Should Japan pay more to Washington for hosting U.S. bases?

The US should be paying rent.

runner3, Totally Agree!

If they absolutely HAVE TO have bases here, they should pay rent at the same rate as we would have to if we rented the land. Kadena alone would bankrupt them. But, this is the money that Okinawa is losing.

Putin and Xi want a weak Japan.

Putin and Xi want a weak Japan.

And Trump.

I second runner3, the US voluntarily installed military bases in Japan post-WWII and never left. In theory, they could leave anytime if the conditions for them to stay became undesirable for them.

In theory, they could leave anytime if the conditions for them to stay became undesirable for them.

Mass peaceful protests are needed.

Japan should be paying less than it is for US forces in Japan. The US wants to have its cake and eat it too. It wants to station its troops and navy as close to china and Russia as it can for its own security first, and Japan is already overpaying for the US presence.

S. Korea & Japan are a part of America's front line of defense. Just by allowing the U.S. to build bases on their soil put them in harm's way. The U.S. should be grateful for S. Korea's & Japan's permission and trust in having U.S. military bases here.

Besides, it's a bargain to the U.S. in terms of America's own national defense. But try explaining that to this president.

If not for USA, Japan would be in a total mess with mo telling what, no democracy probably. There would not be a prosperous South Korea at all. Kim would be the despot for the Korean peninsular. All of it. Just let an enemy try to attack Japan or South Korea. USA would be here immediately with a strong response. You’s guys posting the seeming anti USA base comments might be fairly young, I don’t know. But, there is the “And there rose up a king who knew not Joseph” syndrome. Forgetting history.

Reverse the payment.

Invoice the U. S Government.

Land&Service rentals

I don't think they should have to pay less, but I think they are already paying their fair share. Of course being in Japan is in the United State's interest, but like it or not, it also has the byproduct of Japan falling under the defense of the US and that is not free.

Why should Japan pay more, just to serve as human shield for US forces?

Tell them to go home already!

Well, if the U.S.A. Military is not paid more, then the U.S.A. Military can leave the far east asia to Russia and China. Lets see if South Korea and Japan can fend off all the incursions that will happen when there is no American Troops there to keep both parties in check. Russia will no longer negotiate with Japan about the islands. In fact, they will threaten to take more since there is a No Aggression part in Japan's constitution. China, they will take Okinawa as soon as the U.S.A. military leaves there. And Japan cannot do anything about it. With the ''America First'' thing going on, there will not be any promises to help Japan reclaim Okinawa from China once its successfully taken.

U.S. Forces in Japan is not here solely for self-serving reasons. It's primary missions are:

1) Joint defense of Japan with the JSDF

2) Ensure a free, open, and stable Indo-Pacific

Regarding 1), Japan is currently physically incapable of defending itself unilaterally from regional aggressors. Developing a force capable of doing this will take decades and cost several times what the "burden" of hosting U.S. Forces currently costs Japan. It is simply more cost effective to support the U.S. Forces through a bilateral defense treaty than to go it alone.

Regarding 2), a free, open, and stable Indo-Pacific absolutely critical for Japan, which cannot exist without trade through this region. Currently, its constitution does not allow for it to use military force to maintain its supply lifeline through SE Asia. The Indo-Pacific is demonstratively more stable with U.S. presence than without, and the Japanese government fortunately understands this and is willing to contribute to this stability through its support for U.S. Forces. Anyone who believes that Japan would be less at-risk if it did not have U.S. Forces stationed on its soil is a fool.

Whether Japan should pay more to the extent that President Trump has indicated previously is up for debate, but an increase in support would be wholly reasonable.

US forces are getting a free ride in Japan... the US government should be paying the Japanese.

The operational mission for the US Forces that are located in Japan covers the region from Hawaii to the Middle East. Japan hosts the Indo-Pacific REGIONAL HQs for US Air Force, Navy, Army, and Marines. They are not in Japan simply to defend Japan but to support US security commitments throughout the entire Indo-Pacific region. That is a very different mission from US Forces Korea for example who are 100% dedicated to defending South Korea.

Total out of pocket annual costs for Japan to host the 54,000 USF uniformed personnel in Japan averages $6B per year. Most articles you see refer only to the $2B spent on “sympathy” costs. When you add the rent Japan pays to 3rd parties for the land the bases sit on, all utilities, the costs for local labor the annual total is now over $4B. And when you then add the annual costs for base realignments, renovations, etc. that adds another $2B per year bringing the total to $6B. And that excludes the $3.3B estimated to move some US Marines to Guam and the $10B or more required to build Futemna.

By comparison, Seoul has been paying about $850M annually for 28,500 US service personnel. South Korea may wish to note that the US forces in Japan are in part there to back up the US Forces in Korea. So not only is Seoul not paying anywhere close to what Japan is paying, but Japan is also paying for forces that defend them. Not a word of gratitude of course much less an offer from Seoul to pay for part of those costs to be had.

Japan pays more than its fair share to cover the costs for stationing U.S. Military forces in Japan. I cannot speak for U.S. Bases in Mainland Japan but I can speak for the U.S. Bases on Okinawa and I can tell you that the Japanese Govt. has built first class housing, dependent schools, day care centers, and leisure facilities including golf courses for the U.S. Military and their dependents on Okinawa. In fact a lot of the Japanese Govt. funded construction on the bases on Okinawa have been for facilities that are not actually necessary for the defense of Japan but were built because of all of the Military Dependents on Okinawa. If you believe that Japan is getting a free ride, then come and take a tour of the bases on Okinawa and see how the U.S. Military and their dependents live thanks to the money spent by the Japanese Govt. and I think you will change your mind.

The US should be paying rent.

But we have to sacrifice men, women and resources and they get to sit back? No, I think Japan can afford to pay more or they can change “Article 9” forgo their Pacifist ways, build a strong and powerful full functioning ground military, then we should leave or take a backseat and pay more.

But we have to sacrifice men, women and resources and they get to sit back? No, I think Japan can afford to pay more or they can change “Article 9” forgo their Pacifist ways, build a strong and powerful full functioning ground military, then we should leave or take a backseat and pay more.

You should leave. America is too unstable to properly provide protection anyways.

Actually every nation should adopt their own version of Article 9. War is a disgusting disgrace and only weirdos who love violence are in favor of it.

Actually every nation should adopt their own version of Article 9. War is a disgusting disgrace and only weirdos who love violence are in favor of it.

I kind of agree with that, really.

If you believe that Japan is getting a free ride, then come and take a tour of the bases on Okinawa and see how the U.S. Military and their dependents live

You want the US military, you meet US military standards. You are acting like Okinawa is some kind of paradise for dependent families, when it is simply providing a decent standard of living for them. Get over it.

I kind of agree with that, really.

You just argued against it.

Actually every nation should adopt their own version of Article 9. War is a disgusting disgrace and only weirdos who love violence are in favor of it.

Agreed. The US will destroy all their weapons as Russia, China, NK, Iran, do the same. But the issue is that China can still roll over every other army in the world if weapons don't equalize their vast numbers.

When China invades anyone, who will stop them? They are trying to take as much of the South China Sea. Who is standing up without the US?

theFu, I do not think the USA will defend Japan. Then again China has no reason to attack Japan.

LOL.....I love you Japan but all these ridiculous comments that the U.S. should pay rent. Just stop this nonsense. If a fight breaks out I'm thinking you will want the biggest and baddest backing you up. So who's your Daddy? That would be us, the U.S.

You are acting like Okinawa is some kind of paradise for dependent families

It is.

Apart from the typhoons.

You just argued against it.

No, I agreed wit you on that very statement.

Actually every nation should adopt their own version of Article 9. War is a disgusting disgrace and only weirdos who love violence are in favor of it.

No arguments here.

Then again China has no reason to attack Japan.

That’s exactly what China hopes and wants you to think.

But we have to sacrifice men, women and resources and they get to sit back?

That's not how the defense treaty works at all. Cursory research goes a long way in not being incorrect.

No, I think Japan can afford to pay more or they can change “Article 9” forgo their Pacifist ways, build a strong and powerful full functioning ground military,

Someone doesn't know much about Japan's military strength:

The Japan Self-Defense Forces, established in 1954, ranks as the world’s fourth most-powerful military in conventional capabilities, with the eighth-largest military budget.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/feb/10/editorial-japan-becomes-the-worlds-fourth-most-pow/

Someone doesn't know much about Japan's military strength:

Oh, I know, but it seems like Tokyo doesn’t want to improve in that strength.

The Japan Self-Defense Forces, established in 1954, ranks as the world’s fourth most-powerful military in conventional capabilities, with the eighth-largest military budget.

So I think if we ask for more, it’s more than fair given the fact if anything should ever break out, it’s us that will be on the front lines, if Japan doesn’t like it, then they should buildup their military as I have stated, build a sizable and formidable ground infantry force., then we can pullback, now we can be the backup and I think at that point we should pay more, but until then and as long as we have to do the heavy lifting, Tokyo can pony up, it’s a small price to pay.

Oh, I know, but it seems like Tokyo doesn’t want to improve in that strength.

Then why did you post that Japan should "build a strong and powerful full functioning ground military"?

So I think if we ask for more, it’s more than fair given the fact if anything should ever break out, it’s us that will be on the front lines, if Japan doesn’t like it, then they should buildup their military as I have stated, build a sizable and formidable ground infantry force., then we can pullback, now we can be the backup and I think at that point we should pay more, but until then and as long as we have to do the heavy lifting, Tokyo can pony up, it’s a small price to pay.

Your retort to being democratic strayed incorrect is doubling down on being incorrect. Smooth.

*demonstrated

If Japan has more of its youth serving - perhaps only for a short stint or part-time stint - this may take away the some of the military burden from the United States and the economic burden from Japan.

Then why did you post that Japan should "build a strong and powerful full functioning ground military"?

I already explained.

Your retort to being democratic strayed incorrect is doubling down on being incorrect. Smooth.

I disagree, I think I’m very correct.

If Japan has more of its youth serving - perhaps only for a short stint or part-time stint - this may take away the some of the military burden from the United States and the economic burden from Japan.

I agree.

Japan does not have enlistment or conscription.

Sigh....We already covered that, so they should change it and make it mandatory at least for the very minimum of 18 months.

The SDF are special civil servants, not members of a military.

That should change.

That would require a change to the constitution which is has unlikely has American changing its 2nd Amendment.

Then Japan can easily pay more, problem solved.

So 84% is not high enough for you?

No.

Conscription armies are unable to operate at the same levels achieved by professional forces.

The IDF would like to have a word with you.

Sigh....We already covered that, so they should change it and make it mandatory at least for the very minimum of 18 months.

Why?

The IDF would like to have a word with you.

One data point is too small a sample to from which to extrapolate any useful information.

When you volunteer uproot your family and move every few years while your spouse/parent deploys, possible to go to war, it's not unreasonable to receive a few benefits.

I agree that our service members and their families should enjoy benefits for the job they do, but the service members did volunteer to serve and chose to have families.

The children of service members deserve better schools, but Donny chose to redirect funds from improving their schools to build his albatross at the southern border. Wouldn't it be great if Donny cared more about our military than an ineffectual wall in which the cartels are cutting holes and for which he promised Mexico would pay?

No

Simply because Donny says so.

The IDF would like to have a word with you.

One data point is too small a sample to from which to extrapolate any useful information.

The IDF has pretty much been in a perpetual state of war since its inception and is respected worldwide for it's training and performance. As a tanker in the US Army, when discussing hypothetically which country's tank forces would we not want to fight against, Israel was always at the top of the list.

The ROK military is another conscripted service that is also very well trained and

He said conscripted armies are "unable to operate at the same levels of professional forces" which the IDF and ROK military prove to be untrue. The fact is, zichi's statement is just plain wrong.

but the service members did volunteer to serve and chose to have families.

That's kind of the whole point. They volunteered to put their lives at risk. That's exactly why they deserve every benefit they receive.

That's kind of the whole point. They volunteered to put their lives at risk. That's exactly why they deserve every benefit they receive.

While I completely agree with you, the exact opposite holds true as well. They volunteered so they deserve what they get.

How would it have panned out for you in basic had you told your DI that you deserved to be talked to more kindly or have more time for chow because you volunteered? You'd have been smoked to total muscle failure, even if it weren't Friday.

He said conscripted armies are "unable to operate at the same levels of professional forces" which the IDF and ROK military prove to be untrue. The fact is, zichi's statement is just plain wrong.

Zichi's blanket statement was partially incorrect, as you have astutely pointed out. Do you think his statement is true for conscripted forces of nations that are not perpetually at war?

For what it's worth, I appreciate the civil discussion on this point. It's a rarity that people act like adults on the internet. (I include myself in that statement.)

Why?

One reason would be to bring more nationalistic pride, responsibility towards their own country, build up interest in wanting to join the military to want to make a change and to create a stronger military, especially in the infantry division.

The children of service members deserve better schools, but Donny chose to redirect funds from improving their schools to build his albatross at the southern border.

There’s still more than enough money and talk to the Democrats about creating better schools, they haven’t been doing that and the education department is one of the biggest donor to the Democrat party, so instead if indoctrinating our kids with stuffings of racial, liberal and national guilt and identity politics, they should go back to teaching what they used to teach, the main subjects and they definitely need to bring civics back

Wouldn't it be great if Donny cared more about our military

He does and that’s why you seen the pushback of withdrawing the troops out of these endless wars, but the Washington swamp just wants to stay there, to them that’s more important than the wall, border security and illegal immigration, when Trump wins a second term, it’s game over for Democrats on the border issue.

One reason would be to bring more nationalistic pride,

Yeah, because they don't have enough national pride already and the last time they had national pride through military service it resulted in the rape of Asia and two atomic bombs being dropped on them.

responsibility towards their own country, build up interest in wanting to join the military to want to make a change and to create a stronger military, especially in the infantry division.

The infantry division? Wow, you obviously do not understand the organizational structure of the military.

There’s still more than enough money and talk to the Democrats about creating better schools, they haven’t been doing that

Republicans keep cutting funding for education. Do a little research and you won't constantly be incorrect.

and the education department is one of the biggest donor to the Democrat party,

The education department does not donate to political parties because it is a governmental entity. Smooth.

so instead if indoctrinating our kids with stuffings of racial, liberal and national guilt and identity politics,

This doesn't occur.

they should go back to teaching what they used to teach, the main subjects and they definitely need to bring civics back

That may be possible if republicans would stop slashing funding for education.

He does and that’s why you seen the pushback of withdrawing the troops out of these endless wars,

Withdrawing means bringing them back to the US, not shifting them to the oilfilefs and SA.

but the Washington swamp just wants to stay there, to them that’s more important than the wall, border security and illegal immigration, when Trump wins a second term, it’s game over for Democrats on the border issue.

2013: Republicans twice killed bills that began addressing the immigration issue. No amount of excuses will change this fact.

Yeah, because they don't have enough national pride already and the last time they had national pride through military service it resulted in the rape of Asia and two atomic bombs being dropped on them.

I seriously doubt they would be THAT stupid to make that kind of mistake again.

The infantry division? Wow, you obviously do not understand the organizational structure of the military.

I do, but the more infantry soldiers you have, the more it sends a very serious message of a possible and ground could always occur.

Republicans keep cutting funding for education.

Of course, liberals are not teaching education, Kids can’t read, do math, have the basic scholastic skills, the only thing their teaching them is Thanksgiving is bad. We should allow Transgenders in changing rooms with girls, check your pronouns, identity politics and invoke race 24/7, so there’s your reason for the cut.

This doesn't occur.

Exactly! Again, all the reason for the cuts.

That may be possible if republicans would stop slashing funding for education.

Then the Democrats should go back to teaching kids.

Withdrawing means bringing them back to the US, not shifting them to the oilfilefs and SA.

I would love the majority of US troops to leave Japan, but until then and until the Japanese revise their constitution and Article 9, they can afford to pay more for us protecting them, if they don’t like or don’t want, change it, institute a draft, change the constitution, build up their military and then we can talk about us paying them.

Japan does not have the money to pay the Americans. Solution is to make a true peace with China and Russia. China is the future of the Japanese economy not the USA which will raise tariffs on Japanese goods.

The US needs to start paying for the strategical position they enjoy in the world. Japan is positioned perfectly for launching any offensives in Asia pacific, particularly at a time when China is growing more and more powerful.

Let’s not get silly and pretend that America is doing Japan a favor. Y being here. They aren’t.

If America doesn’t want to pay they can get out and Japan can use the money they currently spend on American bases on their own SDF instead.

Trump has exposed a major bug in the American system, and it’s shown the world how unstable and I undependable the country is. The rest of us need to insulate from that and try to profit off it when we can.

Tough one. My automatic inclination is to say "no", but I mean they are benefitting from their presence and its deterrence. At the very least, Japan should definitely not have to pay as much as they do. I think the US should have to pay rent on the land.

We ain't funding US's attempt to control the world

No, the US should be paying for the benefit of having a strategic position. If they don't want to, then let them go.