Does the U.S. need to have military bases anywhere in Japan?

Monday 04th August, 06:53 AM JST

Latest 15 of 117 Total Comments Show All

TheFunnyMan at 10:48 AM JST - 6th August

Imagawa, "For either the USSR or China to attack the US they would first have to go through these defence rings. It would have stopped them, but it would have expensively slowed them down."

From the "but it would have slowed them down" I assume that you meant "it would not have stopped them" I can assure you that the Soviet Union and China did not have the potential power to land a significant number of troops in Japan at any time during the cold war once the US had established those bases, and given the closeness of Japan, it would have been a cakewalk compared to an attempted invasion of America. The Soviet Navy in the region lacked the power to do much of anything to its American counterpart, and the Chinese navy was more or less non-existent until after they broke with the USSR. The military bases in Japan were not placed there with the intention of preventing an invasion of America (which was unnecessary thanks to ICBMs) but rather with the intention of preventing the spread of communism, which was considered an threat to American interests, and therefore an indirect threat to American security. They did additionally provide security for Japan in the early years of the cold war when it was believed that it might fall to communism. Read up on the effects of the Yoshida Doctrine on Japan and see what that says about security arrangements and the economic results of American basing.

Which brings me to my opinion on the US military bases in general. As an American, I think that forward deploying military forces to East Asia is expensive and at this point the costs far outweigh the benefits. We do not need those bases anymore, Japan is unlikely to be invaded (and since its military budget is the 6th highest in the world, in case of conflict it could look after itself) and should a conflict with China occur over anything other than Japan (Taiwan is far more likely), the Japanese government would likely forbid the use of these bases in the war effort. Japan doesn't need them, we don't need them, and they are expensive. Why are they still there?
apecNetworks at 03:58 PM JST - 6th August

To Imagawa:

If you are an American I can well understand you believing what you were taught to believe, it is the drip drip feed of your education, but should you have the courage to step outside what you have been taught without feeling you are betraying your country, which you would not be doing, you might just be able to see the world & the US from a surprisingly different poiint of view.

That statement is REALLY important. An American generally is kept in the dark of US Foreign Policy, and the screening in higher education is intense. If a student has no solid background/reason to be studying US Foreign Policy, many are pressured out. This occurs in first, second and third tier colleges, but the staff directs the screening. My background did help me get in and stay in certain classes. Also, my aptitude for it was sky high in certain categories, and students w/ outstanding skill(s) may be allowed. Also, some Professors must like the student views to go higher. However, it is a closed society and this is more evident at the highest levels. Thus, many Americans are kept out, and why soooo many do not understand why US Bases are in Japan - for example. It is a hard and a dangerous field depending on a student's background and strength of sponsor(s).
imagawa at 05:27 AM JST - 7th August

The Funny Man

"but rather with the intention of preventing the spread of communism, which was considered an threat to American interests, and therefore an indirect threat to American security."

American security or American business? Is there in fact, for America, a difference?

You go on to say;

"I think that forward deploying military forces to East Asia is expensive and at this point the costs far outweigh the benefits. "

But hasn`t this alway been the case? The "fight" against communism was alawys going to be unwinnable when you are fighting against what a native population "believes" they want?

In any real sense I agree with you, but I believe the US has handled the last 60+ years so badly that they have lost trust where they had it and confirmed a lack of trust where that already existed.

The bases in Japan today have lost any meaning they might once have had and as such should be removed, for both the Japans and Americas sake.

Sorry but my keyboard seems to have gone totally mad, the keys have all changed and I have to give up. Sorry.
diveit at 07:07 AM JST - 7th August

Does the U.S. need to have military bases anywhere in Japan? - No...but Asia does. Though Japan has moved to a more modern society, many of the old people (especially those in J-gov) tend to be Oji-tarians(Old men doing only what they want to do without thought of those around them). This is not to say that the Japanese people are mean spirited but they tend to not be able to see past their noses.

So, to ensure that a military buildup does not happen in Asia (which Japan would aggrevate unintentionally), the U.S. is the best balancer and best credible powerbroker. Of course, we know, that Joe E-1 Marine is not the best diplomat and face of America but the total American military forces in Japan is diplomatically and respectfully of its host.
bibric at 09:15 AM JST - 7th August

Japan...it's really hard to understand Japanese are civilized in terms of "humanity and dignity on themselves and others".

The US, the strong military power, the primitive measure is very useful and effective in this country, Japan.

Even China, Russia, and North Korea are eager to have the US military stationing in Japan.
imagawa at 09:25 AM JST - 7th August

Bibric

Like most deep poets your words will not be understood in your life time. This sad but how it is.

Now can I ask are you for or against US bases in Japan?
bibric at 09:42 AM JST - 7th August

imagawa

I'm very sorry that at this point, I agree US has to station in Japan. Sorry about it. I know how hard it is to live under the foreign influence!

US military bases have caused numerous crimes to the innocent citizens in South Korea and Japan. Still many Cons want them in Korea. I strongly disagree with that. Yet, Japan...there are too many Cons like Korea..Sorry about that.
tokyotom at 11:35 AM JST - 7th August

Yes
nigelboy at 01:27 PM JST - 7th August

"Cost sharing in support of U.S. forces stationed on its territory remains Japan’s most significant responsibility sharing contribution. Indeed, its host nation support is the most generous of any U.S. ally, and consists of funding covered under both the Special Measures Agreement (SMA) and the Facilities Improvement Program (FIP). Japan’s cost sharing support for U.S. forces in 2000 was $5.0 billion, covering 78.9 percent of U.S. basing costs. "

So the answer is Yes.
TheFunnyMan at 03:01 PM JST - 7th August

Imagawa, To a certain extent there is not a difference. Business (more specifically money) is always linked to political power. For America or any other country, money is a necessity for power, which is in turn a necessity for security. However, it is but one factor among many, and America has on occasion subordinated business and monetary interests to political factors. The effort poured into assisting the reconstruction of Japan after WWII and the protections accorded to Japanese business in order to allow it growth are examples of that. (look up the Yoshida doctrine to see just what American military engagement with Japan post WWII did for the economy)

Although they seem useless now, I disagree with your assertion that the bases were always that way. They proved extremely helpful in the Korean war, a war which significantly aided Japan's economy, and which did succeed in preventing the spread of a brutal communist regime. They also proved useful in the symbolic containment of Soviet power throughout the Cold War. Only after the Cold War ended did they lose their utility.
imagawa at 07:16 PM JST - 7th August

TheFunnyMan.

"The bases in Japan today have lost any meaning they might once have had and as such should be removed, for both the Japans and Americas sake."

"they might once have had"

I think, though for different reasons, we were in agreement.

I would add that I think Bibric wants the bases in Japan so as to keep them out of Korea, but still close to hand should South Korea need a little helping hand.
Howardtheduck at 01:46 AM JST - 8th August

I think we (the US) needs some bases in Japan, but at a reduced level, and in different areas. Okinawa, while strategic, is a Cold War relic. China is growing stronger by the day, and if the US military is stretched fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq, than it certainly is not prepared for China re-taking Taiwan by force (one of the reasons often cited for keeping a base in Okinawa was to protect Taiwan). The Soviet Union is dead and gone, and really, the only country in the area that would start a war (where the US could beat it) is North Korea. I think the US should withdraw a lot of the personnel to Guam, and make a new base in the Tohoku region of Honshu, say in Akita ken. Heck, the towns up there are dying out, so a military base could be economically beneficial to the area.

Before people shout off about Okinawa's strategic importance, remember, on paper, China's got the US by the b@#$s. The economic ties are too important now with China to risk a war. Like it or not, China is in the driver's seat for unification with Taiwan. It's a matter of time before China gets the political or military clout to unify the island with the mainland.

In Tohoku, however, there is more space for a base (Okinawa is cramped), it is closer to the Dear Leader's Socialist Paradise (obvious sarcasm), and, if the need arose, Russia. The US would still be maintaining it's security pacts with Japan and South Korea, and we could finally be rid of the festering, money-bleeding problem that is Okinawa.
dontpanic at 05:38 PM JST - 8th August

The bases are needed to secure the US' commercial and political interests in the area. While there's a quantifiable advantage to be had, the US will cajole, bully or buy influence and resources wherever and whenever it can.

As a smaller player in the game of risk, I'm sure the Japanese government asks itself where its own best interests lie on a daily basis. For now it's in Japan's commercial and political interests to ally with the US and keep the bases. Having said that, with the growing commercial and political influence of China, India and Russia, that link must be weakening.

As for the bases ongoing influence on security, not much, barring something kicking off in Taiwan or North Korea I doubt much will change. For the aforementioned new players, the 'long game' is being played out in Africa and South America.
Farmboy at 06:32 PM JST - 10th August

If there are no U.S. bases in Japan, then Japan will need to have more weapons and troops, since some of its neighbors aren't all that friendly. If Japan has more weapons and troops, there are just enough right wing nutcases in politics to get the country back into an aggressive, antagonistic philosophy, despite what the Japanese people want, and there goes the peace and stability in the region. The U.S. has forgotten this point, or believes the nature of the politicians have changed, so they've been pushing Japan to expand their military capabilities, but in my opinion this is a mistake. There have always been peace-loving people in Japan, but those people won't be the ones who choose whether or not to enter into armed conflict.

So yes, the U.S. needs to have bases in Japan. There are drawbacks for both countries, but bases are needed.
retirednavygaijin at 01:52 PM JST - 23rd August

This question will be easily answered if/when the North Koreans start lobbing missiles over here in thier last ditch effort to take as much with them when they go down.