Take our user survey and make your voice heard.
politics

New U.S. envoy, Abe vow to fortify alliance

20 Comments

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

© KYODO

©2024 GPlusMedia Inc.

20 Comments
Login to comment

Those chairs need legs.

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

This is basically a problem between North Korea and U.S. not North Korea and Japan. Abe-san, do not make Japan a sucker. We do not want Japan become a battle field.

-3 ( +4 / -7 )

Hagerty replied, calling the Japan-U.S. alliance "the greatest alliance on earth."

I'm sure it is on his earth.. atm.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

yes, but Mr. Abe is more interested in a photo-op with a U.S, VIP, than in NK, to judge from his smile… hoping the boss will give him a junior-statesman badge I suspect….

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

Abe still acting as if he's relevant in this world?

-3 ( +3 / -6 )

re: This is basically a problem between North Korea and U.S. not North Korea and Japan. Abe-san, do not make Japan a sucker. We do not want Japan become a battle field.

Question: What is Japan to do if it is attacked, just roll over and do nothing? This is not only a problem between NK and US but everyone in Asia. Remember it is NK that is eyeing NK not the other way around from either US or Japan.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Hagerty and Abe vowed to strengthen Japan-U.S. alliance? What does that mean to Okinawa? Since Okinawa is the cornerstone of that alliance, it means Okinawa must take the full brunt of its negative effect by hosting the bulk of U.S. bases in Japan. 

Strengthening the alliance also means the JSDF will shoulder more responsibility to defend its borders, as agreed to last year, with U.S. bases remaining intact or strengthened, or, to put it in other words, Okinawa remaining a U.S. military colony for good.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Hagerty replied, calling the Japan-U.S. alliance "the greatest alliance on earth."

I'm sure it is on his earth.. atm.

It is on everybody's earth.  Who is paying US more than Japan?  Who can provide with bases more strategically important than Japan?

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Since strengthening the bilateral alliance is not to reduce the current "deterrence" capability, Futenma's function must be relocated to Henoko, according to them.  But Futenma is a stolen property because the land it occupies was usurped from private citizens after the war while they were incarcerated in camps.  So some say demanding the Futenma relocation is like a car stealer demanding for a new car for the used car he stole.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

I wonder they spoke in Japanese or English. Both are bilingual. But I don't think both talked about Okinawa. It is not polite too talk about politics or theft crime in Okinawa yet.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

@voice: Have you thought to bring your appeal to official. residence of Abe? Collect signatures.There are aides. it is. easier than gooig to sue in District Court. Place your petition o top of signature. Pile.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@tina. In 1970, Japan and USA signed a treaty that USA will protect from China and Russia. Both country wanted Japan as a communist country. Since 1960. Japan tried but US did not wart. Ten years it took. Japan was the one needed this treaty. p.m. could give Okinawa but he. did not.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

As we know, NK isn't the real issue; NK is just the "puppet", with China being the "puppet master". The real underlying issue and concern of the U.S.-Japan Alliance is China and its assertive actions in the region.

@voiceinokinawa, I know you and Gov. Onaga don't consider China to be a threat, militarily or otherwise and want the U.S. military forces out of Okinawa. But why are Taiwan and countries in the South China Seas region worried about China? Why are they concerned about that military base China built in that region? Why do they want U.S. protection?

You all need to take off your blinders and look at a map of the South China Seas, including TAIWAN, Ryukyu Islands and Japan, to see why U.S. bases in Okinawa are needed.

The closest active U.S. bases proximity to that region are in based in Okinawa. If U.S. military action is needed to counter Chinese agression in the South China Seas or Taiwan, U.S. can respond quicker from bases in Okinawa than from bases in Japan or Guam.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Halwick,

Let me recapture what I posted above. I said:

Futenma is a stolen property because the land it occupies was usurped from private citizens after the war while they were incarcerated in camps.

Almost all U.S. bases on Okinawa were built in a similar manner, blatantly violating international law and conventions.  These bases occupy 18 percent of the land mass of Okinawa Island. Some municipalities give away significant parts of their land to the U.S. military, for example, Kadena Town (circa 80%), Chatan Town (circa 60%) and Ginoza Village (circa 50%).

Naturally we 're mostly concerned with how to address this state of affairs, that is, "occupation" by the U.S. military, the end of which is not in sight as yet after 72 years. Mind you, emnity between the U.S. and China is not of our immediate concern.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

voiceofokinawa: You are very skillful in the art of deflective arguing. You ignore the issues at hand (or anything you do not agree with) and instead bring up other issues that that serves to detract.

But as I've stated, many countries in the South China Seas, including Taiwan DO consider China to be a threat and that military base they built there to be a threat as well. 

I've suggested looking at a map (which you ignore) of the region and you'll see the proximity of Okinawa. Given the strategic proximity of Okinawa to South China Sea and East China Sea and Taiwan, makes the case for U.S. military presence on that island. 

I'm glad to see Prime Minister Abe recognizes and supports continued U.S. military presence on Okinawa as a cornerstone to Japan-U.S. Military Alliance.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

There's a right-winger fringe group of people who are willing enough to agree with what you're suggesting here and accept Okinawa's status quo as a permanent U.S. military colony.  You are suggesting Okinawa be better off as a U.S. military colony to help fend off assertive China. 

You can't tell other people to be weary of thieves while you yourself are a thief. Ask people in Taiwan, the Philippines or anyone in Southeast Asia, who experienced colonialism in the past, if I'm talking nonsense. (Currently travelling in Kobe)

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Correction:

There's a right-winger fringe group of people in Okinawa who are willing enough to agree with what you're suggesting here and accept Okinawa's status quo as a permanent U.S. military colony.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

voiceofokinawaAug. 20  02:24 pm JST

Mind you, emnity between the U.S. and China is not of our immediate concern.

Why is this not an Okinawan concern? Okinawa is a Japanese prefecture. Japan is a U.S. ally and a strategic partner under the US-Japan Mutual Defense Treaty, under which he United States is obligated to protect Japan from attack. Why are you so adamant in removing the ability to protect Okinawa and leaving the door open for China?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

There's a right-winger fringe group of people who are willing enough to agree with what you're suggesting here and accept Okinawa's status quo as a permanent U.S. military colony. You are suggesting Okinawa be better off as a U.S. military colony to help fend off assertive China. 

This is the agenda here and it was the same in his previous incarnation.

It's a simple and brutal choice offered: who do you want as occupier? China or the US?

Scaremongering, neo-colonialist cajoling. Such is the way of those who have vested interests in keeping US overseas power structures remaining.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

OssanAmerica,

Why is this not an Okinawan concern? Okinawa is a Japanese prefecture. Japan is a U.S. ally and a strategic partner under the US-Japan Mutual Defense Treaty, under which he United States is obligated to protect Japan from attack. Why are you so adamant in removing the ability to protect Okinawa and leaving the door open for China?

You suggest that, since Okinawa is a Japanese prefecture, it can't say "No" to whatever the central government does to its own territory and nationals. Sounds reasonable. Or does it?  As is now, Japan isn't an independent sovreignty but is a sycophantic vassal of the U.S. without any doubt.

The Abe administration is merely implementing what it was dictated to do by Washington regarding Okinawa's base issues. So Okinawa's saying "No" is not merely against the central government but ultimately against the U.S. government, a behind-the-scene mastermind.

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