politics

Abe says gov't to stick to Okinawa base plan despite referendum result

71 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© 2019 AFP

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.

71 Comments
Login to comment

We have spent many years holding dialogue with people in the prefecture. We will continue our dialogue so that we can gain their understanding," Abe said. 

Sounds like Abe govt idea of holding a dialogue with Okinawa is along the lines of ...." This is what we gonna do, agree or disagree with us?....Disagree?

We,ll do it anyway , while seeking your understanding " .

Translation - up yours.

9 ( +12 / -3 )

Is anyone surprised,or can pretend to be surprised by what he said? The p.m. is becoming increasingly authoritarian by the year a la Japan's cousins across the seas.

8 ( +13 / -5 )

Japan s idea of democracy.

9 ( +12 / -3 )

The title photograph is quite old.

From footage on NHK last night it looks like 50% of the enclosed area has been backfilled.

So, if construction were to be halted, what is the plan B for the filled land?

8 ( +9 / -1 )

There is no point in holding a referendum, then.

"We have spent many years holding dialogue with people in the prefecture. We will continue our dialogue so that we can gain their understanding," Abe said. "Reducing the burden of Okinawa is a major responsibility for the central government... we will continue our utmost efforts towards a reduction of the burden related to hosting bases."

Meaningless lip service. Abe doesn't respect the people of Okinawa nor the idea/concept of democracy.

Okinawa accounts for less than one percent of Japan's total land area, but it reluctantly hosts more than half of the approximately 47,000 American military personnel.

Staggering. I believe its the most concentrated place of foreign military members in the world.

3 ( +9 / -6 )

"We will continue our dialogue so that we can gain their understanding,"

You see this phrase used every single time a politician is faced with the fact that the population overwhelmingly hates a policy that the politician is forcing down their throats.

Its never a problem with the policy, always a problem with the people failing to grasp how a policy that in most cases is going to make them worse off is actually a great idea. Therefore the solution is never to change the policy to take into account legitimate grievances people have with it, but to just lecture opponents about how great it is for whatever specious reasons you can come up with.

In this case those reasons are "we told the Americans 20 years ago we would do it so we should do it and screw everything else." Not sure how anyone other than Abe could conceive of the problem with that being a lack of understanding on the part of the Okinawan population.

6 ( +9 / -3 )

So out of 52 percent of the population, 30 were in favor or did not care and the rest couldn't be bothered to vote. Hardly overwhelming support. And since when is one prefecture voting on an issue that affects the entire country democracy. Okinawa needs to stop thinking like it's it's own country.

-4 ( +4 / -8 )

So out of 52 percent of the population, 30 were in favor or did not care and the rest couldn't be bothered to vote

What part of 72% against the move and 19% in favor is so difficult for LDP bots to understand that you have the need to try and spin such clearcut result?

6 ( +7 / -1 )

Marcelito, 72 percent of half the population were against the relocation. Which means 28 percent of half the population were in favor or did not care. And what about the 48 percent who didn't even bother to show up. How passionate do you think they are about opposing the move. It's not that complicated.

-5 ( +2 / -7 )

We have spent many years holding dialogue with people in the prefecture. We will continue our dialogue so that we can gain their understanding," Abe said. 

> Sounds like Abe govt idea of holding a dialogue with Okinawa is along the lines of ...." This is what we gonna do, agree or disagree with us?....Disagree?

> We,ll do it anyway , while seeking your understanding " .

> Translation - up yours.

precisely

Japan s idea of democracy.

Ex_Res, WHAT democracy?

Is anyone surprised,or can pretend to be surprised by what he said? The p.m. is becoming increasingly authoritarian by the year a la Japan's cousins across the seas.

Exactly.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

Abe said he accepted the outcome "sincerely" and would seek "understanding" from Okinawa residents on his decision to move forward with the relocation.

Logical coherency was never his strong point.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

When Japan fights china, Okinawa will be thankful for the base.

-6 ( +4 / -10 )

So, if construction were to be halted, what is the plan B for the filled land?

It won't be stopped so no need. Really that simple.

0 ( +4 / -4 )

For not only Abe, but for all other political parties and politicians still in support of the base indicates something beyond and behind what the public knows.

Given the current international climate, and threats form all arounf including insults from N Korea and S Korea and direct threats from China and Russia, there must be an urgent need for such a move. That is because... in effect, they are building a "second" base... not just moving a base...

Personally, I see a threat by China to take Taiwan within a near future. Their effort to take SE Asia in the pretext of the Silk Road is not faring well with the locals. China wants that direct and open access to the Pacific.

Then I see China "taking" Japan by simply "populating" Japan with Chinese people and "buying up businesses and real estate in Japan. In effect "ownership" by "occupation", something that they did with the islands in the S China sea. And the Japanese people are much too profit oriented and excessively accommodating to realize the threat.

The only way to "remove" them is by "force". And any use of force is an "excuse to start a war.

The only way to prevent it all until Japan changes their Constitution is to "reinforce" their Self Defense Force and their armaments. But for all that, they need the bases (the land and the ports - airports and sea ports) to accommodate their newly added armaments and personnel.

-6 ( +1 / -7 )

All this ends up to be is a huge waste of taxpayers money to put a small PR speed bump in the path of finishing it once and for all!

0 ( +2 / -2 )

All who have taken it upon themselves to rule over others have incurred hatred and unpopularity for a time; but if one has a great aim to pursue, this burden of envy must be accepted, and it is wise to accept it.

Pericles

-7 ( +1 / -8 )

When Japan fights china, Okinawa will be thankful for the base.

If Japan fights China the presence of the bases will make Okinawa a target for a potential nuclear strike. I sure wouldn't be thankful for that if I lived there.

1 ( +5 / -4 )

What part of 72% against the move and 19% in favor is so difficult for LDP bots to understand that you have the need to try and spin such clearcut result?

It’s interesting how worked up you get about those numbers. You did the same to CyberneticTigers breakdown of the election results on the other article.

Does it cause you to lose confidence in the idea of a clear majority of opposition when you see only a 3rd of Okinawans casted ballots in opposition? It makes sense to be shaken when you realize 72% of the participating 52% is not a large majority when you take into account opposition only got 430,000 votes from the 1,150,000 eligible voters. That’s pretty clear cut.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

If Japan fights China the presence of the bases will make Okinawa a target for a potential nuclear strike. I sure wouldn't be thankful for that if I lived there

The base will be the safest place to be should a war breakout with China. It will have all manner of anti-missile capability, and response capability.

China on the other hand would attack targets that would most cripple Japan, eg power stations.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

Prime Minister Shinzo Abe said Monday that the controversial relocation of a U.S. military base in Okinawa will not be delayed despite a referendum that saw voters reject the move.

As expected. While tramping on his own people(s democratic wishes and human rights, can he ever say Japan is a great democracy sharing principal values with the U.S.? Probably, he will say to tramp on democracy and the name Tramp rhyme exactly, so that Japan shares various values with the U.S.

"It has been 20 years since Japan and the U.S. agreed" to relocate the Futenma base, Abe said. "We cannot delay this any further."

When former Okinawa Governor Hirokazu Nakaima approved the relocation work on Feb. 24, 2014, his condition for the approval was to have Futenma closed and returned in 5 years. Abe promised he would do all his best for what he agreed with Nakaima. That 5-year deadline was due yesterday, and Abe brazenly says "We cannot delay this (relocation work) any further," as if nothing had happened.

6 ( +7 / -1 )

Anyone who actually thinks Japan and China are going to go to war, much less that China would use nuclear weapons, should start packing up now... and Googling mental health facilities at their destination.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

The base will be the safest place to be should a war breakout with China. It will have all manner of anti-missile capability, and response capability.

I'd say that places where missiles weren't falling at all would be the safest place, not the place where all the missiles are falling but which has a system that is capable of knocking half of them out of the sky.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

72 percent of the people that voted do not want the new airfield. As for the safest place on Okinawa it is not any American base! My guess the Chinese will fire volley after volley of conventional missiles to know out the American bases. Once the Chinese achieve air superiority, then Chinese paratroopers will take the American bases. As always the Americans and Japanese do not respect the Ryukyu people!

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

Marcelito, 72 percent of half the population were against the relocation. Which means 28 percent of half the population were in favor or did not care.

As only 19% of the 52% that showed up to vote supported the move ( as the article clearly says ) using your line of argument that translate to overall eligible voter support for the base relocation is in single % digits . Thats pathetically low result however one tries to spin it.

It’s interesting how worked up you get about those numbers.

Does it cause you to lose confidence in the idea of a clear majority of opposition when you see only a 3rd of Okinawans casted ballots in opposition? It makes sense to be shaken when you realize 72% of the participating 52% is not a large majority when you take into account opposition only got 430,000 votes from the 1,150,000 eligible voters. That’s pretty clear cut.

Lol...no it doesnt get me worked up or loose any confidence because no matter how the pro LDP fanboys try to spin the result , numbers are clear...almost 4 times as many people opposed the move in the referendum as supported it. Thats pretty clear cut. You try to to make light of 430, 000 voters supporting it , yet conveniently gloss over the fact the yes vote only managed a pathetic 114,000 which translates to only 10% of total eligible voter support. And before anymore pro LDO spin comes into it, the 48% who didnt show up ...even if we were to be overgenerous and say their opinion is split 50/50...it would not change the overwhelming defeat for the new base supporters.

Now, thats what one calls clear cut...despite the desperate pro Jiminto spin attempts.

4 ( +6 / -2 )

With such a high percentage of voters voting No to the relocation of MCAS Futenma to Henoko there is a very high probability that a large number of voters maybe even a majority of the voters  living in Ginowan where MCAS Futenma is located voted No to relocate to Henoko. Hopefully a breakdown of the votes by location will be provided.

Abe is not being truthful when he says he will continue to seek the understanding of the people of Okinawa. If he really wanted to get the understanding of the people of Okinawa, the Central Govt. would have been holding Town Hall Meetings all across Okinawa and talking directly to the people of Okinawa. But the attitude of the Central Govt. has always been one of arrogance and their policy has always been to use coercion and bribery to push this relocation plan through. If the Central Govt. is truly  convinced that Henoko is the only viable solution then it should be easy for them to explain that directly to the people and get at least a majority of them to accept that.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

When former Okinawa Governor Hirokazu Nakaima approved the relocation work on Feb. 24, 2014, his condition for the approval was to have Futenma closed and returned in 5 years. Abe promised he would do all his best for what he agreed with Nakaima. That 5-year deadline was due yesterday, and Abe brazenly says "We cannot delay this (relocation work) any further," as if nothing had happened.

It would have been returned if the following gov's had stuck with the plan. You just have to look in a mirror to realize that it's people who have opposed the agreement are the number one cause of this.

You can twist the words, twist the results of the election and everything else, any which way you choose, but you and the others of your ilk are the reasons why it hasnt happened. Dont blame Abe, the failure is on you!

But have no fear, the landfill will be completed and you will need to find a different soapbox!

0 ( +2 / -2 )

 If he really wanted to get the understanding of the people of Okinawa, the Central Govt. would have been holding Town Hall Meetings all across Okinawa and talking directly to the people of Okinawa.

Ignorance of the political system here shows through in comments like this. You are using an example used in the US, not Japan.

Quit trying to force American methods of politics onto the Japanese people!

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Yubaru, clearly the majority of the people of Okinawa are against the new airfield. The Americans and Japanese do not care about the opinion of the Okinawa people. The Americans only want free bases and the Japanese want the Americans anywhere but the "home" islands.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

Yubaru, clearly the majority of the people of Okinawa are against the new airfield. The Americans and Japanese do not care about the opinion of the Okinawa people. The Americans only want free bases and the Japanese want the Americans anywhere but the "home" islands.

Yuri, you as an American must be in a difficult position. You of all people here should know that it's not about America vs Okinawa, no not at all.

Okinawa and the Japanese national government need to settle this issue!

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Yubaru, I am not an American and will never be an American. This issue will never be settled until the people of Okinawa are offered a choice, base or no base.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Yubaru, I am not an American and will never be an American. This issue will never be settled until the people of Okinawa are offered a choice, base or no base.

You fail to understand that there will always be a base, whether it is the US or Japanese, the bases will still remain in Okinawa.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Yubaru,

You just have to look in a mirror to realize that it's people who have opposed the agreement are the number one cause of this.

You can twist the words, twist the results of the election and everything else, any which way you choose, but you and the others of your ilk are the reasons why it hasnt happened. Dont blame Abe, the failure is on you!

We're opposed to the construction of the so-called replacement of Futenma in Hebnoko for reasons: (1) it's the waste of taxpayers' money estimated to amount to Y2.5 trillion; (2) it doesn't contribute to Japan's security and defense because the active element of Okinawa-deployed Marines are to move to Guam, (3) the landfill will destroy and devastate the pristine natural environment, 84) it doesn't alleviate Okinawa's burden in any significant way of hosting so many facilities and areas on land, at sea and in the sky. 

If the central government were serious enough about reducing Okinawa's burden, it must scrap the Henoko relocation plan right then and there -- a tax-money-squandering white elephant that has nothing to do with Japan's security and defense.

Yubaru, you are an ardent supporter of the Henoko relocation plan. So let us hear your say about why the construction of Futenma's replacement is necessary in Henoko.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Japan s idea of democracy.

Ex_Res, WHAT democracy? 

Is anyone surprised,or can pretend to be surprised by what he said? The p.m. is becoming increasingly authoritarian by the year a la Japan's cousins across the seas.

Exactly.

Democracy is merely the Tatemae. The character of the people in Japan is more suited to alternative forms of government where the you say we follow mentality fits better.

Sure the people elect their representatives but China elects its leaders too. Does that make it a democracy?

0 ( +1 / -1 )

quercetum, anything China does is supported by 100% chinese people, with 5% standard deviation. Is that not democracy ?

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

Lol...no it doesnt get me worked up or loose any confidence because no matter how the pro LDP fanboys try to spin the result , numbers are clear...almost 4 times as many people opposed the move in the referendum as supported it. Thats pretty clear cut. You try to to make light of 430, 000 voters supporting it , yet conveniently gloss over the fact the yes vote only managed a pathetic 114,000 which translates to only 10% of total eligible voter support. And before anymore pro LDO spin comes into it, the 48% who didnt show up ...even if we were to be overgenerous and say their opinion is split 50/50...it would not change the overwhelming defeat for the new base supporters

Ahhh, bro, it makes sense now. You fail to see the point of this whole things. The argument has never been that Okinawans support the relocation. The clear cut argument is that most people don't care either way and that its twisting fact to say that the majority of all Okinawans oppose the relocation. There's no spin when you say more Okinawans voted neither or didn't vote at all than ones who voted in opposition. Its straight up facts

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

@Akie

quercetum, anything China does is supported by 100% chinese people, with 5% standard deviation. Is that not democracy ?

In a democracy, the leader doesn't appoint himself president for life...

1 ( +1 / -0 )

"Abe says gov't to stick to Okinawa base plan despite referendum result"

...because being the representative of one's constituents has long since gone out the window.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Yubaru, you are an ardent supporter of the Henoko relocation plan. So let us hear your say about why the construction of Futenma's replacement is necessary in Henoko.

Close Futenma., we dont want to wait another 25 years!

It's that simple. It's not a new base, you know it too, you just keep repeating the same lies because it's easier that admitting you are wrong. Do NOT complain about the money either, that's bull and you know it!

You do not care one bit about the people of Ginowan. You will never see Futenma closed in your life time, and it's because of people like you and the politicians who run Okinawa. They and you have screwed up things here royally by always barking up the wrong tree!

This referendum about this should have been done decades ago! It should have been a message sent BEFORE things got this far along. Everyone prior to this, including Okinawan politicians had their hands out for their "cut", they wanted the money, and Okinawa couldn't come to any conclusion. The national government had enough and look Futenma IS going to close, and the landfill at Schwab will be completed!

You should be pointing a finger at yourself and all the others who made this get to this point. You had your chance 20 plus years ago, you blew it. Now step aside and lets get it done!

1 ( +1 / -0 )

We're opposed to the construction of the so-called replacement of Futenma in Hebnoko for reasons: (1) it's the waste of taxpayers' money estimated to amount to Y2.5 trillion;

I am annoyed that anyone would even suggest that money is a problem here. How many trillions upon trillions of yen have been wasted all over this country on projects that do little for the benefit of the people? I can not believe anyone would be able to make a statement like this with a straight face! Let's not forget how much of this money too is being pocketed by corporations and politicians, directly or indirectly.

I know for a FACT that businesses involved in the landfill are pocketing money allocated by the government, rather than paying a decent wage to the actual construction workers. One example; there is a HUGE need for dump-truck drivers, they are being paid less than 10,000 per day, yet other sites on island, and in other locations in Japan, pay between 15,000 to 20,000. However the construction companies are reporting RECORD profits!

There is no accounting for the money being spent, you want to complain bark up the right tree!

0 ( +1 / -1 )

(2) it doesn't contribute to Japan's security and defense because the active element of Okinawa-deployed Marines are to move to Guam,

This is debateable, and it's an agreement between the two national governments, not between Okinawa and the US. You dont decide policy,

Your opinion, is just that, and to extrapolate it to include "all" Okinawan's is intellectually bankrupt.

(3) the landfill will destroy and devastate the pristine natural environment,

Please stop with this. you dont give a damn about the environment of Okinawa! This too is an emotional knee-jerk type of excuse to justify an unjustifiable position!

You know I say you dont care? You say NOTHING about all the rest of the environment that the Okinawan and Japanese governments have literally destroyed here, in the name of progress!

Right now you are going to bring up the age old garbage......"if it's for Japanese, killing the environment is fine with me! "It's because it's the US military!"

Brother if that isnt hypocritical, I dont know what is!

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Oh and more importantly do not forget the HUGE increase in spending that Okinawa will receive from the national government. Money that is needed for countless numbers of infrastructure improvements and development. Many on hold because of this issue.

Money that would otherwise NOT be available. Economic development, infrastructure improvements, better quality of life overall, and you still can make a claim that NOT moving Futenma is better?

Yeah right!

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

you still can make a claim that NOT moving Futenma is better?

I don't think many people want Futenma to stay where it is, as it is.

What they object to is the destruction of the environment/disruption of the lives of people living near Henoko. (Tipping rocks and sand into Oura Bay, home to hundreds of endangered species and possibly many more as yet unidentified species, in order to build a runway for warplanes? Seriously?)

By all means, move Futenma.

Move it to Guam, or Hawaii, or (if Trumpo continues his BBF relationship with Kimmy) how's about to the outskirts of Pyongyang. Help boost the economy of North Korea, cement the friendly relationship for all time, and give Donny a shoe-in for the Nobel.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

We're opposed to the construction of the so-called replacement of Futenma in Hebnoko for reasons: (1) it's the waste of taxpayers' money estimated to amount to Y2.5 trillion;

This makes me wonder who owns the construction companies contracted to build the extension to Camp Schwab for the relocation of Futenma. Also, who are the employees carrying out the construction. If everyone is Okinawan then that’s a huge economic boost to employees and contractor. So from an economic standpoint a return of land and an expensive construction project at the cost of the GOJ is a big win for the Prefecture.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

from an economic standpoint a return of land and an expensive construction project at the cost of the GOJ is a big win for the Prefecture.

What it means is that the Japanese taxpayer is paying for unnecessary make-work jobs, lining the pockets of construction companies (we all know which political party they like to get into bed with...) and destroying the environment into the bargain.

A waste of money is still a waste of money.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Well that’s your opinion. It’s still a good boost to the economy down here

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

What it means is that the Japanese taxpayer is paying for unnecessary make-work jobs, 

AKA, Japanese Koumuin!

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Yubaru(Feb. 26 | 07:59 am JST),

Close Futenma., we dont want to wait another 25 years!

Is this your response to my asking why the construction of Futenma's so-called replacement is absolutely necessary in Henoko? No convincing reasons, strategic or otherwise, except that you simply want it? LOL!

Yubaru (Feb. 26 | 09:28 am JST),

How many trillions upon trillions of yen have been wasted all over this country on projects that do little for the benefit of the people? ... Let's not forget how much of this money too is being pocketed by corporations and politicians, directly or indirectly.

I really don't know how much money is being squandered in this country on "projects that do little for the benefit of the people". Neither do I know how much public money are firms and politicians filching from public works in Japan. But even if what you point out is the truth and nothing but the truth, you can't ask Japanese firms and politicians to do the same for the U.S.

Yubaru (Feb. 26 | 09:33 am JST),

This is debateable, and it's an agreement between the two national governments, not between Okinawa and the US. You dont decide policy,

You can't support a governmental project unless you fully understand the content of that project. And so, since you are an ardent Henoko-relocation supporter you must be fully versed with the U.S. government's stance as regards this project and therefore you must clarify why you support it so enthusiastically.

Yubaru (Feb. 26 | 09:43 am JST),

Money that would otherwise NOT be available. Economic development, infrastructure improvements, better quality of life overall, and you still can make a claim that NOT moving Futenma is better?

Governments anywhere or at any level have obligations to care about the welfare of the people they administer by stimulating economic activities in the region or by betterment of the region's infrastructure. If the central government stops tax revenue allocations due naturally to Okinawa Prefecture because Okinawa opposes to the Henoko relocation, it will mean Okinawa isn't an integral part of Japan's sovereign territory. Every prefecture in Japan receives a tax revenue allocation from the central government, you know.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Voice you never are going to understand it, It's always an academic discussion from your point of view, and that is where you fail, as the world is REAL and not an academic study like you try to treat it all the time.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Yubaru,

I'm not asking you to explain the issue academically. A simple, non-academic explanation of your personal opinion and view would suffice. That's all I expect from you because I assume you are an ordinary man on the street. Or are you a military specialist or expert, perhaps?

0 ( +1 / -1 )

I'm not asking you to explain the issue academically. A simple, non-academic explanation of your personal opinion and view would suffice. That's all I expect from you because I assume you are an ordinary man on the street. Or are you a military specialist or expert, perhaps?

You got your answer, and while I know who you are, and what you stand for, I am not going to continually repeat myself just to please you.

Go back and read what I wrote, your answers are there!

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Yubaru,

You got your answer, and while I know who you are, and what you stand for, I am not going to continually repeat myself just to please you.

You gave an answer? Where and how? All you said was: "Close Futenma, we don’t want to wait another 25 years!" 

That's not an intellectual answer to the question why Futenma's replacement must be built at Henoko when the most active elements of Okinawa-deployed Marines are to relocate to Guam, leaving only command and logistics units in Okinawa; when the two governments struck a deal to the effect that primary responsibility to defend Japan’s territory rests with JSDF and not with the U.S. Marines. 

The cost to build the replacement is reported to amount to Y2.5 trillion. You must explain, because we will shoulder all the cost, that even so it is worthy for us to spend that amount of money to build the replacement facility for the Marines.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Like there was going to be any other outcome. You guys crack me up.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

*Ahhh, bro, it makes sense now. You fail to see the point of this whole things. The argument has never been that Okinawans support the relocation. The clear cut argument is that most peopledon't care either way and that its twisting fact to say that the majority of all Okinawans oppose the relocation. There's no spin when you say more Okinawans voted neither or didn't vote at all than ones who voted in opposition. Its straight up facts*

Lol bro, you just keep getting on the perpetual merry go round here hey ....be it this referendum, Tamaki,s election against the LDP backed, pro Henoko candidate, the prior prefectural election result.....in all of these the anti base / anti Henoko votes far outnumber the supporting ones. But yeah, just keep on discounting the results by saying that close to half the electorate didnt vote....but if you keep that same line of argument dont forget to dismiss every other poll result starting with Abe,s electoral victories and ending with Trump getting into the White House..in fact pretty much any poll around the globe with the exception of countries with compulsory voting could be dismissed by saying that large % of population didnt bother to show up therefore announcing poll victories is twisting facts and carries no weight.....might as well do away with voting alltogether, lol. That line of argument is way off :) .....have a good one, champion...

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

when the two governments struck a deal to the effect that primary responsibility to defend Japan’s territory rests with JSDF and not with the U.S. Marines. 

Voice, you tend to provide half a picture or twist the story. The JSDF has operational control and a leading responsibility to defend the territory. However, the Marines will still fight in defense of Japan and it’s territory. That agreement and promise has been reiterated nearly yearly. ****the USFJ will fight alongside the JDSF. Period. End of discussion.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

CyburneticTiger,

 ... the Marines will still fight in defense of Japan and it’s territory. ... the USFJ will fight alongside the JDSF

Well, thank you, Marines, for your selfless contribution to the defense and security of Japan and the region. 

But the core elements that "will fight in defense of Japan and its territory" will be in Guam, some 2,400 km away from Okinawa. Under such circumstances, why is it necessary to have Futenma's replacement built in Henoko?

1 ( +1 / -0 )

I imagine the Marines asked to close Futenma and move the airfield to Camp Schwartz because it is too far to fly helicopters from Guam to Japan, Taiwan, Korea, or the Philippines.

Fixed wing aircraft can easily move people en masse a far distance quickly though. So putting your combat arm a 2 hour flight away wouldn’t really effect response because they can arrive quickly and already have required support in the area.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

CyburneticTiger,

Wasn't the reason why the Marines would have to move to Guam to keep themselves safe from China's new ballistic missile DF 16s? But China is said to have further developed a newer missile (DF 16) with Washington easily within its range.

This means Futenma or its replacement in Henoko is less and less significant, making the Henoko new base a sheer white elephant.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Corection:

Wasn't the reason why the Marines would have to move to Guam to keep themselves safe from China's new ballistic missile DF 16s? But China is said to have further developed a newer missile (DF 26) with Washington easily within its range.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

We both know reason for the Marines moving a portion of their forces to Guam is to ease the burden on Okinawa.

Thats what China claims, but, the US has about 60 years of missile defense technology development over China’s weapons development programs. Oh, and the Soviets were much better at weapons development and manufacturing than China. So it’s more likely that the threat China presents is mostly mitigated.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

CyburneticTiger,

Thats what China claims

The Pentagon's policy toward weapons development is to always keep the U.S. 10 years ahead of other countries in the technology. So you may be right to point out that China is lagging behind the U.S. in missile development and technology.

But that's not a point at issue here. If 8 to 9 thousands most active elements of the Marines can relocate to Guam, what's the use of building Futenma's replacement in Henoko?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

If 8 to 9 thousands most active elements of the Marines can relocate to Guam, what's the use of building Futenma's replacement in Henoko

This is your answer

I imagine the Marines asked to close Futenma and move the airfield to Camp Schwartz because it is too far to fly helicopters from Guam to Japan, Taiwan, Korea, or the Philippines. 

Fixed wing aircraft can easily move people en masse a far distance quickly though. So putting your combat arm a 2 hour flight away wouldn’t really effect response because they can arrive quickly and already have required support in the area.

Oyasuminasi, Voice

0 ( +0 / -0 )

CyburneticTiger,

... the Marines asked to close Futenma and move the airfield to Camp Schwartz  (Schwab?) because it is too far to fly helicopters from Guam to Japan, Taiwan, Korea, or the Philippines.

You argue that in order to transport combat-ready personnel en masse to a combat zone, you need fixed-wing aircraft such as MV22-Ospreys. OK but, look, those combat-ready, active Marine personnel are to be in Guam, 2,500 km away from Okinawa, but you conclude erroneously that the Ospreys must be based in Okinawa and therefore that the new base in Henoko is absolutely necessary. LOL.

Note, also, that the other means of massive troop transportation, the amphibious assault ship Bon Homme Richard, is based in Sasebo, Nagasaki. So you cannot use troop mobility, nor Okinawa’s strategic location, to support your pro-Henoko theory. Do you get it?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

but you conclude erroneously that the Ospreys must be based in Okinawa and therefore that the new base in Henoko is absolutely necessary.

Please direct me to where I mentioned Ospreys? You do know the Marines have various rotary wing aircraft that cannot fly the distance that the MV-22 flies?

Note, also, that the other means of massive troop transportation, the amphibious assault ship Bon Homme Richard, is based in Sasebo, Nagasaki. So you cannot use troop mobility, nor Okinawa’s strategic location, to support your pro-Henoko theory. Do you get it?

Your facts are outdated. the Bon Homme Richard is not based in Sasebo. If I remember correctly, its the USS Essex, currently.

Its never been a troop mobility argument. Its logistical and supply support and aviation support for various contingencies in the area. You have never been able to counter this and you still haven't. The bottom line is that the location of the island makes it an efficient location that provides several Marines to support various humanitarian and combat operations throughout SE Asia and East Asia. Pulling rotary wing aircraft and other support assets to any other location negates that ability and no allies in Asia want that to happen.
0 ( +0 / -0 )

Also, I argued that it would be easy rapidly to transport combat elements from Guam en mass via fixed wing aircraft.

BUT

Rotaty aircraft required for support roles cannot deploy anywhere in Asia from Guam. They can, however, deploy to most areas in SE and East Asia from Okinawa. Hence the critical need to maintain an air station in Asia.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

So you either don’t understand the strategic importance or are just ignoring it

0 ( +0 / -0 )

CyburneticTiger,

Of course, I am not a military specialist nor a strategist That much said, though, I can point out your "facts" aren't facts at all, either. It's the USS Bon Homme Richards that took the place of the USS Essex in a ship swap on April 23, 2012 and is being deployed at Sasebo right now.

You can't deny the fact I presented that the eight to nine thousand most active elements of the hitherto Okinawa-deployed Marines are to relocate to Guam, leaving only command and logistics units in Okinawa. You didn't directly mention MV-22 Ospreys, all right, but these aircraft are the ones that will transport Guam-stationed Marines to the battle grounds you mention: Taiwan, the Philippines, the Korean Peninsula and maybe the Senkakus. 

Pundits often tell us that Futenma's replacement must be within Okinawa because of its strategic location. But how does this theory fit in the picture I described above – the picture in which the most active, combat-ready troops are in Guam and transport vessels, either a ship or aircraft to transport them to battle grounds are in Sasebo and in Okinawa? Can you explain your reasoning why it’s absolutely necessary to build Futenma’s replacement in Henoko where 14 MV-22 Ospreys will be based together with some other attack helicopters?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

https://news.usni.org/2018/04/20/after-six-years-of-forward-deployment-uss-bonhomme-richard-returns-to-the-u-s

Wrong again. You haven’t gotten anything military correct at all, Shimoji-san. Maybe for once it would be better to listen and accept the facts.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Because they don’t need ships or troops in Okinawa to respond to contingencies. They can respond from Guam easily. What cannot respond from Guam is aircraft and supplies. However, Marines can fly AH-1, UH-1, and CH-53 to Taiwan, Korea, or the Philippines from Okinawa and that is the only location where they can go to all those areas directly. So you fly in the troops from Guam and the rotary aviation and supply support meets them on site. Like, I can’t break this down any simpler unless I wrote it in Japanese for you.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Also, MV-22’s won’t transport troops from Guam. There’s much faster aircraft that can carry more Troops.

Dude, you don’t know what you’re talking about. You need to stop pretending and realize your contentions have no merit or validity

0 ( +0 / -0 )

CyburneticTiger,

I see.  But replacing the USS Bon Homme Richard was the USS Wasp, LHD-1, and not the Essex as you said. These are negligible, minuscule mistakes, however, not very important to this discussion.

You have offered no convincing argument, as yet, why Futenma's replacement to be built in Henoko must be absolutely needed when the Wasp-carrying F-35B Lightning IIs will be able to deal with contingencies in Taiwan, the Philippines and the Korean Peninsula.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Correction:

You have offered no convincing argument, as yet, why Futenma's replacement to be built in Henoko must be absolutely needed when the Wasp-carried F-35B Lightning IIs will be able to deal with contingencies in Taiwan, the Philippines and the Korean Peninsula.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites