Saturday, December 20, 2003

Okinawa's Christmas Presents


Santa Claus came to town

Saturday, December 20, 2003
Saturday Evening Edition

Several meetings were held in Tokyo Thursday regarding Okinawan development plans by the central government in connection with U.S. military base conversion to commercial use. It is an annual function of budget allocation coinciding with the Christmas season. Both the central government and Ginowan City agreed to complete conversion planning for Futenma Marine Corps Air Station by fiscal year 2005.

The central government put the total budget for the Northern Area Development Plan at 2.1 billion yen for the second portion of this fiscal year's allocation. The government opened the joint assembly of two working groups, one for northern area development and the other for relocation and development of surrounding areas, with the attendance of the Minister of the Okinawa Bureau Toshimitsu Mogi, Governor Keiichi Inamine, and Nago City Mayor Tateo Kishimoto.

Minister Mogi announced the budget and four new projects for the northern part of Okinawa, designated as the new host area for Futenma MCAS. The government will pour billions into the development of the north in compensation for accepting a potentially new troublesome facility. In his speech, Minister Mogi showed enthusiasm to work hard for northern area development in cooperation with the governor and citizens.

On the same day, the government held another meeting with Ginowan City Mayor Yoichi Iha to discuss the conversion planning of Futenma MCAS after its relocation to the north. It was decided to complete a basic plan by fiscal 2005 to convert the military base for civilian use. It was the first meeting for the group to reach a definite time line.

Ginowan City and the OPG will form a study committee inviting Futenma landowners to help make the conversion plan within this fiscal year. Mayor Iha welcomed the progress of the working group and requested an earlier return of the land. He also explained that he was elected by citizens who supported his promise to return the land within five years and went on to complain about the annoying aircraft noise. Minister Mogi replied, "We take your words seriously."

For Chatan Town, where serious soil contamination was found on returned land used as a U.S. military base, the central government promised to take necessary measures for recovery. Chatan Mayor Choichi Hentona appreciated the central government's efforts concerning hazardous materials and recovering cultural treasures found after U.S. base removal.

The four new projects for northern area in the second portion of this year's budget are as follows: a 340 million yen processing facility on Iheya Island for packing and sales of Mozuku seaweed; a 332 million yen IT Business Integration Project which would serve as a data base center for new business in Nago City; a 147 million yen Wide Area Network Project for the northern area which would connect public facilities of the four municipalities of Nago, Ginoza, Kin, and Onna with optic fiber; and a 23 million yen Long Life and Healing Village Project in Ogimi Village, known for its many centenarian residents, which would study the home helper service and associated businesses.

Saturday, December 6, 2003

Futenma Relocation Still Undecided



The Futenma issue a hot potato

Saturday,December 6, 2003
Saturday Evening Edition

The deadline for the return of land used by U.S. Futenma Marine Corps Air Station to the local community passed last Thursday. It was on December 2, 1996 that the Japanese Prime Minister and the U.S. Ambassador to Japan had declared the return of Futemna within five to seven years. The condition for land return was to provide a new air station within Okinawa, but plans have not even been put down on blueprint and it seems the process will take ten years or more.

The idea of relocating Futenma to Camp Shwab in Nago City is seemingly halted. Nago wants several limitations on the kinds of planes, flight patterns, and for environmental protection. And the dugong, a natural treasure, resides around the seashore of Camp Shwab. Many issues lie in the way of planning to build a new military airbase there.

Going back seven years, the declaration by both the U.S. and Japanese governments was to return Futenma by making a helipad to land helicopters and other related facilities. Later it was revealed that they needed a runway and certain other facilities, which was far from image of a pad, and proposed locations for the new air station jumped from one place to another like a grasshopper.

Keiichi Inamine became governor in 1998 and decided to accept the building of a new air station in Henoko, Nago City and within the area of Camp Shwab on the conditions of making an additional runway for commercial use and limiting military use for only fifteen years. Many local residents supported his appeal during his gubernatorial election campaign.

But the U.S. government publicly stated it would be impossible to accept a time limitation regarding security matters and they believed the governor's request could not be granted. The Japanese government also took the same stance.

The horrible crime of U.S. servicemen assaulting an elementary schoolgirl in 1995 attracted world-wide attention to Okinawa military base issues. Both governments set up a Special Action Committee, SACO, for the consolidation and reduction of military bases on Okinawa to ease the burden of the local people. It included the return of Futenma.

Although SACO agreed to return eleven military facilities, only two have actually been returned to local communities. It proved difficult to relocate military bases within Okinawa which was already saturated by bases. Even if the SACO agreement would be implemented, Okinawa would still host seventy percent of the total U.S. military facilities in all Japan.

The seven-year anniversary of the SACO agreement was not a celebration, but the reality and difficulty of U.S. military base issues remains.

There is little progress on the Futenma issue between Tokyo and Okinawa. There was the question of who would be in charge of the commercial runway and it was agreed that the central government would be. Before agreeing, Okinawa argued that accepting a new military base was itself a heavy political cost and the Defense Agency said it could not manage anything other than a military facility.

Monday, December 1, 2003

Henoko Ordnance Ammunition Depot

Okinawa, Japan
[ca December 1, 2003]

Henoko Ordnance Depot, which is adjacent to Camp Schwab, is an ammunition storage facility for the U.S. Marine Corps. Most of the ordnance depot is covered over with dirt. Henoko is the village closest to Camp Schwab.

The US military has had plans to construct a new heliport in Henoko. In December 1999 Nago City Mayor, Tateo Kishimoto accepted plans to move the Futenma Marine Corps Air Station to Nago’s southeastern district of Henoko. The Mayor’s approval was considered to have cleared the final obstacle towards the relocation of Futenma. It also ended a debate that has been going on for more than three years. The isssue first came up in 1996, when the US and Japan decided to move Marine air operations to other, less developed areas of Okinawa.

Henoko heliport is planned to be the upgraded version of the major Marine Corps' Futenma Air Station, which is nestled in a crowded metropolitan area on the South End of Okinawa. Futenma has long been the object of controversy, as its noise pollution and other chemical contagion have been pinpointed as major causes of health problems in the area. Schools, hospitals, and thousands of homes are located within mere yards of this highly valued Marine transportation hub and supplies outpost.

The new air station, which would replace Futenma Marine Corps Air Station, would be built over a reef that is almost 2 miles off the shores of Henoko. The environmental assessment is the first step toward making the move northward. Government officials have been working on the plan and estimate that the size of the proposed facility will be about 195 hectares. It would be 2,600 meters long and 750 meters wide. The planners considered eight different proposals on different construction methods depending on the location. The construction work is estimated to take between eight to nine years. The total cost is estimated to be from ¥200 billion to trillion.

Surveys, expected to begin in December 2003 and to take about three years, will assess the area where land is to be reclaimed and the airport construction’s environmental impact.

Some environmentalists expressed fear that the airport would harm the seabed grazing grounds of an endangered saltwater manatee, the dugong. Henoko city officials said the dugongs never really were a consideration in the decision. Most of the 18 confirmed dugong sightings in Okinawa waters since 1979 were beached carcasses. And officials said they know of no sightings inside the reef where the airport will be built.

In December 1996, after 12 months of study and consultations, the governments in Tokyo and Washington and their representatives on the Special Action Committee on Okinawa produced their final report concerning the return of US military base properties on the island. The plans for the Futenma Air Station - the single most important issue for Okinawans - were not finalized.

A floating heliport was the leading option, but its location and the construction method had not been determined. The focus of the December 1996 Special Action Committee on Okinawa final report was an accord is to relocate the major military heliport now at the US Marine Corps Futenma Air Station to a 1,500-meter sea-based facility off the east coast of the main island of Okinawa. It envisaged developing and constructing the facility off Camp Schwab, located in the city of Nago. But an exact location for the heliport was not specified in the report, because agreement from local residents had not been reached. In the past, such marine super floating structure had been considered and talked about many times as a touch-and-go base as the replacenent of the Atsugi Airbase as well as a candidate for the Kansai Airport. At the meeting between President Clinton and Japanese Prime Minister Hashimoto, held in New York on September 24, Clinton commented on proposed sea floating heliport as a replacement facility for the Futenma Airbase by saying, "no matter where it would be moved, it should be done in a way that the US military system would not be harmed, and it must be solved in a way that in the future the problem like that of Futenma should never be resurfaced".

The United States established a runway length requirement of about 4,200 feet for the sea-based facility. Arresting gear would be located about 1,200 feet from either end of the runway to permit carrier aircraft to land. In addition, the runway would have 328-foot overruns at each end to provide a safety margin in case a pilot overshoots the optimal landing spot during an approach and a parallel taxiway about 75 feet wide alongside the runway. Additional aircraft facilities include a drive-through rinse facility for aircraft corrosion control, an air traffic control tower, and aircraft firefighting and rescue facilities. Up to 10,000 pounds of ordnance would be stored in a magazine collocated with an ordnance assembly area aboard the sea-based facility. Also, flight simulators and security and rescue boat operations, among other capabilities, are required aboard the sea-based facility. The "DoD Operational Requirements and Concept of Operations for MCAS Futenma Relocation, Okinawa, Japan (final draft)" stated that the sea-based facilities of the new military base and all associated structure shall be designed for a 40 year operational life with a 200 year fatigue life.

The United States planned to locate the headquarters, logistics, and most operational activities aboard the sea-based facility and most quality-of-life activities, including housing, food service, and medical and dental services, ashore at Camp Schwab. US officials estimate that over 2,500 servicemembers currently stationed at MCAS Futenma would transfer to the sea-based facility and Camp Schwab. To accommodate the incoming arrivals from MCAS Futenma, Marine Corps Bases, Japan, plans to relocate about 800 to 1,000 servicemembers currently housed at Camp Schwab to Camp Hansen and absorb the remainder at Camp Schwab. US engineers estimated that about 1,900 people would work on the sea-based facility.

In August 1997 the Okinawa Prefectural Government officially accepted a central government request to conduct borings at a site off Nago on the east coast of Okinawa Island as part of a survey for a sea-based US military heliport facility. Despite strong pressure from Tokyo, local people in Nago voted against the heliport proposal in a referendum in December 1997.

By November 1997 the Japanese government was considering two methods of construction for the sea-based facility, which would be approximately 1,500 meters long and 600 meters wide. One called for a pontoon platform, protected by breakwaters, moored outside a coral reef at a point approximately 3 km from Henoko, the nearest residential area. The other entailed a platform supported by stilts sunk in the sea bottom inside the reef and about 1.5 km from Henoko. Within the reef, the water is less than 3 meters deep, while outside the reef it is 10 meters to 70 meters deep. A thir method, dubbed the "semisub" system, had been dismissed due to potentially exorbitant costs. Both methods included construction of a runway about 1,300 meters long and 45 meters wide, along with a control tower, hangers, an apron, repair facilities and warehouses. Additional residential facilities would be built at nearby Camp Schwab to accommodate some 2,500 Marines and their families.

According to the proposal, about 60 aircraft would be deployed at the sea-based facility, including UH-1 utility helicopters, AH-1 attack helicopters, and CH-53 and CH-46 cargo transport helicopters.

A March 1998 report by the General Accounting Office noted that the sea-based facility, planned to replace the Marine Corps Air Station at Futenma, faced three major technological, financial and operational challenges. Annual operations and maintenance costs for the sea-based facility were initially estimated at $200 million based on a $4-billion design and construction cost, significantly higher than the $2.8 million being paid by the United States at Futenma.

The area planned for the new base is in a natural conservation area dedignated by Okinawa Prefecture. The area, where a diverse ecosystem is maintained, such as coral reefs, tideland and sea weed grounds, is given high priority for conservation. The sea area is the northern habitable limit of dugongs, an internationally protected animal.

In June 2001 the Futenma Relocation Committee was presented with eight different designs and three different methods of construction. The conceptions were for structures either within the coral reef or beyond it. Generally the methods are based on structures connected by piers, floating pontoons or land reclamation.

Sunday, November 23, 2003

U.S. takes first step away from S. Korea

Sunday, Nov. 23, 2003
By RICHARD HALLORAN
Special to The Japan Times

HONOLULU -- U.S. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld's visit to South Korea this past week should be seen for what it really was, an early step in a long, gradual disengagement of U.S. land forces from South Korea and a greater reliance on sea power to maintain an American security posture in Asia.

As he flew through Northeast Asia, Rumsfeld sprinkled clues about the future of U.S. military dispositions there even as he reaffirmed the American treaty commitments to South Korea and Japan. Other U.S. officials explained what the hints meant.

A primary reason for pulling back from South Korea is that the U.S. needs the 17,000 soldiers of the Second Infantry Division elsewhere. As Rumsfeld and military leaders have said repeatedly, U.S. forces are stretched thin. The U.S. Army has only 10 divisions and cannot afford to have one tied down in South Korea.

Related to that need has been the refusal of South Korea to send a division of 12,000 soldiers to secure a sector in Iraq, as requested by the U.S. Instead, Seoul will post only 3,000, and that will include the 700 already there.

Moreover, anti-Americanism is so widespread that moving American troops out of Seoul and positions north of the capital will ease tensions only slightly. In a discussion of South Korea and North Korea, an American officer said, only half joking, "Sometimes I wonder which one is really our adversary."

Despite superficial agreement, U.S. President George W. Bush and South Korean President Roh Moo Hyun disagree on how to dissuade North Korea from acquiring nuclear weapons. The U.S. president advocates a firm approach while the South Korean leader would be more accommodating.

Thus, over the next five years the U.S. will shift most of the 7,000 people in its headquarters in Seoul out of the city. The U.S. will move the Second Division into posts south of Seoul near airfields. Those soldiers will prepare for swift strikes in contingencies elsewhere in Asia. The 37,000 troops in Korea today will be cut to an undecided number.

Why five years? That would have changes made before the end of the second Bush administration, assuming Bush is re-elected next November.

In addition, the United Nations headquarters, in South Korea since the Korean War of 1950-53, will probably be disbanded. The Combined Forces Command, which gives the U.S. operational control over South Korean troops, will be dissolved and authority returned to the South Korean government; those controls have long irritated nationalistic South Koreans.

Finally, the position of the four-star U.S. Army general, who today commands the U.N. mission, the Combined Forces Command, and U.S. troops, will be abolished in favor of a lower-ranking commander. The four-star flag may be moved to the headquarters of the U.S. Army in the Pacific, as many senior Army officers have advocated.

Rumsfeld's clues: On the way to Guam, he told the traveling press that the Pentagon has been reviewing "our force deployments and stationings." He said: "We're now at a stage where we can begin discussing [that] with our allies and with Congress."

Aboard the Navy command ship Blue Ridge in Yokosuka, Japan, Rumsfeld said: "I think those of you who are serving in the Navy are going to see the responsibilities of the United States Navy increase generally, and increase particularly here."

Addressing Americans in Okinawa, the defense secretary said: "We've got to continue to pull down deployments." He said some overseas deployments would continue but added: "Once they do that job they ought not to be there any longer than they need to be there." American troops have been in South Korea since the Korean War.

At a press conference in Seoul, after meeting with the defense minister of South Korea, Cho Young Kil, Rumsfeld said: "I have assured the minister that any changes to U.S. military posture in Northeast Asia will be the product of the closest consultation with our key allies. Most important they will result in increased U.S. capabilities in the region."

Rumsfeld said those adjustments "will reflect the new technologies that are available, the new capabilities and they will strengthen our ability to deter and if necessary defeat any aggressions against allies such as South Korea."

After meeting with Roh, Rumsfeld said the president had asserted that his nation "could become more self-reliant. I agree with that." He said the same thing in a meeting with American troops at Osan Air Base.

Translation: South Korea is capable of defending itself and U.S. forces are needed elsewhere.

Richard Halloran, formerly a correspondent for Business Week, The Washington Post and The New York Times, is a freelance journalist.

Friday, November 14, 2003

Japanese Rebuff Rumsfeld on Eve of Visit


Posted on: Friday, 14 November 2003, 06:00 CST

Any hope Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld had of being greeted in Japan with government assurances of a speedy dispatch of troops to Iraq were dashed even before he arrived Friday.

Rumsfeld was whisked directly from the airport to an evening meeting with Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi, whose government announced a day earlier while Rumsfeld was visiting Guam that it almost certainly will delay sending a contingent of non-combat troops until sometime next year.

Japan is one of America's most steadfast allies - arguably the most important in Asia - and it has pledged billions of dollars in financial aid for Iraq's reconstruction. The Bush administration had hoped the Japanese also would send troops before the end of the year. But after Wednesday's deadly attack on the Italian compound in south-central Iraq, Chief Cabinet Secretary Yasuo Fukuda backed off, saying the security situation in Iraq is not yet stable enough.

In an interview with reporters flying with him to Tokyo, Rumsfeld showed no sign of disappointment at Japan's decision and even suggested that the U.S.-led coalition in Iraq is gaining strength.

He said he was impressed by Italy's stated determination to remain in Iraq, even after losing 14 people in the attack at Nasiriya. The Italians indicated they may send replacement forces, he said.

"So the signal that's been sent is quite the contrary" to any suggestion that the coalition is in trouble in Iraq, Rumsfeld said, noting that 32 countries have troops on the ground and that Washington is in discussions with 14 more on providing either combat or humanitarian troops.

Rumsfeld acknowledged, however, that the anti-American resistance in Iraq is learning to stay one step ahead of the technologically superior U.S. military.

"The remnants of the regime are going to school on us," he said. "They watch what takes place and then they make adjustments. The test is who's going to outlast the other, and the answer is we're going to outlast them."

Tokyo was the second stop on an Asia tour that is Rumsfeld's first since becoming secretary of defense nearly three years ago.

After two days in Japan, to include a visit Sunday with American troops stationed on the southern Japanese island of Okinawa, Rumsfeld was headed to Seoul, where the South Korean government also dealt the Pentagon a setback this week by pledging a smaller troop deployment to Iraq than Washington had hoped for. It also is unclear how soon the 3,000 South Korean troops will go.

Rumsfeld has said repeatedly that the Bush administration wants countries to contribute troops to Iraq only if they feel it is in their self-interest - and in numbers that suit them. But the timing of the announcements by Tokyo and Seoul - while Rumsfeld was still en route - gave weight to the perception that even the administration's best allies are doubtful of progress in Iraq.

And in recent days Rumsfeld has underscored how difficult these troop decisions have become.

"It's a dangerous country, it's a violent country," he said Thursday in Guam. "It's been a violent country for a long time and it very likely will be for a long time. Certainly people need to participate there with their eyes open."

Speaking to U.S. troops over lunch at Andersen Air Force Base on the north end of Guam, Rumsfeld said Friday that stabilizing Iraq is "a tough, dangerous business," and that while progress has been made in the six-plus months since major combat ended May 1, "we have a way to go" before the situation is stable enough to transfer control of the country back to the Iraqis.

Rumsfeld also said the Bush administration has abandoned its original plan to restore sovereignty to the Iraqis only after they have written and ratified a new constitution and held elections.

"The experts say to do that would take a very long period of time - a couple of years," he said.

The U.S.-appointed Iraqi Governing Council has "come up with ideas," presented to President Bush through L. Paul Bremer, the top American administrator in Iraq, on how to "find some transfer of responsibility at a pace that is earlier" than the projected two-year timetable, he said.

"It does not mean we would physically leave the country any sooner," he added. "What it means is the Iraqis would begin to take on a greater portion of responsibility sooner than the original (plan)."

During his stop in Guam, Rumsfeld got briefings from U.S. Navy and Air Force commanders on the island's growing importance as a launching pad for American firepower in the Asia-Pacific region.

The Navy stationed two Los Angelese-class attack submarines in Guam last year and another is due to arrive next year. It also may add an aircraft carrier. No Air Force attack planes are permanently based there, but the Air Force is considering basing F/A-22 fighters as well as bombers and the Global Hawk surveillance plane.

Saturday, November 1, 2003

"Farewell, dear Isle!" The cost of demilitarizing Okinawa

"Farewell, dear Isle!" The cost of demilitarizing Okinawa: Okinawans may soon get what many of them have long wanted: the departure of US troops and the return of their land. But be careful what you wish for.

From: Japan Inc. | Date: 11/1/2003 | Author: Stanley, Michael E. Japan Inc.

BY THE BEGINNING OF the 19th century, the inhabitants of the Ryukyu Kingdom -- including what are now the 159 islands of Okinawa Prefecture -- were well aware that foreign ships occasionally prowled their waters. Among them were trading vessels bound for the European trading enclaves in the region and a few European and American whalers, who had begun to search out the great pods of leviathans that dwelt in the western Pacific. These vessels came and soon departed, usually without incident, often leaving only puzzlement and speculation in their wake.

In 1816, two Royal Navy vessels, the Alceste and the Lyra, had borne a part of Lord Amherst's mission to the imperial court at Peking. The two ships were ordered to survey the western coast of the Korean peninsula and the Ryukyu islands. In mid-September, the ships met their first Okinawans and the crews were duly impressed, noting their friendly and generous demeanor.

Between that first meeting and the departure of the two vessels, there was an ongoing mutual admiration and lack of friction that has few parallels in the history of Western voyaging and exploration. The journal of Dr. John M'Leod, ship's surgeon aboard the Alceste, recorded the impression left upon the English voyagers: "... The kindness and hospitality of its inhabitants have fixed upon every mind a deep and lasting impression of gratitude and esteem."

Another officer put his feeling into verse: "Farewell, dear Isle!--on thee may ne'er/The breath of civil discord blow!/Far from your shores be every fear,/And far--oh! Far--the invading foe!"

On the homeward voyage, the Lyra put in at the lonely South Atlantic isle of St. Helena, where the exiled Napoleon Bonaparte was in enforced residence. Captain Basil Hall secured an interview with Bonaparte, in which he mentioned that during his stay in the Ryukyus he saw no weapons of any kind. Hall noted that Bonaparte was "... completely perplexed ... Nothing struck him so much as their having no arms." Bonaparte was equally surprised by the Ryukyus' life without war. "'No wars!' cried he, with a scornful and incredulous expression, as if the existence of any people under the sun without wars was a monstrous anomaly."

But in 1945, as the Empire of Japan tottered toward defeat in World War II, the islands of the Once-flourishing Ryukyu Kingdom bristled with Japanese arms, and did indeed feel the tread of "the invading foe." The rest is a history with an especially ironic twist for that apparently unarmed land whose story had so amazed Napoleon.

Today, Okinawa is the least economically viable of Japan's 47 prefectures, and has had a sizable contingent of forward-deployed United States military forces on its soil for almost six decades. In that time, the prefecture has grown considerably from its Third World-like status as a war ravaged backwater.

Over the years, the presence of a large number of US military personnel -- approximately 25,000, with about 23,000 dependents -- making exclusive use of 19 percent of the main island's land area has become an increasingly visible source of friction between the Okinawans, the US military personnel stationed there and the government of Japan. Despite the politicians and bureaucrats who dodge the issue every time it is brought forward, it is quite clear that to the Japanese government, the large Okinawa-based forces and their facilities are in that prefecture until it's in their best interest to leave, and no amount of local protest will dislodge them.

In the meantime, 75 percent of the land reserved for use by US military forces in Japan is in the prefecture, the vast majority of it on the same main island that is home to 90 percent of Okinawa's overall population. Better there than here--or in Kyoto, Fukuoka or Sapporo -- is the attitude demonstrated but never precisely articulated by the Tokyo decision makers.

The really telling facts are these: Okinawa has a small population (just over 1,300,000 compared with Tokyo's over 12 million) and comprises only 0.6 per cent of Japan's total land area. Moreover, the prefecture is very heavily dependent on largesse from the national government to keep its books balanced, and must rely on Tokyo handouts on a perennial basis. In the thirty years since the switch from US military occupation to Japanese civilian rule in 1972, the Japanese government spent [yen] 6.7 trillion on improving Okinawa's infrastructure.

It is hard to go cold turkey on an addiction of that scale.

Those two hard truths -- small political presence and reliance on largesse from Tokyo--ensure that while there are well-orchestrated local choruses of caterwauling about the US military presence, they can have no effect until either Washington or Tokyo, or both, decide to drastically alter their relationship.

That may come to pass in the very near future. Over the next few years, the US will likely implement a large-scale repositioning of its overseas forces. Despite the official press-release denials, it is far from inconceivable that the forces stationed in Okinawa could well he shifted to other locations in the western Pacific area. Such moves may be much more likely than anyone is letting on at the moment, especially it there is a diplomatic breakthrough -- or a coupd'etat -- that guarantees the stability of the Korean peninsula.

In recent months, there has been speculation that some of the units now in Okinawa could move to bases in northern Australia, Guam or the Philippines in very short order. While there are indeed several potential locations, one certain factor is that any move is likely to be made on a large scale. The two major units of the US Forces in Okinawa are the Marine Corps' 3rd Marine Expeditionary Force (III MEF), headquartered at Camp Courtney, and the Air Force's 18th Wing, headquartered at Kadena Air Base. These are large and intricate elements of the total US force structure in the Asian-Pacific region.

The structure and mission of these two critically important force components are such that the larger part of the US forces in Okinawa cannot be drawn away gradually, a piece at a time. Each has to maintain its function and readiness together. If there is a realignment that causes the 3rd MEF and/or the 18th Wing to relocate, that removal would have to be on a large scale. Fragmentary or small-scale changes of a long-term nature could not occur; neither of these force's components can effectively function if, say, its electronics repair personnel, cooks or military police units were to be removed. The far greater part has to essentially move together, just as a spleen, liver and gall bladder have to move with the rest of a living human body in order for that body to survive. Essentially, it's a case or "all or nothing.'"

Force relocation out of Okinawa would not only be on a large scale, it would be precipitous: these components--despite their size and complexity -- cannot afford a long down time while they pack, move and unpack. And there are important strategic and tactical aspects to consider: the Pentagon is absolutely unwilling to reveal its forces' movements any more than is necessary. As long as the major threat in the region is only two hours by air (or less than 15 minutes by missile) from Okinawa, it is indeed naive in the extreme to think that any long-term advance notice of a major redeployment would be offered. Given these two conditions, it is apparent that any moves in store for the Okinawa-based US military would be both large and relatively sudden. And with US military presence in Okinawa of such a scale that it is deeply woven into the fabric of life on the island, any such move would have a broad-based and potentially devastating economic impact.

Back during the bubble years of the 80s, the term '3 K' was used to describe work seen as demeaning to the younger Japanese generation: kiken, kitanai, kitsui (dangerous, dirty, harsh). The Okinawan economy has its own different set of Ks: kanko, kichi, kokyo jigyo. These describe the bases of the prefecture's economy--tourism, the military bases and public-works spending. (Note that agriculture and manufacturing are nowhere in the mix, even with tax incentives aimed at aiding these sectors.)

At the time of reversion to Japanese sovereignty, military-related transactions accounted for 15.6 percent of the prefecture's total economic activity, for a total of [yen] 78 billion. In recent years, that same category--including rent paid for the land occupied by military facilities, salaries of Japanese employees on the bases and the calculated expenditures by the US personnel in the local economy -- has hovered at just about 5 percent, with a total of around [yen] 180 billion. Much of this, including the salaries of Japanese-national employees and the rental payments to land owners for the use of their "conscripted" property, is actually paid for by the Japanese government.

However, these monies are contingent on the presence of the US forces, and whatever the source, for years the total has been more than double the figure for the income generated by Okinawa's agricultural sector. Despite the claims that the bases cause economic hardship by depriving Okinawans of their land, a quick look at the rentals paid for the use of that land reveals that the amounts paid are higher on the average than the profits resulting from sugar cane or pineapple cultivation -- a fact which is grudgingly conceded even by some of the bases' most vociferous opponents. Some of these individuals are owners of the properties themselves. The economic reality of this payment is underlined by the fact that there are Okinawan real estate agencies that specialize in buying and selling titles to individual parcels of the land on which the bases sit.

The US Air Force and Marine Corps together employ about 7,500 Okinawans, with another 1,200 or so employed at the smaller US Army and Navy facilities. This makes the US military one of the prefecture's largest employers; it is fairly easy to envision the impact of the loss of both those jobs and the concomitant economic input by the US military.

With Japan still in its decade-plus recession (and no sign of it ending soon), with tax revenues in a slide and necessary expenditures rising, it requires no mental wizardry to understand the government's aversion to having to further bail out Okinawa. The entire prefecture could suddenly plunge into a depression by the loss of an amount approaching [yen] 180 billion per year--not to mention the sudden disappearance of local construction, maintenance and service contracts let for base facilities and paid for by the Japanese government through the Defense Agency's Defense Facilities Administration Agency.

The presence of the Gordian-knot state of tension on the Korean peninsula will assuredly keep the US forces in Okinawa for the time being. However, if the Bush administration's evident coolness toward the apparent threat of a nuclear-armed and nuclear arms-exporting North Korea (as opposed to its fervent heat over a Baathist Iraq) is any indication, a removal of major force components from Okinawa to another location becomes a greater possibility. Such relocation to bases from which they may better be able to operate, say, against Islamic guerillas and terrorists in Southeast Asia is a definite possibility for the near term. The rising profile of Islamic terrorism in that region will be a major motivation. With such large forces tasked and based outside Japanese territory, being unable to "let George do it" will surely provide an impetus for Japan to arm itself more fully so as to be able to mount a far more vigorous defense than the currently eggshell-thin Defense Forces could muster on their own.

It is already evident that some new and precedent-setting measures in this direction are not only being contemplated, but acted upon. For example, last February, Defense Agency chief Shigeru Ishiba blustered that if Japan's reconnaissance satellites were to detect North Korea fueling its ballistic missiles, Japan could rightly mount a strike against North Korea as an act of self-defense.

Ishiba may have revealed more than he intended to at the time. As things stand today, the Japan Air Self Defense Force could not do much; but the new -- and air-refuelable --F-16-based F-2 attack fighter is configured to employ the GPS-guided Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM) "smart bomb" system. This combination will multiply Japan's air-strike capabilities by several orders of magnitude, and so make a quick-reaction strike such as that mentioned by Mr. Ishiba well within the capability of the JASDF in very short order. His comments might be hinting that active acquisition of this system is now on the fastest of tracks and that reaching operability at the earliest opportunity is a major priority.

A few years ago, during an interview covering the day-to-day realities of the Japan-US defense relationship, a Japan Air Self Defense Force colonel -- a wing commander at the time -- opined: "In Japan there is no long view; everything is a reaction to the perceived problems of the moment. That is our real problem, and that will hurt us." If the colonel's assessment is indeed accurate, Japan may encounter a painful and dangerous set of difficulties of which there is no apparent precedent.

The impact of the sudden relocation of the large Marine and Air Force components from Okinawa would not be limited to that island alone; it would ripple throughout the nation and the region. But the two dollars-and-cents problems that Japan would face are the relief of an Okinawa plunged suddenly into a prefectural depression of unprecedented scale, and the need for the nation to arm and train to thoroughly and completely defend itself in the event of a regional crisis. Whether it is politically up to that challenge is something we may see in the months and years ahead. The days of a chaotically overheated, virtually unmanaged economy and a head-in-the-sand approach to international difficulties should be over, and the real test may just be beginning.

* MICHAEL STANLEY
(Farewell Dear Isle, page 52) has lived in Japan for 24 years, working in the fields of print and broadcast media. He is a veteran documentary photographer specializing in challenging environments such as deserts, rain forests, oceans--and the cockpits of high-performance military aircraft. His work has appeared in Japanese magazines ranging from Bungeishunju to Elle Japon. He is also an analyst and commentator for Fuji TV news and a frequent contributor to J@pan Inc. http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G1-110807936.html

Saturday, August 16, 2003

JAPAN-U.S. RELATIONSHIP : A turnaround remembered

Saturday, Aug. 16, 2003
By RICHARD HALLORAN
Special to The Japan Times

HONOLULU -- August stirs memories of the darkest hours in the complicated 150-year history of America's relations with Japan.

On Aug. 6, 1945, the U.S. dropped the first atomic bomb on Hiroshima and on Aug. 9 the second on Nagasaki. About 200,000 Japanese perished in that holocaust.

On Aug. 15, Emperor Showa announced that, in an acute understatement, "the war situation has developed not necessarily to Japan's advantage."

On Aug. 28, the first Americans landed to begin seven years of occupation.

Then, after four years of bitter war that had filled each nation with hatred, there began a remarkable turnaround. Over the ensuing half-century, Americans and Japanese not only learned to live with each other but to forge an alliance that serves the best interests of both countries. This month Japan stands with Australia, Britain and Canada as America's most reliable allies.

A white paper issued by the Defense Agency in Tokyo last week restated Japan's need to nurture its alliance with the United States, including the dispatch of its Self-Defense Forces on more peacekeeping missions abroad. Japan's Constitution forbids using military force to settle international disputes.

Japan's relations with America stand in marked contrast to those with China, North Korea and South Korea, all of which experienced Japanese aggression in the first half of the 20th century. Beijing and Pyongyang rarely miss an opportunity to criticize Japan and the U.S. Seoul's dealings with Tokyo are often edgy, and Korean anti-Americanism has become rampant.

From the outset in 1945, Emperor Showa and American Gen. Douglas MacArthur put their respective nations on the path to partnership. The emperor, in his Aug. 15 radio address, charged the Japanese not to resist the victors because "we have resolved to pave the way to peace for ten thousand generations by enduring the unendurable and suffering the insufferable."

MacArthur, accepting Japan's surrender aboard the battleship Missouri on Sept. 2, struck a tone for a magnanimous occupation. As supreme commander, he said he would proceed with "justice and tolerance" to see that "the Japanese people are liberated." Naoyuki Agawa, a Japanese scholar, said in a recent paper that the U.S. occupation had been "benevolent and generous."

A telling note: No Japanese shot at the American occupiers. A soldier in the 11th Airborne Division said they landed in Atsugi, southwest of Tokyo, with rifles loaded. Within a couple of days, they felt secure enough to stack their rifles and wander into town to see if they could find an open bar to drink beer. (Contrast that with Iraq where 160 Americans have been killed since hostilities ended.)

Even some American and Japanese warriors became friends. Adm. Arleigh Burke, who detested the Japanese but was posted to Japan in the 1950s, and Adm. Jinichi Kusaka, who fought Burke in the South Pacific, toasted each other over dinner. Burke also studied Japanese history under Adm. Kichisaburo Nomura, who had helped mask Japan's surprise attack on Pearl Harbor in 1941.

After the occupation, U.S.-Japan relations were often on a roller coaster. Anti-American riots greeted a new security treaty in 1960. The U.S. return of the island of Okinawa to Japan in 1972 relieved much tension. The 1980s saw repeated trade disputes and "Japan bashing" by Americans. In the early 1990s, Japan drew American grumbling because it sent only money to the first war against Iraq.

Throughout this period, Japan wrapped itself in a pacifist cocoon, the consequence of the atomic bombings and the defeat of World War II. Japan's ambassador to the U.S., Ryozo Kato, told an audience in Washington last month: "We largely were on the sidelines when it came to global security issues."

In the last few years, Kato said, "Japan has been moving from supportive observer to active player." Noting Japanese deployments in peacekeeping, humanitarian missions and naval support for the U.S. in Afghanistan and Iraq, Kato said: "Together with the United States, we are ready to have boots on the ground for the world's peace."

On a personal level, good relations between Japanese and Americans are all the more remarkable considering their cultural differences. Americans come from the Judeo-Christian tradition, Japanese from the teachings of Shinto, Buddhism and Confucius. Americans are individualistic, Japanese prize social harmony. Americans talk of their rights, Japanese of their obligations.

The list could go on forever. Indeed, many learned tomes have dissected the differences between Japanese and Americans. Nonetheless, as Agawa the scholar has written: "We will continue to work, study, suffer, laugh, cry and live together for a long time to come."

Richard Halloran, formerly a correspondent for Business Week, The Washington Post and The New York Times, is a freelance journalist.