Should the Japanese government stick to the 2006 agreement over the realignment of U.S. forces in Japan, which the previous government and the U.S. agreed upon?

Sunday 08th November, 06:00 AM JST

› Login to comment

Latest 15 of 40 Total Comments Show All

glycol57 at 02:01 AM JST - 13th November

International agreements should be adhered-to. Countries that change or throw out such agreements every time the people in government change are ... well ... unreliable. Why make ANY kinds of agreements, ANY long-term plans with such people ? The system must be stronger than the individuals who inhabit it at any given moment or it's all useless.

Now BAD agreements - or ones that became bad because circumstances and situation have changed considerably - CAN often be re-negotiated. That's the proper, honest, approach.
sonnoujoui at 05:03 PM JST - 13th November

USA out of Japan! NOW!!!
sonnoujoui at 05:08 PM JST - 13th November

USA out of Japan! NOW!!! The war is already over more than 60 years.
Sarge at 05:13 PM JST - 13th November

"USA out of Japan! Now!"

Yeah, but the majority of Japanese favor a continued U.S. military presence.

"The war is already over more than 60 years"

Yeah, and Japan has stayed out of trouble for over 60 years because of... get ready... the U.S. military!
sonnoujoui at 11:22 PM JST - 13th November

No, the Japanese want them out. The Japanese people also voted for Hatoyama knowing his position about politics with the US.

Do you seriously think Japan would be attacked if the US would leave? Get real!
USNinJapan2 at 02:06 AM JST - 14th November

sonnoujoui

The Japanese people also voted for Hatoyama knowing his position about politics with the US.

Assuming you are one of them, it was incredibly naive to have believed that a group of novices to the diplomatic stage such as Hatoyama and the DPJ could take office for the first time in half a century and expect them to summarily and significantly alter the power balance between Japan and its strongest and most influencial ally. Perhaps with time and much needed experience if they manage to stay in power, but I'm afraid they've made some campaign promises on which they really don't have the means to deliver. It's going to be particualarly hard for them to save face on this base realignement issue.

Do you seriously think Japan would be attacked if the US would leave?

Maybe, maybe not. But you cannot say with any degree of certainty that with US military gone from the region in a few years' time the geopolitical stage in East Asia could change to make armed conflict between Japan and one of its Asian neighbors a possibility. The degree of probability is debatable but it certainly is very much possible. On the other hand, you can say with a pretty good helping of certainty that Japan would NOT be attacked while the US military presence is maintained here. Think about it, open anymosity towards Japan is still periodically expressed by the peoples of neighboring countries and aggressive postures and actions are taken by neighboring governments in regards to the multiple territorial disputes that they curently have with Japan, and that's WITH the US military presence. Speaking of getting real, do you believe that these problems will magically go away or even diminish if we were to leave Japan? The odds are even if it doesn't lead to all out war, with our absence Japan's opponents will be emboldened, diplomatic friction will increase because after all military capability is a form of diplomacy, and Japan's difficulties with it's neighbors would compound and increase. Smart strategic and fiscal play for Japan is to continue to support and maintain the US military presence. That's what's real.
harmoneeikaiwa at 03:12 AM JST - 14th November

That is why there is democracy.Otherwise have a Communist system where with a change of govt, results in the status quo.
USNinJapan2 at 11:28 AM JST - 14th November

harmoneeikaiwa

...results in the status quo.

When the status quo is the most mutually beneficial condition it is more desirable than seeking change for the sake of it with litle consideration for the consequences.
noborito at 12:48 PM JST - 14th November

From the actions of President Obama, the Japan importance is over. Off to Singapore.... Skipping the Imperial Family.
sonnoujoui at 05:54 PM JST - 14th November

USNinJapan2

alter the power balance between Japan and its strongest and most influencial ally.

It's high time to make a change. And it would be a good thing if Hatoyama would not only talk but do some changes.

But you cannot say with any degree of certainty that with US military gone from the region in a few years' time the geopolitical stage in East Asia could change to make armed conflict between Japan and one of its Asian neighbors a possibility.

No, it is very unlikely there will be an attack from one of the neighbouring countries, with or without american forces in Japan. There is only 1 country possible, and that is North Korea. And they wouldnt invade Japan, they'd drop an A-bomb. I wonder how a Navy man like you could avoid that. But, I dont think this will happen anyway.

By the way, did that military base on Hawaii about 70 years ago prevent an attack?

If Japan wouldnt have relied on big america all the time, then it would probably already have arranged better relationships with it's neighbouring countries. Now they realise, USA is on the downfall and it's better to have good relationships with the awakening dragon China.

So, kichiku-beihei out of Japan!
USNinJapan2 at 06:36 PM JST - 14th November

sonnoujoui

By the way, did that military base on Hawaii about 70 years ago prevent an attack?

LOL. Talk about confusing your fruits. Hawaii was attacked by your country precisely because it was a military target. The attack's intent was to destroy the US' power projection abilities in the Pacific and to discourage it from engaging Japan in a larger drawn out conflict. It failed miserably on both counts. If diplomatic and economic ties between Japan and its 'friends' in the region sour, the US forces in Japan today are about the only deterrents you have against possible military action. Also, these existing diplomatic and economic ties aren't critical enough to prevent military confrontation if these countries feel it is called for. However, a similar armed conflict with the US is not desired by these same countries because the ties they have with the US are indeed critical to their welfare. Case in point, China does not desire a military conflict with the US and won't for the foreseeable future because the economic ties with the US are far too vital for its survival. Attacking Japan under any pretense will automotically mean armed conflict with the US, so yes, the US military presence in Japan is a very real deterrent.

So, kichiku-beihei out of Japan!

Good luck with that. I wouldn't hold your breath though; you won't be seeing that dream realized anytime soon, probably not in your life time.
sonnoujoui at 07:14 PM JST - 14th November

Hawaii was a military target becase military was there. Okinawa could be another military target in a new conflict. If I'd be an islamic terrorist in Japan, I'd attack american military bases. China would never attack Japan. What for? They are making business with each other. It's like Russia would never attack Germany, with or without american bases there. Now, what is sure is that rape incidents on Okinawa would decline without US bases. That is reason enough for them to leave. The possibility of an Okinawan girl to be raped by an american soldier is higher than beeing caught by any asian invaders.

BTW, where did I say I am Japanese?

Case in point, China does not desire a military conflict with the US and won't for the foreseeable future because the economic ties with the US are far too vital for its survival.

Funny, I rather think it's the other way around. The US doesnt want military conflict with China because the economic ties with China are far too vital for the survival of the US.

Good luck with that. I wouldn't hold your breath though; you won't be seeing that dream realized anytime soon, probably not in your life time.

Well, as I plan to live for the next 50 years I am quite confident. Mainly because it's just a matter of time that the US wont be able to maintain such a big army anymore as it is already on the way of economic decline. Ask the Romans where their military bases in Germania, Gaul and Brittania are now. lol
Antonios_M at 10:49 PM JST - 14th November

Ask the Romans where their military bases in Germania, Gaul and Brittania are now

Haha...very clever statement. Its unfortunate but some Americans tend to believe that the power of their state will remain forever. That is a huge ignorance of history itself. U.S bases of Okinawa are just the "fossils" of the post-war era and the Cold War. Nobody needs them and above all, U.S don't need them.
USNinJapan2 at 12:01 AM JST - 15th November

sonnoujoui

Now, what is sure is that rape incidents on Okinawa would decline without US bases. That is reason enough for them to leave.

So you're real concern is for rape victims in Okinawa? How touching. Removing the US military from the island will prevent, oh, .82% of all crimes committed on Okinawa. Since the SOFA population is 3.9% of the total Okinawa population that means the local Japanese populace commit 5 times as many crimes per capita as we service members. Talk about throwing the baby out with the bathwater. The military crime rate on Okinawa is many times less than the local population and it's sheer ignorance and prejudice to invoke it as a reason for the our removal. http://www.stumbleupon.com/s/#2mXj0W/nihon.awardspace.com/okinawasofacrime.html/

No one said the US "empire" will remain as strong as it has been for ever, but applying your standared of the Roman Empire, I'd say we have a few hundred years before our decline. Like I said, not in your life time.
sonnoujoui at 08:11 PM JST - 15th November

So you're real concern is for rape victims in Okinawa? How touching.

I think it's kind of strange, that you are making fun of the rape victims by that statement.

About your statistics - there is a saying: "Dont believe any statistics that you didnt fake yourself." There are several things that are not taken into account. Cases where the predetaor wasnt identified and crimes that havent been reportet at all. And it doesnt show all the rapes and crimes that happened right after US military came to Okinawa. If the US military would leave, then the total numbers of crimes would go back. That is sure.

The US mlitary is a guest in Japan, and therefore they have to be extra carefull. Of course the average number of crimes commited by military members or police should be lower than that of the average people, that also includes jobless people, drug addicts, etc. I hope it's same in the US as well. US-military doesnt belong to Japan and therefore they should leave. The crimes are just one of many reasons.

No one said the US "empire" will remain as strong as it has been for ever, but applying your standared of the Roman Empire, I'd say we have a few hundred years before our decline. Like I said, not in your life time.

Funny, you assume that the "American Empie" will stay as long as the Roman Empire. Only totally blind people havent noticed yet the decline of the Superpower America.