politics

U.S. urges Japan to pay more for hosting American troops

130 Comments

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

© KYODO

©2021 GPlusMedia Inc.

130 Comments

Comments have been disabled You can no longer respond to this thread.

The United States has urged Japan to shoulder more for hosting American troops during preparatory talks on a fresh cost-sharing agreement from fiscal 2022 and onward, diplomatic sources said Wednesday.

It seems to be a rule of urges that when governments urge they do not really care about the outcome in the end. Either the Japanese public or the American public pays.

Items of real import to governments and their business owners, geo-political struggles for resources and taxes, are never couched in the form of urges but with coercion and force.

7 ( +7 / -0 )

Come on Japan you can say no. Just say no. No doesn’t mean the end of the security agreement. Let’s see if Japan can fend off Russia and China by itself? That’ll never happen because the US won’t leave. Japan has so much leverage it needs to use.

Japan will pay more when the US starts paying rent for the bases because everyone agrees it is in both countries’ interests for the US to be in Japan not to mention Japan’s overplaying already.

China and the US and every nation should adopt a similar version of Article 9. The US would save so much money. Learn to live like bonobos instead of chimpanzees.

7 ( +14 / -7 )

NO, no more money

5 ( +11 / -6 )

The Negotiation:

US -"Pay us more or else."

Japan -"Or else what?"

US -"Or else we'll leave."

Japan -"But that would alter the entire balance of world power."

US -"No it wouldn't.

Japan -"It would knock you guys off your position of super-power, remove your ability to support your troops in Korea, hamper you ability to re-fuel your both your naval and air fleets, and reduce you ability to support and protect other allies like Taiwan and the Philippines. And it would be a boon for your enemies like China, NK, and Russia."

US -"So what. Pay us more, or else you guys will be pronouncing all your kanji in Chinese."

Japan (a few mumbles amongst the assembled negotiators) -"OK, do you prefer Yen or Dollars?"

US -"Dollars. And remember, when our boys get drunk and cause a ruckus with the locals, you can't penalize them with your laws. And by the way, stop complaining about our low altitude flights over Shinjuku. It's annoying."

9 ( +20 / -11 )

Japan already pays more then anyone else. More then any other country. For USA troops and bases.

Japan already is part of Quad Alliance to balance China.

Japan already supports Taiwan and was threaten with Nuclear destruction by China.

Japan already is the Shield, the country who is closest to Russia and China who will get all the missiles and destruction.

South Korea

-Refuses to pay more or equal share, gain freedom from being a colonized country 1945. Korean War USA helped In 1950 against North Korea and China. But they won't pay more! Or equal to Japan!

S. Korea not part of Quad Alliance to balance China.

S. Korea getting closer to North Korea and China.

S. Korea is threating to leave GSOMIA intelligence agreement over any Issue they disagree with Japan over.

Time for USA To Ask More From Rich S. Korea To Take More Responsibility And Cost in East Asia. Which has no Article 9 or Military Restrictions Either. Yet This Country is Getting A Full And Complete Pass!! While bashing Japan over any Issue they Feel Like!

0 ( +13 / -13 )

The United States has urged Japan to shoulder more for hosting American troops during preparatory talks on a fresh cost-sharing agreement from fiscal 2022 and onward, diplomatic sources said Wednesday.

Sorry Japan, the days of riding on the coattails of the USA are coming to an end.

Happy Trump had the courage and foresight to bring up this issue in the first place.

-19 ( +6 / -25 )

US -"Dollars. And remember, when our boys get drunk and cause a ruckus with the locals, you can't penalize them with your laws. And by the way, stop complaining about our low altitude flights over Shinjuku. It's annoying."

And more golf courses please. We only have 10 in Japan.

0 ( +4 / -4 )

The American Defense Budget is about $800 billion. The total cost of maintaining 800 overseas US Military bases in 70 countries, is only $25 billion.

Is it time for a review of American bases here?

6 ( +10 / -4 )

Just send some home out already. I doubt we need that many troops here. I am starting to think they expect us raise their extra troops. South Korea can have them.

-2 ( +6 / -8 )

It's so outrageous that the U.S. should demand the base maintenance cost (sympathy budget) be increased more for the U.S. military presence to continue, a pseudo-occupation in every respect.

Come to Okinawa to confirm the fact that the U.S. military occupies so much prime land for bases and uses them free and with impunity paying no attention to local voice about noise pollution, environmental pollution and societal pollution (base-related crimes)

And the U.S. is demanding for more money for that state of affairs to continue forever? China's rise and assertiveness may be a godsend U.S. policymakers couldn't ask for a better. LOL.

7 ( +14 / -7 )

@quercetum

That’ll never happen because the US won’t leave.

US won't leave, but also won't leave out of its bases when Japan battles China at the Diaoyu Islands alone.

China and the US and every nation should adopt a similar version of Article 9. 

Other countries didn't commit war crimes like Imperial Japan did and lost the war.

@divinda

remove your ability to support your troops in Korea

USFJ bases aren't really necessary to support Second Korean War, because the second war is expected to be wrapped up quickly, 2 weeks by ROK estimation and 1 month by North Korean estimation. 

The ROK's insanely massive firepower is the reason why Kim Jong Un is obsessed with nukes. In a conventional war, Pyongyang falls to ROK in a week or less, all of NK in 2 weeks.

 reduce you ability to support and protect other allies like Taiwan and the Philippines.

Suppose Taiwan falls to China, Diaoyu Islands are next. 

@ReasonandWisdomNippon

Time for USA To Ask More From Rich S. Korea To Take More Responsibility And Cost in East Asia.

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/3/10/south-korea-agrees-to-boost-funding-for-us-troops-by-13-9-percent

South Korea agrees to boost funding for US troops by 13.9 percent

https://asia.nikkei.com/Spotlight/Comment/Time-for-Japan-to-concede-South-Korea-has-better-defense-strategy

Time for Japan to concede South Korea has better defense strategy

Seoul's budget tops Tokyo's to deal with potential threats from North Korea and China

-6 ( +7 / -13 )

Japan spends 0.93 percent of its GDP on defense. The U.S spends 3.4 percent. Japan is renting a world class military at a fraction of the cost of standing up its own. The noise pollution bemoaned by another poster costs $33,000. dollars for one hour of F35 operation, and that does not include the purchase price.

2 ( +12 / -10 )

The Japanese pay for 100% of the infrastructure on the bases as well as upkeep, and utilities.

The Americans only pay for the salaries and the military hardware for their war machine.

There is nothing else that the Japanese can contribute to. And most if not all of the bases are shared with the JSDF.

6 ( +8 / -2 )

Uncle Abe wanted to change Japans Contusion to allow Japan to take a more aggressive role in defense, but was met with a wall of naysayers. If Japan could defend itself and the region, the US would not have any reason to be here.

-2 ( +7 / -9 )

Some perspective: Most Japanese, govt and people, want the US bases here ( while few Americans want the bases here). The Japanese will rarely ever admit that, but it's the truth.

4 ( +10 / -6 )

Sorry.... Japan Constitution... did not catch the autocorrect.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

It time for American to leave Japan,and let the Japanese grow up, instead of being a US child,maybe they will learn to not antagonize their neighbors by honoring

3 ( +9 / -6 )

Suga's government approved a record 5.34 trillion yen ($51.7 billion/€42.4 billion) defence budget for the fiscal year 2021.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

The majority of the American people do not want the US military to be anywhere outside the US borders. For the US military to leave Japan, all it would take is for the Japanese Government to negotiate that departure.

0 ( +5 / -5 )

A friend of mine is in the US military, stationed in Okinawa. He and his wife (two people) live in a house that by American standards is huge. The rent is ¥500,000 per month. This is their housing allowance. It seems to me that if the US military needs more money, they might try saving money here and there. Okinawa is not Tokyo. The apartment we live in is plenty big enough for two (100 square metres) and the rent, with two parking spaces is ¥65,000 per month.

12 ( +15 / -3 )

There's not much difference when triads used to collect "protection fees"

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

As a counterbalance to China and Russia, the bases are worth their weight in gold. It’s a shame that many Americans don’t understand this.

2 ( +7 / -5 )

The rent is ¥500,000 per month. This is their housing allowance. It seems to me that if the US military needs more money, they might try saving money here and there. Okinawa is not Tokyo

50k in yen on Okinawa will get you a house or apartment of about 186 square meters IF you are military. This is a large house, but not huge. You are correct that Okinawa is not Tokyo, in a lot of aspects it is more expensive. The rental price to a Japanese would not be the same, probably about half or less. Military personnel are required to rent houses that are on the military approved list. If your friend has a housing allowance of $5000, then they are higher ranking or civilian. If you go to rent a house on Okinawa, the first thing the rental agency will ask you is what is your rank, they look up what your housing allowance is and that becomes the price of rent for all the houses you are interested in.

8 ( +9 / -1 )

How about the US looks at cost cutting measures first, like troops reduction, pay cuts for their overpaid administrative staff and looking into all the wastage in procurement contracts ? They probbaly can reduce operational expenses easily by 20-25 %, before asking other to pay for service not needed!!

3 ( +5 / -2 )

How about the US looks at cost cutting measures first, like troops reduction, pay cuts for their overpaid administrative staff and looking into all the wastage in procurement contracts ? They probbaly can reduce operational expenses easily by 20-25 %, before asking other to pay for service not needed!!

Agreed! But the JOG needs to go first. As soon as they use their saved money to get defense up to speed, the US can start.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

As a counterbalance to China and Russia, the bases are worth their weight in gold. It’s a shame that many Americans don’t understand this.

I personally don't like fighting other peoples battles and I don't like my tax dollar supporting such, especially when it is unappreciated.

2 ( +5 / -3 )

If it wasn't about China, Russia, North Korea....japan shouldn't need to pay a massive "Protection Money"! When there were thugs out there, you need a cop to protect your shop! A cop that took "Protection Money"!

-6 ( +0 / -6 )

It seems to me Japan will not make/start war (with China or N Korea) in the future whatever happens but will defend. Japan has not made war for 76 years. No US soldiers died for Japan for 76 years. No more war there. Japan accepts US military bases in Japan as ally. The US actually wants to keep so many soldiers constantly all over the world for its all national interests. Why Japan pays more for US interests? No war here like Afghanistan. I've heard many US soldiers want to be rather stationed in Japan than if they go to middle east or others, because Japan has no war no guns and most Japanese don't want so many big US bases in Okinawa in peace time. I wonder why not US military let JSDF to handle more roles of US military to protect it own country. Japan has enough American weapons to protect/defend. If JSDF can do well, many Americans can happily go home and Japan can cut big budget for US military, though Japan must accept proper US military bases as ally.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

@Droll Quarry

And I also don't like fighting other peoples battles, but it's difficult to completely ignore the strategic importance of having U.S. bases in Japan to maintain an overall military balance, forget what the natives think on a local level. Many of them will always be unhappy, and they don't see the big picture, just the small one.

If trouble should ever arise between the U.S. and another power in the Asian, Japan will., whether she likes it or not, be on the very front lines of such an armed conflict, not Guam, Hawaii or California. To take the chance of throwing away such strategic advantages is exactly what our rivals and potential future enemies wants to see happen. Take U.S. military bases in Japan off the board, and China (and Russia too for that matter) will have the freedom to do as they like in this region of the world. South Korea, for example, would be in a very dangerous position without U.S. bases in Japan to defend it if it was ever in trouble with one of its neighbors.

Again, the bases are worth their weight in gold, and the price for such overseas bases in Japan is small when considering the potential cost - benefit ratio. For the U.S. to close the bases and turn its back on Japan would thrill America's rivals, particularly China.

2 ( +5 / -3 )

What happens if the US pulls 50% of their military out of Asia?

What happens if the US pulls 75% of their military out of Asia?

What happens if the US pulls all military out of Asia?

It that really desirable for the region?

Korea and Japan are getting a bargain today. That cannot continue.

-4 ( +2 / -6 )

Droll Quarry,

Japan spends 0.93 percent of its GDP on defense. The U.S spends 3.4 percent. Japan is renting a world class military at a fraction of the cost of standing up its own. The noise pollution bemoaned by another poster costs $33,000. dollars for one hour of F35 operation, and that does not include the purchase price.

It's none of your business whether Japan spends 0.93% of its GDP on defense, and so the U.S. has every right to demand it be increased along the lines of the U.S.? Do you want to say that the U.S.'s demand for Japan to increase the sympathy budget is not unnatural but quite reasonable? .

The problem I am afraid of is that Tokyo's imbecile bureaucrats may succumb to this exorbitant demand by the U.S. side, as usual.’

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

Philippine has no US military bases. Taiwan has no US military bases. China has never invaded these countries in the past. It seems China can't invade and all maintain same.

1 ( +5 / -4 )

as a taxpayer i urge government to send US troops back home.

war has ended in 1945.

some 76 years ago.

Japan have own SDF we pay by our taxes.

whay to waste more money from our taxes for ...nothing?

Japan as sovereign country have to make that decision now!

-1 ( +4 / -5 )

Droll QuarryToday 08:24 am JST

Japan spends 0.93 percent of its GDP on defense. The U.S spends 3.4 percent. Japan is renting a world class military at a fraction of the cost of standing up its own.

Tell 'em!

1 ( +2 / -1 )

The use of the word HOST, is quaint: Japan, is host to 86 major American military installations — the most of any country in Asia and second most in the world, not counting the United States. The largest U.S. installation in the country is Camp Fuji, which contains five live fire ranges and is operated by the Marine Corps.

If anything, market value should be paid for leasing property where the 86 bases are situated. It is not a rent-an-army and if so, it would need to be under the command of the Japanese, not the Pentagon. It is not a defense force, but an imposition on Asia, situated in an offshore island, to enforce U.S. foreign & economic policy upon Pacific nations.

The stationing of U.S. military forces in Japan is not a charitable relationship. It is imposed by the USA, as a result of WWII, which ended 77 years ago. Japan is not an ally of the USA, it is a client-state.

The behavior of U.S. soldiers, especially Marines, in Okinawa, is heinous and certainly doesn't comport to the notion of a 'guest', if one actually believes the obfuscation behind the term Host.

Additionally, the USA profits from the enforced sale of weaponry, the latest being the F-35, which often just falls out of the sky, as reported in 2019 by JT.

0 ( +5 / -5 )

Japan is renting a world class military at a fraction of the cost of standing up its own.

Maybe it may be true, but no US soldiers died for Japan for 76 years. because no war and ever.

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

At Droll. Nice to see at least one person on here that knows about the US military presence, the status of G ratings for housing, utilities etc. The two major rental property companies in Japan have a list as you said. If a G-13 as I was wanted to rent compared to an out of HS enlists, I had to pay way more for the housing even if it was the same, but it was not out of my pocket.

Navy Federal Credit Union is still wonderful. Commissary does have the best American steaks you can buy as long as the cuts are supervised by an American butcher.

I really do not understand what more the Americans want for increased payments unless they want to stock the commissaries better, or help offset the high payments to private contractors hired through the DOD system. Bidding can get crazy. Sofa also makes it cheaper to drive here but toll roads are the same. Road tax way reduced. Inspections much easier as well.

Both Japan and America get a good deal out of this. For those complaining about land use in Okinawa, the owners are very well compensated. Japan is lucky Okinawa was returned. They should thank the Americans for all those lucrative base jobs and all of the small mom and pop places that make the economy grow and flourish.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

If America closed its Japanese bases the savings would be very small.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Other countries didn't commit war crimes 

No, the US bombing Iraq over false accusations of harboring weapons of mass destruction is a crime.

War crime is not a prerequisite to renouncing war.

That’ll never happen because the US won’t leave.

US won't leave, but also won't leave out of its bases when Japan battles China at the Diaoyu Islands alone.

Therefore Japan should not have to pay more.

If Japan could defend itself and the region, the US would not have any reason to be here.

Nothing further from the truth.

The majority of the American people do not want the US military to be anywhere outside the US borders. 

The US isn’t run by the majority is it? The MIC and money dictate what the US does regardless what the average Joe thinks.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

The American armament industry is powerful and influential.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

As long as it’s cheaper than building and maintaining 3 air wings, 1 carrier battle group, 2 fleets, 1 MAGTAF, 1 MEF. To a total of 30,000-50,000 personnel.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

@elephant200

If it wasn't about China, Russia, North Korea....japan shouldn't need to pay a massive "Protection Money"! When there were thugs out there, you need a cop to protect your shop!

Very twisted logic. Why the idea of defending oneself never comes to your mind? Japan is not a banana republic that needs foreign protection, it does not have to pay "protection money" and face the risks of becoming a battlefield for somebody else's war. Japan is capable of defending itself. Military threats Japan faces do not require U.S. military presence here.

Russia: zero military threat. The Northern territory problem is a diplomatic issue, not military. Russians do not have plans to land on Hokkaido (what for?).

North Korea: there is threat from NK missiles, but Kim is not an idiot, he won't attack Japan just for the hell of it, he can use his missiles only as a ransom tool to milk Japan. The threat can be dealt with the anti-missile systems that Japan has. No U.S. bases required.

China: here is the main threat (Senkaku). But Japan can deal with this threat by strengthening its southern front with additional MSDF / ASDF assets. In case China does something really stupid against Japan just make an alliance with Taiwan. No U.S. bases on the Japanese territory required.

@stormcrow

it's difficult to completely ignore the strategic importance of having U.S. bases in Japan to maintain an overall military balance, forget what the natives think on a local level

It's so refreshing to see the real attitude, not the usual blah-blah about "commitment to Japan's security". Right, to hell with these aborigines, U.S. strategic interests are all-important! I just do not understand why Japan should be a battlefield for American interests and pay for it.

If you want something done right, do it yourself. If Japan wants security it should defend itself.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

voiceofokinawaToday  08:14 am JST

Come to Okinawa to confirm the fact that the U.S. military occupies so much prime land for bases and uses them free and with impunity paying no attention to local voice about noise pollution, environmental pollution and societal pollution (base-related crimes)

Japanese mainland companies occupy prime land on the main island of Okinawa. Check out the hotels owned by JAL, ANA for example. Naha is occupied by mainland companies too. So you have all that money being sucked out of Okinawa and sent back to Tokyo.

The US bases on the other hand provide a boon for the local economy. More than 10,000 locals work on the military bases, and receive salaries 2-3 times the amount of their fellow Okinawans.

And it goes without saying that the US military bases land is kept pristine, spotless..

Want to see what that prime real estate would look like if it were reverted back to Japan? Just drive down route 58, and the streets of Chatan-cho near Araha Beach, American Village, Sunabe.

-4 ( +2 / -6 )

Japanese mainland companies occupy prime land on the main island of Okinawa.

The operative word being Japanese.

And it goes without saying that the US military bases land is kept pristine, spotless..

Does it?

https://thediplomat.com/2020/10/us-military-bases-are-poisoning-okinawa/

https://www.pref.okinawa.jp/site/kankyo/seisaku/kikaku/documents/2-4.pdf

1 ( +2 / -1 )

cleoToday  01:50 pm JST

The operative word being Japanese.

No, the operative word is Mainland.

Does it?

https://thediplomat.com/2020/10/us-military-bases-are-poisoning-okinawa/

https://www.pref.okinawa.jp/site/kankyo/seisaku/kikaku/documents/2-4.pdf

Yes. Lived there. Seen it all.

Drive through Kadena Air Base, and then drive through Hamby Town. You'll know.

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

But the bases could be located on mainland Japan or even Hokkaido. Too many on Okinawa.

In 76 years Japan has not needed to be defended. Nothing happened. It’s just an expensive insurance policy with America getting the benefits.

The same number of troops and equipment stateside would still cost almost the same.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

zichiToday  02:08 pm JST

But the bases could be located on mainland Japan or even Hokkaido. Too many on Okinawa.

There are bases located in Mainland Japan and even Hokkaido.

US troops are based in the UK too.

The locals love the bases; provides jobs, and boosts the economy.

In 76 years Japan has not needed to be defended. Nothing happened. It’s just an expensive insurance policy with America getting the benefits.

It has been defended for 76 years by the US base presence, which is why it has not been attacked.

Japan gets tons of benefits, which is why it is a thriving economy.

The same number of troops and equipment stateside would still cost almost the same.

Huh?

-6 ( +1 / -7 )

"Philippine has no U.S military base. Taiwan has no U.S. military bases. China has never invaded these countries in the past . . . "

You're ignoring the fact that China is claiming islands and building islands within the territory boundaries of the Philippines and other Asian countries. The Philippines used to have U.S. military bases and they're gone now. And since leaving, look at how busy China has been declaring the entire China Sea as its own. Now instead of free and open waterways for ships to move about as they wish, you have the Chinese military threatening airplanes and ships to stay out of the area. It wasn't like that before.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Commodore Perry

But the bases could be located on mainland Japan or even Hokkaido. Too many on Okinawa.

There are bases located in Mainland Japan and even Hokkaido.

You know very well, the majority of American troops are stationed on Okinawa, a very small island. Out of about 50,000 troops, 30,000 plus their families are on Okinawa

US troops are based in the UK too.

Irrelevant to this post. Mostly refuelling and spyware.

There are currently 24,000 US military personnel, civilian staff and family members posted in the UK, mostly stationed in major military bases. The UK pays very little for the troops.

The locals love the bases; provides jobs, and boosts the economy.

The majority of Okinawa people do not support having troops.

In 76 years Japan has not needed to be defended. Nothing happened. It’s just an expensive insurance policy with America getting the benefits.

It has been defended for 76 years by the US base presence, which is why it has not been attacked.

America is here to protect its own interests.

Japan gets tons of benefits, which is why it is a thriving economy.

Could be replaced by increased tourism.

The same number of troops and equipment stateside would still cost almost the same.

Huh?

That is correct. You can do arithmetic. Remove the troops and equipment. The costs remain almost the same. The cost of 800 overseas bases is only $25 billion.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

zichiToday  02:57 pm JST

The majority of Okinawa people do not support having troops.

Really? I lived there, That's not what I heard. Especially from the thousands who work on the bases, or whose businesses are base-dependent.

Regardless, Japan wants the military bases in Japan. Complain to Japan.

Irrelevant to this post. Mostly refuelling and spyware.

There are currently 24,000 US military personnel, civilian staff and family members posted in the UK, mostly stationed in major military bases. The UK pays very little for the troops.

Totally untrue. That is all I can say.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

I thought that the cost of American forces in Japan was already fairly split. Exactly what is the US asking be increased?

2 ( +2 / -0 )

BertieWoosterToday  09:19 am JST

A friend of mine is in the US military, stationed in Okinawa. He and his wife (two people) live in a house that by American standards is huge. The rent is ¥500,000 per month. This is their housing allowance. It seems to me that if the US military needs more money, they might try saving money here and there. Okinawa is not Tokyo. The apartment we live in is plenty big enough for two (100 square metres) and the rent, with two parking spaces is ¥65,000 per month.

That’s ridiculous, but that money comes from the department of state, so it has nothing to do with the defense budget. I agree they should cut the amount of money they pay for people to live off the installation… but it won’t help the US defense budget one bit.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Why does not Japan defend itself? Has nothing to do with the United States. All Japan would have to do is make changes to it's Constitution to allow its Military to take offensive military action. The US does have military forces in Japan and it's not all about protecting Japan. It has always been the US policy to fight wars on foreign soil if possible. That in itself is not totally a bad thing, if you don't think a hulking B52 or a swarm of fighters drilling down on your position is a deterrent to aggression, then you need a reality check. Little Kim would be slinging a lot more rockets out in the Pacific if he did not have to keep an eye out over his sholder. As far as Taiwan not being attacked.. The Chinese consider Taiwan as part of China. One day in the very near future, China will roll up on the Taiwan beaches and deploy Hong Kong diplomacy. Will Japan be there waiting for them?

3 ( +3 / -0 )

japan should ally more with south korea. Japan doesnt need more USA bases and what not.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

1.That’s ridiculous, but that money comes from the department of state, so it has nothing to do with the defense budget.

The defense budget pays for the military and all associated costs.

they should cut the amount of money they pay for people to live off the installation…

Military personnel only live off base when sufficient housing is not available, or it is more advantageous to the government. Due to the high cost of rent on Okinawa, you can be sure the Military would have everyone on base if there was enough housing.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

CommodorePerry

I am not complaining about having the American troops. That's between Japan and America. But over the years many Okinawans have protested against the bases. I believe their voices should be listened to. They especially want the Marine unit to leave.

This is a post on JT and I can express my opinions.

"Dysfunctional economic planning dooms Okinawa to a vicious circle of poverty"

https://japantoday.com/category/features/kuchikomi/dysfunctional-economic-planning-dooms-okinawa-to-vicious-circle-of-poverty

 

US Military Base Issues in Okinawa.

https://www.pref.okinawa.jp/site/chijiko/kichitai/documents/us%20military%20base%20issues%20in%20okinawa.pdf

2 ( +3 / -1 )

It has been defended for 76 years by the US base presence, which is why it has not been attacked.

Japan gets tons of benefits, which is why it is a thriving economy.

It sounds like some countries have been tried to attack Japan. I wonder which country tried to attack Japan in the past? N Korea? Never, it still wants a lot of economy supports from Japan in the future. Russia? Never, It just wants to keep Northern Islands forever. Japan and China have been peaceful for decades even Senkakus are Japan's national territory. China is politically interested in Senkakus but doesn't want any war because two countries are counting on each other economically. So no war around East China Sea. But the US been lately provoking China surprisingly. That is a worry.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

@Droll Quarry you’re right. I had it confused with civilians; their LQA is paid for by the Department of State (and the rates are still ridiculous).

0 ( +0 / -0 )

That’s not so much one-sided as it seems. Make a poker face and pay nothing. They won’t withdraw as they strategically need the position held of course even without any payment. In that case a constitutional change is needed and the JSDF sufficiently strengthened and equipped for the coming challenges. Or pay it generously, even more than they urge for, and in that case also demand some more troops, more and reliable guarantees, more contemporary and sophisticated weapons, so that a real substantial defense potential without the need for constitutional changes is built for the future threats expected to come. Those are the best two options, I think.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Zichi

 But over the years many Okinawans have protested against the bases. I believe their voices should be listened to. They especially want the Marine unit to leave.

When it comes to Okinawa and the CJG, it quickly becomes a carbon copy of the CJG and the Olympics. After WWII, the US military ended up on Okinawa because it was off the mainland and the easiest/best location to occupy. The Japanese government was happy not to have the US in view to remind them they lost the war and Okinawa was somewhat sparsely populated for a Japanese prefecture. There is a very robust political machine in place here that drives who becomes governor and many other key government jobs. It also keeps the drumbeat for ousting the US military. It is well funded and when you look at the reality of the local population verses the perceived "outrage" there is a void that don't add up. Who has the most to gain from the US leaving the region? I agree the Okinawa PEOPLE should be able to have a dialog with the CJG and have their voices heard, as well as getting some or all of the US moved out, IF that is what the people want, not just a small vocal group with an agenda. Okinawa deserves to be the beautiful place it is capable of, not just a political pawn between the US, CJG and and another foreign country.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

Japan, and Okinawa in particular, benefit greatly from the US bases presence.

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

But the US been lately provoking China surprisingly. That is a worry.

I keep forgetting how peaceful and benign China is. They have every right to absorb the all the islands in the South China Sea as well as to make new ones. Hong Kong is now brought back to fold and pretty soon Taiwan will be showed the path. The Rhyku's are a worry though, may have to enlighten them as well. The world will be a better place.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

japan should ally more with south korea. Japan doesnt need more USA bases and what not.

Korea and Japan allies? ......You're not from around here huh, Pilgrim?

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Commodore Perry

Japan, and Okinawa in particular, benefit greatly from the US bases presence.

So answer. How much local income is generated locally from having an American base? In Okinawa, less than 5% of the total island income comes from having the bases. Deduct the monies paid to America.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

Okinawa should have a referendum on the bases.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Japan gets tons of benefits, which is why it is a thriving economy.

Japan’s economy is not thriving. Those with their heads constantly stuck in Fox “News” wouldn’t know that, though.

Really? I lived there

”Cons” sure love personal anecdotes when they have zero evidence.

There are currently 24,000 US military personnel, civilian staff and family members posted in the UK, mostly stationed in major military bases. The UK pays very little for the troops.

Totally untrue. That is all I can say.

Zichi was 100% correct about US troops in the UK.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Maybe it may be true, but no US soldiers died for Japan for 76 years. because no war and ever.

You just made my point! No Japanese solders either. .......... Rent well Spent.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

The Negotiation:

US -"Pay us more or else."

Japan -"Or else what?"

US -"Or else we'll leave."

Japan -"But that would alter the entire balance of world power."

US -"No it wouldn't.

Japan -"It would knock you guys off your position of super-power, remove your ability to support your troops in Korea, hamper you ability to re-fuel your both your naval and air fleets, and reduce you ability to support and protect other allies like Taiwan and the Philippines. And it would be a boon for your enemies like China, NK, and Russia."

US -"So what. Pay us more, or else you guys will be pronouncing all your kanji in Chinese."

Japan Really? We don't have worry about China, because we have 46 tons of plutonium. Enough for 6000 nukes. Kamikazes with nukes

US - Well what was money between friends.

Japan, you are right. BTW, what happen in Afghanistan?

2 ( +2 / -0 )

P. SmithToday  04:28 pm JST

Japan’s economy is not thriving. Those with their heads constantly stuck in Fox “News” wouldn’t know that, though.

Oh--it has been suffering for the past 76 years? Nice story.

Zichi was 100% correct about US troops in the UK.

Put 0 and 0 together.

zichiToday  04:25 pm JST

So answer. How much local income is generated locally from having an American base? In Okinawa, less than 5% of the total island income comes from having the bases. Deduct the monies paid to America.

Speaking as someone who spent time there, I can tell you that most of Okinawa's economy is based in tourism. Much of the reason the Japanese visit there is because of the presence of the bases; there are tour buses that drive up to Kadena Air Force Base just so the people can look over the fence, and maybe see an airplane take-off.

If you do not have long term experience living there, and just look at different links to try and get information about the base issue on Okinawa, you will never understand it.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Commodore PerryToday  04:47 pm JST

P. SmithToday  04:28 pm JST

Japan’s economy is not thriving. Those with their heads constantly stuck in Fox “News” wouldn’t know that, though.

Oh--it has been suffering for the past 76 years? Nice story.

Love how you suddenly change the goalposts from “it is a thriving economy” to “it’s not been suffering for the past 76 years.” Childish.

Speaking as someone who spent time there, I can tell you that most of Okinawa's economy is based in tourism. Much of the reason the Japanese visit there is because of the presence of the bases; there are tour buses that drive up to Kadena Air Force Base just so the people can look over the fence, and maybe see an airplane take-off.

Lmao! This is just ridiculous.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

The US is not here to defend Japan. They are here to ensure the world that Japan would never try to colonize the rest of Asia like in the 1930s and after. Also they want a forward position in Asia. I don't think that there are enough people here to defend Japan.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

To those who claim the money being made from the US presence can be substituted with tourist money, Okinawa is already (pre-COVID) at a saturation point for tourism. Fully booked hotels every holiday season. Part of the tourism allure is also the “American vibe” that is a result of the US presence. On the other hand, how many people do you know who actively avoid visiting Okinawa because of the US military?

30,000 Marines blowing their entire paycheck on the overpriced Y number car dealers and American village, Koza street, Kokusai street, etc; officers living in overpriced real estate, compliments of Uncle Sam… Losing the bases won’t increase tourism, it’ll rob the 20,000 locals who work in base-related jobs, and the countless others who cater to the servicemembers.

The whole Henoko fiasco started because Futenma land owners didn’t want Futenma to relocate as they would lose literally millions of dollars in lease money. The communist activists jumped on the bandwagon and made it their issue, but during the Koizumi administration, in the early stages of relocation negotiations, there is a video of a landowners association meeting where they are demanding the govt guarantee them reimbursement for money lost when Futenma closes.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Commodore Perry,

Your comparison of private hotels owned by Tokyo-headquartered corporations with U.S. bases, the raison d'etre of which is to invade and occupy foreign land, won't hold water. You can't simply compare two entities that are each on a different plane.

Would you be happy if the JFK Airport in New York, the O'Hare Airport in Chicago, the Dulles Airport in Washington, D.C. and what not, were owned and used by foreign militaries tax-free, thinking they provide a countless number of jobs to local people? And the authorities of these airports demanded the U.S. government to pay salaries to airport workers for them?  Would you be happy?

3 ( +4 / -1 )

voiceofokinawaToday  05:05 pm JST

Your comparison of private hotels owned by Tokyo-headquartered corporations with U.S. bases, the raison d'etre of which is to invade and occupy foreign land, won't hold water. You can't simply compare two entities that are each on a different plane.

That is not what I wrote or mean. But actually I got the idea from some Okinawans.

If you live there then you would know how Okinwans feel about the Japanese central government.

-6 ( +0 / -6 )

BeerDeliveryGuyToday  05:05 pm JST

He is right on all points.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

"Japan’s overplaying already."

Korea and Germany pay a much small % of the costs (I think Japan pays 70% and the ROK and German pay 30-40%). Is the US asking for more from these countries too?

1 ( +2 / -1 )

The US is not here to defend Japan. They are here to ensure the world that Japan would never try to colonize the rest of Asia like in the 1930s and after.

Japan has a fleet of black vans on standby to deploy at a moments notice. Be afraid, be very afraid.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

ShinkansenCabooseToday  12:24 pm JST

He is right on 90% of his points.

If someone has not lived on Okinawa in some capacity, it is not possible to understand the situation there.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

Korea and Germany pay a much small % of the costs (I think Japan pays 70% and the ROK and German pay 30-40%). Is the US asking for more from these countries too?

Yes, in fact they are. The US is frustrated that Germany does not commit enough of its GDP to it’s NATO obligations, and US pressure on SK to take more responsibility for its defense and cut out the anti-Japan indoctrination is causing SK to lean toward friendship with NK and China.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I’m 100% certain that “conservative” Americans who lived on Okinawa understand the situation there despite having spent all their time with their heads buried in Fox “News.”

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Korea and Germany pay a much small % of the costs (I think Japan pays 70% and the ROK and German pay 30-40%). Is the US asking for more from these countries too?

Korea has full authority to engage in military offensive engagement, Germany as well. This means if the US calls them for help, they can come. Japan can only stand on the beach and yell good luck. Germany also falls under the NATO alliance and members all contribute to a central fund. Last but not least, the US asked and got more from Korea in the recent negotiations.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Out of the two countries, who really [really] needs the US to be based in Japan?

I think the US are the desperate ones and their audacity is legendary. Japan should sit tight and refuse to pay more.

I speak as a Brit from a country that 'enjoys' a 'Special Relationship' with the World's Policemen, which at best is totally one-sided.

Be tough, Japan!

4 ( +5 / -1 )

Okinawa should have a referendum on the bases

There was a referendum a couple of years ago, 80% voted in favor of removing the bases, problem was only about 40 percent of the population voted. The results were filed away in a cabinet and the drummers moved on to something else.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

P. SmithToday  05:24 pm JST

I’m 100% certain that “conservative” Americans who lived on Okinawa understand the situation there despite having spent all their time with their heads buried in Fox “News.”

From the mouth of Don Lemon himself.

Why would the Libs not want Japan to pay the US more in this case?

EnnTeeToday  05:30 pm JST

Be tough, Japan!

No disrespect with your views, but Japan does, and will do what the US tells it to.

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

despite having spent all their time with their heads buried in Fox “News.”

What news sites are on the approved list so I don't get insulted?

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Commodore Perry

No disrespect with your views, but Japan does, and will do what the US tells it to.

There we have it straight from the American horses' mouth. The ex-military guy who does not accept the American occupation was over decades ago!

Such a level of arrogance.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

There used to liberals, moderates and conservatives in American politics. Now there is only left, right and hate.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Droll QuarryToday  06:01 pm JST

There used to liberals, moderates and conservatives in American politics. Now there is only left, right and hate.

I'm trying to think of reasons why any of those groups would not think it is in the US' interest to pay more for hosting American troops.

Especially the libs who never saw a tax they didn't love.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

CommodorePerry

No disrespect with your views, but Japan does, and will do what the US tells it to.

An invited country does not tell a host country what to do.

Same as the UK--US is there because the UK wants us.

You mention the UK to me frequently but Japan has been my continuous country for 30 years.

https://cnduk.org/resources/military-bases-us-bases-in-the-uk-and-uk-bases-overseas-what-they-are-and-what-they-do/

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Requesting more money from Japan is self defeating. The more Japan pays for US troops the less money it has for its own armed forces. The less capable the Japanese forces the more US troops needed. Cost should be no more than 50/50 shared across the board.

The US is in Japan for a dual purpose. For US strategic requirements and for Japan's added protection.

If the US expects Japan to pay more than half it is kidding itself. Not including expenditure on ammunition and equipment which should be paid by the US alone.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

zichiToday  06:10 pm JST

An invited country does not tell a host country what to do.

If you lived in Japan so long, you would understand it does.

You mention the UK to me frequently but Japan has been my continuous country for 30 years.

You are a UK citizen. You are not a Japanese citizen.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

Much of the reason the Japanese visit there is because of the presence of the bases

My family and I love spending time in Okinawa, we go most summers (not last year or this year because of the corona) and I can tell you we do not go to peer over the fences into the bases.

We go for the sea and natural environment, for the Ryukyu atmosphere, the food, the music, the culture, the people. We avoid the bases as far as possible and have taken to holidaying on the islands, away from the bases and ubiquitous fighter jets screaming overhead.

The bases a tourist attraction? Don’t make me laugh.

4 ( +6 / -2 )

The bases a tourist attraction? Don’t make me laugh.

The bases themselves are probably only a main attraction for military enthusiasts (of which Japan has plenty). But they do add an atmosphere of the exotic, and something mainlanders don’t have a chance to see much.

I know some girls who go to Okinawa for the express purpose of hooking up with “Macho US Marines” (their words, not mine).

The “American vibe” I mentioned earlier is also undeniably an attraction for some as well.

While you choose to engage in a more holistic style of tourism, it’s not everyone’s cup of Sanpincha. Some tourists go for more carnal reasons.

And I’ve also seen the bus loads of camera-snapping Otaku taking the Base drive-by bus tours mentioned by Commodore.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Keeping troops in Japan is of best Interest of US Government .. if they believe Japan should increase the share for the military cost of US troops in Japan they can decrease their force and Japan start getting more domestic military presence in Okinawa and other strategic bases.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

@kwatt

Japan and China have been peaceful for decades even Senkakus are Japan's national territory. 

1) No other country in East Asia recognize Diaoyu Islands as Japanese territory.

2) According to CCP, China's unification isn't complete until all of its territories are recovered, including Diaoyu Islands.

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

This is not a great time for the U.S. military to come begging for more money from Japan.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

@Samit Basu

1) No other country in East Asia recognize Diaoyu Islands as Japanese territory.

2) According to CCP, China's unification isn't complete until all of its territories are recovered, including Diaoyu Islands.

Most countries recognize Senkaku islands as Japanese territory. That's why Japan is controlling the islands for decades. According to old official China's history map, old map documents clearly showed Senkaku Islands belong to Japan and China recognized it once, but China claimed it in 1971 since it knew a lot of natural resources under the water around Senkakus in 1960s.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

Japan has good Self Defense Force and weapons. Why not US military let JSDF handle more roles of US military to protect own country. It seems to me US military don't want to let SDF use the US bases in Okinawa. The US soldiers leave Afghanistan soon and then let Afghans handle their own country. If the US let JSDF handle the roles of US military to protect own country and half of US soldiers can go home, the money issue for US military would be solved.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Droll QuarryToday  08:24 am JST

Japan spends 0.93 percent of its GDP on defense. The U.S spends 3.4 percent. Japan is renting a world class military at a fraction of the cost of standing up its own. The noise pollution bemoaned by another poster costs $33,000. dollars for one hour of F35 operation, and that does not include the purchase price.

That 0.93% equates to nearly US$50B annually, ninth highest in the world. Not bad for a country with a relatively small defensive force that doesn't project power beyond its borders...

0 ( +1 / -1 )

If America closed its Japanese bases the savings would be very small.

China would love that for sure.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

I thought Trump was bad but Biden is reaching more now.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Japan Really? We don't have worry about China, because we have 46 tons of plutonium. Enough for 6000 nukes. Kamikazes with nukes

Nah, it is the opposite. The US holds the keys on all Japanese weapon systems as well as their missiles. There has been stories of the US locking the F-16 of a Middle Eastern country because this country is going to bomb someone that the US didn't want. The same case applies to Japan but much worse as the NSA has bases of operation across Japan.

Japanese ultranationalists boast a lot about their supposed mythical nuclear power but it does not exist if the US is still here. The US won't ever leave Japan!

If the US leaves Japan, Taiwan will be conquered by China. The CPC will enact a blockade against the belligerent Japan, and China can simply watch Japan starving to death without putting a fight. Assuming if Japan gets a nuke on a ICBM, Chinese ballistic missiles are very close to Japan and should be easily shooting down Japanese missiles. Russia on the North can also jam all Japanese electronics devices and computer systems, and they can help China shooting down Japanese missiles.

Japan is geopolitically cursed, so it definitely needs the global power of projection from the US or China will dominate over Japan.

The Negotiation:

US -"Pay us more or else."

Japan -"Or else what?"

US -"Or else we'll leave."

Japan -"But that would alter the entire balance of world power."

US -"No it wouldn't.

Japan -"It would knock you guys off your position of super-power, remove your ability to support your troops in Korea, hamper you ability to re-fuel your both your naval and air fleets, and reduce you ability to support and protect other allies like Taiwan and the Philippines. And it would be a boon for your enemies like China, NK, and Russia."

US -"So what. Pay us more, or else you guys will be pronouncing all your kanji in Chinese."

Japan (a few mumbles amongst the assembled negotiators) -"OK, do you prefer Yen or Dollars?"

US -"Dollars. And remember, when our boys get drunk and cause a ruckus with the locals, you can't penalize them with your laws. And by the way, stop complaining about our low altitude flights over Shinjuku. It's annoying."

The US only leaves Japan when it wants to. Apparently, Japan is too important for the US because its close proximity to China and Russia. Anyone in the Japanese state, who proposes kicking out the US, will be severely harmed through political resignation or character assassination. Yukio Hatoyama is still a story for anyone in Japan who opposes the US.

14 ( +16 / -2 )

"The CPC will enact a blockade against the belligerent Japan, "

When did you last look at a map?

To blockade Japan, China must first escape Japan's blockade of it!

Geography is a must here, no doubt.

Again:

Maps are everywhere.

Try Google!

-8 ( +0 / -8 )

@kwatt

Most countries recognize Senkaku islands as Japanese territory. 

The list of countries that do not recognize Japanese claims over Diaoyu Islands

1) China

2) Taiwan

3) Russia

4) ROK

5) North Korea

In other word, basically all of Japan's immediate neighbors do not recognize Japan's claims.

Why not US military let JSDF handle more roles of US military to protect own country. 

Japan's complaining about lack of money as the reason why Japan can't pay more.

https://english.kyodonews.net/news/2021/07/05eaabf70db4-us-urges-japan-to-shoulder-more-for-hosting-american-troops.html

Japan wants the United States to understand that it is contributing as much as possible under tight finances and is also financially supporting works related to U.S. forces' realignment, the sources said.

Japan also hopes to avoid increasing its contribution by convincing the United States that it is doing its part in strengthening the bilateral security alliance, including in cyberspace and outer space where China is increasing its clout, they said.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

The US should just match budget to budget. Whatever 50% of the host country pays, is the amount the US should pay, lagging 1-2 yrs behind for changes in personnel and equipment that needs to be relocated.

Congress and the Executive branch don't need to be involved outside of wartime. Bureaucratic choice.

Call it a peace dividend, if you like.

But don't complain when China moves onto all the islands they claim and start blocking Japanese fishing boats from entering those waters.

Nuclear waste isn't the same as weapons-grade nuclear materials. Creating dirty bombs wouldn't be good for anyone. The optics on that - from Japan? Not gonna happen.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

All Asians should unite together and forge strong and lasting alliances to send out the western invaders and their pathetic interventionism and decadent culture that has only brought troubles to the world..

They are only there to feed their own greed for world economic power and resources.

Countries have the right to self-determination

Let the rest of the world live as they please..

Cry me a river in 3...2...1...

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

Ha...the wonderful world according to euphemism when an Army of Occupation, long, long having overstayed ANY real excuse for its presence is described as being 'Guests' in the Occupied country... May the Farce Be With You like an unshakable parasite that gives little but takes much and then expects More. At this time, and with an evermore China-bellicose America, as the American sun begins to set sucked dry by a variety of conscienceless 'allies'/parasites, America seeks to share that parasitic load with one of America's few real friends while it becomes an actual risk to that friend by poking at the friend's enormous and not amused neighbor nextdoor. While the Human 'mind' claims for itself some ill-defined thing called 'intelligence', it has never made a convincing claim for rationality and here we see just how unlikely that claim would be, particularly if the 'Host' accedes to the demands. Or, as a less loquacious person might state it, "This is just nuts!" If America cannot afford the overhead that comes with being the self-described "World's Policeman" (see: Bully), maybe it's time to shed a couple of useless, untrustworthy 'allies' and try to keep its friends, and not try to bleed them to feed the backstabbers and thieves sucking it dry. Just sayin'...

0 ( +1 / -1 )

jeancolmarJuly 29  09:37 pm JST

This is not a great time for the U.S. military to come begging for more money from Japan.

It is not begging. It is actually telling.

And with China building up its weapons and military overall, Japan will gladly pay.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Commodore Perry (Today 05:07 pm JS),

If you live there then you would know how Okinwans feel about the Japanese central government.

I am a bona fide Okinawan, and I'm sure that my opinion as regards U.S. bases is shared and supported by the majority of the Okinawans. Of course, there's a fringe group of right-wingers who appear not to agree with me.

It's true that much of the money earned by Tokyo-headquartered branch companies operating here would go to Tokyo, but that is a different topic that should be discussed some place else, not here.

Aren't the same phenomena observed in the U.S., that is, a parent firm in New York or Chicago syphoning off profits earned by their branch companies in the South?

As far as the Japanese government is concerned, it acts as if it were a local office of Washington, turning its face only to Washington for instructions and guidance, oblivious of its own citizens. This is because for the central government the Japan-U.S. ties weigh far more important than the welfare of a tiny locality, Okinawa. You mustn't offend your great master, the U.S., they think.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Commodore Perry. "There are bases located in Mainland Japan and even Hokkaido."

Please name the US base in Hokkaido.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Japan has had it's cake and eat it for too long. I think that Japan should pay more.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

@Samit Basu

It seems there are only five countries don't, but still other more countries recognize Senkakus are Japan's territory if you look at many countries maps. Those five countries are definitely not whole world. The most important thing is how whole international communities look at it.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

@Samit Basu

Japan's complaining about lack of money as the reason why Japan can't pay more.

Japan pays about 70% (of whole US military presence budget in Japan) to US military. Can S Korea pays 70% to US military in your country? 70% seems enough. If Japan pays more, US soldiers are going to be Japan's mercenaries.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Happy Trump had the courage and foresight to bring up this issue in the first place.

You're mistaking "Happy" for delirium but that is a common thing for the conservative mind as we saw in Mordo...um...Washington, D.C. a few months ago.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

US is troublemakers and bandits.

They are asking for protection money, nothing else.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

It seems Japan doesn't want to pay more. The US better let JSDF handle more roles of US military to protect own country. Half of US soldiers are no need any more in Okinawa. Japan has enough SDF members and good weapons as Japan buys a lot of expensive weapons from the US. I wonder why so many US soldiers are in Okinawa? Japan is not at war. It is time the US let JSDF handle own country. The US soldiers better go to poorer unstable countries that want democracy there.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

If the USA needs more money or leave, do not let the door hit your backside on the way out. Japan will have to find a diplomatic solution with China. As for Korea, it is not our problem. Japan can defend itself from Korean aggression.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

I don't see the need to pressure Japan on this as long as they buy all their weapons from us. Which they should anyway for performance and interoperational capability.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

kwattToday  09:44 am JST

It seems Japan doesn't want to pay more. The US better let JSDF handle more roles of US military to protect own country. Half of US soldiers are no need any more in Okinawa. Japan has enough SDF members and good weapons as Japan buys a lot of expensive weapons from the US. I wonder why so many US soldiers are in Okinawa? Japan is not at war. It is time the US let JSDF handle own country. The US soldiers better go to poorer unstable countries that want democracy there.

Japan does not want to pay more, but they will.

Japan is not at war because of the security alliance with the US, and the US bases in Japan.

I would be fine if there were a US troops pullback from this country; of course, this would not be Japan for too long thereafter.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Japan does not want to pay more, but they will.

Japan is not at war because of the security alliance with the US, and the US bases in Japan.

I would be fine if there were a US troops pullback from this country; of course, this would not be Japan for too long thereafter.

Probably Japan may pay a little more. If half of total US soldiers and military bases are there, Japan-US security alliance still seems good enough to protect Japan as JSDF will cover the half. As long as there is a security treaty, half of US soldiers would be stationed there.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Alan Harrison (Today  07:35 am JST),

The Japan -U.S. Security Treaty has served double purpose only for Japan, you want to say - saving money and providing security with Japan for free. In other words, Japan is being given a free ride for its security. On the other hand, the U.S. must sweat to defend Japan, deploying so many troops to Japan.

At first glance, it indeed appears unfair to the U.S. side.

But how did this apparatus of the Japan-U.S. Security Treaty come into play? Wasn't the security treaty initially signed between Japan and the U.S.at the U.S.'s initiative in 1951, obligating Japan to provide with the hitherto occupation forces as many bases and areas as necessary, in exchange of which Japan recovered its post-war independence somehow. Okinawa was amalgamated into this system when it was returned to Japan in 1972.

If the U.S. side says the treaty is unfair, then the current treaty should be scrapped all across the board. Then, only a few necessary U.S. troops could be allowed to be stationed here.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

voiceofokinawaToday  02:37 pm JST

But how did this apparatus of the Japan-U.S. Security Treaty come into play? 

Japan started wars by attacking a multitude of countries, including the USA.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

We go for the sea and natural environment, for the Ryukyu atmosphere, the food, the music, the culture, the people. We avoid the bases as far as possible and have taken to holidaying on the islands, away from the bases and ubiquitous fighter jets screaming overhead.

Absolutely....

All Asians should unite together and forge strong and lasting alliances to send out the western invaders and their pathetic interventionism and decadent culture that has only brought troubles to the world..

Yeah well, that claim might have some credibility if Japan didn't try to colonize those same Asian countries in WW2...oh, gomen ne...you went there to liberate them right? Wonder why they still don't like you much....fushigi.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

cleoJuly 29  07:12 pm JST

My family and I love spending time in Okinawa, we go most summers (not last year or this year because of the corona) and I can tell you we do not go to peer over the fences into the bases. 

We go for the sea and natural environment, for the Ryukyu atmosphere, the food, the music, the culture, the people. We avoid the bases as far as possible and have taken to holidaying on the islands, away from the bases and ubiquitous fighter jets screaming overhead.

The bases a tourist attraction? Don’t make me laugh.

When you land at Naha's airport, you are a stone's throw away from the Naha Port Facility--a joint US-Japan installation.

And when you drive down route 58 to wherever you're staying, you go by Camp Kinser, Futenma, Butler...impossible to avoid the bases but yes, as you are not in the military or SOFA status you cannot enter the bases anyway.

And there are actually a limited number of beaches that are accessible--and if you hit one of those up, you will see US military personnel with their families there.

Sure--stay out of the small section of Miyagi and you can avoid the roaring airplanes over head. Not hard to do. There are also fighter jets screaming overhead in Naha---Japan's. Along with commercial jets--basically everyone wants to avoid those too.

And the bases are not a tourist attraction except to the Japanese who take bus tours to see them--laugh at those people if you want.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

The idea that US bases drive tourism to Japan is simply asinine.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

P. SmithToday  05:08 pm JST

The idea that US bases drive tourism to Japan is simply asinine.

It is if you do not understand the situation in Okinawa. Ever been stationed there, or lived there? No, so you don't know what you are talking about right? As an English teacher, I guess you don't get much time away?

Same goes for Yokota, and I was in Misawa for awhile too. When they hold their friendship festivals 10s of thousands of Japanese would attend.

But keep up with your fact-less opinions. Funny for a Friday.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

gokai_wo_maneku

The US is not here to defend Japan. They are here to ensure the world that Japan would never try to colonize the rest of Asia like in the 1930s and after.

Err now, I do not know anyone who makes that claim, do you? You can argue what you want about them being here, but the fact is they save Japan a lot of money by providing a counterbalance to CCP Chinas growing power and claims in the region.

People can argue for them to go home, but they should admit that in that case Japans "self defense" budget will have to be increased immensely.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

If the U.S. side says the treaty is unfair, then the current treaty should be scrapped all across the board. Then, only a few necessary U.S. troops could be allowed to be stationed here.

Agreed.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

kwattToday  06:19 pm JST

Agreed.

The basic principle fo the US Japan security alliance is that the US guarantees Japan's security.

The US determines therefore the necessary number of troops it needs to station here. There is no allowable amount--it is what the US decides it requires to keep up its end of the bargain.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Commodore Perry (Today  04:29 pm JST),

So, in your opinion, the said bilateral security treaty must never cease to be but maintained as it is forever, and 55,148 U.S. service members, in contrast to South Koreas 26,183, must be deployed to Japan in order not to let the genie out of the bottle.  Well, well...

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites