Okinawa OKs relocation of U.S. air base from Futenma to Nago

Thank you for your bitter sarcasm and the insinuation that Okinawa's struggle against the American juggernaut is a nonstarter and so of no use. But, who knows, those bases may be windmills after all. This is no joke because when the 9/11 occurred, these U.S. bases, supposedly the most powerful citadels on earth, were guarded and protected by local policemen

Allow me to offer one more suggestion;

http://lightshouse.org/lights-blog/why-its-smart-to-let-toxic-people-have-the-last-word#axzz2pCFvW9Hi

lincolnman,

Thank you for your bitter sarcasm and the insinuation that Okinawa's struggle against the American juggernaut is a nonstarter and so of no use. But, who knows, those bases may be windmills after all. This is no joke because when the 9/11 occurred, these U.S. bases, supposedly the most powerful citadels on earth, were guarded and protected by local policemen

the U.S.'s ultimate goal is crystal-clear. It wants the status quo, the U.S. military presence, a.k.a. occupation, to go on forever. The occupation of Okinawa has been America’s long-cherished scheme since Commodore Mathew C. Perry in the 19th century.

May I offer you a suggested reading for 2014 - Cervantes' Don Quixote, specifically the passage below.......

“Destiny guides our fortunes more favorably than we could have expected. Look there, Sancho Panza, my friend, and see those thirty or so wild giants, with whom I intend to do battle and kill each and all of them, so with their stolen booty we can begin to enrich ourselves. This is nobel, righteous warfare, for it is wonderfully useful to God to have such an evil race wiped from the face of the earth." "What giants?" Asked Sancho Panza. "The ones you can see over there," answered his master, "with the huge arms, some of which are very nearly two leagues long." "Now look, your grace," said Sancho, "what you see over there aren't giants, but windmills, and what seems to be arms are just their sails, that go around in the wind and turn the millstone." "Obviously," replied Don Quijote, "you don't know much about adventures.”

I'm sure you find your outlandish anti-US conspiracy theories adventurous but my wish for 2014 is that you find your Sancho Panza who can lead you from your self-delusions and back to reality......

lincolnman,

You are directly involved in the discussion on this thread. You are the party directly concerned. So you cannot be a judge of a dispute, saying my opinion is flawed, outlandish and inaccurate.

Wasn't it you, rather, who often make inaccurate statements, saying, for example, Camp Kinser is moving to Guam? However specific the "Consolidation Plan for Facilities and Areas in Okinawa” may be ( it should be), the U.S.'s ultimate goal is crystal-clear. It wants the status quo, the U.S. military presence, a.k.a. occupation, to go on forever. The occupation of Okinawa has been America’s long-cherished scheme since Commodore Mathew C. Perry in the 19th century.

I want the new year to be a year of emancipation of Okinawa from the yoke of camouflaged occupation. The Henoko relocation must be stopped and the unconditional, immediate return of Futenma must be realized however difficult it may be. Anyway, it’s a man-made difficulty that is blocking the way.

The season’s greetings to you , also.

The Futenma relocation issue and the Naha Military Port relocation issue are essentially the same in nature. Both are brainchildren born of U.S. military people of how to consolidate, strengthen, and perpetuate the function of bases. The unlimited U.S. military presence in Okinawa is tantamount to occupation and colonization of the area -- or a form of neo-colonialism.

I'm glad you made these statements even after being given all the facts to show just how flawed, outlandish, and inaccurate your opinions are - comments like these truly show to everyone that you have no compassion for the local Okinawa people and care nothing about their welfare.

But in the spirit of the New Year, allow me to offer you best wishes for 2014.....

OK, on page 23, it says, “Functions supporting units relocating outside of Japan – Deactivate.” But the Marine units relocating to Guam are: III MEF Command Element, 3d Marine Division Headquarters, 3d Marine Logistics Group Headquarters, 1st Marine Air Wing Headquarters, and 12th Marine Regiment Headquarters. Are they all quartered at Camp Kinser and do all the marines there move to Guam?

The early chronicle of the Naha Military Port issue shows that return negotiations started in 1969. I don't know which side took an initiate to start talks. Maybe, it was the Okinawa side that did so because the predominantly military use of the port, a gateway to Okinawa since ancient times, was now hindrance to economic development. Like Futenma, various sites for relocation sites were examined but Urasoe was finally agreed upon by both sides in 1984. The U.S. had already drawn a blueprint for a new military port in Urasoe, certainly with Camp Kinser in mind.

The Futenma relocation issue and the Naha Military Port relocation issue are essentially the same in nature. Both are brainchildren born of U.S. military people of how to consolidate, strengthen, and perpetuate the function of bases. The unlimited U.S. military presence in Okinawa is tantamount to occupation and colonization of the area -- or a form of neo-colonialism.

Hong Kong was returned after 99 year's colonization. When will Okinawa be returned?

lincolnman, So I read the "2006 United States-Japan Roadmap for Realignment Implementation" but I found no mention of what you said, that is, that Camp Kinser is not going to be relocated to Guam. Then you referred me to the 2013 "Consolidation Plan for Facilities and Areas in Okinawa," in which the Guam relocation of Camp Kinser is not mentioned, either. Instead, it's mentioned that the facilities there are going to be relocated to various locations in Okinawa.

See page 23, last line: “Functions supporting units relocating outside of Japan – Deactivate.” I assume you know what deactivate means – it means they will be disestablished – they are not relocating.

As for the Naha Military Port's relocation, you implied there's no problem for it to be moved to Urasoe even if Camp Kinser was gone because the new port will be used by not only the Marines but also all forces. If so, why should Naha Military Port be returned and its replacement built in Urasoe with so much unnecessary money spent? Wouldn't it better on your part for Naha Military Port to remain as it is rather than being relocated to Urasoe?

If you want to know why Naha Port is moving from Naha to Urasoe, go ask your government, they were the ones who proposed the move and its new location.

lincolnman,

In your Dec. 31, 2013 - 01:21PM JST posting, you said "Camp Kinser is not going to be relocated to another base north of Kadena. Camp Kinser is going to be relocated to Guam - along with the 8,000 Marines who will need the equipment and materiel stored there."

So I read the "2006 United States-Japan Roadmap for Realignment Implementation" but I found no mention of what you said, that is, that Camp Kinser is not going to be relocated to Guam. Then you referred me to the 2013 "Consolidation Plan for Facilities and Areas in Okinawa," in which the Guam relocation of Camp Kinser is not mentioned, either. Instead, it's mentioned that the facilities there are going to be relocated to various locations in Okinawa.

As for the Naha Military Port's relocation, you implied there's no problem for it to be moved to Urasoe even if Camp Kinser was gone because the new port will be used by not only the Marines but also all forces. If so, why should Naha Military Port be returned and its replacement built in Urasoe with so much unnecessary money spent? Wouldn't it better on your part for Naha Military Port to remain as it is rather than being relocated to Urasoe?

lincolnman: Thank you for the information and I agree with your comments about the reduction of the U.S. Military footprint. And I also agree with you that it is unfortunate that no other areas were suitable for the re-location.

You're welcome - best wishes for 2014.......

lincolnman: Thank you for the information and I agree with your comments about the reduction of the U.S. Military footprint. And I also agree with you that it is unfortunate that no other areas were suitable for the re-location.

I am not familiar with the specifics regarding your questions but would offer the following possibilities;

i didn't see any mention of the family housing or the school so I assume the U.S. has waived to right to have them re-located or maybe they are part of new facilities planned for Guam.

The reduction of personnel with families means that existing housing assets and DODDS schools on Okinawa can handle the expected residual family/school aged population. And yes, I would assume that additoinal DODDS schools/family housing will be built on Guam - in fact, I believe several Japanese construction companies are planning to bid on the project.

I am puzzled by the omission of the AAFES facilities since that bakery serves all of Okinawa, I would assume they would want it replaced and knowing AAFES I can't believe they would spend their own money to re-locate it when they could have the J-Govt. do it for them

While AAFES is an appropriated fund activity, it is also a revenue generating one. The GOJ Facilities Improvement Program (FIP) typically does not fund US Forces facilities that generate revenue - if AAFES desires to relocate the bakery, it will have to fund it itself.

Also I agree with you that some progress is better than no progress but it is still going to be painful to watch that beautiful ocean spot be destroyed.

Yes, that area is very beautiful - it is unfortunate that no other areas were suitable. That's the downside. The upside is that large tracts of prime land south of Kadena will be returned to the local governments for development, enticing more tourists and creating more jobs. The US military footprint will be reduced, lessening the impact on the local people. And most importantly, Futenma will be closed, and the people living and working around it will no longer have to worry about flight related accidents and incidents.

lincolman: Thank you for the link, it was very informative. I was only listing facilities that I have actually been to and considered to be candidates for re-location inside Okinawa. i didn't see any mention of the family housing or the school so I assume the U.S. has waived to right to have them re-located or maybe they are part of new facilities planned for Guam. I am puzzled by the omission of the AAFES facilities since that bakery serves all of Okinawa, I would assume they would want it replaced and knowing AAFES I can't believe they would spend their own money to re-locate it when they could have the J-Govt. do it for them. Do you have any info on that? Also I agree with you that some progress is better than no progress but it is still going to be painful to watch that beautiful ocean spot be destroyed.

I read a relevant section concerning force reduction and relocation to Guam in the "2006 United States-Japan Roadmap for Realignment Implementation" and nowhere did I find in the document that Camp Kinser is going to be relocated to Guam. The document only says about 8,000 marines from III MEF Command Element, 3d Marine Division Headquarters, 3d Marine Logistics Group HEADQUARTERS, 1st Marine Air Wing Headquarters, and 12th Marine Regiment Headquarters, and their dependents, will relocate from Okinawa to Guam.

Camp Kinser will not be moved lock, stock and barrel to Guam but the entire base will be returned. There are quite a few facilities that will need to be re-located inside Okinawa. I believe Heavy Equipment and Vehicle Maintenance Facilities will be moved to Camp Courtney or Camp Hansen.

Please refer to the following document posted on the MOFA website - Camp Kinser is addressed on pages 5-6, 14-15, and 23-23 - it identifies unique capabilities/facilities at Kinser required to be to relocated and the installations north of Kadena designated to receive them. Additionally, see Appendix A for a list of all facilities scheduled for return and tentative timelines.

http://www.mofa.go.jp/mofaj/area/usa/hosho/pdfs/togo_20130405_en.pdf

Camp Kinser will not be moved lock, stock and barrel to Guam but the entire base will be returned. There are quite a few facilities that will need to be re-located inside Okinawa. I believe Heavy Equipment and Vehicle Maintenance Facilities will be moved to Camp Courtney or Camp Hansen. There are some warehouses that are operated by other branches of service that will have to be re-located. There are a lot of Military Family Housing Towers and other housing units that are operated by the Air Force. I assume that they will also need to be re-located somewhere in Okinawa because personnel other than Marines are living there. Kinser Elementary school is also there but since the military has 5 more Elementary Schools on Okinawa they might give a pass but under the one for one replacement agreement they have a right to have one built. AAFES has a bakery there that supplies bakery goods to all the bases, that will have to be re-located. AAFES also has their trucking headquarters there. The military mortuary is also there and that will need to be re-located. And the list goes on and on.

lincolnman,

I read a relevant section concerning force reduction and relocation to Guam in the "2006 United States-Japan Roadmap for Realignment Implementation" and nowhere did I find in the document that Camp Kinser is going to be relocated to Guam. The document only says about 8,000 marines from III MEF Command Element, 3d Marine Division Headquarters, 3d Marine Logistics Group HEADQUARTERS, 1st Marine Air Wing Headquarters, and 12th Marine Regiment Headquarters, and their dependents, will relocate from Okinawa to Guam.

Was there an informal agreement between the MOFA representatives and your group to that effect which we don't know?

lincolnman, I want you to clarify just one point.

Sorry, we’ve been down this road before – in other articles I tried to politely help you understand the specifics of the ATARA agreement and the only thing I received was to be called "selfish, anti-democratic, and jingoistic." It’s clear you have no desire for the facts – your mind is already closed. But for others following this discussion, let me try to help them.

If Camp Kinser (2.7 square km) is to be returned and its sprawling facilities are to be relocated to another base north of Kadena Air Base…..

Camp Kinser is not going to be relocated to another base north of Kadena. Camp Kinser is going to be relocated to Guam – along with the 8,000 Marines who will need the equipment and materiel stored there. If there is a special capability currently at Camp Kinser that supports remaining forces (such as a telephone switch or satellite tower), those will need to be rebuilt at an exiting base north of Kadena. All of the large warehouses and other storage buildings that comprise 99% of Kinser will be moved to Guam and the complete facility will be returned to the local government..

…….what is the merit for a new military port to be built in Urasoe?

You wrongly assume that the current port function at Naha is used by the Marines only – it is used by all four services (and the US Consulate) to move large outsized cargo. You may remember when the Army PAC 3 missiles now at Kadena came to Okinawa they arrived at Naha Port. It is also used by JSDF forces when requested. Given its current prime location in downtown Naha, the US and Japan agreed to move it farther from the city. Why Urasoe – ask the GOJ – they decided the location, but my sense is that given similar civilian port facilities nearby, the infrastructure/construction costs would be significantly less than at another less developed area.

lincolnman, I want you to clarify just one point.

The Naha Military Port or Naha Port Facility (0.6 square km) was promised for return in 1984 but it has remained at the present site for the past 29 years. The reason is due to a condition attached to its return: a new port facility must be constructed on the coastal area in Urasoe just one block across Camp Kinser, an important logistic base for the Marines.

If Camp Kinser (2.7 square km) is to be returned and its sprawling facilities are to be relocated to another base north of Kadena Air Base, what is the merit for a new military port to be built in Urasoe?

Not only I myself but also other posters are following our discussion on this thread. So don't simply say "Contact MOFA representatives or read the 2006 ATARA agreement."

Poster lincolnman says, "Futenma will be closed, Camp Kinser and portions of Camp Lester and Foster will be returned, and 8,000 Marines and their families will move to Guam." Looks like the U.S. side is making a big concession to Okinawa by closing Futenma, returning Camp Kinser and portions of Camp Lester and Foster, and moving 8,000 marines and their families to Guam. But the return of these bases is all string-attached except some small portions of Camp Lester and Foster. Futenma will be returned only if its permanent and cutting-edge replacement is built at Henoko in northern Okinawa with all the costs to be borne by Japanese taxpayers. Camp Kinser, probably a most important logistic base for the Marines, will be returned in two steps. One portion, about one third of the area, will be returned when Futenma's Henoko relocation is completed. The other portion will be returned when the facilities there are moved to some other base. The catch is if there is a base north of Kadena that has big enough to accommodate these facilities. Another catch, a very mysterious one, is the U.S. side is demanding a replacement for Naha Military Port to be built on the coastal area in Urasoe just adjacent to Camp Kinser, which is supposed to be returned.

You continue to offer an inaccurate and skewed view of the 2006 ATARA agreement and subsequent modifications, even after I have urged you to contact MOFA representatives for the correct assessment – that means you have no desire to know the facts, and that your views have no credibility.

As for 8,000 marines and their families, if they are moved to Guam, how many marines will remain in Okinawa? If the total number of marines supposedly stationed in Okinawa is 18,000, there will remain about 10,000 marines. But it's said that the actual number of marines constantly stationed in Okinawa is about 12,000. So 8,000 marines said to be moving to Guam is not so big a deal as the US. side ballyhoos.

Well, that’s an interesting opinion – two large US bases closed and retuned to the local government, major portions of two others also returned. 40% of personnel move from Okinawa to Guam – and all of this is “not so big a deal”. Thank you VOO for providing a perfect summation of the elite-world view – any progress, large or small, in solving the US military problem on Okinawa is unwanted and “not so big a deal,” I’m glad you have finally admitted that all you want is the status quo – that you don’t want any progress. Again, thank you - you have made it much clearer for everyone to understand your views.

Poster lincolnman says, "Futenma will be closed, Camp Kinser and portions of Camp Lester and Foster will be returned, and 8,000 Marines and their families will move to Guam."

Looks like the U.S. side is making a big concession to Okinawa by closing Futenma, returning Camp Kinser and portions of Camp Lester and Foster, and moving 8,000 marines and their families to Guam. But the return of these bases is all string-attached except some small portions of Camp Lester and Foster.

Futenma will be returned only if its permanent and cutting-edge replacement is built at Henoko in northern Okinawa with all the costs to be borne by Japanese taxpayers. Camp Kinser, probably a most important logistic base for the Marines, will be returned in two steps. One portion, about one third of the area, will be returned when Futenma's Henoko relocation is completed. The other portion will be returned when the facilities there are moved to some other base.

The catch is if there is a base north of Kadena that has big enough to accommodate these facilities. Another catch, a very mysterious one, is the U.S. side is demanding a replacement for Naha Military Port to be built on the coastal area in Urasoe just adjacent to Camp Kinser, which is supposed to be returned.

As for 8,000 marines and their families, if they are moved to Guam, how many marines will remain in Okinawa? If the total number of marines supposedly stationed in Okinawa is 18,000, there will remain about 10,000 marines. But it's said that the actual number of marines constantly stationed in Okinawa is about 12,000. So 8,000 marines said to be moving to Guam is not so big a deal as the US. side ballyhoos.

"How much will this move cost the USA taxpayer?"

A bundle! And the Japanese taxpayer too! But no matter what was decided about Futenma, both governments are going to spend a bunch of money on defense that they don't have.

If anyone would like to read what Okinawans think of this and their turncoat governor, read this: http://english.ryukyushimpo.jp/2013/12/30/12701/

Hardly. This is one opinion from one editor of a far left wing, anti-US, tabloid-like periodical owned and operated by like-minded elites on the island. Gutter journalism.

The Shimpo and Times criticize Nakaima for only one reason – he is making real progress on reducing the US military footprint – Futenma will be closed, Camp Kinser and portions of Camp Lester and Foster will be returned, and 8,000 Marines and their families will move to Guam. That’s what these elites deathly fear – a reduced US presence – resolving the US base issue deprives them of the foundation of their existence – without all the slanted, sensationalist anti-base propaganda, these papers would dry up and die…….

Poster lincolnman once disparaged the paper on another thread by saying it was a cheap tabloid unworthy of reading. Does he still think so? I wonder.

I believe you have your answer.....

Thank you, BertieWooster, for referring us to the English version of the Dec. 28 Ryukyu Shimpo editorial That's a lofty editorial in form and content, expressing all we want to say about the Futenma issue. Poster lincolnman once disparaged the paper on another thread by saying it was a cheap tabloid unworthy of reading. Does he still think so? I wonder.

If anyone would like to read what Okinawans think of this and their turncoat governor, read this:

http://english.ryukyushimpo.jp/2013/12/30/12701/

While the people of Ginowan may be happy that the base will be moved, I don't think you will find the majority of the people of Ginowan overjoyed that it is being moved to Henoko. The majority of the people of Okinawa want the base re-located out of Okinawa. Even the Okinawa branch of Komeito broke with the LDP and submitted a document to Gov. Nakaima asking him not to sign the landfill agreement.

lincolnman, did you read my Dec. 28, 2013 - 06:19AM JST posting? If you haven't, here's what I said:

Poster lincolnman writes: "Kudos to Nakaima. ... Futenma will now be closed and moved to the much safer and isolated Camp Schwab area - common sense prevails."

Moving the Futenma air station to another place on the same island, even if the new location is less densely populated, won’t eliminate the hazards U.S. military aircraft pose nor reduce the burden that Okinawa bears as a whole. Then, can lincolnman persist in saying "common sense prevails"? His "common sense" is tantamount to "un-common sense."

Nakaima was against Henoko relocation to the last minute. He swept to victory on that platform for the second term. But he reneged on his election promise, brazenly siding with the pro-Henoko force and even shaking hands with former Nago mayor Yoshikazu Shimabukuro, a pork barrel poplitician who favors Henoko relocation only for money.

lincolnman, you praise pork barrel politicians like Shimabukuro and Nakaima, saying, "common sense prevails."

Please read my posting (Dec. 28, 2013 - 04:25PM JST) addressed to Erik Rick, too. That will answer your remark against me.

I also ask you to read "Loopy logic of Futenma prevails" run on a reader page of the Dec. 25 Japan Times, that may be relevant to your remark.

This is old data but I am going to list here like under other articles.'

The Japanese Gvt paid $2.17 billion as annual host-nation called budget of compassion. The U.S. government employs over 8,000 Master Labor Contract (MLC)/Indirect Hire Agreement (IHA) workers on Okinawa (per the Labor Management Organization) not including Okinawan contract workers. Immediately after the 2011 Tohoku earthquake and tsunami, 9,720 dependents of United States military and government civilian employees in Japan evacuated the country, mainly to the United States.,,,,,,

Figure how much it will cost to Japanese people for this movement. When US medias tell "controversial US Military bases in Okinawa, Japan", you can guess how American people think about Okinawa bases.. All they know is Okinawa must be Japanese property. Maybe moving US bases in Okinawa to Hawaii or some other US territories may satisfy outspoken US media and American people? They don't know keeping Bases in Okinawa is very profittable to almost bankrupting USA. Okinawa drinks are popular in USA and so that US people know Okinawa is not US territory.

Toshiko: Pls go to the MOFA website and look for “2006 US-Japan Alliance Transformation and Realignment Agreement (ATARA) – it will answer all your questions.

Our good friend VoiceofOkinawa seems to think that moving an airfield from a crowded, urban area, to one that is bounded by the ocean on three sides, and is far from any major urban areas will not make operations any safer or less risky – and that it somehow “doesn’t make sense.” VOO, please go ask the students in the schools and residents with houses around Futenma if they agree with you – ask them if it makes sense to them to close Futenma and move all the aircraft and personnel up to Henoko - pls post the answer here for all of us to see.

VOO and his “ilk” use what I call “Elite-world” logic. It works this way - we say we are against the US military and want it to leave but secretly we want it to stay – no US military equals fewer sensationalist stories for the media to sell newspapers, and one less issue for the academics and politicians to hurl hot air in hopes someone will listen and vote for them. Money and self-importance is really what motivates these elites. Isn't it a shame it’s not what’s best for the people of Okinawa?

Understand that "Okinawa" didn't agree to this.

Nakaima caved.

voixceofokinawa is right. Relocation cost will be paid by JP Govt just like it has been paying so many billion dollaras a year for letting US Military Bases on Japan. I forgot when and which Okinawa base, but anyone recall what happened to the talks about one base supposed to move to Guam? What happned the talks about rumors that Okinawa will be athe big tourist mecca in Japan after :Yankewe Go Home: actions?

Erik Rick asks:

... can you honestly say by putting an airfield in an areas less populated won't REDUCE the risks?*

Of course, I can't. But if that airfield is exclusively used by a foreign military unit mainly for training purposes, the story would be different.

Just imagine how Americans would react under a similar situation. Wouldn't they think the foreigners' demand to relocate it to a less populated area was preposterous? Wouldn't they protest and demand the airfield be closed down immediately?

Let me repeat. Moving the Futenma air station to another place on the same island, even if the new location is less densely populated, won’t eliminate the hazards U.S. military aircraft pose nor reduce the burden that Okinawa bears as a whole.

Voice, I don't think anyone really believes moving the air-base will eliminate aircraft hazards, I mean aircraft are high speed flying lumps of metal, but can you honestly say by putting an airfield in an areas less populated won't REDUCE the risks?

Fadmore, you think all the costs for moving Futenma to another place in either Okinawa or elesewhere are borne by U.S. taxpayers. You are absolutely wrong. They are one hundred percent borne by Japanese taxpayers. Japan must even put evacuated base land in order. Restoration of the status quo ante of contaminated base land is Japan's responsibility.

Common sense in general society doesn't work here. Indeed, it is "un-common sense" that prevails in Japan-U.S. relations, especially when it comes to the Okinawa issue. History's laughing stock, it certainly is!

II warched one of CBS loc al news and there was mentioning of this news. It mentioned 'one of controversial US Military bases in Olkinawa, Japan". And showed view of this baes from sky,

Poster lincolnman writes: "Futenma will now be closed and moved to the much safer and isolated Camp Schwab area - common sense prevails."

Let me repeat. Moving the Futenma air station to another place on the same island, even if the new location is less densely populated, won’t eliminate the hazards U.S. military aircraft pose nor reduce the burden that Okinawa bears as a whole. Then, can lincolnman persist to say "common sense prevails"? His "common sense" is tantamount to "un-common sense."

Indeed, "un-common sense" prevails here in Okinawa as far as the U.S. military is concerned.

Jeez am I tired of hearing about this. Let's just leave Okinawa. Perhaps the Okinawan politicians could extract even more money and concessions from the China or Korea, who won't wait long before moving in. If they don't care about themselves, then I - as a U.S. taxpayer and vet who spent many years defending that piece of rock - won't care about them any longer.

bam_boo,

What a great comment! Absolutely nailed it.

The US doesn't have the same type of value as Japan. Base reallocation does not negate the moral standard of the leader of a nation.

How much will this move cost the USA taxpayer? Please add in a high fence to keep the drunks on the base, too.

With all of the saber rattling that's been going on with China and North Korea, did anyone really think that the base wouldn't go through?

abenomics meets nakaimadementia... Japanese politics at its best!

It should be clear that moving the Futenma station to another place on the same island, even if the new location is less densely populated, won’t reduce the burden that Okinawa bears as a whole.

Great! Then there's no reason to spend all that money in a move from Futenma, right? The American people thank the "Voice of Okinawa" for saving us all that money! (Though the "Voice" probably should check with the rest of Okinawa before basically saying it doesn't matter WHERE the base is located).

Fadamor I think any Chinese attack will be on the continental USA. No I do not see Japan attacking the USA. I see protestors trying to stop construction. I think the JP will remove them possibly with the help of the SDF. It is going to be UGLY but think the American and Japanese will not report it. Me I am going to sit back and watch. I pledge never to support the LDP and DPJ again. I ask why so grim? The USA wins again.

Umm... OK. Sure whatever. (Anybody understand this? I don't)

Fadamor I think any Chinese attack will be on the continental USA. No I do not see Japan attacking the USA. I see protestors trying to stop construction. I think the JP will remove them possibly with the help of the SDF. It is going to be UGLY but think the American and Japanese will not report it. Me I am going to sit back and watch. I pledge never to support the LDP and DPJ again. I ask why so grim? The USA wins again.

Now some of the best coral reef in the world will be destroyed.

Yeah. When I think of the world's best coral reefs, Nago Japan tops the list. Australia's Great Barrier Reef? pfft! Mundane.

There are not enough US combat troops to make a difference.

You hear this a lot from Okinawans, but it is patently false. Currently, any country considering "acquiring" Okinawa has to first decide whether they want to start another "Pearl Harbor" because attacking Okinawa means attacking the U.S. contingents there. As has been shown repeatedly (and Japan can vouch for from experience), the U.S. doesn't take kindly to being attacked. And yes, attacking a U.S. division on foreign soil they are there to protect constitutes attacking the U.S. The risk of focusing the full weight of the U.S. military onto your country is a very real deterrent. Only countries with extremely large "huevos" are even going to CONSIDER it.

In a democratic country, there would have been a referendum.

But Japan (like the U.S.) is not a "democratic" country. In fact there isn't one on the face of the Earth. Countries like the U.S. and Japan are REPRESENTATIVE governments where we elect people to make the decisions for us. Think about it, do you REALLY want to be forced to vote in a referendum on every item that comes up on the Government dockets? When are you going to have time to do your job? The answer was to create a JOB where the task is to vote on those things. The result is the representative politician.

Here in the U.S. our Presidents from BOTH sides of the aisle like to go on and on about how great "democracy" is, but the truth is that our's is not a real "democratic" government - and we wouldn't want it to BE one. We'd spend the rest of our lives voting in National referendums to the exclusion of anything else just so government could continue to function.

lincolnman、darknuts and people of their ilk:

In the 1959 crash of an F-100 Super Sabre at Miyamori Elementary School, the pilot had noticed a glitch in the aircraft’s engine and tried to return to Kadena Air Base. When the engine caught fire and stalled, the pilot bailed out after setting the aircraft in the direction of a hilly area with no houses, according to the official report. The pilotless fighter is said to have then swerved toward Ishikawa City (now Uruma City) before crashing into the elementary school. The school was not adjacent to Kadena Air Base, yet 17 people were killed and more than 210 people injured

According to the Okinawa prefectural government documents, U.S. military aircraft were involved in 212 accidents, including two crashes, over seven years from 2005 to 2012. It should be clear that moving the Futenma station to another place on the same island, even if the new location is less densely populated, won’t reduce the burden that Okinawa bears as a whole.

You are wrong Yuri if the troops move out of okinawa the government doesnt get your farm China will and when this happens you are right you will never have a chance to get your farm back. Is this all you want is your farm very self centered.

Smith China can easily take other countries but have not. The PI could fall like ripened fruit. Now please stop gloating get over it and be a gentleman. The government of Okinawa has taken the lure. Without there support there is no hope. I really how much will actually make it to civil works projects? 1/2? 1/4? I bet one of the governor's friends will get my farm and I will never have a chance.

Jared: "US GO HOME"

And allow Okinawa not only to never be the Ryukyus again (not that the government would allow it), but to become China. Nice suggestion in today's world, Jared, and definitely not going to happen.

OK. The Americans have decided to fund the move. With the Secrets Act any individual in Japan and especially the governor of Okinawa cannot say anything to the contrary even if there was disagreement. The sword is always hanging over the heads of those who don't agree. Can't wait for Shinzo Abe to commit kara hiri when all his three arrows fall into the shit pile ie. if he has the guts to even do so.

Just yesterday an oldster gave me an anti-base flyer at a demonstration in downtown Naha. I can't help but feel that this is a good thing for Okinawa. The people have suffered for a long time for the sake of the Japanese mainland. Any victory will help to mollify and heal the people. And they certainly can use the cash.

Well done Abe!!

Those people are not complaining; seems to me most of the complaints are from people far away.

Exactly. You do not hear complaints from the people of Nago, and certainly not Ginowan.

YuriOtani: "The US alliance prevents invasion. There are not enough US combat troops to make a difference."

So, which is it? The US alliance could not prevent invasion if there were no troops or ships to help prevent it, could they? Certainly the SDF couldn't stop China on its own. You vascillate far too often between demanding the alliance/protection of the US, and demanding they be gone and not build no bases, etc., although granted since the 'red menace' has grown in strength and threat you, like most Okinawans who complained about the bases they made livings from, have toned it down if not gone 180 again to supporting them.

"As for the politicians well frack them!"

Quite the 180 for a person who only months ago said Nakaima would never allow this to happen, but like I said.

"Now it is up to the people of Nago and if they agree it will be built."

Won't happen, Yuri. It's about as much "up to the people" as the restart of NPPs, and we saw how that worked out in Kansai when they refused to follow public opinion (after promising they would) and restarted the Oi reactors anyway. Nakaima and the central government have reached an agreement and are finally going to live up to promises made long, long ago. And heck, Yuri, look at all the business it'll bring to Nago! Those people are not complaining; seems to me most of the complaints are from people far away. Where are you again? :)

This is a great day for the people of Ginowan.

This is a sad day for Okinawa.

In a democratic country, there would have been a referendum.

The fact that this hasn't been done shows that Abe knows full well that most Okinawans are fed up with the US bases and don't want another one!

I'm watching the news conference now. If gov. Nakajima flaps his arms a bit harder, he may just fly away.

Kudos to China for stepping up as peace broker to solve the near impossible deadlock concerning the Futenma issue. That's called leadership.

Now some of the best coral reef in the world will be destroyed.

Who cares about the coral reef. People's lives are more important.

Not coincidentally shortly after the central govt budgeted ¥300,000,000 per tear for the next ten years in assistance to Okinawa.

After years of staunch opposition, Okinawa Gov Hirokazu Nakaima this week met Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, who pledged a big cash injection into Okinawa’s economy every year until 2021.

Typical Japanese who can't stand for his values and convictions once the money is brought to the table. They can just be bought so easily, that's so disappointing. People are just driven by money, what a shame.

I not sure if this is a done deal, I mean I remember way back when it was supposed to be sorted by 1995!

A little premature to be saying this is a done deal me thinks!

Smith there are other Okinawa Islands with out US troops and the Peoples Republic of China has not invaded. The US alliance prevents invasion. There are not enough US combat troops to make a difference.

I a standing aside and maybe I will see my families farm again. As for the politicians well frack them! Now it is up to the people of Nago and if they agree it will be built.

Kudos to Nakaima for siding with the Okinawa people and not the academics, media and other anti-FRF elitists who criticize the FRF proposal but in truth secretly desire Futenma to remain open so they can continue to rail against it, inflating their own pocketbooks and sense of self-importance.

Futenma will now be closed and moved to the much safer and isolated Camp Schwab area - common sense prevails........

And JUST after Abe's visit to Yasukuni has completely aggravated already existing tensions in Asia. Well done, Abe!

Yuri: "Now will the demonstrators let the build it? Will Japan use force to remove them?"

They can, and they should, as long as the demonstrators (far fewer than before Abe came into office!) cause problems, same as any other demonstration where there is a threat. Besides, the people of Okinawa now more than ever need to bow down and praise the US forces for being there, lest the wish to be bowing down to the Chinese flag. Again, thank your leaders, including Nakaima, whom Okinawans voted in.

Am checking news from Hades, think it has froze over. Now will the demonstrators let the build it? Will Japan use force to remove them? Yes I agree with Smith they have been bought out. They got their 30 silver. Now some of the best coral reef in the world will be destroyed.