With China grabbing more and more ocean as "its own," it is hardly time for a reduced presence of the USA.
3
Imagine China stationing troops and arms in Mexico, Quebec, Brazil let alone in more than another 100 countries around the globe.
4
As a US Maine I spent from September of 1963 till September of 1964 on Okinawa with brief forays of three weeks to 8 weeks in Japan proper, the South China Sea on a ship, in Taiwan and VN over the course of that year. If my memory serves me correctly (always suspect at 74) the USMC was the only service not permitted to bring family along for their tour. The centerpiece of US policy there then is still, as I can best determine, also the centerpiece of US police today: That is to maintain a forward deployed presence in the area to counter Chinese and NK expansionist wishes. One can easily argue if that is necessary in today’s world given our ability to move men and equipment quickly if necessary. In any event my memory of Okinawa was quite pleasant. Friendly people, lots of really interesting places to visit, and, at the time, no particular need to kill anyone in the process to enjoy the island. There were folks then that did not want us there just as there are folks today that don’t want us there. Just as many or more were delighted to have us there and the boost our presence gave to the economy of the island. It doesn’t seem that has changed all that much in 2018.
4
A realpolitik assessment of Okinawa would not have the United States reducing its footprint when the Chinese are doing the opposite in the South China Sea.
5
Make sure servicemen behave themselves
5
So while the United States works to create landfills in the ocean outside out territorial limits for military plane runways we condemn China for creating landfills in the ocean outside their territorial limits for military plane runways. Except China is much closer to their installations than the US would be to theirs in Okinawa.
2
@Carl Hultberg The allies agree with the United States to station American troops on their soil. China on the other hand did not agree with anyone in the region to create landfill. Moreover, while the US claim Okinawa as part of the US, China claims South China Sea as their territory. Your argument is so bad that even the Chinese wouldn't use it in real diplomacy.
4
I think we have a situation where two rights make a wrong.
Japanese citizens benefit both directly and indirectly from US military aid. Citizens aren't paying the tax burden for the full military expense of defending their national sovereignty. That's one benefit. A Japanese military force would have to build their own base somewhere anyway. So the US presence isn't really relevant.
There's also the indirect benefits to local businesses. Military bases spend a lot of money in local economies. That's why US Senators fight to get them in the first place.
The generals are right too of course. Military tactics 101: Don't unnecessarily divide your forces; you are weaker as a military when you are apart.
However, the Okinawans have a point too. Why is the military, any military, permanently parked in their backyard? That's more of a domestic issue, isn't it? Abe wants to park a new military installation in Okinawa and the Okinawans don't want it there.
I expected Abe to shop other prefectures to see who might be interested. Vermont might not want a military base but I'll bet you Nebraska wouldn't say no. Abe could come up with a short-list of willing locations and see what the US military finds acceptable. That seems easier than fighting about it.
And anyway, Okinawans will probably sing a different tune if Abe agrees to remove the entire military presence from Okinawa. It's like local vacation spots complaining about tourists. They want the revenue but not the tourists.
8
@Andy, this would have been a good argument a decade ago, but The Okinawan economy gets a massively larger proportion of its boost from tourists from China and Korea. Building continues despite limited land in tourist hot spots. The exodus of 10,000 service members and families and giving a base or two back to Okinawa would be a huge windfall for the economy - more hotels, more shopping, more roads to ease the burdensome traffic. I hope we stay as is because this is a beautiful and safe place to be stationed a raise kids, but their economy does not benefit as much as popular American public opinion suggests
6
The history of our humanity is a history of war, the question is not only can we ever come to an international structure where half of our national effort is NOT preparation for war, but are we even thinking of such a thing?
I don't have that answered. But the reason it feels really weird to be blithely discussing a giant US base on the other side of the world in a very rich country that is better off than us is that it OUGHT to be weird. That is, people intrinsically sense that we should be more advanced as a species than to have to be constantly preparing incredibly extensive military bases when, the citizenry is underpaid, in poor health & fitness, and their retirements are completely insecure. Wake up and get off the Neolib Neocon warhorse. Divest out of being the completely ineffective World Military Police.
3
This editorial does not present an accurate picture of the situation in Okinawa. My wife and I were civilian employees of the US government on Okinawa from 1999 to 2009, and I doubt the situation has changed significantly since we left. Several factors not mentioned in this piece should be considered.
First, because of their historical role in the region the Japanese cannot expand their military role in countering Chinese expansion. There is, adjacent to the memorial to the people killed in the WWII invasion of Okinawa, a monument to the Korean laborers killed constructing defenses for the Japanese military. Want to reunify Korea? Put a uniformed Japanese soldier on the peninsula.
Second, the US military is the employer of choice for residents of Okinawa because it offers significantly better pay and benefits.
Third, Okinawa is largely populated by an ethnically distinct group of people (Uchinanchu), and the Japanese are more than willing to foist the US military presence on them. The Okinawans extort their national government by objecting to the US military.
Finally, the notion that the US is a major factor in the destruction of coral reefs around Okinawa ignores the Japanese willingness to do the same. Look at the coastline from Hija River (the site of the WWII invasion) south to Naha, and then tell me about the Japanese respect for their coral reefs.
2
My wife and I served 27 years and seven months active duty between us. One thing is certain. Wherever we went, somebody didn't want us there. It was before my time but I hear the original inhabitants of North America wished the U.S. Army would just go away.
3
Don't really know what's to be done with Okinawa now but do know that it was a life altering event in my late father's life. He was a young ensign in the U. S. Navy & during the invasion he, as a recently graduated electrical engineer, was charged with setting up a primitive electrical generating station in the secured area while the fighting still raged on the island.
I think he was deeply moved by what he saw there. He left a scrapbook which included a picture of 2 Japanese soldiers who had killed themselves by firing their rifles into their heads by using their toes to pull the triggers. Also were pics of destroyed villages & religious sites.
Before he died I asked him to recount for my young son (now an airline pilot) his experience watching a Kamikaze aircraft pass so close to him that he could see the yellow ceremonial scarf on the pilot's neck flapping in the air stream.
I still have a postcard prepared by a young Japanese on the island for mailing to his homeland. It was obviously never sent & it's very probable that its originator died there. I should see if there is any way of having it returned to any possible descendants of its author's family.
The island was bought at extreme cost to all involved & careful, fair judgement should be applied to determining its just future.
5
Okinawa is but a sample of the excessive military force throughout the world...in times of relative peace, other than the ongoing Middle East insecurity created by the stupid invasion of Irak, under false pretenses when trying to link it with 9/11, debunked long ago, and with impunity of those that lied to us (including 'W' and Cheney) about it, and causing untold suffering and loss in human lives and treasure. Is there no one, other than Mr. Tamaki, with the fortitude and integrity to call this invasion what it is, a thorn in their sovereignty and a waste of resources better spent on really worthwhile efforts to make our lives more enjoyable, i.e. education, health and housing? Does this sound too simplistic to the geniuses out there, imposing their ill-will?
3
So - why didn't the author explain to us exactly what the burden to the poor populations is and why it can't be shifted? If it's a taxation issue it seems easy to resolve. Also, why didn't the author explain the economic advantage to the Okinawan that the military presence provides? What will happen to the poor population when the Americans depart? Will they become richer? Lots of holes in this story.
1
@Morris
I’m from Okinawa living in VA. The economic advantage from the American military to the Okinawan is only 5% of their entire revenue. A vast land returned that used to host American civilian residences now thrives with fashion malls, restaurants, an art museum, national theater, duty-free center where the Mainland Japanese flock, etc. If all the military lands were returned to the Okinawan, maybe they wouldn’t have to live with a stigma of the poorest prefecture.
5
The U.S. has installed bases all over the world because it's important to keep the military welfare complex running. It's big money for defense spending. It's also a way to make Americans think we are protecting the world.
Funny thing is, we really haven't proven to be the best peace keepers (far from it). The U.S. military has also proven that it isn't really good at winning armed conflicts. We explode a lot of bombs and shoot a lot of bullets but, with the exception of Grenada, what war has the U.S. actually won since WWII? An even better question is, what enemies have the U.S. military actually defeated? Working backward: not Afghanistan, not Iraq, not Vietnam, not Korea.
We have very little to show for all our excessive spending on the military other than enriching military contractors.
21
@mrfreeze6Dam those people on Grenada.......an island protected by the UK......and Ronnie invaded anyway............Margaret never ever spoke to him after that episode
3
@mrfreeze6 Make no mistake, the US has bases around the world to protect the US first. And while it would be nice to believe that the world wants peace, that is far from the truth. Each country is filled with elitist government bureaucracy that seeks power above all else. Millions gave their lives not too long ago to stop the spread of those seeking world domination. The US may have gone in that direction if it hadn't been for the wisdom of our fore fathers that actually had some good ideas. No, the US isn't perfect, but we are not (at least haven't been until the last couple of decades) stupid.
One of the truly legitimate concerns of the residents of Okinawa, not mentioned in this editorial, is the permanent destruction of coral reefs and the loss of their ecological integrity. And for what? China has been destroying coral reefs wholesale as the government seeks to lock out everyone else, so American must also destroy reefs.
Another occupied land, as if the war never ended. Further, Okinawans were not treated as ethnically Japanese by the dominant culture during WWII. There are numerous sound reasons for the residents to oppose this project.
8
As a young marine, I was stationed on Okinawa in 1958/59. I remember it as a large, beautiful island with friendly, very polite people. There were several "incidents" that occurred while I was there. I recall that an election was held for mayor of Naha City and the candidate who won was detained by American authorities for being a "communist." A large demonstration followed, of course. Times change. For some, too slowly.
11
The original owners of what is now called the United States of America can only wish that we would occupy a smaller footprint on their land.
I find it preposterous that well educated, better than Thou Christian wannabes are so illiberal when it comes to basic truths about the founding of our nation. With a military budget of $639.1 billion, what is our governemnt afraid of?
4
@Enarco
"I find it preposterous that well educated, better than Thou Christian wannabes are so illiberal when it comes to basic truths about the founding of our nation."
Don't think "well educated" applies to most Kristocrites these days.
@Richard Iverson
Your point is well taken.
We must also understand that being "educated" does not necessarily mean "intelligent". (I believe that I recently read that in The Manchester Guardian)
“...the security this brings to Japan and the region cannot come at the expense of an unfair, unwanted and often dangerous burden on Japan’s poorest citizens.”
When faced with the imminent threat of war, burdens are seldom evenly shared. Unless “Japan’s poorest citizens” aspire to be the newest citizens of the People’s Republic of China, a large military presence is necessary - US, Japanese, or both.
1
Is there an imminent threat of war?
Also, do you really believe having a base anywhere in the world actually stops wars from happening?
All of the hardware and manpower in the world won't stop a war if people are determined to start one.
4
Have to agree with other comments- time for us to leave Japan. As they so forcefully demonstrated in the past, they are fully capable of defending themselves, and in light of North Korea’s nuclear bluster, might have to seriously reconsider their non-nuclear stance. If anyone wants us to stay in Japan, it’s probably China.
2
What does this mean?
The Battle of Okinawa was the bloodiest of the Pacific Theater. And the Japanese Empire's invasion and occupation of China aks The Chinese People's War of Resistance against Japanese Aggression was the deadliest part of World War II. Japan under American pressure renounced aggressive national offense in favor of limited self-defense under an American military nuclear weapons umbrella.
Japan is an aging and shrinking nation with a below replacement level birthrate with a tenth of China's population108 . While China is also aging and shrinking with a below replacement level birthrate along with a massive gender imbalance about 20% of the human race is ethnic Han Chinese. And while Japan has the nominal # 3 GDP and China the #2 GDP on a per capita GDP basis China ranks near Bulgaria and the Dominican Republic.
America has 10 nuclear power aircraft carrier battle groups. China has one refurbished conventional power Soviet Union era carrier. America annually spends as much on it's military as the next eight nations combined including 9x Russia and 3x China.
2
@Blackmamba
What’s your point ?
So why are the US military still on Okinawa, the war ended 73 years ago................the island is Japanese
14
These comments, with a couple notable exceptions, are informative and intelligent on all sides of this issue. All I can add is, Some things never change. I was stationed at HQ USARIS in '69. I vividly remember one exceptionally stupid piece of posturing that left me shaking my head in shame.
Some Okinawans were demonstrating at the entrance to the base. Rather than allow them their right of peaceful expression, the Brass decided to deploy a bunch of us hidden behind a ridge near HQ, "armed" with ammunition-less rifles and absolutely no idea what to do with them. Eventually everybody involved got bored and went home.
Such a farce.
I grew quite fond of Okinawans and their beautiful islands. I'm aware of the complexities surrounding the issue of bases, and I lack the genius to supply an answer.
I just wish the populous peace and happiness.
16
Why are we still there. This is not our country. It is however our arrogance. The same thing in Germany as well. Both want us out. So get out.
6
To the fine people of Okinawa: Xi Jinping and Kim Jong-un support your efforts.
1
Part of PM Abe's presumption when sword rattling with the DPRK, the ROK and China is that the US bases in Okinawa will remain there. The US should take a hard look at the risks he's likely to expose them to in his final term in office, and consider a move to Guam, which is a US protectorate.
3
America is similar to France before 1789. We are bankrupting our country and one of the main causes is excessive spending on the military. There are other reasons for our huge deficits of course but reducing military spending to less than 2% of GNP would be a good start to alleviating problem. We should have a goal of shutting down all our foreign military bases as soon as possible and shutting down the bases in Japan in the near future would be a good start. For better or worse America can simply no longer afford its military empire.
8
The world did not come to an end when we were asked to leave France and did, or when we left the Philippines; or turned the Panama Canal over to Panama. The Japanese and South Koreans have the economic power to take over the defensive needs currently provided by the USA military. Perhaps if left to their own devices, the Koreas could figure out how to co-exist. I am not an isolationist. It would be far more productive if we found diplomatic means to engage the rest of the world and let others take the lead in managing their own business. "Father" didn't always "Know Best" and neither does the United States. Start winding down the US military presence in Japan and Korea and do not build any more bases in the region.
26
@John Warnock After 15 years of U.S. Air Force presence, French President Charles de Gaulle decided to evict NATO forces from France.......
as simple as that
At some point, we do have to withdraw all our forces. We've done the greatest good for humanity by helping to promote global stability and reduce major conflict. Of course America made big mistakes but looking at the data, our alliances, globalization, and power projection has helped stabilize the world. War is going out of fashion, it's not a good way anymore to get what you want.
For now, a reduction in force is okay. But like Germany, US wants to prevent a rise in nationalism and militarism. Threats of China and North Korea need to be checked. The Japanese know this and don't want America to leave, but a compromise should be met regarding America's force in Japan.
But US troops cannot stay in other countries forever. How much longer? 10 years? 50 years? 100 or 200 years? Trump is pretty isolationist, and the time to withdraw and trust others to be independent and responsible may be nearing. His praise of Kim Jong Un may in part be due to pressuring Japan to concede more to him for America's security and remind everyone America's importance in the region.
2
US troops are stationed at 800-odd posts worldwide as outposts of the American Empire, not because they are wanted or needed by their vassal states.
2
@df
We've done the greatest good for humanity by helping to promote global stability and reduce major conflict..............you have to be joking, the USA has started 201 wars or conflicts since 1945
1
What exactly have our troops in Okinawa done to justify being there for 75 years other than to add to the Japanese economy. That may have been important years ago, but not now. Japan is fully recovered and "rehabilitated" and doesn't need that financial prop. Our vaunted military has lost the two wars in SE Asia we faut in the last century, Korea and VietNam. In fact our vaunted military has only won two conflicts since WW2, Granada and the First Gulf War and right now is engaged in our longest War with no end or victory in sight in Afghanistan.. Who are we kidding? Okinawa is basically indefensible. The days of Invasion from sea are over. There are no more landing boats depositing troops on hostile shores to fight their way across Islands. So what are we defending against by being there? Our "right" to occupy it forever as a spoil of war in the tradition of the the great Colonial Empires, now residing in the dustbin of history. Get out of Okinawa now, before we are forced to by the Japanese people.
12
Built more aircraft carriers and comfort ships.
The greater Asian sphere of co-prosperity,under a Chinese flag is in effect. The Okinawans are bright enough to realize the the Americans can and will do nothing to slow it's creep.
It's been stated that nothing short of war will stop the Chinese.
Admirals who plan for the last war fail to acknowledge that land based missiles have made surface battle groups floating coffins.
The recent disasters in tidal ares throughout the world shows the inadvisability of stationing forces in areas that weather could reduce to so much scrap, very expensive scrap.
One good storm and the berms pictured will be a submerged reef, and don't tell us the military doesn't know. A fat retirement and a defense contractor vice president ship awaits those that continue to rob the bank.
Perhaps the Times could state how dependent the Okinawan economy is on the American military and what it would propose to do to replace Uncle Sugar.
Perhaps unexploded ordinance tourism? There are hundreds of tons of it on the island and it's surrounding waters.
Pulling out of untenable positions and spending the money at home on renewables would do for the the defense and prosperity of the nation than flushing it away on bases whose reason for existence has passed.
4
So we now have 50,000 troops on Okinawa and another 30,000 troops (give or take a few) in Korea. These troops would be what is known as "cannon fodder" if a war with China should break out and there would be little in the way of protecting them from the million man Chinese Army that could roll right over this island. Not to mention just how expensive these distant bases are to keep up.
I was stationed in Japan and I know what effect a base of young Americans can do to the economy, both good and bad. Bars and prostitution abound which has a negative effect on the populous and it's culture not to mention the noise and pollution caused by these bases.
Also, having these bases is like a thumb in China's eye. Think how we would like it if China had thousands of Chines troops right off the coast of California. Neither China or the U.S. is the same country they were at the end of the 2WW. Times change and we must change as well.
I'm all for bringing the troops home where they can boost the economy here instead of on Okinawa as well as keeping them from becoming cannon fodder for the militarists.
Semper Fi 3rd. Mar. Div.
12
@USMC1954
Oh, I’m sure the US military planners haven’t overlooked the danger of being overrun by a million Chinese. One wonders if someone foolish enough to concentrate a million-man army has overlooked the MOAB, for starters.
When we leave, the Chinese will move in, and they won’t be as responsive to the opinions of the Japanese people as we were.
5
Fear & profit has always been the issues when overseeas US military clousers were suggested and recommended. Sadly it took a Nuclear bomb to end WW2 in the pacific, and it will take competent peace talks to establish a Japaneses contentinent without a forienge military occupying their lands.
It is the militaries generating local profits that politicians use to maintian their employment along with the fear of the possibility of war that keeps Japanesse people favorably secure and happy.
Ironicly it is the nuclear bomb drop by the occpying force that caused fear to all in the region. :-)
There is no reason to pander to the Japanese governor.
We're on Okinawa for a reason.
We weren't the ones driving native Okinawans over cliffs.
We won, they lost.
Tough.
3
Time, way past time. to dismantle the American Imperial Oligarchy. Okinawa would be a good place to start. The idea that there are not qualified alternatives is just more military-industrial-financial motivated Republican lies
10
PM Abe has ignored the request by the Okinawans to reduce the American presence on the island up to now. He has just won a third term as the leader of his party and is trying his hardest to please Trump in any way that he can so as to avoid tariffs on autos, steel, etc. Why would he back down and grant the wishes of these people?!? Only if Trump wants to pull back troops....
2
@richard I'm one of "these people." Why? Because we are suffering. Simple.
6
Considerating that China is gobbling up islands in the area, now's not a great time for the Okinawans to push for this.
3
@Kash
China is not gobbling up Islands anywhere near Okinawa. Suggest you look at a map.
2
When the Republicans say we have to choose between Social Security and National Defense because they cut taxes I'll respond with "Let Japan step up and defend themselves". Ronald Regan said he was going to cut taxes, increase military spending and balance the budget. He never got close to balancing a budget and the USA can not afford to police the world. At some point America needs to get real and work with allies who can defend themselves. Honda makes jets now, the Asian aircraft business will boom soon no matter what we, America, want.
5
@Mr. Jones and dont forget AIRBUS, who make the biggest airliner in the world..........
Airbus A380
The $446 million Airbus A380 is the largest and most expensive airliner in the world. Take a look inside. The Airbus A380 superjumbo is the largest commercial airliner in history
I lived in Okinawa when I was 9 years old, back in 2006. I rode the bus from our housing base, Plaza (Foster), to Kadena AFB for school in the mornings and would see protesters standing outside; local residents who were not happy with the expansion of the U.S. military presence on their island. I didn't understand much of the situation as a child, and I was intrigued to see this article talking about something I've seen in person those 12 years ago. Now as an adult, albeit a young one, I am pleased to see that activists are still out there protesting to get their own land back. Okinawa is their home, and we've been there for 70 years. I believe it's time we ease back our military presence and let the people who live there have their island back.
19
@Luke Giltz They were protesting in 1971-72 when I was there. I was stationed at Henoko Depot, indeed, a beautiful, unspoiled place.
3
America's great military paid for Okinawa with her sacrifice. Okinawa is ours and not Japan's, period.
1
@DANIEL CODIANNI Okinawa does not belong to the U.S. Winning a war against a country does not mean we own their land; this isn't feudalism. America should respect the sovereignty of Japanese citizens living in their own homes, and not have to take a consolation prize for winning a war against them that ended 70 years ago.
6
@Luke GiltzThats true, but the USA doesnt have to own an island or a country,they just go in and take it or them, that is the way the USA has been doing it for decades.............and they do it with impunity
That's just what the Russians told the Japanese when they took the northern territories...
2
Why "a Smaller American Footprint on Okinawa"?
If the US drive to fill the space of its "Manifest Destiny" did not stop in Hawaii, but took over Japan and The Philippines, there would have been no Pacific theater of war in World War II. Also, the Japanese language might have developed the sound L, and there would have been five syllabic letters in katakana and hiragana: la, li, lu, le, lo.
@Tuvw Xyz Are you suggesting that America should have continued west, across the Pacific, continuing to take islands? Sure, the Pacific theater could have been a non-issue if the U.S. controlled the region beforehand, but with that logic, why not take over the entire world? Then there'd be no more theaters of war anywhere, right?
2
@Luke Giltz
The US has never stopped trying to take over the entire planet, including space. The DoD has carved it up into 8 strategic areas over which there are commanders responsible for seeing that US goals for global and interstellar hegemony remain on track. The US economy has been on a war footing since 1941 - the business of the US is war.
I totally agree with the authors, and their new governor. WWII ended over 70 years ago. I understand why (but don't necessarily agree with) the US military presence was still there during the Korean and Vietnam Wars. After that, we already had (and still have) enough military forces in the region to take care of any business. We could and should use all of those funds towards our healthcare and/or environmental issues.
13
@Easy Goer
"" After that, we already had (and still have) enough military forces in the region to take care of any business.""..what business?????, or do you mean minding other peoples businesses
1
It has taken us 70 years to get where we are today. A precipitous withdrawal from Okinawa, Japan as a whole, Germany, South Korea and every other OCONUS base would create a vacuum of a huge size with very unpredictable effects.
Sure, withdrawal is aligned with Mr. Trump's America First posture and is even pleasing at some level to those on the far left. But such a move would not guarantee the countries which were cut loose would rise to fill the gap.
Although South Korea has the maritime construction facilities to build them, can you see a South Korean Carrier Strike Group?
Would the Philippines be the nation to support a B-2 bomber wing?
We have largely abandoned many of our HUMINT assets in foreign lands. Which countries would take over drone support for remote intelligence? Or the fleet of KH-11 satellites and their successors?
We have unmatched assets which are not easily replicated and bad actors, like weeds in a tilled field, will rise to support their desired hegemony.
A reduction of 10% of forces annually for five years would allow those nations to begin a proper realignment. Faster reductions would be literally suicidal.
7
what Okinawans most fear is perhaps a possibility of their islands being a stage for possible confrontations between the US-Japan alliance and China. they already had that experience during the 2nd World War. it is said that about thousands of ordinary people were dead at the time. (then, the United States and Japan were belligerent) what Okinawans cry is perhaps never let that happen again. and they believe it cannot be accomplished through a military base or fighters.
I support them.
10
I agree with the comments made by DC VET.
I have a Marine currently serving in Okinawa. From his relayed experience, I would say the U.S. Military is very aware of the sensitive nature of their being there. The Marines are strict by nature, however there is a entirely another level of strictness applied to our service personal in Okinawa.
Though it was our doing, from the war, nothing existed around Futenma when it was built. There is now a thriving city. In no small part due to the U.S. presence.
The truth is though, no one really wants the vacuum that would be left if the U.S. was to pull out of Okinawa. Either Militarily or financially.
5
@Eric DeYoung
Only 5% of the economic revenue of Okinawa comes from the American military. And there were villages around Futenma which were bulldozed by the Americans after the War.
1
If you rely on military men to come up with a diplomatic solution you are using a fly swatter to catch butterflies. People whose expertise is primarily fighting wars should function only as consultants to diplomats on their side in almost any diplomatic endeavor.
This is true in peace and doubly true during war. Generals are trained to win wars not to negotiate compromise.
22
It is disgraceful that the war cabinet of Japan left Okinawa for the US invasion just to buy time for their indecision; while no hope for winning the war they sought a way to keep the government intact for any sacrifices, including soil which is not proper and lives which are said to be cheaper than horse. Whether consciously or not the US military took advantage of this situation.
What saddens me most is the indignation shown by Okinawan collectively is almost mute. This time is no different; the margin Tamaki won the opponent by is not huge enough to make the central government to rethink their policy.
I do not see really no way out. Okinawan should have a wider view as they navigated between China and Japan before and Japanese too. I sometimes feel a wide cultural gap between the US and Japan difficult to bridge over. As Mr. Trump bundled together China, South Korea and Japan as exporters of junks, these three countries have much in common in a sense. It looks easier to find a way to live together in peace to make the US presence unnecessary; besides Mr. Trump now has a friend in North Korea.
4
@Aki I shared your disappointment that Tamaki's victory wasn't more resounding. Of course, Inamine's defeat in Nago was even harder to swallow.
2
@Aki
So, you too believe that Drumpf has a friend in N K................brainwashed as well, are you
This editorial recognizes that Okinawa is the poorest prefecture of Japan, but doesn’t explore the effect on the local economy that a withdrawal would have. A significant part of the economy is providing services to the military members stationed there.
As a veteran previously stationed in Okinawa, I loved living there, and the vast majority of my interactions with the local population were very positive. I hope Okinawa and the US military will continue to maintain a relationship and that the US military will always strive to be worthy guests on these beautiful islands.
24
@DC Vet. The preferctural government's own figures, compiled under the auspices of Tokyo friendly government indicated that the the US bases contribute 5% to the economy while swallowing up 20% of the land. In places like American Village, Main Place and Raikom, the departure of the US military has created tens of thousands more retail jobs than existed before.
10
@Peter Oooo retail jobs, we all know that's a big wage payer. You fail to mention that most of the protestors are flown in from mainland Japan to create fake protests or that that leases the Japanese government pays to the families that own the land where these bases are located have enriched many in Okinawa. Okinawa is a beautiful place, but the day to day experiences that I have enjoyed with local Okinawan's does not reflect the opinion of the elitist minority calling for the closure of the bases.
"most of the protestors are flown in from mainland Japan to create fake protests or that that leases the Japanese government pays to the families that own the land where these bases are located have enriched many " This is absolutely untrue. Protests have been grassroots since the '70`s, and the stipend /compensation paid by the JoG for property illegally seized by the US does not reflect its fair market value, particularly if US forces were to leave.
It is noteworthy in the context of this article that the indigenous population of Okinawa (Ruuchuu minzuku or Uchinaanchu) was subject to forced assimilation in late 19th and early 20th century Japan, with suppression of language and other aspects of Uchinaanchu culture. The tendency of the Showa government to consider the Indigenous population of Okinawa as suspect and sympathetic to the Allied cause in World War II - not necessarily unfounded given Japan’s history in the region - imparts a note of bitter irony to the current state of affairs.
14
The only equitable solution is to withdraw ALL American troops and to have Japan take over ALL military bases on their own. (with their own costs associated) - The same should be done with Germany and every other nation on earth.
The time for peace is NOW.
If China continues to be provocateur, then it is up to Japan to deal with the situation. The united States holds the economic power with China (and most others) that if it were to stop buying all goods made within China for export, then their economy would collapse in an instant. The Chinese people would rise up, since there would be no longer the cultural bargain left of trading in human rights for limited prosperity.
Discussing anything less than this is futile, and only a prolonging of the MIC and the socialization of its profits to a select few, while a portion of those profits being kicked back to the politicians that support the gravy train.
End the vicious cycle now.
29
@FunkyIrishman,
Here is what would happen:
1) China would actualize their hegemony, much to the detriment of Vietnam, the Philippines, Taiwan, and South Korea.
2) Japan would have a fully functional nuclear arsenal in a year (not the stick-and-string lashup of NoKo).
3) South Korea would follow within six months (see point 5).
4) The JMSDF would extend their patrol range to protect the sea lanes they depend on for both oil and trade, shortly leading to an active engagement that would leave the People's Liberation Army Navy on the bottom of the ocean (see point 9).
5) The possibility of Japan and South Korea getting tangled up (they have been before) would increase exponentially.
6) Russia would attempt air dominance in the Sea of Japan, a move sure to be contested by JASDF (second only to the IAF in lethality per kilogram).
7) Without an American presence, Vietnam and Singapore would enter an extraordinarily perilous situation, emboldening Malaysia and Indonesia
8) Leaving Australia to deal with a northern maritime frontier beyond the capacity of the RAN to manage.
9) Until someone nukes someone else's capital.
Despite that, and in all sincerity, I wholeheartedly agree with you. We should immediately begin an accelerated program to return all permanently stationed forces to CONUS. Let Germany and Russia and China and Japan work this out for themselves. 73 years without a major power conflict has been a pretty good run; the US has done its duty.
19
@Charles Becker,
Your doomsday scenario assumes that only the US is capable of maintaining any semblance of world peace. It's a paternalistic view pushed by the Pentagon for decades based on an outdated theory more than current evidence. We could test it gradually by incrementally closing military bases in fully functional democracies. Okinawa would be a good starting point.
6
I agree wholeheartedly. Why are we the world's bodyguard? Merkel wrings her hands over refugees from Libya, forcing all of Europe to accept literally overwhelming numbers of refugees (overwhelming the social welfare infrastructures, overwhelming the commercial infrastructures, and overwhelming the legal and policing capacities) but underspends on military against Germany's own promises by half. Thus, there is no will or capacity to attack the evil that causes these millions to seek refuge. Why has Germany not attacked al Assad? More than 50% of native Lybians live abroad. Lybia is a dystopian wasteland of violance and genocide.
In Japan, a poor district supported by US military expenditures and a country protected by America's young soldiers and Marines luxurates in idle babble about American withdrawl... with no capacity to protect itself from China or Russia. I say let 'em go out on their own. I wouldn't serve there!
The NY Times' cant-we-all-just-get-along prattle is vacuous drivel - but it leads to the same conclusion: let American forces protect America!
1