Nearly 80% of Japanese think Okinawa's U.S. base-hosting burden unfair

The poll was conducted on 3,000 randomly selected people aged 18 and older from March to April with valid responses received from 1,958.

A nationwide mail survey . . . 3,000 randomly selected . . . 1,958 were "valid" . . . and 1,042 responses were . . . What? Not valid? A third of those selected were purposely rejected?

And no indication of a margin of error?

Apparently not a serious poll.

SkepticalToday  05:13 pm JST

Apparently not a serious poll.

yes, but when are they ever?

Japan can't live with them and cannot live without them.

indigoToday  04:51 pm JST

japan is a US military base proxy, JGOV does not care about Japanese citizen opinion....

I think a better description would be the JGOV don’t care what the Okinawan “Japanese” people think!

compared to mainland Japanese they have always been deemed second class citizens and the JGOV prefer the US problem to be out of site out of mind!

As we watch the worlds despots and dictators are now making moves to expand their domination on Democracy and human rights to kick them in the dustpan of the past as historical. Beware of nationalists and fascist regimes, they never went away. I would like to see a world without military diplomacy and each ethnicity of the only race, the human race. We are all one species and race. Let culture and people meet and share and let the truth lead, not the political false memes that are lying to them just for the power. listening to each other and sharing the differences and the likes will be the way. We need to throw militarism ways in the dustpan of history and a lesson learned.

I would love to see the US Military leave all foreign countries period. The issue is will the despots and dictators get emboldened? Be sure the people of Japan will have the Love and Dedication as the people of the Ukraine have. China is lurking in the shadows

Not true when you look at what has happened to non-NATO protected Ukraine

There’s the rub. Love America’s military presence or hate it, a NATO nation has never been the target of attack by a foreign power. Take a look at the nations Putin’s Russia has gone after in the last few decades: Georgia, Moldova, and now Ukraine. They all have one thing in common - they weren’t under the mutual defense pact of NATO. There’s a reason countries that have formerly scoffed at the idea of becoming NATO members are now becoming far more receptive. Finland and Sweden are seeing now, in grim detail, just what happens to countries who are outside NATO’s collective security.

The same applies to Japan. As it stands right now, the fact China hasn’t just snatched the Senkakus has nothing to do with Japan. If Japan was all they had to worry about, they wouldn’t be worried at all. It’s the guy standing behind Japan that has kept them from getting handsy.

Given Okinawa’s strategic location, there’s always going to be some kind of military presence, whether American or Japanese. I’m sure the people of Okinawa would much prefer the Japanese to the Americas, which is understandable.

Peter Neil

On the other hand, the US military bases in Japan and Okinawa have big red targets on them in the grand geopolitical games

Not true when you look at what has happened to non-NATO protected Ukraine

Non-aligned nations are the sitting ducks, not those who have the full force of NATO and/or US protection

Samit BasuToday  01:56 am JST

And how many of those Japanese who think Okinawan burden is unfair would welcome a new US base in their towns?

You should try reading the first few paragraphs of the article.

Doesn't the base provide protection for all of Japan? If that is the case, all prefectures should pay a fair share if Okinawa is footing the bill alone. I can understand their fight.

Nearly 80 percent of people in Japan think the burden on Okinawa in hosting the bulk of U.S. forces in the country is not fair compared with other prefectures, according to the results of a Kyodo News survey.

But 69 percent opposed relocating the bases to areas where they live, although 79 percent believe the burden on Okinawa was unequally large.

Pointless survey considering the above.

I support the US-Japan alliance and appreciate all that the US has done for us when it comes to security but i also think the amount of troops and bases are a bit too much. We actually do not need that many of them. How about reducing the numbers to around 20k instead of 55k troops? And transfer half of the 22 US bases back to the JSDF?

Instead our government should focus more on better missile defense systems and drones. Ground troops are overrated. Especially when our jsdf is focus on self defense and not as aggressors.

Japan would be in just as much jeopardy as Taiwan if the US military weren't here. They should be extremely grateful. Japan is incredibly weak militarily, China or North Korea would be happy to show them if the US wasn't involved.

Okinawans aren't Japanese .

Do you know the difference between ethnicity and nationality? I get the impression you dont.

Okinawan's are Japanese citizens, and few if any want it any different. Okinawa can not survive as an independent country, and no one wants that.

Okinawa will never be without military bases, of one country or another!

El RataToday 05:19 pm JST

Wen kicking out the invaders?

The Russian invasion of Ukraine is a different topic.

The survey also found that 65 percent think the security alliance between Japan and the United States should remain as is, but 22 percent believe it should be strengthened and 11 percent said it should be weakened.

The alliance is approved and more want it even stronger. Those who dont are only 11%

dagon

For the well-being of both Japan and the US I would support a total US withdrawal.

I would support the strengthening of the alliance for the good of both Japan and the US.

US is sinking, let's hope Japan will still be able to float !

Russia has already sunk. Good thing Japan has no ties there.

The joys of being a vassal state... paying for your own occupation.

It is an alliance that both nations agree with. Meanwhile Russia attempts to extinguish Ukraine and expand Russian borders again. They took the Northern Territories and will never return them to Japan. Thats what they do. The US is the opposite. They return control and sovereignty and work in partnership.

I would love to see the US Military leave all foreign countries period.

Such a removal would leave a vacuum that would quickly be filled by China and Russia making them the predominant powers in the world. Not something that democracies will ever endorse.

My theory with Japan opposers to U.S is the same theory I have with South Korea, send US troops back home please do we want our men and women back on our soil and let both countries fend for themselves if there are ever any conflicts… remember these words whenever there’s a conflict DONT ask US for help money anything

With what's happening in Ukraine? Japan should be happy there's US military in their country. That's 100% deterrent from idiots like Putin.

Would they prefer the option of the unguarded burden North Korea might dish out on Japan's home islands?

that cannot deal with the recent development of new weaponry, such as supersonic cruise missiles and killer drones.

If you study the history of cruise missiles used in naval warfare, the majority have never hit their target. The Egyptians and Syrians fired dozens of cruise missiles at Israeli patrol craft and none hit, defeated by electronic warfare. The Israelis fired a lesser number of their smaller and shorter ranged Gabriel I missiles and some of those missed. Same thing during Operation Praying Mantis where all the many missiles the Iranians fired at US forces were defeated by electronic warfare. During the Falklands Island War the Argentines used all seven of their Exocet missiles. Two managed to hit targets, though one of those was seduced off its first target by electronic warfare and subsequently acquired another target, the Atlantic Conveyor. A third missile was a near miss but the explosion set fire to a destroyer's helicopter hanger. The other four didn't hit anything. The recent sinking of the Moskva was more an outlier than a trend, and obtw the cruise missiles used were sea skimming subsonic ones, not the high flying screamers that can be seen a long way off on radar and engaged.

Supersonic missiles are a bit over rated. Take a subsonic missile and a supersonic missile, each with a nation's best sensor on the nose and the subsonic missile will have 2 1/2 to 3 times more time to conduct a scan, classify the many contacts, choose a contact that is a legitimate target and not neutral merchant shipping, switch to a tracking mode and attack the target. Remember the target is moving and is going to be many kilometers from where it was when the missile was launched probably mixed in with neutral merchant traffic. The faster the missile flies the less time it has to find a target and maneuver to hit it. They also cannot fly as low to the sea surface as subsonic missiles do, making the subsonic missile harder to detect. The US has been experimenting with supersonic screamers since the 1950s with Project RARE, ALVRJ and ASALM to name a few. The US has operated numerous supersonic targets that simulate enemy supersonic ASCMs (MQM-8 Vandal, GQM-163 Coyote and MA-31 Krypton, which turned out to be kludge). ASALM even nudged the boundary into hypersonic speed. But when it came time to put missiles in the fleet that had to reliably hit targets and be affordable (because salvo size matters too) they were the subsonic Harpoon and Tomahawk. There are a lot of good reasons the western navies have stuck to subsonic anti ship cruise missiles. Even the Russians most recent ASCM is subsonic and more like a Harpoon than their supersonic screamers of the past. They are learning.

But 69 percent opposed relocating the bases to areas where they live, although 79 percent believe the burden on Okinawa was unequally large.

which basically cancels out the first story, you can think anything is unfair u til you can come up with a side plan. Otherwise, it’s just the usual noise.

Desert Tortoise (May 7 10:01 am JST),

Small, maneuverable ships may be better than large, awkward warships as Francis Drake demonstrated in the Battle of Armada. And you are talking about way smaller landing craft to land Marines on enemy shores.

But this shouldn't be a venue at which to discuss such matters.

The point at issue is whether it's reasonable to build an air station for a Marine air wing by reclaiming pristine waters off Henoko and in Oura Bay at a time when the most active elements of the Marines are to be in Guam; and when Tokyo and Washington have agreed that primary responsibility to defend outlying islands rests with JSDF. Besides, the time is shifting to that of AI -- supersonic cruise missiles and killer drones.

The nationwide mail survey, conducted ahead of the 50th anniversary of Okinawa's reversion to Japanese administration on May 15, found that 58 percent of respondents supported transferring some of the U.S. military facilities outside of the southern prefecture.

But 69 percent opposed relocating the bases to areas where they live, although 79 percent believe the burden on Okinawa was unequally large.

Japanese "omotenashi" at it's best. We feel sorry for Okinawa, but screw hosting, or relieving their burden , in my backyard.

Whatever, what Japan actually needs is more American presence, not less. China are potential homicidal maniacs in the vein of Russia - with even less justification than Russia have, and are a danger to everyone in that part of the world.

@Airbuzz You wink you sleep. If you think the US is slipping then you better start crawling. There is an old say "Loose Lips Sink Ships"!

US is sinking, let's hope Japan will still be able to float !

@TARA TAN KITAOKA Sometimes its best to stay silent, we already know what you are thinking!

The Americans are very good for taking advantage.

Just leave and let the Okinawans fend for themselves. We all know that Chinese aircraft fly noiselessly, never ever crash and their soldiers are all gelded, never touch alcohol, never gamble and are the epitome of politeness. Just look at Chinese tourists and you can see exactly what I mean.

Yubaru,

Here we go again with the propaganda and lies. There is no new base. Camp Schwab, which the media in Okinawa, conveniently "forgets" to include in any articles or anything about the landfill project there, has brainwashed people into believing that it's new. It's not, Camp Schwab has been around for decades, and was established following WWII.

And what's your response to my contention that the problem is whether or not 70% of all U.S. bases in Japan should be in Okinawa. Rather, that the problem should be whether all these U.S. Marine bases are absolutely necessary at a time when the U.S.'s strategy is shifting to make Guam the hub of U.S. forces in the western Pacific, when your counterparts have perfected, or are developing, supersonic cruise missiles and may also have killer drones. Note, too, that it is bilaterally agreed that primary responsibility to defend outlying islands rests with JSDF and not with U.S. forces.

Tell me clearly why, under such circumstances, U.S. Marine bases, especially the new Henoko base or whatever you may call it, are absolutely necessary for the defense of Japan.

Tell me clearly why, under such circumstances, U.S. Marine bases, especially the new Henoko base or whatever you may call it, are absolutely necessary for the defense of Japan.

First, there is no "new Henoko base" There is a new airfield being built on landfill at the existing Marine base at Camp Schwab. The American and Japanese taxpayer are forking out their hard earned so the Marines can close the base at Futenma and eliminate that point of friction with the Japanese. It is being done so people like you have less reason to whine all the time.

As for the necessity, airlift and air power are integral to how the Marines operate. Entire amphibious assaults can be conducted over distances of hundred of kilometers from their ships using Marine Corps helos and tilt rotors and relying on Marine and Navy air power for close air support. It is an integrated air and ground team. Without their aircraft the Marines cannot operate successfully and they would not be able to train the way they would fight.

80% is standard outcome for such issues -- NIMBY (not in my backyard). So, such polls are quite meaningless. The JGOV is rather blameless on this, as the US bases were already there long before Okinawa was returned to JP. It is difficult to move them any time, as we all know. So the correct issue to look at is where is the best location for those bases for the strategic defense of JP against its worst enemy -- China. It seems the Americans made the correct judgment for JP many years ago. And not just for JP, but for Taiwan and probably S Korea too.

consideration Japan's past frequent sneak attacks strategies its a bit unclear that if Japan attacks another nation whether or not the USA will defend Japan anyway.

Um. No. No, it’s not unclear in the slightest.

The Mutual Defense Agreement between the US and Japan only applies in cases of defense. If Japan decides to take a swing at one of its neighbors first, all bets are off: Japan would be going it alone. And that would include something like a preemptive strike. So if you want Uncle Sam to go to bat for you, you’re gonna have to wait till someone takes a shot first.

I don't care whatever you may call it, a new base with many innovative functions and facilities that Futenma doesn't have at the current site or, as you say, an extension of Camp Schwab, a logistic base for the Marines and a recreational center for them and their dependents.

You obviously do care, and quite a bit too.

Not only me but anyone who follows this thread wants to hear how you answer

Once again, repeating myself here, to refresh your memory, as you seem to have forgotten

When you forever agree to stop calling it a "the new Henoko base" and call it the landfill at Camp Schwab, I may consider your request here.

Desert Tortoise (May 6  10:50 pm JST),

Your comment is completely off the mark. Even if the Marines changed and reshaped with these innovations as you mention, can't they be vulnerable to supersonic cruise missiles and killer drones?

So, what's the use of building a training base for MV-22s in Henoko with a cost estimated by the OPG at 2.5 trillion yen, that will all be borne by Japanese taxpayers? Answer this as well as the other questions I posed in my previous post.

Yubaru (Today  07:23 am JST),

Your comment is nonsense, as usual. LOL!

Your comment is completely off the mark. Even if the Marines changed and reshaped with these innovations as you mention, can't they be vulnerable to supersonic cruise missiles and killer drones?

You are also missing how the US and NATO fights. Air power typically leads ground power and those cruise missile shooters you mention will be running from determined air attack. The Russians advance through fire power. It is a slow, plodding, set piece way to fight. You saw it in Chechnya and now you see it in Ukraine. Western forces advance through maneuver, using speed and a relentless high optempo to force and enemy off balance and never allow that enemy the ability to regroup and consolidate their forces against yours.

All is fair in love and war.

The easiest way to turn 80% against in the opposite direction is to make it a choice between Okinawa bearing the lion’s share, or that privilege being extended to the mainland. We all know how much lead there is in that balloon.

Is this News ? I don't think you'll find many people who disagree with that.

Tell me clearly why, under such circumstances, U.S. Marine bases, especially the new Henoko base or whatever you may call it, are absolutely necessary for the defense of Japan.

When you forever agree to stop calling it a "the new Henoko base" and call it the landfill at Camp Schwab, I may consider your request here.

Yubaru,

I don't care whatever you may call it, a new base with many innovative functions and facilities that Futenma doesn't have at the current site or, as you say, an extension of Camp Schwab, a logistic base for the Marines and a recreational center for them and their dependents.

Not only me but anyone who follows this thread wants to hear how you answer it.

 when a raison d'etre for the U.S. Marines is diminishing before the advent of new technology in war, such as supersonic cruise missiles and killer drones, 

A laughably uninformed comment. The Marines demonstrated one possible future in 2002 when then LT GEN Mattis led an amphibious assault from ships in the North Arabian Sea to an unused airstrip called Rhino in Afghanistan near Kandahar. The assault was conducted entirely by air. Mattis made a decision to leave the MAGs artillery and tanks on the ships to speed up the operation (sling loading artillery is slow work and no helo can sling load a tank) and instead rely entirely on air power for close support. It is by far the longest distance an amphibious operation has ever been conducted and demonstrates that the Marines do not have to come close to shore with ships and use vulnerable landing craft to conduct an assault. The V-22 was not in service for this assault but it is now and it greatly expands the Marines ability to conduct assaults from the air and support them afterwards.

The Marines are changing their mission and how they are equipped. The Marines are in a sense going back to their roots as a part of the US Navy. They have handed all of their heavy armor and most of their tube artillery (meaning howitzers) over to the US Army. These are being replaced with longer range rockets to fire from HIMARS and new robotic vehicles that carry anti ship cruise missiles. The Marines are going lighter and pushing the Navy to buy smaller landing ships. Their new mission is to land on small islands with a force of 75-85 Marines, rapidly set up their anti ship and anti aircraft missiles on their robotic launchers, then engage enemy warships in coordination with naval forces, or to block narrow straits between islands in advance of an enemy movement. Small UASs for surveillance are very much part of their tool kit today. Once the action is over the Marines depart. Another job of the Marines will be to make it extremely costly for the PLAN to try to deploy outside the first island chain as every one of those small islands should have Marines with anti ship missiles ready to attack PLAN ships if they try to pass between islands.  That would also apply to places like Iceland and some Norwegian islands to the north and islands in the Med, to corral Russian warships. The new landing ships are supposed to be small enough and of a configuration that would allow them to mix with merchant traffic and in that manner hide themselves from detection.

Views from the island.

Okinawa Prefectural Governor Denny Tamaki met with the Overseas Correspondents’ Membership of Japan.

An article based on the interview is available on GeneratePress TechyJob at https://techy-job.com/okinawa-governor-makes-case-for-peace-and-a-diminished-us-army-presence-in-japan/ .

Preview: he has a classic way of speech, seldom seen within extended quotes by the press.

He said that, with conflict and speak of conflict acquainted once more on two continents, the world must pause and take into account extra peaceable strategies to resolve its variations.

“Once we have a look at the tensions between the USA and China, this actually should not be responded to solely by deterrence,” Tamaki mentioned. “That is, certainly, why we have to have these new efforts so as to ease these sorts of tensions.”

"Fifty years in the past Okinawa prefecture sought to grow to be an island of peace and without bases. Nevertheless, even right now, even if Okinawa is a prefecture with solely 0.6% of Japan’s complete land, it hosts 70.3% of the full space devoted to the U.S. army.”

That presence creates challenges, from plane noise to tying up property and labor that might profit the Okinawa economic system, he mentioned. Private earnings stays about 70% of that in Japan as an entire, and one in three youngsters stay in poverty, he mentioned.

“And but this has not been amended a single time on this interval,” he mentioned. “This settlement doesn’t meet the calls for of right now or the wants of the folks within the context of a recent consciousness of human rights and environmental points.”

So, what's the use of building a training base for MV-22s in Henoko with a cost estimated by the OPG at 2.5 trillion yen, that will all be borne by Japanese taxpayers?

To protect Japan as established under the security agreement.

Your comment is completely off the mark. Even if the Marines changed and reshaped with these innovations as you mention, can't they be vulnerable to supersonic cruise missiles and killer drones?

The Marine equipment and tactics have changed to allow them to either land a large force from a distance well beyond the reach of cruise missiles, meaning an air assault from ships hundreds of kilometers from the landing zones ashore, or to operate small teams from small landing ships undetected to land anti ship and anti aircraft missiles on islands in coordination with naval forces to defeat enemy fleets, then leave immediately after the battle has concluded. The small landing ships are being designed with an eye towards them being able to hide among merchant traffic undetected. These would not be the traditional MEF built around an LHA/LHD with an LPD and LST. These would be small ships similar in size to a US Army LSV (yes, the US Army has a fleet of watercraft and landing craft) and the landing teams are on the order of 75-85 Marines. The missile launchers would be robotic. Land the team and its missiles, shoot missiles at the right time during a naval battle and egress before a counter attack can be mounted.

The point at issue is whether it's reasonable to build an air station for a Marine air wing by reclaiming pristine waters off Henoko and in Oura Bay.

Where is your outrage at the reclaiming of the pristine waters off Naha Airport, when they did the same thing, killed off coral and destroyed the reef there?

Being called a hypocrite is not a complement.

Okinawan's are Japanese citizens. Please educate everyone here on how you are going to differentiate between the native Okinawan's and ethnic Japanese? You can not separate the two here.

There is a side of me that would tell both Japan and South Korea to defend themselves. The US devotes a lot of our tax money and human resources to defend both nations and risk nuclear war in with China doing so. Yet all we hear is this incessant whining and crying about how obnoxious US forces are and oh the sacrifices the poor people of Japan have to make so the US can stations their forces there to help defend them. Some here even call it an occupation. A bunch of ingrates. So eff Japan if that is how they really feel, let them defend themselves. If they can. See how long between the departure of the last US Marine, the last US Navy ship and the last USAF aircraft, and the arrival of the PLA. Just don't cry for US help afterwards.

Apparently not a serious poll.

Never seen one. margin of error 19 times out of 20 we'll never know

On the plus side you can make a poll about anything you want and no one can question it, and it will be in conflict with another poll the day or week or month later. It's about the political narrative of the day, not data. The poll is a canard

Take, for example, the new base now under construction in Henoko, Nago City, Okinawa Prefecture

Here we go again with the propaganda and lies. There is no new base. Camp Schwab, which the media in Okinawa, conveniently "forgets" to include in any articles or anything about the landfill project there, has brainwashed people into believing that it's new. It's not, Camp Schwab has been around for decades, and was established following WWII.

Anyone that calls a "landfill" a new base, a new town, a new city, or anything other than what it is, an "extension" of an existing base, town, or city, is just blowing smoke.

Naha AP finished it's landfill for the new runway, no one calls Naha AP a "new" airport, they just note the additional "new" runway.

Same with Camp Schwab, a new landfill, connecting to existing facility.

Of this there is no argument!

Nearly 80 percent of people in Japan think the burden on Okinawa in hosting the bulk of U.S. forces in the country is not fair compared with other prefectures, according to the results of a Kyodo News survey.

Yet those voters keep voting into office politicians who are intent on keeping those bases in Okinawa.

painkisller,

To protect Japan as established under the security agreement.

I've been posting the relevant Marine base, a supposed replacement for Futenma, is a white elephant, budget-wise or whatever, that cannot deal with the recent development of new weaponry, such as supersonic cruise missiles and killer drones. And you say the new base is necessary to protect Japan? Humbug! Nonsense! LOL!

But 69 percent opposed relocating the bases to areas where they live, 

And boom goes the dynamite. NIMBY at its finest.

the money you refer to was the marshal plan but like we see the imf and world bank doing today this money was/is not a gift more of a tool for manipulation and pushing forward with agenda’s. Imo

Well, considering the alternative was to leave Japan a blasted, bombed-out ruin in economic shambles without even a fraction of its prewar industrial output with access to zero resources and surrounded by former enemies who would have loved nothing more than to carve off pounds of flesh and miles of territory (The Germans of East Prussia come to mind) and telling the Japanese “you’re on your own. Rebuild yourselves”, I think Japan came out ahead. Love it or hate it, Japan is the economic and global power it is today as a result of the occupation. Was it right? That’ll be debated till the end of time. But what isn’t debatable is that the economic miracle of Japan’s postwar recovery is linked directly to the aid they received as a result of the Marshall Plan.

@ Dave.

the money you refer to was the marshal plan but like we see the imf and world bank doing today this money was/is not a gift more of a tool for manipulation and pushing forward with agenda’s. Imo

And how many of those Japanese who think Okinawan burden is unfair would welcome a new US base in their towns?

Nearly 80 percent of people in Japan think the burden on Okinawa in hosting the bulk of U.S. forces in the country is not fair compared with other prefectures, according to the results of a Kyodo News survey.

The problem is whether or not 70% of all the U.S. bases in Japan should be in Okinawa. The problem should be whether all these U.S. bases are absolutely necessary.

Take, for example, the new base now under construction in Henoko, Nago City, Okinawa Prefecture on the pretext of building a replacement for USMC Air Station Futenma when a raison d'etre for the U.S. Marines is diminishing before the advent of new technology in war, such as supersonic cruise missiles and killer drones, and when the U.S.'s strategy is shifting to make Guam the hub of U.S. forces in the western Pacific.

Note also that it is bilaterally agreed that primary responsibility to defend outlying islands rests with JSDF and not with U.S. forces.

Lamilly

I live on an island in Okinawa and there's no military presence here.

Okinawa has over 160 islands .

How the survey was done isn’t much of an issue.

Unless you live in a cave, anyone in Japan and/or Okinawa understands the heavy presence relative to mainland Japan. It hasn’t changed in 75 years.

Why would China or Russia invade Japan? What would they gain? All they would do is lose a customer.

On the other hand, the US military bases in Japan and Okinawa have big red targets on them in the grand geopolitical games. So, is Japan being protected or more of a target because of the US military?

Just leave and let the Okinawans fend for themselves.

And comments like these show the ignorance, of all the people posting here about Okinawa, that they have no idea what they are talking about!

Okinawan's are Japanese citizens. Please educate everyone here on how you are going to differentiate between the native Okinawan's and ethnic Japanese? You can not separate the two here.

Okinawans aren't Japanese .

Not by choice anyway.

With the preemptive strike capabilities and nuclear deterrence capabilities on Japan's agenda to be reviewed by the end of this year , it won't be necessary for the USA military to have such a large presence in Okinawa.

Good luck telling the USA military what to do tho as in reality Japan is still occupied and a vassal cash cow for the USA.

Important to emphasize the fact that the USA agreement is to defend Japan if its attacked and not to defend its territory borders unless its attacked.

Better if Japan could fend for itself without the USA presence but however i seriously doubt that will happen anytime soon.

William Bjornson

Well said!

Japan is very determined and adamant of being a leader of modern AI automation systems.

So with preemptive strike capabilities and the AI systems and taking into consideration Japan's past frequent sneak attacks strategies its a bit unclear that if Japan attacks another nation whether or not the USA will defend Japan anyway.

With cyber warfare rapidly evolving the status of Japan's security alliance with the USA might not be as stable as it seems.

Nearly 80 percent of people in Japan think the burden on Okinawa in hosting the bulk of U.S. forces in the country is not fair compared with other prefectures, according to the results of a Kyodo News survey.

For the well-being of both Japan and the US I would support a total US withdrawal.

Let Japan shoulder the entire burden of defending against the rising hegemony of China in the region.

Supporting the burden of a large defense budget while providing corporate welfare to Japan Inc. might be what accelerates the Japanese populace's realization the LDP are parasites and need to be dumped into the dustbin of history.

The joys of being a vassal state... paying for your own occupation.

japan is a US military base proxy, JGOV does not care about Japanese citizen opinion....

"Nearly 80% of Japanese think Okinawa's U.S. base-hosting burden unfair"

For the conservative Nihonjin, Okinawa is not REALLY Japan in the same sense that the four main islands are and the government is more than happy to put the burden upon the people who fought with all their hearts and lives to stop the Americans from invading the main islands. And recently the government suggested putting even MORE military on the backs of the Ryukruans as a sacrificial shield against China.

It would be much better if 80% of ALL Nihonjins thought it unfair that the most aggressive, warlike, and manipulative country on the planet, the country most likely to cause Japan's destruction, has maintained armed occupation for over 75 YEARS monopolizing and polluting and destroying the land, abusing the people, meddling in its government, using it as a forward base to attack other neighboring countries, and, now, pushing to turn it again into the military threat that almost destroyed it 77 years ago. Japan is NOT an ALLY of the United States, it is a vassal. Memories are long in Asia but Japan could be a GOOD neighbor to the countries around it if allowed to chart its own course albeit that would depend upon the Japanese people recognising the pathology of and uprooting those currently dominant in the Japanese social structure as well.

I have a great affection for Japanese people and, perhaps, overestimate their ability to become great in ways not related to mass murder and armed dominance, if given the chance and not forced into the destruction of war by a bully. That is my story and I'm stuck with it. But all I see for Japan in the grip of America is destruction.

Wen kicking out the invaders?

US is sinking, let's hope Japan will still be able to float !

The Americans are very good for taking advantage.