politics

Japan protests against U.S. Marines dumping toxic water in Okinawa

91 Comments

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

© KYODO

©2024 GPlusMedia Inc.

91 Comments
Login to comment

PUBLIC SERVICE ADVISEMENT and ABSOLUTELY ON TOPIC 'comment' for all exMarines having served at Camp LeJeune for greater than 30 Days from August 1953 through December 1987...it ain't just for Okinawa, it's for US also:

https://www.va.gov/disability/eligibility/hazardous-materials-exposure/camp-lejeune-water-contamination/

-1 ( +4 / -5 )

Japan protests against U.S. Marines dumping toxic water in Okinawa

Dumping something toxic in Japan soil? That's not first time.

https://features.japantimes.co.jp/agent-orange-in-okinawa/

3 ( +7 / -4 )

Such hypocrisy considering they will dump nuclear tainted water from Fukushima nuclear reactors into the ocean!

8 ( +23 / -15 )

As I have posted many times before, there is no denying that Okinawa is still occupied by the U.S. military. Some posters here vehemently deny it, saying that the U.S. military is in Okinawa according as the bilateral treaty and agreements sanction.

But the U.S. military thinks Okinawa is their occupied land, won by a war at the sacrifice of 20,195 troop deaths. That's why USF Okinawa tend to think they can do whatever they want to do in Okinawa. The dumping of polluted water to local rivers or underground is nothing unusual.

9 ( +15 / -6 )

The U.S. military said the water has been treated to meet safety levels for drinking, maintaining that the combined presence of the man-made pollutant chemicals perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS) and perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) is lower than the Japanese government's provisional standards.

The third organization (Health and scientists group) definitely need to check the level whether they can drink or not. No one knows water is safe or not to drink even if the US military only says "safe".

0 ( +2 / -2 )

The U.S. military said the water has been treated to meet safety levels for drinking

What a waste to release it, then.

Bottle it and give it to US servicemen to drink.

Put it into the camp water supply.

No need to waste perfectly safe water.

11 ( +20 / -9 )

Such hypocrisy considering they will dump nuclear tainted water from Fukushima nuclear reactors into the ocean!

This is completely different. Japan got an approval from the organization IAEA to dump treated tritium water. The US military needs to get an approval from the third scientific organization before dumping the water if the US says "safe".

-2 ( +9 / -11 )

Kick the US military out of Okinawa, problem solved!

6 ( +16 / -10 )

Time for the U.S military to be held accountable!!

10 ( +16 / -6 )

Such hypocrisy considering they will dump nuclear tainted water from Fukushima nuclear reactors into the ocean!

agree

1 ( +13 / -12 )

"US Marines" and US Military" don't mean anything; what is the name and rank of the officer who actually gave the order to do this?

0 ( +5 / -5 )

The U.S. military should be kicked out of Okinawa.

1 ( +9 / -8 )

The U S servicemen and women should be drinking this "safe" water.

-2 ( +5 / -7 )

Kick the US military out of Okinawa, problem solved!

That is not the solution. The very next day after that happens, Communist China strolls right in and takes Okinawa. They have been eyeing Okinawa forever.

The solution is to have the US Military behave properly. That is a real challenge.

12 ( +15 / -3 )

Just because water is not harmful to drink does not mean it tastes nice. Dumping in sewage is probably the best place for it.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Dumping in sewage is probably the best place for it.

if treated water really meets safety standard to environment around there.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

Sewage normally goes through treatment plants in first world countries. Putting already treated water into a sewage system that then goes through additional treatment seems the best option. Sure get a test of what is being dumped to confirm or deny it's safe to do so. If it is safe then no issue, If not then you have them red handed in naughty behavior and can fine them appropriately.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

But the U.S. military only notified the prefectural government on Thursday morning that it would begin releasing the water less than an hour before going ahead with the plan.

I wonder if Japan has strict protocols for the US Military on how these things should be handled. why are the US military simply notifying the prefectural govt (and under such short notice) and not seeking approval?

US Military are a guest in someone's home so respect your host!

2 ( +4 / -2 )

hmmmmm....

is ok, for the Japanese to dump nuclear wasted into the pacific ocean, but is not ok for the US military to dump treated water, the lefty mind set is crazy!!

wow!!!

just because it's not the Japanese corrupt government. brain wash anyone or lefty hypocrisy anyone?

-3 ( +3 / -6 )

Well its not good for anybody to be dumping anything toxic in the ocean.

Trying to hold the USA military and responsible or Japan's Fukushima issues or imperial Japans military dumping of chemicals from their chemical and biological weapons factories all over Asia that dumped into the ocean after they lost the war is futile.

Japan's burnable refuse issue is also something that needs to change.

Nobody should be dumping any type of refuse into the ocean and trying to pretend it doesn't negatively impact the environment.

And that includes cruise ships.

Treat the ocean with respect !

0 ( +2 / -2 )

US Military are a guest in someone's home so respect your host!

Most of them don't. They still think they are damn conqueror and superior. More than a half century ago. They are still arrogant because they have advanced strongest weapons, but the US lost wars: Vietnam, Somalia, Afghanistan. It is time to behave nice to allies to help each other.

2 ( +6 / -4 )

And yes Okinawa is occupied by USA forces.

And yes its also a paid for alliance.

No Japan can't ask or force the USA military to leave if it chooses.

Unless JAPAN can change its constitution its better to continue to be occupied and host USA forces .

The negative impact that Okinawa has suffered at the hands of Japan's military and government and the USA and its allies is truly sad and i hope the situation improves peacefully and the protection of the environment takes priority over territory disputes.

4 ( +6 / -2 )

@Kyo wa

The US military personnel are stationed at Okinawa US bases because there is the US-Japan security treaty, Okinawa Not occupied by US forces. It was before 1972.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

Kwatt:

Iam well aware of what is called a security treaty in Okinawa because i live here.

However its really just a nice way to be amicable and in reality an occupation.

You know how USA military rolls why not just say it like it is.

An occupation for reasons of strategic importance for the USA and its allies.

And a paid for security treaty by Japan.

Its both.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

PFAS stands for "polyfluoroalkyl substances", that are toxic chemicals that cause cancer and are said to affect fetal development. The chemical is used as extinguishant in firefighting 

Early this year, the Okinawa Prefectural Government announced that the sample of groundwater collected near Futenma Air Station contained PFAS at 2,000 ppt despite the U.S. legal standard being 70 ppt.

The OPG, let alone the Japanese government, can't investigate into the case directly because of the status of forces agreement standing as a high wall.

Is Japan really an independent sovereignty?

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

A client state does not have the right to protest against the ruling hegemon.

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

No Japan can't ask or force the USA military to leave if it chooses.

A nice sentence to make Chinese communist party official's happy but not true at all.

Make factual comments as these fake ones are easy to spot.

Iam well aware of what is called a security treaty in Okinawa because i live here.

However its really just a nice way to be amicable and in reality an occupation.

It is a normal stance from a local inhabitant not happy with the base location, but still is not based on factual agreements made in good faith between nations. You can call American allies occupiers but they are not, it maybe better to call your governments traitors if you believe what you say. It is they who can ask the US to leave. They dont, and for very good reason.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Put it into the camp water supply.

Where do you think the water that supplies the bases comes from? Since you obviously dont know, they ARE drinking and using the same water!

2 ( +3 / -1 )

No Japan can't ask or force the USA military to leave if it chooses.

Yes they can, just like the Philippines asked the US, Japan COULD do the same.

However, the reality is totally different, Japan wont ask, as long as China remains a problem along with North Korea.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

US military bases need to dispose of a lot of toxic material.

So make a choice Japan- no US base, or toxic materials dumped into your natural environment?

You can't have it both ways.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

As I have posted many times before, there is no denying that Okinawa is still occupied by the U.S. military. 

One, what you posted before and what you posted now, are the same and again totally wrong.

Does the US Military dictate your life here in Okinawa? Do you pay taxes to the US Military? Do the military's police keep the peace for you and all of us here in Okinawa who live off the bases? Hell do you register your family with the US Military when a child is born? No, no, no, no, and no, to all of it. (Hmmm... even you should see the pattern there!)

To the unknowing and uneducated the way you talk makes it sound like they control life of everyone here, and that is 100% wrong. Hell I can go literally months without seeing anything related to the military here, and now with corona, it's even longer than that.

It's obvious to even the casual observer that your opinions and ideas are totally biased and unbalanced.

(Hmmm... even you should see the pattern there!)

But the U.S. military thinks Okinawa is their occupied land, won by a war at the sacrifice of 20,195 troop deaths. That's why USF Okinawa tend to think they can do whatever they want to do in Okinawa. The dumping of polluted water to local rivers or underground is nothing unusual.

Please get your facts correct! there were not 20,195 US military deaths during the Battle of Okinawa

Like you always do, exaggerate the numbers to make a false point!

The Americans bore over 49,000 casualties including 12,520 killed. General Buckner was killed in action on June 18, just days before the battle ended. Japanese losses were even greater—about 110,000 Japanese soldiers lost their lives. It's estimated between 40,000 and 150,000 Okinawa citizens were also killed.

https://www.history.com/topics/world-war-ii/battle-of-okinawa

https://www.britannica.com/topic/Battle-of-Okinawa

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

Iam well aware of what is called a security treaty in Okinawa because i live here.

Just because you may live here does not automatically mean that you are aware of or know about the treaty. There are plenty of people who live here and have ZERO idea of what the treaty is, or what it is all about.

Most Okinawan's are apathetic to the bases, and that was proven with ZERO doubt during a referendum a few years back. Most people dont care, one way or the other!

2 ( +5 / -3 )

Septim Dynasty,

Thank you always for the covering fire. In spite of Yubaru, japan is not a sovereign state.

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

There are research studies that discuss the adverse environmental impact US military bases have on local communities. The environmental pollution has always been one of the biggest downsides to military bases abroad. They seem to be less regulated than US corporations on home soil.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

How about Japanese protest their own Government throwing toxic water from Fukushima into the sea.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

A client state does not have the right to protest against the ruling hegemon.

Thank you! Quite so! And seeing as Japan is complaining, and protesting, it verifies that Japan is NOT a client state.

I am glad you pointed that out. Even the blind will see it!

0 ( +3 / -3 )

"Local residents are feeling very anxious," Koizumi said.

Pfff. Anything uttered by pretty-boy Koizumi needs to be considered through this lens: he's a hawk in Johnny's clothing. He appeals mainly to the housewife electorate who are somewhat leftist when it comes to stuff done by foreigners (especially by big burly gaijin GIs in Okinawa -- "we want peace!", Peace Boat types), but pretty nationalistic and conservative when it comes down to the bottom line.

Hey environment minister, take a good hard look at Fukushima.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

I wonder how clean the waters are near the major hotels.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

JimToday 07:55 am JST

Such hypocrisy considering they will dump nuclear tainted water from Fukushima nuclear reactors into the ocean!

Ya beat me to it! spot on!

4 ( +4 / -0 )

Japan becoming stronger=Better for USA.

Better for Okinawa.

Better for S. Korea.

Better for Asia.

Japan can take more responsibility to defend the rule of law. Freedom of navigation. Maintain the peace. Credible deterant.

USA would spend less on foreign bases. Less problems with soldiers behaving badly. Stronger Ally in Japan who can take more responsibilities.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

why does this ybaru person keep pretending he is from Okinawa.

I laughed when he said you can go months without seeing US soldiers in Okinawa. Maybe if he lived in Yonaguni or something. But on Mainland Okinawa island, you will see them easily, especially if you are in Central Okinawa like Yomitan, Ginowan, etc

and also BS about that referendum claim. A majority of Okinawans voted against new bases

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_Okinawan_referendum

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Monty

Kick the US military out of Okinawa, problem solved!

SO that China can kick Japan out of Japan OKAY!! Problem solved!

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Thank you! Quite so! And seeing as Japan is complaining, and protesting, it verifies that Japan is NOT a client state.

Japan still does nothing to stop whatever Americans are doing. Action speaks louder than protests.

Japan is a client state, period! Japan has no ability to forcefully cancel any American action in the country.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

So the Okinawans are whining because the US Army treated water to a potable standard, meaning it is fit to drink, and put it into their sewage system. I guess the Okinawans think their poop is cleaner than drinkable water? This is a manufactured reason to whine.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Yubaru-

In response to your comments on this news discussion about how the Japan government feels about the unnecessary dumping of toxic waste by the USA military stationed in Okinawa

If "you" think your so called proven facts and referendums and agreements and comments are all correct then why does your nonlinear thinking pattern and passive agressive commentary prove without a shadow of doubt that your situational awareness is redundant.

As you have clearly stated okinawans don't care one way or the other then why should we believe your sensational rhetoric?

How can you honestly assume to know what all okinawans feel about USA military's presence in Okinawa just because you live here?

Have you personally talked to all of them ?

Perhaps you should ask the Ryukyu people how they feel about the occupation of Japan and the occupation of USA military.

Obviously okinawans and Japan care about the USA military presence in Okinawa and are concerned about the dumping of toxic materials into the water.

Japan has sensitive territorial issues in the region that are being addressed by its allies that it pays for in a security agreement .

I think it would be a more productive discussion to address the issues at hand than to spout your angst at other commenters trying to have a meaningful intellectual discussion .

I sincerely apologize if any of my previous ,present or future comments make you feel uncomfortable.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

I laughed when he said you can go months without seeing US soldiers in Okinawa. Maybe if he lived in Yonaguni or something. But on Mainland Okinawa island, you will see them easily, especially if you are in Central Okinawa like Yomitan, Ginowan, etc

and also BS about that referendum claim. A majority of Okinawans voted against new bases

You only see what you want to see with regards to the referendum. Look at the total numbers, and then go back and reread what I wrote. Anyone can easily figure it out. The majority of voters who voted voted no, but that does not tell the entire story. Learn to read!

And your first paragraph here.... Yes I can, and DO go months, without seeing any military. Particularly now with the pandemic, and restrictions on the military. Naha, Nishihara, Najyo, Yaese, Tomigusuku, Yonabaru, Haebaru, Itoman......Yeah, THEY do not frequent these areas all that much, and I dont see them.

Better not to assume that just because where you are extrapolates to everywhere.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Kyo wa heiwa dayo ne 5:52am: “Well its not good for anybody to be dumping anything toxic in the ocean. 

Japan has sensitive territorial issues in the region that are being addressed by its allies that it pays for in a security agreement .

Yubaru- I think it would be a more productive discussion to address the issues at hand than to spout your angst at other commenters trying to have a meaningful intellectual discussion .

Learn to read! Better not to assume just because where you are extrapolates to everywhere.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

septim Dynasty -

this discussion is about what the USA military is doing with its waste not what Americans are doing.

Are you aware of the fact that the USA military's personnel stationed in Okinawa are multiracial and not all from the Americas?

Large percentage of USA personnel are samoans or pacific islanders for example.

All Americans are not active members of the USA military because America is a continent of 35 countries.

Obviously Japan "does" protest the dumping of waste by the USA military and that is exactly what the article describes and this discussion is about.

Protesting what the USA military is doing "is" doing something about the issue of dumping and where it's dumping it.

And Japan has demanded they stop.

Japan is a democracy which means words come before action.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

KentarogaijinAug. 30  09:22 am JST

What can be expected of an interventionist, hypocritical .......

Who will you call when China threatens Japan as it is threatening Taiwan and other nations?

And as for your Icon "Trump Lost LOL" you are using; Joe didn't legally win. LOL.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Yubaru,

You say you rarely see a U.S. service member in the area you live in Okinawa. Based on this fact you say Okinawa is not occupied by U.S. forces any longer.

Even during the pre-reversion days when Okinawa was physically and literally occupied, I never saw a U.S. service member sauntering in the area where I live.

 But even today I never fail to feel that the U.S. military is domineering over us like erstwhile occupation forces. Futenma-based aircraft make it a routine flight path in our sky flying at a low altitude day and night.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

The Japanese government can protest all their little hearts desire but at the end of the day the occupiers can and will do whatever they want.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Who will you call when China threatens Japan as it is threatening Taiwan and other nations?

The American occupiers are the only reason China would target Japan.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

Based on this fact you say Okinawa is not occupied by U.S. forces any longer.

Never said that, so, and again dont attempt to attribute something to me that I did not state anywhere or ever.

Again, you assume something you do not know.

 But even today I never fail to feel that the U.S. military 

Thank you! I am glad you stated it's just a "feeling".

Feelings can change, and the facts are that the US has not occupied or controlled Okinawa since May 15, 1972.

Everything after that is what counts today!

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

The Japanese government can protest all their little hearts desire but at the end of the day the occupiers can and will do whatever they want.

Something is understandable. Thousands of The US military soldiers went to Afghanistan and occupied the country and occupier really did whatever they wanted for 20 years, Finally the occupier got a little happy end of it.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Everyone knows you can only safely dump toxic waters around Fukushima and the rest of Japan, not a US military base, sillies!

1 ( +1 / -0 )

https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202108/1232884.shtml

"Japan's environment minister has strongly protested to US forces based in Okinawa Prefecture for dumping toxic water containing organofluorides into the local sewage system. Japanese Defense Minister Nobuo Kishi also asked the US to stop any future dumping.

Responding to the issue, Wang pointed out Japan's contrasting attitude toward releasing wastewater. Japan protests against wastewater dumped in its own country but ignores international opposition when releasing toxic water outside."

Right on time. I knew it.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Japan got an approval from the organization IAEA to dump treated tritium water. The US military needs to get an approval from the third scientific organization before dumping the water if the US says "safe". The US military can dump the treated water into river/ocean if it really meets safety standard. So better get an approval (proves no problem) from the third organization, not from the US military.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Yubaru,

Feelings can change, and the facts are that the US has not occupied or controlled Okinawa since May 15, 1972.

Of course, feelings of being occupied by the domineering U.S. forces may change, but only if the reduction of bases and the U.S. military presence is done to the minimum necessary.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Of course, feelings of being occupied by the domineering U.S. forces may change, but only if bases and the U.S. military presence are reduced to the minimum necessary.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

says Government who is dumping radioactive water into the Pacific....

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Of course, feelings of being occupied by the domineering U.S. forces may change, but only if the reduction of bases and the U.S. military presence is done to the minimum necessary.

No not may, I am going to hold you to your previous comment of

But even today I never fail to feel that the U.S. military is domineering over us like erstwhile occupation forces.

In the context you wrote it here, it means that your "feelings" are about the "former occupation", meaning that even to you there is no occupation today and you are only talking about pre-1972, again, not now.

Thank you for confirming this as well, your statements show you acknowledge by your own words, there is no occupation today.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Yubaru,

In the context you wrote it here, it means that your "feelings" are about the "former occupation", meaning that even to you there is no occupation today and you are only talking about pre-1972, again, not now.

You are talking only about rhetoric. Under the real occupation that lasted from 1945 to 1972, you had an oppressive feeling of being occupied. Now, that occupation is supposed to have ended in 1972 when Okinawa's sovereignty was returned to Japan. 

But if the feeling of being occupied and oppressed remained the same as before because large swaths of U.S. bases and troops remained almost the same and the USF Okinawa (mostly the Marines) used these bases with impunity, I would say Okinawa was still under occupation.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

If you don't like the word "occupation", then change it to "quasi-occupation".

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Agreed @Kyowaheiwadayone with and reposted your @5:52am point. - What’s your point/beef/downvote about, now? - Feel free to “elaborate”.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

If I didn't like and respect the rest of Japan so much and value them as an ally I would advocate the US simply leave Okinawa and tell the Chinese it's theirs to take. Let the Okinawans become vassals of China like they were two and a half centuries ago and see how they like it. See if Chinese forces ask permission to do anything. Lol, Okinawans are a trip.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Desert Tortoise,

The U.S. won a war against Japan and made it a docile vassal. That's what you value so much about Japan: its doglike loyalty to the U.S. 

You say that if you didn't like Japan, you would advocate U.S. forces to leave Okinawa immediately so that China might take it easily. In your view, then, Okinawa is being used as a convenient cog to make U.S. dominance over Japan possible. Is that the reason why U.S. bases in Okinawa must be maintained forever and fortified ever more?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

You say that if you didn't like Japan, you would advocate U.S. forces to leave Okinawa immediately so that China might take it easily. In your view, then, Okinawa is being used as a convenient cog to make U.S. dominance over Japan possible. Is that the reason why U.S. bases in Okinawa must be maintained forever and fortified ever more?

Japan is hardly a vassal of the US. That claim is both grossly untrue and grossly offensive. The US doesn't own Japan. Japan is an ally and a friend. But you also ignore Japan's history in Asia. Until fairly recently Japan was still feared in most of Asia. The prevailing view in Asia that a Japan with strictly limited military capabilities that has to rely on the US for protection from the big powers that want to take Japan by force and subjugate its people was best for the safety of other Asian nations. You can sneer if you will but nations like Vietnam and Philippines for example still feared a return of Japanese militarism. Memories of the horrors inflicted by the IJA remain strong, and especially so in China where they still burn for revenge. As long as the US took responsibility for Japan's defense, other Asian nations slept well at night. Japan was not trusted in Asia and every time one of their far right politicians flapped their yap it only reinforced that distrust. Many Japanese politicians understand this too even if they are silent on the matter. The assertiveness of Xi Jinping has changed this dynamic and today Asian nations fear China greatly and see Japan as being threatened by China like they are and not a threat to them any more.

The US also agreed to shoulder much of Japan's defense burden so it could concentrate on economic growth. The Cold War was as much a competition for hearts and minds as it was a military competition. Having prosperous allies with elected governments, a free press, religious freedom and high standards of living was part of the argument advanced to the world about the superiority of western style elected democracy over the repression and grinding poverty of Communism, and part of the reason the west ultimately prevailed and the USSR ultimately collapsed. If Japan had to shoulder the full burden of her defense her economy would never have grown to the worlds second largest as it was for a long time before China eventually eclipsed it (not that Japan's economy shrank, China simply grew past it) and the narrative of the superiority of western style democracy would not have been as compelling. The US ran up a massive debt trying to defend its allies from Soviet aggression.

Look at a map and you can clearly see the importance of the bases in Okinawa. This isn't difficult to understand. Keeping China's navy inside that first island chain is critical to the defense of both Japan and Taiwan. That makes a strong military position on Okinawa critical. If the PLAN can operate freely outside the first island chain the US will have a very difficult time defending Japan or Taiwan as their navy will be able to attack resupply and reinforcement efforts and attack the islands from all sides. Japanese leadership understands this even as Okinawans grouse. Abandoning those bases in Okinawa leaves both Japan and Taiwan vulnerable to Chinese domination. If you don't think the Chinese want to burn Japanese cities and subjugate Japan in revenge for WWII I can introduce you to my wife and her family in China. They hate the Japanese with a passion. Don't underestimate China's determination to take revenge for WWII. It is real and they will do it if they ever think they have a chance of success. It is up to the US, Japan, Canada and Australia to make sure the Chinese never think they might have that chance of success and to do that they must have sufficient military capability in the region to deter China from taking action and defeat them if they attack anyway.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

If you don't like the word "occupation", then change it to "quasi-occupation".

Just like your "quasi-comments?" So they mean nothing!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Desert Tortoise,

The prevailing view in Asia that a Japan with strictly limited military capabilities that has to rely on the US for protection from the big powers that want to take Japan by force and subjugate its people was best for the safety of other Asian nations.

So, in your opinion, Asian nations think the U.S. military presence in Japan, particularly in Okinawa, is good to keep the genie not out of the bottle. In other words, the U.S. military presence in Japan is necessary not only for deterrence against China but also as a lid to contain the re-emergence of Japanese militarism and imperialism.

The Pacific War was fought between two imperialist nations: the Empire of Japan and the Republic of U.S.A. that has been aspiring to become a great empire itself since its inception. Cf. the name "Empire State" for New York.  How can a victorious imperialist nation justify its military presence in a defeated nation by saying they are here to defend it and democratic principles?

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

 How can a victorious imperialist nation justify its military presence in a defeated nation by saying they are here to defend it and democratic principles?

This is as about naïve a comment as I have ever seen here.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

@Desert Tortoise,

If you don't think the Chinese want to burn Japanese cities and subjugate Japan in revenge for WWII I can introduce you to my wife and her family in China. They hate the Japanese with a passion

not that i'm saying you are lying but i have experienced the exact opposite when i use to travel between Tokyo and Shanghai frequently for work... all of the local chinese i've known have nothing but good things to say about Japan (the politeness of the ppl, the intricate details they put on everything, their dream trip of wearing a kimoto in kyoto etc..)... the only passion i sense is that they have a passion to learn and experience other cultures (including Japan) ... the chinese are clearly getting richer and with that, they have the time and resources to enjoy life.. now, why would they risk that to revenge for an event more than 70 years ago? i don't buy it

0 ( +0 / -0 )

So, in your opinion, Asian nations think the U.S. military presence in Japan, particularly in Okinawa, is good to keep the genie not out of the bottle. In other words, the U.S. military presence in Japan is necessary not only for deterrence against China but also as a lid to contain the re-emergence of Japanese militarism and imperialism

That was certainly the prevailing view in the 1980s and 1990s, well before China became a major threat (in fact there was considerable military cooperation between the USN and PLAN until Tiananmen Square). It was stated openly in the press. Asian nations wanted US forces protecting Japan to deter Japanese militarism. It is no big secret. It was a big part of the original decision to deny selling AEGIS to the JMSDF when they first asked (the reason the US eventually relented was they feared Japan would develop their own equivalent and in the process learn technologies and the whole complex research and development process the US preferred to keep restricted, maybe better to sell ours than let Japan learn how to make their own).

Until recently China was viewed more favorably than Japan all across Asia. Memories of WWII linger. China's increasing power, increasing belligerence and their threats to sovereign territory held by China's neighbors including Japan have caused the views of most Asian nations to change their views, distrust China and see Japan in a more favorable light.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

The Pacific War was fought between two imperialist nations: the Empire of Japan and the Republic of U.S.A.

It is both sad and uninformed that you consider the US to be the imperialist in WWII. The US was attacked without warning by Japan and until the Japanese attack had stayed out of the war in Europe. At the outset of WWII the US Army was tiny and the Army Air Corps was likewise small. The IJN was considerably larger than the US Navy. It was only after Japan attacked that Germany and Italy both declared war on the US. How that amounts to imperialism escapes me. But that sneak attack on Pearl Harbor greatly changed how the US approaches its defense. It never wants to be caught out like that again and is very aggressive about deterring threats. Lessons learned the hard way.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

not that i'm saying you are lying but i have experienced the exact opposite when i use to travel between Tokyo and Shanghai frequently for work... all of the local chinese i've known have nothing but good things to say about Japan (the politeness of the ppl, the intricate details they put on everything, their dream trip of wearing a kimoto in kyoto etc..)... the only passion i sense is that they have a passion to learn and experience other cultures (including Japan) ... the chinese are clearly getting richer and with that, they have the time and resources to enjoy life.. now, why would they risk that to revenge for an event more than 70 years ago? i don't buy it

My family in China has a visceral hatred of Japan and all things Japanese. But momma survived the Japanese occupation of Shanghai. You will find many Chinese hate Japan, even if they won't tell you to your face.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

You will find many Chinese hate Japan, even if they won't tell you to your face.

And many of them will tell your face! They aren't shy about it in China. Also, it should be clear we're talking about Chinese from mainland China, not people of Chinese ethnicity. I know lots of foreign-born Chinese who are fine with Japan and have Japanese friends etc. But when you go to mainland, there is a LOT of hatred for Japan there. Although, many in the younger generation like Japan for its cultural influences.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Back to the original topic of the U.S. Marines dumping PFAS-tainted water to sewage.

Some poster says the game ends in a draw because TEPCO is releasing radioactive-tainted water into the sea. In his opinion, there's nothing wrong for the Marines to do the same: dump PFAS-tainted water to sewage. Japan and the U.S. are thus quits and even, he says.

If the TEPCO-owned nuclear power plants were operating in New York and were to dump nuclear-tainted water to the Hudson Bay, I would buy his argument. But TEPCO's Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant issue and the U.S. Marines Okinawa's dumping of PFAS-tainted water into Okinawa's sewage system without previously consulting Okinawa Prefecture are different matters that cannot be discussed on the same table.

The Marines' action is inexplicable unless one considers they are above Japanese law, that is, they are an occupation force.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

If the TEPCO-owned nuclear power plants were operating in New York and were to dump nuclear-tainted water to the Hudson Bay, 

You can attempt to make as many comparisons to make some esoteric point, but it's not the same. This is about Okinawa, and Japan.

Keep the discussion here and on topic!

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

The Marines' action is inexplicable unless one considers they are above Japanese law, that is, they are an occupation force.

Really? Then pray tell why there are Marines in Japanese prisons? Please stop with the erroneous information that you attempt to pass off as fact!

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

There's the Ministry of the Environment in the Japanese government that deals with environmental pollution issues such as this. But why is the ministry reticent about it? Where is Minister of the Environment Shinjiro Koizumi?

Kunitoshi Sakurai, former President of Okinawa University, writes on the April 23, 2020 Asahi Shimbun that similar chemical incidents have occurred in Okinawa at least 7 times since 2007. Doesn't this mean Okinawa is still under occupation or “pseudo-occupation” by the free-wheeling U.S. forces?

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

There is no occupation of Okinawa of any kind by the US. Okinawa is not a country. The US is in Japan under a treaty. Is Okinawa under Japanese occupation, because Japanese police and SDF are stationed there.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Goyt,

There is no occupation of Okinawa of any kind by the US. Okinawa is not a country. The US is in Japan under a treaty.

True Okinawa is not physically and literally occupied by U.S. forces like it was until 1972 when its administrative right was returned to Japan. But it was only the administrative right that was returned. The occupation forces, bases and their right to the free use of these bases remained the same. Troops' perquisites above Japanese law remained intact.

These are the reasons why I say Okinawa is still under occupation or pseudo-occupation. The treaty that makes it all possible is nothing but shenanigans.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

 But it was only the administrative right that was returned.

Hmm... seems to me even you are unaware that Okinawa is a part of Japan.

These are the reasons why I say Okinawa is still under occupation or pseudo-occupation.

There is no such thing as pseudo-occupation, or quasi-occupation, or any occupation by the military here in Okinawa, or anywhere in Japan! Your narrowed minded opinions and feelings on the subject conveniently leave out the bases in mainland.

So your by your illogical opinion, ALL Japan is "occupied" by the US Military lol! You can not separate one from the other, leastwise not from 1972 to today.

So, as Okinawa is a part of Japan, and there are US Military bases throughout the country, the only LOGICAL conclusion to you would be to say that ALL Japan is occupied. But it's not, not here, or anywhere in the country, and YOU know that too.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Yubaru,

There is no such thing as pseudo-occupation, or quasi-occupation, or any occupation by the military here in Okinawa, or anywhere in Japan! Your narrowed minded opinions and feelings on the subject conveniently leave out the bases in mainland.

Of course, what I say about Okinawa and U.S. bases here applies also to Japan in general and bases on the mainland. So, if you want the situation not to be called "occupation", "pseudo-occupation", "quasi-occupation" or in whatever term you may like, scrap or revise the current security treaty that works as a gimmick to camouflage the real state of affairs.

Okinawa represents what Japan is really like, you know.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

scrap or revise the current security treaty that works as a gimmick to camouflage the real state of affairs.

Lol!! Once again, barking up the wrong tree! You have a problem, take it up with the JAPANESE government!

Okinawa represents what Japan is really like.

I highly doubt the people in mainland are going to agree with you! Okinawa is what Japan is "really" like.

Joke of the day! But no one is laughing.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Yubaru,

Nobody, from the higher-up to men/women in the street, thinks the Japan-U.S. Security Treaty is a gimmick to camouflage the hard reality that the U.S. military will stay here forever as occupation forces. Rather, they are duped to believe the said security treaty on which U.S. military presence is based and legalized is necessary for deterrence against rising China. But time will eventually come to tell the people that that's contrary to the fact. We'll see.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Nobody, from the higher-up to men/women in the street, thinks the Japan-U.S. Security Treaty is a gimmick to camouflage the hard reality that the U.S. military will stay here forever as occupation forces. 

Someday you will learn that the people are apathetic to the situation. Just like they are here, including you, because you spend your time writing articles and posting here, but you dont take your protesting to the right place, or maybe you have, and got the door shut in your face!

Rather, they are duped to believe the said security treaty on which U.S. military presence is based and legalized is necessary for deterrence against rising China. But time will eventually come to tell the people that that's contrary to the fact. We'll see.

I highly doubt you will be alive IF and when any changes happen!

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Yubaru, why in your opinion is it wrong to scrap or revise the Security Treaty to make the U.S. military presence to the minimum necessary?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Yubaru,

All you can say may be: "There is no reason. I simply like it that way. That's all there's to it. No reason."

There are 131 U.S. military bases and facilities planted all across Japan, with the total area amounting to 344,566,680,679 sq.km. The number of U.S. service members is 56,118. Add to that 5,078 Pentagon-affiliated military personnel.  

Tokyo shouldered 197. 4 billion yen for the maintenance of these bases and facilities in 2019 or about 70% of all the maintenance cost. But the U.S. is demanding Japan pay more. Donald Trump once suggested Japan pay 1.5 times more than 197. 4 billion yen.

If the Security Treaty were revised, as I advocate, whereby the U.S. military presence would be reduced to one-tenth the current size, Japan's share would become 19.74 billion yen. In that case, Japan would consider the increase of its cost sharing. A win-win dealing, isn’t it?

As it is, that is, under the current Security Treaty, one can safely say that Japan is occupied by the U.S. military no matter what you may say.

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