bam_boo comments

@ CrucialS

That referendum is interesting... Voter turnout was barely 60%.

Which is quite a high turnout for a non-binding referendum, especially for a country with such a passive electorate like Japan. Even in a very democratic country like swiss there are hardly any referenda with more then 50% participation.

You do the math and it's close to 50/50 of the total population of Okinawa that was anti US.

Kind of a weird assumption that only the ones against the US bases would go and vote while the ones pro bases would all stay home. How could that happen?

The normal assumption would be that there is an at least roughly similar pro and contra ratio amongst non voters as amongst voters.

And please note this was not a "pro" or "anti US" referendum, it was about US military on Okinawa.

Yubaru and smithinjapan keep repeating far-fetched assertions about the Okinawan people not knowing what they want in regard to US bases and Henoko, but they have never ever provided even one piece of factual evidence for such presumptuous claims.

Everybody in Okinawa knows what the majority wants. The polls tell it, the media tells it, the election results tell it, the public says it, there's absolutely no doubt about the fact that the large majority of the Okinawan people is clearly against any new US military facility in their prefecture.

And that some Okinawan people yield to pressure from Tokyo doesn't make them pro-base or pro-Henoko, usually they just give up to be anti because they're afraid to lose their jobs.

Do you have proof that Onaga hasn't held a referendum simply because he could lose?

There actually has been a prefecture wide referendum in 1996 where an overwhelming majority of 89% voted for a clear reduction of the US military on the island and absolutely nothing indicates that this stance has changed substantially.

The Okinawan people have been clear about what they want even under sustained and strong pressure from Tokyo all along the way.

Under the current circumstances a referendum could heat up things in way nobody could foresee and is not an option to take light-heartedly.

To say one would need a referendum to know what Okinawans want is cheeky, to put it mildly.

@ edojin

Did the government manage to "censor" the TV news agencies and keep them from reporting on this?

The government doesn't even have to censor because the media corporations know exactly what they can cover and what is off limits. The submissive conservative news outlets know from frequent wining and dining with Abe and sleazy Suga, the less submissive ones know from public threats by Abe and his watchdogs.

@ Yubaru

politicians that scream "No bases" and then reach out with their other hand and demand more money from the government.

Who exactly are you talking about?

There have been submissive and not-submissive Okinawan politicians. Usually the submissive types like Nakaima and Inamine are the ones that first pretend to oppose Tokyo's policies, as that is of course the majority opinion in Okinawa, and then reverse their positions under purported "pressure" from the central government, pretending that they did their best against Tokyo's power harassment.

Unwillingness to improve infrastructure for political reasons, and it's not just about the bases, in fact the mismanagement comes from non-base related issues. The list is long indeed.

You would have to be a bit more specific as such general accusations are not even remotely proving anything.

I could easily refute your claim of "Unwillingness to improve infrastructure for political reasons" unless you are referring to completely useless infrastructure measures that arise from Tokyo's carrot and stick policy like cutting mountain tops in Yanbaru to make completely unprofitable pineapple fields and building roads to nowhere in the jungle. To oppose those is the duty of any sane politician and the Okinawan environmentalists at the forefront of the anti-Henoko movement have always opposed those destructive "pork-barrel" projects.

@ smithinjapan

Except that Okinawa is part of Japan, and the central government, which funds the nation's poorest prefecture, is trying to go against the democratic government of Japan and do it's own thing, under the self-serving renegade Onaga,

It seems you have never heard of some of the basic foundations of modern democracy, which are "self-determination", "regional or local autonomy", "equal rights and duties for all citizens" and "meticulous protection of minority rights".

In no other true democratic nation would a region have to be submissive to the central government in regard to policies that mainly concern that region.

All modern democracies have constitutions that prevent such a "tyranny of the majority". That is democracy 101.

The problem is that in Japan this doesn't work properly. Okinawans where never granted the same status with other prefectures as they were returned to Japan having been forced to become the US "military keystone" and were never ever asked whether they want to be such.

And unfortunately there is no constitutional court in Japan that would have the courage to face the ones in power to protect citizens constitutional rights. The supreme court has even said that it doesn't deal with US alliance issues even if seemingly unconstitutional. Quite unbelievable, but that's Japan.

and when not even the majority of the prefecture support him.

We know that clearly more then 70% of the Okinawan people support his stance on the Futenma relocation, which is to oppose the construction of a new US military facility in Okinawa.

And even of the small minority that doesn't directly oppose the relocation scheme many apparently do so because of the threats from Tokyo, not because they think it is a good policy measure.

And in the meantime, Okinawa should get all funding cut in the equivalent of delays and court costs that Onaga's personal mission have cost.

Anti-democratic bullying policies to threaten the people of a prefecture with budget cuts, if they are not submissive.

Let these protestors know they have won: the base will stay in Futenma until further notice.

Yes, that's exactly what authoritarian bully Abe is saying "sink or swim you renegade, weak and minor Okinawans".

Once again those are anti-democratic power harassment policies.

Very good news indeed as more and more non-Okinawan Japanese seem to understand how unfair the status quo is and are starting to support the Okinawan democratic cause. Many Japanese are also beginning to see this conflict as not only being about Okinawa, but about democracy in Japan in general.

If Abe's authoritarian and discriminating policies were to succeed this would impact Japan in a much more profound way then we might think now. The Okinawan struggle is a struggle for basic citizens democratic rights, for equality and for self-determination and it could become the litmus test for how far Abe and his cronies are willing to go in suppressing democratic voices in Japan.

@ Yubaru

Okinawa has been poorly managed for decades since it was returned to Japan.

On what do you base this claim? Of course Okinawa has a number of historical, structural and cultural disadvantages if judged from an Japanese standard, but how do prove that it has been poorly managed?

To the contrary there is plenty of evidence that it was part of Tokyo's strategy to make Okinawa economically as dependent as possible in order to be able to keep forcing US bases onto the Okinawan people.

The last and most stunning of such examples of Tokyo's carrot and stick policies was when sleazy Suga invited the heads of three hamlets around Henoko to Tokyo and directly offered them big budgets in front of the press, making the local leaders look like aborigines receiving bags of glass beads from white man for giving away land.

Embarrassing for Japanese government politics and for the local leaders, who apparently felt misinterpreted by Suga as they corrected some of his claims later, making clear that they were not pro-Henoko relocation.

@ bjohnson23

Okinawa is poor and it's being kept poor because of the bases. Not so ask the many Okinawan and Japanese companies over the years who have made lots of yen with huge contract but in the name of profit kept the majority and little to the worker.

You are only right insofar as it was Tokyo's policies to feed corrupt Okinawan politicians, and their kin in the construction business, in order to keep Okinawans submissive.

Tokyo's carrot and stick strategy has indeed led to a number of rather corrupt people, especially in the construction business and in local politics involved with bases, becoming more powerful, but more and more Okinawans are fed up with this kind of dirty politics and even powerful economic leaders in Okinawa are changing their stance towards Tokyo's divide and rule tactics.

All one has to do is look to the current gov of Okinawa who is owner of a major construction/development company and by the way made a lot of his money on gov base contract jobs.

Are you talking about Onaga? No, he's not the owner of a major construction/development company, but he's a thoroughbred politician from a politicians family.

Such apparently wrong claims are not really helping your credibility here. It is the kind of completely baseless rumors that the extreme right-wing "netuyo" are unscrupulously feeding on.

Anyway, each country has a different meaning for the same word.

I have to admit that I don't know what you are trying to say here.

Are you suggesting that the english term "hate speech" has a different meaning in Japan? Or rather that the Japanese translation of the term (ヘイトスピーチ) has a different connotation because of cultural differences?

I don't know of any profound differences of how the term is used in Japan, but if you believe there are please enlighten us.

He seemed have done some meaningful research, and his findings conincide with other official findings by US, Korean and Japanese experts.

In the few videos I have seen Marano refers to all the same few documents that are usually cited by the net uyoku. Mainly the notorious 1944 US army report that features arbitrary interviews with 20 or so "comfort women", a hand full of pimps and a collection of readily available information on comfort stations. The report wasn't even remotely designed to reveal violations of women's rights, but only aiming at unveiling weak points of the enemy. It's meaning and content is well known by anybody who has dealt with the matter and it is only people like Marano or Japanese right-wingers that get excited about it.

But if you believe there's anything meaningful that Marano has uncovered himself, tell us about it.

Why would Japan have to be bound by the definition of hate speech somebody wrote in Wiki?

Please feel free to look up "hate speech" in any serious dictionary, wiktionary or contemporary encyclopedia that you like, just make sure that you understand what it means.

If you don't care about what certain terms actually mean, but just use them in your own arbitrary way, then we won't be able to engage in a meaningful discourse with you here.

@ Triring

I also suggest people watch what they say because unlike Ms. Pak, he is a private citizen so he can sue people of　defamation as well as the publisher if they resist in taking down those post.

Watch what they say? Defamation? Could you explain that?

People here are just saying that Marano is uttering ridiculous things, that he's distorting history and that he's engaging in hate speech, all of which is easy to prove, just look at one of his videos.

If there's anybody who schuld be afraid of a defamation suit it is Marano. He's defaming several hundred former "comfort women" from more then 8 nations in his rampages. He has ridiculed the former comfort women and suggested that they should have put paper bags over their heads because they were so ugly. He's trying to make us believe that all those hundreds of largely consistent first hand accounts are all blatant lies.

And he claims all this without having done any meaningful first hand research and without ever having talked to even one former "comfort woman". Isn't that ridiculous?

He's a puffed-up internet "celebrity" who found the oddest of all audiences, one that is desperate to believe anything that could soothe their deep engraved inferiority complex.

He's not the first person in history to be successful with BS, but he's surely one of the most embarrassing I have seen in action.

@ tinawatanabe

I suggest that you look up the definition for "hate speech" as you seem a bit confused about its meaning.

To criticize someone based on arguments, and as a reaction to claims of that someone, doesn't account for hate speech, even if the criticism is harsh.

Wiki defines hate speech as "speech that attacks a person or group on the basis of attributes such as gender, ethnic origin, religion, race, disability, or sexual orientation."

I have seen several videos by Marano and what he says is so ridiculous that I wonder how an article on this guy could end up in the POLITICS section of JT.

As Marano's ruthless rampages surely trigger a lot of hate I would rather like to see an articles on him in the CRIME section.

Or with a slight touch of blasphemy, wouldn't an article on someone who calls himself "Texas Daddy" and who seems desperate to "entertain" the Japanese right-wingers better fit in the ENTERTAINMENT section?

While I do believe it is important to debunk the nonsense and myth uttered by such weird people I don't believe those who take him serious are within reach of whatsoever arguments.

@ lincolnman

Factually incorrect. Proposals are initiatives yet to be acted upon. And unless you were in the room behind those closed doors, your statement is an opinion, not a fact.

As always, trying to obscure the bullying and the discrimination that Okinawa is experiencing.

The base relocation was agreed on behind closed doors, so even if somebody might have proposed something to somebody behind closed doors we don't know about it, but in any way it has long ago left the stage of being a "proposal" as it is being built now.

If you want to go on bothering us with your euphemisms, go ahead.

Hardly. I support a fully executable plan to close Futenma, Kinser and parts of Foster – those closures would all change the status quo.

Unfortunately you are not even able to understand what Okinawans feel to be the main problem with the status quo.

The main problem in a nutshell is that Okinawans are fed up to be told what is good for them by people from Tokyo or the US.

They want to judge and decide by themselves on what they think is appropriate, safe, livable, sound, healthy and compatible with their idea of a democratic society. They are not anti-american and they don't even seem to demand a full withdrawal of US military from their islands, at least not in a first step.

As sfjp330 and other posters here clarify, the main point for the Okinawan people is to regain the level of self-determination that is a basic condition for being part of a true democracy.

Unfortunately you apparently lack the ability to understand what it means to not have proper democratic control over ones own homeland.

The US military and Tokyo told Okinawans Futenma is safe enough to operate for decades, now suddenly Tokyo says it is so unsafe that we have to hurry up to build another new US military facility in Okinawa to make Ginowan safe again.

That is what I call hypocritical and dishonest, and if someone like Suga grins at you while pretending to care about you, but didn't care a rotten nut for you for decades, and now only cares for you in order to get the governments idea of national security organized without creating problems in mainland constituencies, then I think "sleazy" is to soft an adjective to describe that kind of fallaciousness.

But that is what happens when people without real consideration for people have the power to decide on what is good for people, and that is why the people invented democracy in the first place.

You oppose that plan and have no alternate executable plan of your own – therefore, you support the status quo.

If Okinawans would be in full possession of their democratic rights Tokyo and the US military would come up with alternative plans immediately, no question, and everybody would be happy.

And there have been several viable alternative plans, even from pundits within the US military, but of course if Tokyo, in unity with the US military, thinks it will be easier to force things onto the Okinawan people rather then to develop the alternatives it will go ahead as far as it can get.

And again, no comment on my other two points above?

Sorry, but which other two valid points are you talking about?

This is getting rather redundant......

Yes, because you are not able to react to the content of arguments, but keep on talking about formal issues.

rather than a criticism of the various policy proposals

What Suga and Abe are doing with Okinawa are not democratic "policy proposals", but dishonest and discriminating actions. To call those policies "proposals" is factually wrong as they have not been proposed to any Japanese citizen, but have been agreed on behind closed doors between the US and the central government. And they are being forced onto the Okinawan people at the moment, so not a proposal at all.

I support quick resolution of the FRF issue and swift return of MCAS Futenma - you oppose that plan, therefore you are for the "status quo".

We have a different definition of what is the problem with the current status quo. You are expecting the Okinawan people to put up with a discriminating status quo in order to fulfill the wish list of the US military whereas I'm talking about ending discrimination and helping the Okinawan people to regain a normal level of democratic self-determination.

Judging from your arguments here at JT you don't care much about the democratic rights of the Okinawan people and I find that is a much bigger problem then openly showing disrespect for powerful but disrespectful people like Abe and Suga.

There is a lesson in that for you.

Actually I for my side wouldn't address someone I'm arguing on a par with in such a way as I find it contemptuous, but I guess that's just an example for how different people can perceive things.

Hogwash. Suga doesn’t have a disrespectful or dishonest attitude toward Okinawa.

He does have.

Here one of my recent posts on the topic:

"When sleazy Suga flew in three village heads from Henoko to Tokyo (a first in Japanese history that a cabinet secretary met with hamlet heads to talk about allocating budgets) in October 2015, and presented them to the press as if he had managed to pull some aborigines (I surely don't mean to offend aborigines here) over the barrel with a bag of glass beads, this was just the last and most absurd stunt in a long row of awkward carrot and stick measures from Tokyo."

It is just one of the many displays of bad attitude and disrespect towards the Okinawa people and the kind of farce the majority of Okinawans are truly sick of. Besides being a very bad example of ruthless power politics.

But there's a long list of further claims by Suga that most Okinawans feel to be disrespectful and dishonest.

So Suga talks about security for Ginowan citizens but the central government doesn't allow basic US military security standards (as put forward in the US AICUZ program) to be applied to Futenma, creating a potentially disastrous situation for Ginowan citizens on a daily basis. Tokyo is apparently using the lack of security at Futenma to pressure Okinawa to accept a discriminating move and reinforce the unequal status quo and the US presence in Okinawa for decades to come.

If Tokyo would really be interested in the wellbeing of Ginowan citizens they would take care that the standard security measures are implemented now.

And if Suga says the Henoko relocation plan was drafted with direct involvement of the Okinawan people and with their consent Okinawans can only be stunned by the degree of impertinence as they know well that he's talking about pressuring, bullying, intimidating, bribing and corrupting Okinawan people.

So no, not "Hogwash", but a daily and very real experience of disrespect and dishonesty for Okinawan citizens that you are turning a blind eye to.

I choose to not engage in insults, slurs and innuendo, it’s clear from your posts that you do.

I may not use "political correct" language, but other then you, I do not support a discriminating, unequal and anti-democratic status quo in Okinawa with my arguments.

I merely used your logic - if you say Gov Onaga represents the people of Okinawa in his role as Governor, then Chief Cabinet Secretary Suga represents all the people in Japan in his role as CSC

While Onaga was directly elected by the Okinawan people and is without any doubt also their symbolic representative on the national political stage, Suga was not elected by the Japanese people to be their "Chief Cabinet Secretary".

He was appointed to that position by Abe and is far from being anything like a symbolic representative for the Japanese people, which is Abe, or to some extent Akihito.

So it is not clear what you are trying to say with your odd attempt to equate Suga with Onaga.

I wouldn't call them anything,

It's up to you what you call people and how you decide to make your points.

I'd point out the factual errors in whatever they are trying to communicate - I wouldn't attack them personally.

If it is about factual errors, yes, if it is about bad attitude, no. Suga's disrespectful and dishonest attitude towards the Okinawan people is a central point of my criticism and I decide to clarify that by using appropriate language.

There is a lesson in that for you.

I believe it would support your arguments if you stick to your arguments rather then trying to play a senior teacher role here.

@ lincolnman

In your first quote above you call Chief Cabinet Secretary Suga “sleazy” and “pathetic”…..

So how would you call someone who grins at you while telling you blatant lies?

I know no better adjective then sleazy.

Suga is an elected member of the LDP which form the elected government of Japan and represents all Japanese citizens

Suga is not representing "the Japanese people". He represents "Kanagawa 2nd district".

But more then anything else now he represents the central government and is therefor in a much more powerful position then Onaga.

From that position Suga looks down on the Okinawan people and doesn't care a rotten nut for their wellbeing, but he says he does.

I find this kind of arrogance of power behavior sickening and I take the liberty of calling it by the adjectives I believe describe it best.

@ smithinjapan

And? Obviously the majority disagree with your friends.

Yes, that's called democracy.

Gee, that's funny, because whenever a few hundred people gather around Futenma you never say it's about a few hundred people, you say it's representative of how people across the prefecture feel.

A few hundred people? I say that clearly more then 70% of the Okinawan people oppose the Henoko relocation and demand at least a clear reduction of the US military burden if not a complete withdrawal. And that is not my personal opinion, but common knowledge in Okinawa based on factual evidence from a plethora of different sources that I have linked here several times.

@ Yubaru

Problem reading? I wrote some "pretty big guns" and they did, but they stayed away from making promises for anything.

Apparently they did promise something, openly and even more behind closed doors:

"Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s government has dangled prospects of a bigger budget for Okinawa, backing for a Disney resort and promises of aid for impoverished children in Japan’s second-poorest prefecture to boost the current mayor’s chances."

Sleazy Suga even went so far as to embarrass himself by saying he can't do anything as member of the government, but as a private person will talk to his friends at Disney's executive board to advance Ginowan's chances. Pathetic!

Onaga bears a large part of the blame for the government not wanting to meet with him

Onaga and the Okinawan people deserve absolutely no blame for the Henoko deadlock. It is solely a result of decades, if not centuries, of discriminating policies from the central government.

Tokyo has constantly ignored the voice of the Okinawan people, has cheated on them, intimidated and bullied them and that's the only reason why we are facing such a mess now.

Onaga is incredibly brave at facing the bullies in Tokyo to fulfill the mandate his people gave him.

How would you like it if some "underling" went over your head

Onaga is not an underling but an elected representative of the Okinawan people. If you are calling him an underling to humiliate him then you are humiliating the Okinawan people who voted fro him and who by large support his policies.

And apparently you don't know the Japanese constitution as there nowhere is a clause that says a prefectural governor is in any from an underling to the prime minister. The Local Autonomy chapter in the constitution is very clear here.

Onaga is avoiding it like the plague, and I know why and so does Abe.

No, Onaga is not avoiding a referendum like the plague, he is considering it, but he knows very well how this will heat up things to the point of no return, which could also mean a massive intervention from Tokyo, so he's very careful about the topic and apparently considers a possible last resort, if everything else fails.

The vote surely means a setback for Onaga, but most of my Ginowan friends, who all openly supported Shimura, feel it could mean a setback for Ginowan.

They are afraid that Sakima's submission to Tokyos carrot and stick policies will on the long run create another "failed" Okinawan city that is hooked on big budgets from Tokyo and filthy backdoor arrangements while scraping sustainable, long-term and citizens centered policies.

If Tokyo gets directly involved in local Okinawan matters it's always about dividing as well as corrupting people and usually completely messes up everything for years to come, as we can see in Henoko and in Nago in the late 90s.

So we will have to see how Sakima's long term strategies turn out and hope that the Tokyo clientele politics he has displayed in the election campaign were just a stopgap.

@ smithinjapan

Bam_boo: if the anti-base candidate had won you'd be gloating about how it supports Onaga and is the will of the people.

It seems as if you missed the fact that there was no pro-base candidate electable in Ginowan. There were two anti-Futenma-base candidates of wich one was also anti-Henoko-relocation while the other staunchly rejected to openly take a stance on Henoko. Get the facts straight.

Now you literally have the will of the people saying no to Onaga and suddenly you're saying it's not about that. Typical.

We are talking about the will of the people of Ginowan here to be accurate. And this was not a "no to Onaga" vote. It was a vote for the mayor of Ginowan.

Btw, I wonder who is the one "gloating" here?

@ Yubaru

Tokyo knew it couldn't make a pro-Henoko relocation vote out of a Ginowan mayor election, but its main strategy was to divide Okinawans by money to better rule them. The usual anti-democratic and discriminating stance Tokyo takes towards Okinawa.

You have to have your head buried in the sand if you think this too. Tokyo pulled out some pretty big guns in the LDP chain of command to come down here and support Sakima, and Onaga and the opposition did the same for his opponent.

No, Tokyo didn't try to make this a direct vote for the Henoko relocation, it was part of the media that did so. Tokyo even advised Sakima not to take an openly pro-Henoko stance because Abe's strategists figured that would damage Sakimas popularity. Apparently Tokyo also recalled the trauma it experienced in the Nago mayors election some years ago.

You are the one badly informed here.

Apart from that your arguments are contradicting each other. First you say that "Tokyo pulled out some pretty big guns" and then you deny that the big guns had any effect.

Why wouldn't those "big guns" have an effect in a contentious election like the one in Ginowan?

This was neither a vote on Onaga nor on the Henoko issue. And surely it was not a vote that says anything about what the majority of Okinawans want.

While especially Tokyo behind the scenes tried to cook it up it was a mayoral election and obviously a number of issues played into the result.

Tokyo knew it couldn't make a pro-Henoko relocation vote out of a Ginowan mayor election, but its main strategy was to divide Okinawans by money to better rule them. The usual anti-democratic and discriminating stance Tokyo takes towards Okinawa.

Taking into account how much time and money Abe and Soka Gakkai invested openly and behind the scenes in this election, and also considering that Sakima had the incumbents advantage, the results are moderate.

While the Futenma issue surely played a central role first analysis don't paint a clear picture as to exactly how.

It seems clear that Ginowan citizens are longing for a fast return of the Futenma base, but it is less clear whether they meant to endorse the Henoko relocation scheme with electing Sakima as he completely rejected to openly campaign on such an agenda.

While the voters for Shimura more or less equaled the votes for Iha at the last election in 2012 the votes for Sakima rose by 5000.

I would think this could be roughly the number that was mobilized by the ruthless LDP money and economic support promises and possibly also to some extent by a cut lose Soka Gakkai campaign.

Some voters surely thought they could get a carrot so now we can expect the inevitable stick to follow up.

@ smithinjapan

So, yes... choosing money over principles -- you prove what you claimed was not true.

Could it be that there's a slight difference between making a decision based on "fear of losing ones livelihood" and making a decision "for money reasons"?

But such a line of argument is surely lost on someone who never experienced a certain kind of hardship or who simply isn't able to empathize with the hardship of people from a different cultural background.

and in fact that's what happened when Nakaima tried to pull the same crap Onaga is pulling for political points and the government was going to pull money, so when people began to suffer Nakaima chose for himself and for them the money.

So then according to your "Okinawans have no principles" theory how could it happen that they voted for Onaga even Tokyo made it clear that it would cut budgets?

Nakaima has betrayed Okinawans and they voted him out of office for this betrayal even they knew it would hurt them.

This was a decision based on principles and with certainty it was not the first of such uncomfortable decisions that Okinawans have took along their long and thorny path.

Onaga is not doing what he is doing for the people -- he is flying around on his own chartered jets for his own personal missions, eating and drinking high class, and pretending that he's 'suffering' for the people when in reality they will ultimately suffer for his selfish behaviour, and he will not care at all.

Right-wing rumors, baseless accusations and insulting language towards the Okinawan people, their democratic process and their representatives.

If one doesn't know about Okinawas recent history and the social reality discriminatory remarks are surely the easiest way to catch attention. But with the Uyoku crowd applauding you, smithinjapan, I'm not sure if it is the attention you are looking for.

@ Galileo

I think you are mixing up quite some things here and are basing your arguments on wrong presumptions.

To think that Okinawans have to trade their citizens rights if they receive money from the central government is such a weird argument that it is hard to dispute it without resorting to sarcasm.

But first to the mistakes in your argument...

For a very longtime Okinawa has and continues to receive funding and special privileges from the government of Japan.

Yes, just like any other prefecture in Japan Okinawa is entitled to receive funding from the central government.

Some of the funds it gets from Tokyo are labeled "compensation" and are paid for the burden Okinawa carries, but even adding those Okinawa doesn't receive more tax money then other prefectures without US military.

And please note that compensation money is not payed for "subservience", but solely for the harm inflicted.

Regarding the allotment of overall central government budget Okinawa apparently is ranked 6th amongst the 47 prefectures, and nowhere over the top like some posters here want to make us believe.

So no, Okinawa is not getting a single Yen that would bind it to any special duties or subservience to Tokyo.

and special privileges from the government of Japan.

Please tell us what kind of "special privileges" are you talking about? I don't know of any special privileges that Okinawans receive.

Point being don’t bite the hand that feeds you.

While this might be true for pets it luckily is not how democracy and modern societies work.

If you chose to educate your children under such a paradigm I can't stop you, but I prefer humans who are able to speak out about injustice and criticize wrongdoings even if it is about the "feeding hand".

And besides the "hand that feeds" are the Japanese taxpayers which includes the Okinawan people. So if Okinawans want to bite their own hand why not?

Of course Tokyo constantly tries to corrupt Okinawan politicians and has developed an unethical "carrot and stick" policy towards Okinawa through which it attempts to make Okinawa subservient, but luckily the majority of Okinawans are not such kind of servile people.

The last election has even shown that they are willing to cope with some economic hardship if they can get back their freedom and dignity.

@ smithinjapan

As I said to Stuart, you and voiceofkinawa keep lying about a majority when Onaga is only supported by 32%, and claim you are the voice of Okinawa.

The question here is not how many Okinawans have elected Onaga in 2014, but how many Okinawans oppose the current relocation scheme and demand a drastic reduction of the US military burden.

Other then you, smithinjapan, we are able to base our claims (that we are talking about a large majority) on plenty of objective evidence, including numerous polls, the election results, the media coverage and public discussion in Okinawa, the publicly stated opinions of nearly all local representatives, etc. etc.

So what exactly do you base your claims on?

@ Yubaru

So called facts and figures and surveys are skewed to show support for the anti-base movement and nothing ever positive gets reported in the media

To say all facts and figures are skewed is such an absurd argument that it doesn't even need to be addressed.

It rather sounds like a conspiracy theory.

they have jobs to do and mouths to feed and are apathetic about the issue and for the most part just want Futenma gone and this issue put to bed, they are tired of the BS and games.

Is this is pure subjective guessing or can you base such unlikely claims on any objective evidence?

It doesn't really make much sense to discuss subjective speculations of pro-base folks on the opinion of the Okinawan people here.

As Japanese courts rarely decide against the government the odds are against Onaga and the Okinawan people, but it is an important step to take as Okinawans will know whether their democratic rights are properly protected within the Japanese system or not.

“My concern is the more the Japanese government pushes the current ... plan, the more resistance will get stronger and eventually get so strong as to make it difficult to maintain other important (U.S.) facilities on Okinawa,”

Very true statement by Mochizuki. Okinawans have been fighting agains the bases since 70 years and whatever the outcome of this legal battle will be they will go on with their opposition as long as they are discriminated against.

@ nakanoguy01

successive governors have approved of the plan to move futenma but onaga was the first to oppose the move and win.

No that is not true. No governor has proactively supported the Henoko relocation. No governor would be elected in Okinawa with such a pro-base agenda.

@ smithinjapan

Exactly. He is not supported by the majority of Okinawans, either.

Again spreading false information, smithinjapan. And again not even the slightest attempt to provide evidence for your false claims.

The only people in Okinawa who believe in such statements are the pro-base 5% that you apparently belong to.

The majority of Okinawans clearly support Onaga on the Henoko issue. All polls say that 70% to 80% are standing behind Onaga and the public discussion in Okinawa makes it even more clear.

@ sashimigaijin

The last time a base referendum was held only 40 percent of eligible voters bothered to vote.

Can you explain what you are talking about?

The only referendum ever held in Okinawa on US bases was in Nago in 1997 and it had a 82% turnout. Even offered an unreal amount of economic development packages and a PR blitz by the central government Nago citizens voted agains hosting the base.

And while the politicians and media will feed the usual lies to the public you can be sure that all over the Islamic world "ordinary peace loving Muslims" including the ones currently inundating Germany are privately or openly celebrating right now.

(ohara @ 09:35AM JST)

What exactly do you want to say with such an obscure generalization? Do you want people to start looking out for "ordinary peace loving Muslims" in their neighborhood and monitor them?

I know many muslim people and they are obviously shocked by this heinous terror.

I believe with this kind of unspecified accusations of people of a certain belief one is sowing the seeds of discord and hatred.

Being in shock and agony about what is happening in Paris it is hard to engage in a meaningful discussion here, but I feel it is important to not play the hate game that this terrorist obviously are trying to get us into.

It would be respectful towards the victims to allow for a time of mourning and not use this stage for any kind of agitation.

The victims, their relatives and the people in Paris deserve our sympathy and support.

Polling data should always be taken with a grain of salt for obvious reasons.

Yes, polling is surely not something to rely on without proper judgement, but if polls are conducted and interpreted in a scientific manner they are seen as factual evidence.

And this is even more true if there is more then one poll conducted on the same topic, but asking in different ways.

However the very same people that feel so sorry for Okinawan's are always unwilling to have the bases in their backyard so dont try to make it sound like all Japanese are against it, they aint.

Sure, NIMBY is a wide spread phenomena.

We can only guess how Japanese would decide if directly asked to vote on the Okinawan situation - of course such a scenario would directly go against the Japanese constitution and for that reason could never be realized - but I'm very sure that even they won't want to have the US military mess in their backyard won't ever directly vote for discriminating the Okinawan people. I do so much believe in the healthy sense of justice of the Japanese people.

You still have much to learn about this, but your judgement is clouded, hence being unable to see the three sides to this story.

Yubaru, I believe it would better help your case if you'd stick to bringing up arguments based on something objectifiable instead.

turbotsat,

your arguments are so twisted that it makes sense to look at them a bit more in detail.

If all the complaints posters are making over a few houses being paved over,

OK, we understand that this is not about houses related to you or any of your kin.

at a time directly contemporary to the massive actions Japan undertook that I posted above, then neither is pointing out the ridiculousness of their claims in comparison to the much greater claims other peoples in the region have against them.

What do you mean by "the much greater claims other peoples in the region have against them."? Whose claims against who are you talking about here?

The claims of Chinese human rights victims against Okinawan civilians? Or possibly the claims of those victims against the people here (including me?) who claim that the human rights of Okinawans were violated?

It seems impossible to get your point here, but it sounds like you are talking about some kind of trading venue for claims stemming from human rights violations.

Could it be that you are trying to say: because the Japanese military violated the human rights of Chinese (and other nations) civilians the US military is entitled violate the human rights of Okinawan civilians?

If so may I ask which concept of justice this weird argument is based on? Sounds a bit like from the Hundred Years' War out of the Middle Ages.

Have you ever heard of the Hague or the Geneva Conventions?

It is a fact that the rights of the Okinawan people were violated, at least according to the Hague convention, which was ratified by the US.

And it is a fact that how the Okinawan people are treated by the central government wouldn't be possible in any other proper democracy I know of. It is an unfair, unbalanced, unjust and discriminatory.

Okinawans have truth and justice on their side and that's why we can only hope they will succeed in their struggle.

@ notasap OCT. 30, 2015 - 03:16AM JST

Those that feel that Okinawa should have the final word here DO NOT CARE ABOUT DEMOCRACY or the views of the majority of Japanese citizens

It seems as if you get your ideas about democracy from a rather outdated information source. Actually so outdated that even the first US constitution from 1781 seems more advanced.

Please not that in all modern democracies there are provisions that prevent a simple "dictatorship of the majority". So it is not possible that a national majority could dictate policies specifically to one regional minority and this is for very good reasons.

Imagine 49 US states agreeing on 1 state as the best place to dispose all contaminated garbage. Ridiculous idea that wouldn't be compatible with the constitution. Even if national security is concerned does the US federal government need the consent of the states and can not just dictate policies to specific states.

In Japan the constitutional right which guarantees this is called "local self-government".

But what is happening with Okinawa is a constant violation of this right of local self-government.

Why is this possible? Because the US had made a military colony out of Okinawa and when the prefecture was returned to Japan it was occupied by US military and between the US and Tokyo it was agreed on that Okinawa would not enjoy equal rights with other prefectures.

Of course there are provisions like "eminent domain" to force individuals to provide land for important public projects, but it would never be possible to build a US base through "eminent domain" in Japan.

And one final mistake in your assumptions. It is not at all a majority view in Japan that Okinawa should shoulder such an disproportional burden. The Japanese people have never been directly asked about such decisions and even they were not directly addressed during national elections.

Actually there are a number of polls that indicate that a majority of Japanese sympathize with Okinawans and find it unjust what is happening there. As I said before anybody with a normal sense of justice can understand that the situation in Okinawa is appallingly unjust.

@ turbotsat OCT. 30, 2015 - 01:21PM JST

Absolutely off topic post.

Anyway, it is hard to believe that there are still people in this world who think it makes sense to offset human rights violations against human rights violations. Absurd worldview, but we know it well from the Japanese Uyoku right-wingers crowd who is constantly pointing fingers to all kinds of human rights violations committed by everyone except Japan.

@ Black Sabbath OCT. 30, 2015 - 02:06AM JST

Thanks for the link, which supports what I and others here are saying: that clearly more then 70% of the Okinawan people demand a clear reduction of the U.S. military bases and oppose the current Futenma relocation scheme within the prefecture.

Okinawans are so unified in opposing the new Henoko facility because they fear that this will cement the massive US military presence in Okinawa for another some decades and this is a very real fear.

While Henoko might seem like a betterment it is in fact a way to secure the massive US military's foothold in Okinawas central and northern part for the time being. It will make it much more difficult for Okinawans to get rid of the larger part of the US military.

For Okinawans it is absolutely crucial to stop this relocation, in order to regain democratic control of their island and to achieve a drastic reduction of US military on their own terms.

This is not about one US base more or less, but about being able to decide on ones future and about whether an anti-democratic Japanese government going berserk against its own citizens can be stopped by the people.

If Okinawans are not able to stop Henoko it will create a dangerous precedent for forceful suppression of peaceful popular movements and this will have serious repercussions in all of Japan. On the contrary, if Okinawans manage to stop this ignorant arrogant government it would give democratic spirit in Japan a very positive stimulus.

In Okinawa it seems there is a division in the voice, not a unison.

I can not really follow your argument as neither in Gandhis India nor in Martin Luther King Jr.'s US was there an "unisono voice", at the beginning of their respective fights they weren't even able to represent a clear majority. The only real power they had on their side was truth and the very human sense for justice.

In Okinawa the voice is as clear as it can possibly get in a pluralist democracy: somewhere between 70% to 80 % are clear about their demand to stop the Henoko relocation and to have the US military footprint on the island drastically reduced. And please note that the large anti-Henoko, anti-US military demonstrations in Okinawa are by proportion of the population manyfold larger then any single demonstration that has ever happened in India or the US, even if you take the lowest official estimates.

Now anybody with a sense of justice (and without a clear bias) should be able to see that the status quo in regard to US military in Japan is not fair and that the history, which led to this apparent injustice, is defined by the violation of the human rights of the Okinawan people.

Even democracy in its purest form is a thinly concealed veil of what is the truest point in nature: the strong and powerful will always control the weak.

I believe that the best contemporary democracies are very successful at appointing exactly that problem by making sure, through various provisions, that there is no force beside the people that is able to control the people and by taking care that minority rights are respected by the majority.

Unfortunately the Japanese democratic system is comparably weak and as you say often the strong control the weak, but Okinawans are doing their best to change this.

The country I hail from is a democracy ... "The People" have never had the final say because we have delegated representatives to speak for us

Geez, Fadamor, that sounds scary. How come the people never had the final say even it's supposed to be a democracy? So then in your country the representatives don't care about the peoples mandate?

Could it be that you're from a country like Azerbaijan or maybe Kazakhstan?

So yes, Okinawa is chosen to host bases by Japan and always WILL be chosen to host bases by Japan.

May be you missed the point of this discussion here which is not about whether there should be any US military bases in Okinawa, but whether so many are needed and especially whether a new military facility is so desperately needed that it is opportune to override basic democratic rights.

It speaks volumes though that you shied away from providing any comparable example from other established democracies.

As for "suffer"... LOL.

OK, we get your mindset. Apparently you only endorse "suffering" that you define as such. That makes it quite meaningless to discuss this topic with you.

Just to clarify it for the record: Okinawans are suffering for a variety of reasons.

There are concrete reasons like noise, fear of accidents, fear of becoming a victim to the dangers that a military in your backyard poses (like the recent agent orange pollution scandal), further the inability to access the land and the graves of ones ancestors, the inability to plan ones cities in a meaningful way, etc. etc.

But the main point here is that Okinawans are deprived of the ability to determine the future of their island themselves.

Because the Japanese government and the US military are forcing a military occupation onto Okinawans, that in size and proportion is complete out of any rational balance, Okinawans apparently feel that their very "pursuit of happiness" is endangered.

I believe the most real and scary of all fears that Okinawans bear comes from their very own horrifying experience, that of having been the battlefield where Japan was defended at all costs.

It is the experience of having lost one quarter of the civilian population for the "defense" of "ones nation", because military doesn't care a rotten nut for the people.

@ Fadamor OCT. 29, 2015 - 12:18AM JST

It's not my job to ensure the security of the nation named "Japan". That job rightfully belongs to the Japanese government. They have determined that a U.S. Marine base is needed in Okinawa to help with the security of the region. What you think or what I think doesn't matter.

This sounds like the nation you come from is not a democracy. In a democracy it is the people who have the final say on all national matters, including national security, and the government ought to listen closely to what the people want.

In a democracy national defense is there to protect the people, not to take away their freedom and in a democracy the burden each region bears has to be somehow balanced on a rational basis, which is clearly not the case in Okinawa.

The fact that a bunch of Okinawans can't see the need for the base

It is not "a bunch of Okinawans" who oppose the new military base in Henoko, but the large majority.

I believe voiceofokinawa is Okinawan and he is just asking the same questions that this large majority has been asking for more then a decade: why does it have to be Okinawa who has to suffer once again?

Neither voiceofokinawa nor the Okinawan people have gotten a remotely satisfying answer to such questions and obviously neither Tokyo nor Washington thought they would need to seriously answer such questions. It seems they are so used to harassing Okinawans and forcing things upon to them that they never really considered seriously consulting Okinawans.

I don't find it odd in the least that the Japanese government has overridden the Okinawan governor.

The Japanese government has not only overridden the Okinawan governor, but is attempting to force something onto the Okinawan people that they clearly don't wan't and this is odd, at least in a proper democracy.

If you think this is business as usual then please show us anything comparable (where the central government has forced a policy onto a whole prefecture, a state or a region, against the democratically expressed will of the clear majority of that region) from another established democracy. I don't know any such example and I don't think it exists as it would contradict the very basis on which modern democracies are built on.

considering Okinawans have absolutely ZERO interest in the security of Japan

Okinawans over the past 70 years have provided more then 20% of their main island for the "security of Japan" so what you say just sounds quite impertinent and totally amiss.

@ smithinjapan OCT. 28, 2015 - 07:50PM JST

You guys constantly claim that he speaks on behalf of Okinawa, without addressing the fact that half or more stand against him.

What evidence do you base that wired claims on? Just because they didn't vote for him doesn't mean that they stand against him.

Anyway, the way you try to reason here just shows that you have not the slightest respect for the Okinawan democratic process.

Wrong. Not a large majority. Not even a majority.

Yes a very clear and easy to verify majority of somewhere between 70% and 80% of Okinawan oppose the Henoko relocation.

On several occasions have I and others here provided ample and fact-based evidence from various sources for such claims whereas you have yet to provide one objectifiable piece of evidence for such an absurd claim.

It seems you are making up your very personal story about Okinawa, but it is completely out of tune with the reality in the prefecture.

And the Okinawan people live in Japan; it's not THEIR land to decide what to do with, it's Japan's. Japan has decided, so it's time for that minority to listen.

What exactly is that legal subject "Japan" you are talking about? And how does that "Japan" own Okinawan land, e.g. when exactly has Japan decided to expropriate Okinawans?

I believe you are mixing up quite some things here, smithinjapan. Obviously you don't know much about the Japanese constitution as there is nothing even remotely hinting at a legal subject called "Japan" in possession of all Okinawan land.

Please note that in the current constitution the subject is "the people" who are guaranteed liberty, the pursuit of happiness and local self-government.

Okinawans are the people and if there's any kind of common "subject" that can limit the freedom of the individual it is "the people", who in Okinawa happen to be Okinawans. If the majority of Japanese would want to force something onto the majority of Okinawans (note that this is not happening at the moment, at least not yet) it would very likely interfere with the constitutional right to local self-government, but then looking at your posts here I suppose trying to engage you in such a discussion wouldn't make much sense...