Japan, U.S. hail security pact which Trump branded unfair

There needs to be a Pacific/Asian Common Defense Treaty Organization that allows like-minded countries to pool their defense needs together. Separate, but together.

@theFu

Agree. But we need a US leader that doesn't cry "unfair" at everything and starts fights with allies and adversaries alike. And we need a new regime in South Korea that actually wants to be on this side of the fence.

Japan and the United States on Friday lauded the decades-old security treaty that is the bedrock of their alliance, but which U.S. President Donald Trump has criticized as "unfair" and imbalanced.

Trump criticized the Japan-U.S. Security Treaty as "unfair" and "unbalanced"? Of course, he means it gives too much favor to Japanor free ride on the security treaty. That's why he demands Japan pay more for the maintenence of  U.S. bases.  

He must know, however, that we in Okinawa feel the same way but that our complaint is diagonally opposite to his. We feel this security treaty, together with the concomitant SOFA, is very unfair and unjust,  and so must be scrapped or replaced with a new one, if needs be, so that it will become more fair and just. For starters, let this huge U.S. military footprint in Okinawa, or Japan in general, come to an end and make Japan a truly independent sovereignty.

Today’s Okinawa Times runs special articles on the occasion of the 60-year anniversary of the signing of the “Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security between Japan and the U.S”. This treaty is a revised version of the “Japan-U.S. Security Treaty” originally agreed in 1951.  The concomitant document “Administrative Agreement” was also revised in 1960 and renamed SOFA (“Status of Forces Agreement”).

The old agreement allowed occupation forces-turned USFJ to retain all rights to free use of U.S. bases in Japan and U.S. personnel to enjoy the same perquisites as they did during the occupation. The 1960 revision of these agreements guaranteed all the profit over name for the U.S.

The Okinawa Times articles also tell that the Japanese bureaucracy resisted the U.S. initiative and tried to achieve a true independence of Japan but in vain before the domineering victor of the war.

So it’s very strange that the Abe government should hail the security pact when the bureaucracy was originally apprehensive of Japan losing its independence and sovereignty, which Japan is now.

For starters, let this huge U.S. military footprint in Okinawa, or Japan in general, come to an end and make Japan a truly independent sovereignty.

Exactly my position. Japan will be able to freely position itself for Japan’s interests.

Everything to America is not fair. What about the Plaza Accord Japan signed In the late 80s, lost decades and trillions in wealth for the Japanese people. Was that fair?

Using Japanese bases during Korean War then Vietnam War, Afghanistan War Iraq War, was that fair?

Japan pays the most money of any Ally to support thoses bases. 3x as much as Korea. %75 of the cost not including islands purchase for American training.

Was article 9 fair to be forced on Japan after WW2. You wanted Japan in a weak position not to declare war or have the capabilities... And now you cry about it?

Mr Trump we also employee Miliions of Americans, factories opened all over your country. Does that count for anything?

We should be on our own feet when it comes to security and defense. We can maintain the alliance but I don't trust Japan's security or safety when it comes to Trump or America's own interest.

AlexBecuToday  03:35 am JST

Was article 9 fair to be forced on Japan after WW2. You wanted Japan in a weak position not to declare war or have the capabilities... And now you cry about it?

The only one "crying about it" is the current Moron of a President amd his uneducated followers. You will not hear any crying from the US Military or educated Americans. Please do not confuse "Trump" with "America".

After WWII ended the victor nations, et al, wanted Emperor Hirohito charged and tried as a war criminal. The USSR was extremly vociferous on this point, and other nations such as Australia supported it. Douglas MacArthur who was charged with running the occupation and directing Japan's direction for the future believed that the Emperor was a vital part of Japan's culture and his forced removal would undermine national unity, possibly causing a resistance movement or civil war. Which in turn would open an opportinity for the Soviets to enter the game.

Most of us are aware how anti-communist MacArthur was, threatening the USSR from trying to land on Hokkaido proper, and contemplating dropping 5 atom bombs on China during the Korean War.

In order to appease the USSR and other WWII victor allires, the US proposed Article 9, as an alternative to prosecuting Emperor Showa.

So yes, the US created Article 9, but it was to appease the other allied nations. It has never been an American intent, as proven by the US forcing Japan to create the JSDF just 5 years after WWII ended, when Soviet and China backed North Korea invaded South Korea causing the UN to come to SK's aid. That UN Command is now headquartered at Yokota Airbase in Japan.

@theFu

There needs to be a Pacific/Asian Common Defense Treaty Organization that allows like-minded countries to pool their defense needs together. Separate, but together.

Impossible since countries in territorial disputes cannot enter into a collective defense regime. To do so, Japan must abandon its claims on the Kurils and the Liancourt Rocks while returning the Diaoyu Islands to Taiwan, which no Japanese PM and Diet can do.

@OssanJapan

And we need a new regime in South Korea that actually wants to be on this side of the fence.

Korea will never join such a collective defense regime due to its claims on North Korea and its hold on the Liancourt Rocks and surrounding seas, as well as the continental shelf between Okinawa and Kyushu. Basically, there is no country in Asia that is fit to join such collective defense regime.