congress.

I sleep so well at night now....

[DarbyII]

Well, sure they can! An esteemed member of Congress said so. And since he's a member of Congress that means he is much smarter and better than me so, it must be true.

Ryan, I have to admire ADM Williard for not pissing himself, falling on the floor and howling. It was that funny!

On the serious side, however, Rep. Johnson might be the dullest tool in the box but he represents a huge problem in politics: politicians learn the gift of gab but they fail to learn anything truly useful - like math and science. Washington politics is full of these ignoramuses.


I even hear the problem listening to Rush, Levin, Wilcow and Sean. Toss anything of a scientific nature into the conversation and they usually blow it. At least Levin admits that it's his weak point. Rick and I deal with the general lack of scientific knowledge all the time on our other BBS forays. It's sad. Really sad. And people make important decisions that affect our lives based on this ignorance.

[Ryan Ruck]

Ryan, I have to admire ADM Williard for not pissing himself, falling on the floor and howling. It was that funny!

Indeed. It just goes to show how professional our men and women in the military are.

[DarbyII]

Indeed. It just goes to show how professional our men and women in the military are.

Absolutely.

[American Patriot]

You know, Darby, I've always wondered at this lack of scientific knowledge. Especially from the so-called eggheads who are supposed to be the egg-heads of society.

The fact is I see Liberals graduating ALL the time from various colleges, usually with pretty high degrees in this or that science, but when you talk to them on a one-to-one basis (and sometimes I play dumb just to get answers from them) you get some of the stupidest trash out of people's mouths.

The alleged "Global Warming" stuff. You know they just blow off the fact that there was data manipulation? Just BLOW IT OFF like it never happened. They will always say "BUT... we have such and such as well" (which was related to the data manipulation).

Personally, I think none of these guys are really all that "smart". People like Rush, and the others piss me off because they ought to KNOW BETTER if they are going to debunk something to at least UNDERSTAND it to the point they can argue their points.

But when an "esteemed" Congressman doesn't even realize what an Island is made of, it is nothing less than ludicrous to have them in office if they are going to make comments like that.

[vector7]

US to move marines out of Japan

9,000 of the military contingent that is upsetting residents on the island of Okinawa will move to other parts of Asia Pacific region.
Japan and the US have agreed to relocate thousands of US marines from Okinawa in a move aimed at reducing the island's military burden amid lingering anger among residents over pollution, accidents and crime.

Under a deal reached in Washington late on Thursday, about 9,000 marines will move from the southern Japanese island to the US Pacific territory of Guam and other locations in the region, including Hawaii and Australia.

By shifting a large number of the 19,000 marines on Okinawa, leaders in

Tokyo and Washington said they hoped to reduce the US military footprint on the island while retaining a strong enough presence to deal with security emergencies in the region.

In a joint statement, the US defence secretary, Leon Panetta, and the secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, said the agreement would honour Washington's commitment to defending Japan and maintaining stability in an "increasingly uncertain security environment".

"Japan is not just a close ally, but also a close friend," Panetta said separately. "And I look forward to deepening that friendship and strengthening our partnership as, together, we address security challenges in the region."

No date has been given for the $8.6bn (£5.3bn) move – of which Japan will pay $3.1 billion – and questions remain over the fate of Futenma, a sprawling marine base located in Ginowan, an Okinawan city of 95,000 people.

Earlier this year, President Obama signalled a shift in US military priorities towards the Asia-Pacific region, after a decade of prioritising expensive wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The potential for volatility in east Asia was underlined by North Korea's recent rocket launch and the prospect of a third nuclear test by the regime.

There is concern, too, over Beijing's military spending and long-standing disputes between China and Japan over territory and energy resources.

"I think we have made some progress and this plan offers specific and forward-looking action," said Japan's foreign minister, Koichiro Gemba, adding that Japan wanted to "reduce the burden on Okinawa".

But the agreement, made days before the Japanese prime minister, Yoshihiko Noda, meets Obama in Washington, is unlikely to satisfy residents living near Futenma, a cause of friction between successive US and Japanese administrations.

Local opposition to the US military presence on Okinawa reached a high point in 1995 after three servicemen abducted and raped a 12-year-old girl.

The crime prompted the US and Japan to look for ways to reduce the military presence on Okinawa, which comprises less than 1% of Japan's total area, yet hosts three-quarters of all US bases and just under half its 47,000 troops.

The talks led to a 2006 agreement under which Futenma was to be relocated to Henoko in a less populated part of Okinawa, and 8,000 troops moved off the island by 2014.

The Futenma question remains unresolved, however, after the government in Tokyo failed to persuade people in Henoko – an ecologically important stretch of coastline – to agree to host the new offshore base. Most residents of Okinawa want the base moved off their island altogether, but the government has failed to find a new host community.

Up to 5,000 troops – about 3,000 fewer than envisaged in the original 2006 agreement – will be sent to Guam, according to a US defence official quoted by Associated Press in Washington. The remainder will move to Hawaii or rotate between Australia and other parts of the region.

Kurt Campbell, the US assistant secretary of state for east Asian and Pacific affairs, said the deal should satisfy congressional critics who had denounced the original plan as confused and expensive.
"We think it breaks a very long stalemate that has plagued our politics, that has clogged both of our systems," he said.

[Ryan Ruck]

It will end up just like when our military presence in Puerto Rico was cut.

Their local economy will take a huge hit and then they'll sit and bellyache about how everyone is out of work now.

[vector7]

Should read: US troops kicked out Japan, because they're tired of US inner city violence too.