Marine base in Okinawa [Our American Cousin]
Dear Shoji,
.
As I mentioned before, I am not well informed about the issues and interests involved in the "Marines in Okinawa" crisis. However, a knowledgeable contributor to NBR's Japan-U.S. Discussion Forum, Rodney E. Armstrong suggests this:.
"The only realistic solution is now, as it has been for almost 14 years: The Marines send their Futenma transport plane activities to Kadena to enjoy the US Air Force's renowned hospitality and their helicopters to a new (and modest) base carved out of Camp Schwab. Otherwise, the US brings down the Hatoyama government, and the stakes go up to a total removal of the Marines from Okinawa amidst a cooling of the overall US-Japan relationship.".
Armstrong probably represents the opinion of American Foreign Service experts. He has a long record of involvement in US-Japan diplomacy and trade..
Regards,
Mike 2010-04-21
普天間基地の件、当事者である日本人の一人として何かコメントしたいのですが、沖縄ならぬ茶番劇が進行中の永田町に近く住んでいると、呆れることばかりで、容易に考えがまとまりません。
新聞にも書かれていますが、日米合意になっている基地移転案の何処が不都合なのか、民主党政権は沈黙したままであり、現行案に関する論理的な反論ができぬ限、米国側から見れば、これから出て来るかも知れぬ移転案は政権交代を誇示するための策にしか過ぎず、安全保障を置き去りにした愚策と映るでありましょう。
普天間基地を云々する前に、幼児性濃厚な現政権、何とも困ったものです。Mikeに宛ててコメントすれば、日本の恥を曝すようなもので、口を開くことに大いに躊躇います。
by 村尾鐵男 (2010-04-22 08:50)
村尾さん 貴兄の躊躇の心情を理解しますMikeへの私のmailには鳩山政権と民主党が国民の期待に反した政治を進めていることを正直に伝えています。日米関係はMike の書いていることは、間違いないと思います。さすがの千手ならぬ、千舌の鳩山由紀夫も、「日米関係は問題ない。ただメディアが騒いでいるに過ぎない。」とは言えないでしょう。 2010-04-22
by ぼくあずさ (2010-04-22 13:18)
Dear Mike
As you might know, we have territorial issues with Korea and with China.
Korea virtually occupied an island which belongs to Japan. They built a lighthouse and other facilities there long time ago despite strong protest from Japan. We are still insisting our sovereignty over there, nobody listen to us
We have islands very close to Taiwan which are called Senkaku Shotou.
Both Taiwan and China are claiming sovereignty over there. Once either the country or the region virtually occupy there, Japan could not do anything but
shouting protest to international community. They will not listen to our protest, as both China and Taiwan have their own reason to declare their belonging.
China is testing Japanese determination to defend our territory by invading our territorial water invading it intentionally. Once the rift between Japan and the US widen, it might do something. We have to settle Fuenma
matter as quickly as possible. Hatoyam messed up the matter. Some body else has to start from scratch.
Best Regards,
T. Takayama
by Takehisa Takayama (2010-04-24 15:11)
I do not have the background or information needed to form an opinion on the conflicting claims for islands in the seas surrounding Japan nor an opinion on Mr. Hatoyama and the policies of the Government of Japan.
However, I do have an opinion about conflicts about territory, in general. In my opinion, there is no hectare of land in the inhabited world that is occupied by the "original" owners. Every piece of usable land has been occupied and fought over many times by many peoples. I recently traveled to Sicily, an island that has been conquered by eleven different invaders. Who is the true and correct "owner" of Sicily? In the United States, large parts of the southwestern states were taken by force from Mexico. Americans believe that the issue is settled. But in the long turn of history, those lands will certainly be Mexican again some day (and maybe Chinese some day after that!).
EVERY NATION on earth has unresolved claims and disputes about land near its borders. Look at the complex and continual disputes about the Netherlands-Belgium border. There is no way to "finally" settle all these issues. Some will will be temporarily resolved through war; some will be temporarily resolved through negotiations, but many of them will remain unresolved. The best we can hope for is a state of near-equilibrium or dynamic tension.
The value of international organizations such as the United Nations is that they allow us to treat these disputes with some degree of fairness, even though most of these disputes have no "correct" answer. Talk, talk, talk is better than war, war, war.
But there is no way to arrive at resolutions that will be regarded as "fair and just" on both sides of the border.
by Michael Molenda (2010-04-24 23:56)