BY YOICHI KATO
ASAHI SHIMBUN SENIOR STAFF WRITER
2010/04/16
Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama sought U.S. President Barack Obama's cooperation in resolving the Futenma issue by his self-imposed end of May deadline, but didn't get the response he had hoped for.
There was no change in the U.S. government position of pursuing implementation of the current agreement reached in 2006, which the Hatoyama administration is trying to replace with its own alternatives.
U.S. officials certainly have no intention of jeopardizing the decades-long alliance with Japan, but there is growing concern and frustration at the lack of a meeting of minds on such important matters of mutual concern.
Hatoyama broached the issue of the relocation of the U.S. Marines Corps Air Station Futenma in Okinawa Prefecture during a short meeting with Obama on the sidelines of the Nuclear Security Summit in the U.S. capital on Monday. Neither Japan nor the United States explained how Obama responded.
What did come across, however, is that the meeting did not change the U.S. government's position, which is that the best solution to the Futenma issue lies with a 2006 agreement reached by the two nations to relocate the base to the Henoko district of Nago, also in Okinawa Prefecture.
A U.S. government source said, "We do not want Japan to misunderstand our respect for the Japanese review process," indicating that their "respect" does not necessarily extend to the outcome of the review.
For starters, there is no sense on the U.S. side that the consultation process has already started with Hatoyama's government on the Futenma issue.
In late March, Foreign Minister Katsuya Okada met with U.S. Ambassador John Roos and explained the current status of the review process.
According to a U.S. source, the Japanese side only presented its "thinking" on the matter and did not offer a concrete proposal. "So, we are in a holding pattern, waiting for a time," the source said.
The huge gap in perception was highlighted by Defense Minister Toshimi Kitazawa's description of the meeting as "the start of discussions with the United States."
Tokyo wants to emulate the process that led to the current agreement reached between the Liberal Democratic Party-led government and the Clinton administration. In April 1996, the two nations agreed that Futenma Air Station should be returned after adequate replacement facilities are completed.
After three years of consultation, a decision was made to relocate Futenma to the coastline of Henoko.
Tokyo wants to follow a similar process involving U.S. government to put together an alternative plan.
But the United States has shown no inclination to go beyond the current agreement of 2006.
Behind this extremely defensive and careful approach of the U.S. government is its resolve not to make the same mistake of 2005, when Washington compromised and accepted current Henoko option.
During those negotiations, U.S. officials for a long time advocated a plan to construct a replacement facility on a landfill off the south coast of Henoko, Nago city. This plan was commonly known as "Nago Light." However, during the final stage of the talks, U.S. officials abandoned it and accepted instead the Japanese proposal to build the new facility on the coastline of Camp Schwab at Henoko point.
Richard Lawless, who negotiated the agreement for the United States as deputy undersecretary of defense, recalled his decision to go along with his Japanese counterparts.
"They guaranteed that they can implement the proposal," Lawless said. "I made sure about this point with several people in charge (in the Japanese government) a number of times."
Four years after the agreement was reached, the Japanese government has done an about-turn and told Washington the Henoko option cannot be implemented. Japan's turnaround frustrated not only Lawless, but also current U.S. administration officials. They also share a deep sense of mistrust over Hatoyama's frequent flip-flops on this issue.
To deal with this situation, U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates made clear to Okada in a meeting last month in Washington what conditions were most important to the United States. Gates told Okada that the United States expects Japan to help ensure that the presence of Marines in Okinawa Prefecture remains operationally and politically sustainable.
Of those two parts of the condition, what is more important to Washington is "political sustainability," according to a U.S. government official.
What it means is that the U.S. government wants to avoid a situation in which any agreement gets bogged down by opposition from the local population in Okinawa or coalition partners; or effectively nullified by a change of administration, as happened last September.
Ground rule No. 1 for the U.S. government is never abandon the current agreement and enter into talks with Japan for an alternative proposal unless it can be absolutely certain those conditions will be met.
According to a U.S. government source, the "thinking" presented by Okada during his talks with Roos did not even come close to meeting those two conditions.
The other reason the United States is sticking to the Henoko option is because it does not want to weaken its alliance with Japan.
In the Quadrennial Defense Review released by the Obama administration in February, serious concern was raised about China's growing anti-access capabilities, which could neutralize the U.S. power projection capabilities in the western Pacific.
To counter such military tactics, U.S. military planners and strategists began looking at ways to strengthen the country's anti-submarine warfare capabilities and missile defense system. Japan is the only ally in the Asia-Pacific region that could cooperate with the United States in those areas.
The unstable North Korean situation is another element as it keeps U.S. attention focused on the significance of its own alliance with Japan.
Domestic political considerations also play a big role. The Obama administration, with its failing approval ratings, is busy preparing for mid-term elections this fall.
The nuclear issue involving Iran remains a foreign policy headache for Obama. At the same time, worsening relations with Israel have led to criticism the administration is losing a key and trusted ally. The Obama administration cannot afford to let its relations with Japan also slide further south.
Can Japan expect compromise from the United States?
The key would be whether the United States would be obliged to conduct an environmental impact study (EIS).
Gates made clear where the United States stood on this issue at a news conference last fall after his meeting with Kitazawa in Tokyo.
Of the Henoko proposal, Gates said, "With respect to some modest change in the runway of a few tens of meters or whatever, we regard that as a matter between the government of Okinawa and the people of Okinawa and the government here in Tokyo, and our only caveat would be that it not slow the implementation process."
As long as a new set of EIS is not required, the U.S. government would accept changes.
As for now, no U.S. officials is offering any concessions that go beyond Gates' statement.
The consensus among U.S. officials is that if the Hatoyama government really wants to settle the issue by the May, the option will be to return to the original Henoko agreement.
The U.S. government did not have anything to do with setting the end of May deadline. That was something Hatoyama brought on himself.
But since he has repeatedly mentioned it, the perception in the United States is that it really is a deadline Hatoyama must live up to.
Among those holding the greatest interest in the May decision are Congress members involved in appropriations and military construction.
The appropriations bill for the coming fiscal year includes a provision to pay for the transfer of 8,000 Marines from Okinawa Prefecture to Guam, which was included in Roadmap for Realignment Implementation of 2006.
The legal agreement concerning the implementation of that relocation, signed by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and then Foreign Minister Hirofumi Nakasone in February 2009, states that such relocation will be dependent on "tangible progress made by the government of Japan toward the completion of the Futenma Replacement Facility as stipulated in the Roadmap."
Hatoyama pledged to stick to his self-imposed deadline when he met with U.S. Senator Daniel Inouye, chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee.
If this deadline is not met for any reason, the appropriation for the transfer of Marines could be suspended. And that, in turn, could lead to the total collapse of the Roadmap agreement.
If no decision is made by May, U.S. Marines will continue to use the Futenma Air Station, but that will not be sustainable because the very rationale for moving Futenma was the huge danger posed to residents living in close proximity to the base.
An American scholar on Japan said, "One accident, one rape, one killing, one something and the whole island just blows up."
Then the alliance will be shaken to its very foundations. The uncertain future of the Futenma relocation has become a vital concern not only to Japan, but also to the United States.
Posts
