Another perspective on Ozawa's rationale

Somewhere I read that Ozawa just might have decided to run against Kan because Kan had damaged the party with his curious idea to suggest a doubling of the consumption tax which cost the DPJ the July election. A possibility, but one which would not explain why Ozawa would risk doing even more damage to the party.

There's a more interesting explanation of Kan (and Hatoyama's) possible motives at Dispatch Japan.

Despite his flaws, Ozawa hardly resembles the money-hungry, power-grabbing, political opportunist he is so often made out to be. In person he is charming, genuinely warm, and very loyal to friends. Quaint or not, he lives by the samurai ethic of service to the nation while expecting from those he deals with the respect accorded a person of influence and power...

...Far from a political opportunist, Ozawa has been unusually consistent with his policy prescriptions...Dispatch Japan, Peter Ennis

Ennis explains Loopy Hatoyama's flip-flop as due to Kan's refusal to allow Ozawa more influence in the party, although Hatoyama will still try to work out a deal between the two.

And Ozawa is still not anti-American. Don't have any info about his feelings for the British...

Akiramemashita!

Really. I've given up.* The One-with-Whom-I-Share-a-Mansion, a woman with a US university degree who has spent the last 15 years dealing with derivatives in a large US firm that was bailed out by US taxpayers, has basically agreed with Ozawa on one thing---Americans are simple-minded. She is specifically referring to the understanding of Japanese politics. And most specifically, to me.

Not that her opinion is above suspicion as she has supported the commies in spite of the fact that she is in no way a commie. She often votes commie because they are the "opposite" of the LDP. "How about Ozawa?," I asked over a decade ago after being impressed with his English language book (A Normal Country? I forget. See Google search). "Baka! He's the same! Sneaky and cares only about himself." Koizumi? The same. Maybe worse. However, the fact that she has a US university education may have simple-minded her to the extent that she doesn't understand.

A few weeks ago, Gerald Curtis stated that we are in a "period of creative destruction and the destructive phase is not yet over." Boy was he correct. Whereas this destructive phase may be interesting and fun to study for academic purposes, when one is living here and will probably continue to do so for quite a number of years (good lord, why?) it ain't academic. These clowns and their stunts will have a significant impact on people's lives, and that impact does not look positive.

Just over a year ago, when the DPJ's chance for victory began to become realistic and enthusiasm was palpable---especially among the younger (say 45 and below)---I was working at an architectural office in Akasaka-mitsuke. This office was filled with sharp, relatively young people, most with overseas experience and education. It was run by a U.S. educated woman who was the opposite of the stereotypical Japanese woman. Not a fool there, except for me.

In the spring of that year, I was chatting with one especially bright young fellow and smugly giving my brilliant opinions on Japanese (and US) politics. Then he asked me a simple question for which I had no sensible answer. Talking about the LDP, he asked, "How do we get them out?"*** The easy reply would have been to say, "Vote them out," but I could not say that. It seemed childishly simple-minded---like me---and actually meaningless.

Ultimately, the LDP was voted out. But what the hell have we got in its place?

Apologies for the gratuitous use of Japanese in the header, something I have tended to do more of recently. I plead, and can prove, insanity.

*For the duration of this post.

**Which she refers to as "gambling" and sneers at the idea of supposed sophisticated investors who really understand them.

***The LDP still had a myth of near invincibility.

1455 edited for the normal spelling/grammar errors,

Ozawa to the rescue

NHK just reported that Ozawa will run against PM Kan for the head of the DPJ. The good news never ends.

12:10: Tell me it ain't so, Yukio. (in Japanese)

2PM: I must be the last to learn everything, even the NYT has the Ozawa story, the Japan Times recently added a report that included Loopy's involvment, and Some Fellow up in Abiko knew about it 5 hours ago. Need to pay more attention to Twitter.

2:55 Japan Real Time on Loopy Hatoyama's Latest Waffle. Obviously all this maneuvering has confused simple-minded Americans, even here.

Ever notice how bad the NYT's search is? It cannot even locate it's own stories unless you go into advanced search. I understand the NYT will start charging for its online news soon.

Barely concealed contempt*

Ian Buruma's recent Yomiuri op-ed, Japan's Unfinished Reformation, about how the Obama administration "has barely concealed its contempt for the DPJ" is now on line.

Revolutions, it is often claimed, do not happen when people are desperate. They occur in times of rising expectations. Perhaps this is why they so often end in disappointment. Expectations, usually set too high to begin with, fail to be met, resulting in anger, disillusion, and often in acts of terrifying violence.

And, as he notes, disillusionment has already set in.

The Nobel Prize in Peace 2009 was awarded to Barack H. Obama "for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples". nobelprize.org

*It was certainly "barely" concealed for PM Hatoyama.

3:30PM: Edited to correct the incorrect spelling of Buruma as pointed out politely in the comments. I cannot spell, but neither can Google spell check.

Yukio Departs

Sorry, had to remove the video as it automatically played with sound whenever the page was loaded. Suddenly and unexpectedly hearing a space shuttle blast off with one's speakers at full volume is not pleasant. A link to the video---which really has nothing directly to do with Hatoyama---is here.

I spent a lot of the day reading about the resignation of Yukio Hatoyama and various opinions of whose fault it was:

1) Hatoyama's. He should have handled Futenma and the US better, plus he got money from his mother instead of some half-crooked company.

2) The US: Parts of the US gov't were confused and worried about the DPJ's attempt to move Japan .0001mm away on security issues which would have destroyed the most-important-bilateral-relationship-in-the-world-bar-none, as well as have resulted in the collapse of human civilization. These expert managers wanted the policies of their old and trusted Freedom-Fighters in the LDP to continue forever.

3) Nobel Laureate Barack Obama, who was not up to speed on the most-important-bilateral-relationship-in-the-world-bar-none, and whose meaning of the word "change" as far as Japan policy goes appears to have been restricted to "(ex)change George Bush for me." Nobel-man Obama has been a little tied up lately anyway, since he shockingly discovered that the company that was responsible for a major environmental disaster in the Gulf of Mexico was not as responsible as it could have been at stopping it. He is now making angry faces, clenching his jaw, and has become so outraged as to have uttered the stinging expletive "damn."

4) The MSM: Goes without saying. The media is always responsible for everything everywhere.

5) The citizens of this fine land themselves, the least likely culprits.

6) All of the above.

I must rule out "all of the above," even though it seems reasonable. I must rule it out for I read somewhere on the Internet that if we say that, it means everyone is guilty and if we say everyone is guilty it means that no one is guilty. Perhaps due to cultural differences, I am unable to figure out exactly how that works or what it means, so I will focus on the group that has received the least attention: The folks of Japan.

I am not so sure how important the Futenma issue really was to anyone in the mainland. There are polls around that show that most Japanese wanted the Futenma mess solved by relocating the base outside Okinawa, but nobody seems to want those bases, with their lower-than-the-average-compared-to-Japanese-citizens crime rates, near their homes. They simply want and expect the US to defend Japan until hell freezes over because that's the way things have always been, and to do so under "tightened discipline" (perhaps chained to a table when off-duty) at a distance. Besides, Japan is a peace country and Japanese should not have to fight a war for Japan should one come.* And some have called Hatoyama indecisive and loopy**.

I am looking at this from the perspective that citizens of a democracy are over the long term, allowing for normal miscalculations***, voting for politicians and policies that they agree with. So I figure that after 65 years of democracy [Edited: We can't call the Occupation era democracy. Let's say 50-odd years] when folks keep electing politicians who continue the same policies, that they are voting for what they really want. I don't recall Futenma or the so-called alliance**** being a major issue during the election last fall, so I'd guess most outside of Okinawa did not especially object to the status quo. In the US we want low/no taxes, free government programs, wars fought mostly by lesser-well-off citizens and paid for by foreigners. In Japan, we want the US to provide a military and a foreign policy cover and to have little contact with the troops unless we can pawn them off on a poorer prefecture inhabited by Okinawans.

The good thing is, according to some theories, the US may not get what it wants now as there might be some reluctance on the part of the government to follow through on the Henko move. Okinawans ain't gonna just give in because Hatoyama is gone. And Naoto Kan is said to be sort of stubborn. He is also said to be more "practical" in foreign policy, which I take to mean more likely to do what Uncle Sam wants. But maybe, just maybe, this will get folks to think a little more deeply about this "alliance." It obviously isn't going to come from the US side without a swift kick.

*I don't get a chance to ask Japanese acquaintances this as often as I would like. In fact, I think I have only asked it once: If there is a war and an American soldier is killed fighting for Japan, what would you say to the mother and father of that soldier when they ask you "Why did my son (or daughter) die fighting for Japan?"

**I am using the Washington Post's Al Kamen's definition of loopy: "...oddly detached from reality."

***See G.W. Bush, the man who accepted Abe's "apology" about the Japanese Imperial Army's forced recruitment of sex slaves in WW2 which Abe claimed never really happened, but apologized for in spite of the fact that he claimed it never happened and had been claiming for years that it never happened. Sorry, I didn't understand it either. Ask Boy George or Abe.

****Describing the relationship as an alliance was first done in a communique when PM Suzuki visited the White House in 1981 and it was not well-received in Japan. The phrase US-Japan Alliance was not used in an official document until 1995. See AMPO's Troubled 50th: Hatoyama's aborted rebellion, Okinawa's Mounting Resistance and the US Japan Relationship. (Under Treaty? Alliance? about 1/3 down the page.)

A moment of silence, please

Major Japanese newspapers reported on Thursday that Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama has decided to largely accept Washington’s demands that he honor an existing agreement to relocate an American air base on Okinawa, in an attempt to end a damaging dispute that had sown confusion and mistrust between the longtime allies. NYT.

Wouldn't want any confusion as that's the worst nightmare in Japan. If Prof. Hiroshi Nakanishi of Kyoto University is correct, it'll be a "long, punishing process" to convince Okinawans about the wholesome goodness of the deal. Might take until temperatures drop well below 0 degrees Celsius in hell. Does that mean it'll settle back to the pace it was proceeding under the LDP and we'll have to hear about it for another 14 years?

Okinawa Redux

If the Futenma mess---perhaps disaster for Hatoyama, who has thrown in the towel in the fight with the US over who actually runs Japan as far as security issues go---is so unbelievable as to make you pinch yourself to make sure you aren't just dreaming it all, then perhaps you need to read the Chalmers Johnson editorial in the LA Times: Another Battle of Okinawa:

...I find Hatoyama's behavior craven and despicable, but I deplore even more the U.S. government's arrogance in forcing the Japanese to this deeply humiliating impasse...

That about says it all. (Edited to add: I don't personally don't feel that strongly about Hatoyama.)

A thank you towards the Potomac for the heads up.

Somebody slap me

I did not read this letter in the Japan Times Hotline to Nagatacho. I rarely bother with that section. Just like the folks in Nagatacho, I am sure.

It is not wise to mix local politics with diplomacy. Diplomacy is like a poker game played by sovereign states. You cannot play it with your cards exposed. And to read the cards of others, you need the advice of career diplomats... ...Futenma is a case in point...JT

And Hatoyama, who was lucky enough to be born into a wealthy family (which always seems to make one suspect) ought to be more considerate to bureaucrats. Hasn''t the advice of career diplomats (from the old days, both in the US and Japan) been part of the problem? And ain't it about time someone did listen to Okinawans even though it smacks of democracy?

It is a shock when you vote for someone for change, and the person makes some attempt to actually change something.

OK, no more reading of that part of the JT. Ruins my lunch, for I will be thinking of responding there. I once read or heard that one of the first signs of insanity is writing letters to the editor. Blogging may be one of the latter stages.

OK, the video has nothing to do with this except for the title, but I did search in vain for a girl like that before getting hitched.

A "Stumbling Revolution"

The next couple of years will be crucial for the realization of genuine Japanese democracy. More than that. If the Minshuto leaders succeed in carrying out their aim of creating a cabinet-centered government this will be a grand example for others – one of the very few positive turns of fate in the political life of our planet. But the obstacles to achieving this are formidable. Not only domestic forces but also Washington will seek to torpedo the plans for a truly independent Japan that can stand on its own feet in the world. Understanding those obstacles well could help Japanese citizens contribute to the chances for a good outcome. Japan Focus

The article, Japan's Stumbling Revolution, by Karl van Wolferen, originally published in Chou Koron in Japanese last March is now at Japan Focus in English.

The last time I posted van Wolferen's comments

One must be wary of using the label ‘revolutionary’, but if they [DPJ] succeed this would be appropriate in the context of Japan's controlling political institutions.

it irked one of the commenters who thought DPJ being revolutionary was absurd. I think he missed the key word "if." Today "revolutionary" is still in "if" form and that "if" may seem a little less likely every day. Karl van Wolferen writes that "to call the task that the Minshuto has taken upon itself a heavy one is very, very understated." No doubt about that.

I think his take on the Japanese system is always worth reading. And rereading.

Edited to add: His take on the big newspapers and their "creating political reality as it exists in people's minds" seems especially accurate. I wish I could paste the whole article here, it's very good.

PM Hatoyama has emphasized that there is no connection between the abduction issue and tuition waivers (or not) for "pro-Pyongyang" high schools. Yukio explained, "But the problem is whether we can examine the curricula of a country that does not have any diplomatic ties (with Japan)...."It has nothing to do with the abduction issue." Japan Times.

So related or not, it seems very likely that the end result will be no tuition waiver for children in those schools.

Just recently, the U.N. Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, issued it's report on Japan. According to the report, things have improved somewhat since 2001, but there's still plenty of to room to go. Some of the criticism was aimed at the treatment of Chinese and Korean "nationals" such as the lack of accreditation for their schools. One NGO showed a video of kind nutjobs in Kyoto:

...waving flags and protesting aggressively in front of a North Korean school in Kyoto Prefecture, shouting phrases such as "This is a North Korean spy training center!" Japan Times: Japan faces UN...

According to that article, other members expressed concern that these schools received no "government funding at a time when the government is considering removing tuition fees for public high schools."

I, too, would like to state that the abduction issue and the tuition waiver are not, and could not possibly be related. It's a simple matter of coincidence and bureaucratic rules.

Speaking of sweet

I have been about as surprised that the now official scandal involving Ozawa has resulted in arrests as I was to learn that caramel is sweet.

There had been talk that Ozawa might step in as PM before this summer's upper-house election if Hatoyama proves to be not up to the task, but I am sure that such a possibility has nothing to do with the prosecutor's decision to pursue this case. Some might assume that the purity-and-light party, the LDP, might be behind this in some way, but we know that cannot be true. All such cases are thoroughly and fairly investigated and then successfully prosecuted no matter who is involved. This is a country of laws, not men, that is governed by the elected representatives of the people, not faceless, unaccountable-to-the-public bureaucrats. The timing is a mere coincidence:

The 150-day regular Diet session convened Monday with the money scandals embroiling Democratic Party of Japan Secretary General Ichiro Ozawa and Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama expected to snarl efforts by the ruling bloc to pass budget and other bills...

"We need to implement policies that protect the livelihood of our people, especially considering our current economic situation," Hatoyama said. Japan Times

(Not so fast Y, the only policies which could achieve those goals are the ones of the LDP which were just about to show results when you came in and spoiled it all.)

I will admit, however, to a bit of residual belief that the LDP and their buddies in the bureaucracy will never be truly defeated for any more than a temporarily spell at best. Not that I think many are fooled by what is going on, but months and months of "scandals" and a continuing poor economy has to take a toll. The good news is that we can be confident that the fair and impartial media will cover the stories with at least as much skepticism toward the prosecutors as it will toward Ozawa and the DPJ.

1242: Same JT article: Irony defined: "The supplementary budget is important, but to restore political credibility we ask that intense deliberations be conducted on the issue of politics and money," LDP Diet Affairs Chief Jiro Kawasaki said.

Y slaps down Kan

PM Hatoyama virtually slapped the new Finance Minister Natto "RetroMan" Kan upside the head for hinting that he was going to imitate China and start rigging the yen vs the dollar in order to sell more products overseas:

Japan’s Finance Minister Naoto Kan said markets should set currencies, while underscoring the ability to intervene in extreme circumstances and taking account of the yen’s impact on the economy...Hatoyama* attributed Kan’s comments yesterday as reflective of “what the business community thinks.” [Sniff, sniff. Is that foul odour not reminiscent of the LDP?] BusinessWeek

RetroMan, despite his expertise in such matters, had been confused about PM Hatoyama's desire to decrease Japan's dangerous reliance on exports and to stimulate the consumer market. Apparently, Natto had thought that Hatoyama and the DPJ in general was just funnin' around and had actually meant to stimulate foreign consumer markets.

Being no fool, he has now seen the light and will rely on the markets to set rates unless confusion results, in which case he will jump in and save the day.

*925 clarification: Hatoyama said that the government had no need to comment on currencies.

Washington Post solves Futenma

Having campaigned against the corruption of 50 years of rule by the Liberal Democratic Party, Mr. Hatoyama also has been dogged by his own fundraising scandal. Polls show his approval rating has fallen from more than 70 percent to less than 50 percent in just three months. Like the Japanese public, the Obama administration has not concealed its exasperation. The president and other senior officials visiting the country have repeatedly called for an "expedited" resolution to the base dispute. Washington Post editorial

Having been on vacation, I somehow missed the unconcealed exasperation of the Japanese public. Is it because of the Futenma issue? I even wonder just how exasperated the Obama administration is since:

"People tend towards the hyperbolic because that makes for more interesting cocktail conversation and better stories. I wouldn't exaggerate things," one administration official close to the issue told The Cable.

I have to admit that I don't understand the point of the Post editorial---it reads like an editorial in the Japanese press except the schoolmarmish tone of "must" and "must not" is missing. I think it means that even though Obama and the Japanese public are exasperated to tears with the wildly unpredictable Hatoyama, the Futenma issue should not be allowed to damage the alliance to the point where the smaller coalition parties get their wish and kick all US troops out of Japan. This, of course, is a real danger right up there with the alien invasion threat. Then there is the threat posed by folks like Ozawa who go to China and work on improving ties instead of staying in Japan and visiting Yasukuni like the Old Schoolers. But the key point is in the last sentence--something which no other person on earth has thought of:

Japan's nascent two-party system is a democratic achievement, not a diplomatic nuisance; give it a little time to find its course. (Washington Post)

We need a kinder, gentler Obama. This is why I read the Post.

Tweaked slightly at 1058

Futenma, an unnecessary fuss?

It seems to be about impossible to understand what is really going on with the Futenma mess. An article challenging some of the Japanese government claims at Japan Focus (Japanese Bureaucrats Hide Decision to Move All US Marines out of Okinawa to Guam, by Gavan McCormac and Sakai Tanaka) does not help:

...according to the investigations of Mayor Iha and members of the Ginowan City Assembly, American forces have already been implementing a plan to relocate to Guam not only the command unit but also, by 2014, the majority of combat forces and even logistic sections including supply units.

Tanaka makes the obvious conclusion that if true:

"This means that the great fuss over the removal to Henoko that has been festering over the past few years may have been completely unnecessary from the beginning."

McCormac believes that Hatoyama's decision not to make a decision on Futenma until after the New Year has a huge symbolic importance and may signal "a possible changing of tide of history in East Asia, and especially the US Japan relationship."

Some polls have shown that a majority of the public thinks Hatoyama has mishandled the issue (Observing Japan has details of various poll results) and I have neither seen nor heard anything that gives any hint that the public would like to see the US military out (folks in Okinawa may have a different view). I wonder just how huge any change would really be?

Imagine: The D-Y relationship

Instead of John McCain nominating Sarah Palin to run with him last year, what if he had nominated me? Why not? I've plenty of foreign experience, and although I have never seen Russia (well, maybe a glimpse or two from an airplane) I have been stationed in South Korea and have actually set foot in North Korea. I haven't hunted moose, but I have hunted deer and elk. And squirrel. A ticket like that would have sent the skinny fellow with big ears back to Chicago.

Assume that since the financial/economic crisis is still going on, John would have suspended his presidency to work on solving it. That would leave me as president, and I would be the one whom PM Hatoyama would have to call about Futenma:

Good Morning, Mr. President. I'm calling to discuss the Futenma crisis.

Ohio Gazimass, Mr. Prime Minister. Sorry to hear that there is a crisis. I was never much of a fan of bathing with large groups of naked men, but I am sorry to hear about your onsen problem. Is a Futenba the indoor or outdoor type?

It's Futenma, not Futenba, Mr. President. By the way, may I call you D? You may call me Y. Anyway, you are thinking of a rotenburo. I guess the "ten" threw you off. I am talking about the US Marine air station in Okinawa. We would like you to move it to Guam.

A U.S. Marine base in Okinawa? My god, Y, what are they doing there? Were they left behind after the war?

In a way, they were D. We also have much more U.S. military here, including the Air Force.

The Air Force? How did they get there? We didn't even have a U.S.A.F. until 1947. Y, I sincerely apologize. We'll pull them all out immediately. You needn't worry about them being as close as Guam, either. That's a U.S. territory, but we don't need such a large force to protect it.

Oh my god, D! I didn't mean to pull them all out! What about the security treaty? You can't just back out of something that you've already agreed to.

Isn't that from, like, 1960 or something, Y? It's still in force? What year is this? Why are we talking about these things as if it were still the last century? Well, we can renegotiate it later, but right now I wanna help you with the problem of foreign troops on your soil doing what, I am sure you know, Japan should be doing for itself.

I'm sorry D, perhaps you don't understand. You see, Gen. MacArthur helped us write a new constitution after the war which prohibits us from having a military unless we call it "self-defense forces." We also have a policy against possessing nukes for self-defense, so we must get our nuclear deterrence capability from a nuclear-armed foreign country. Plus, I am sure that you know that our countries have had a more or less unofficial agreement that the US would provide security for Japan if we did not establish a military, unless we call it a self-defense force, and that in return you would provide a market for our products. This sort of arrangement has worked out well for both of us for 65 years and we'd pretty much like to continue it as is, except we'd like it to be a more equal relationship. I'll explain exactly what that means at some other time, though.

That's crazy-talk, Y! By the way, how's the missus?

She's on a little trip right now, but she's fine, thank you for asking.

Glad to hear that, Y. But back to the crazy-talk. None of that stuff makes any sense to me. The world has changed. I mean, WW2 is like totally over.

Well, D, it may be in some places, but we have a few here who are still fighting it, even in my own party. I believe the word for them in English is ナッツ*。

Oh yea, I remember the Washington Post ad from a few years ago. We have several varieties of ナッツ here too. But listen, Y. We gotta do something about foreign troops from a country halfway around the world being stationed on your soil. It's not like you're a poor country or something, and besides, we all know how some folks over there feel about foreigners.

D, I've been talking about maybe thinking about possibly at some time perhaps doing some sort of thing about kinda improving some things for foreigners here maybe, but that doesn't really apply in this case. There's no danger of your troops trying to assimilate into society, so we can use them and hopefully give them good memories before they return back to where they belong. Return individually, of course, not the whole military. As far as doing something, I can't make any decisions right now, perhaps maybe next year. Gotta figure out how to get rid of the things we don't like about having a foreign country provide our defense while making sure they they continue to provide one for us. It's much cheaper and more politically feasible for us to rent a military than to build one of comparable capabilities ourselves, you know.

But Y, you called me about the problem. Let's make a decision. How about you just do it my way, like y'all did in the past. We'll pull out all the troops and renegotiate the whole security treaty thing. I'll fax a new version for you to sign this afternoon.

Sorry D, but things don't work that way anymore. I gotta listen to what the people want, not just Mitsubishi. I also have some obstinate folk in the Diet whose asses I have to either kiss or kick to get anything done. Otherwise, they'll just oppose everything I try to do.

Good Lord, Y, don't tell me that we have Republicans stationed over there too! Anyway, I gotta go. Let's get this worked out soon. Say hello to the missus for me.

Sure thing D. I was just about to call her...could I get the number for NASA from you so they can transfer me to her? I could call her directly with my super-advanced Japanese keitai, but I'd have to go 3,576,987,201 items deep in the menu just to turn it on.

Oh, that's simple. I know the short cut. Just press "menu", then enter #678a999.072zg781-b and it will take you right to it. You really ought to memorize those shortcuts, Y. You can find them on pages 983-1014 of the quick-start manual for your phone.

Thanks a ton, D. Bye, bye.

*nuts

Tweaked at 12:53

Futenma goes pandemic

It started like a niggling itch in the throat, one initially ignored as just a minor irritant. Then it became a bit sore---nothing to worry about, but enough to make one suspect that something was not quite right. Later it got to the point where it was obvious that there was a problem. Then came the diagnosis---H1futeNma1---which would either result in a period of light discomfort or would end it all.

It seems that the subject of Futenma has become something that cannot be avoided.

It is easy for many of us with personal interests in Japan (and the success of the DPJ) to cast the US as the bullying heavy in this little spat. However, I am fortunate enough to have gotten my hands on a copy of the Nelson Report. Contained within were the key points of a paper, US Should Stand Firm on Implementation of Okinawa Force Realignment, by Bruce Klingner, Senior Research Fellow at the Heritage Foundation. Mr Klingner wrote of the strategic concerns of the US government.

My (too) brief summary of those key points:

The major provisions agreed to are 1) the redeployment of USMC air units from Futenma to a less populated area near Camp Schwab; 2) A reduction of a total of 17000 Marines and their dependents to Guam and Japan paying 60% of the $10 billion price tag for the move; 3) The consolidation of the remaining Marine units into less-populated areas of Okinawa and the return of a number of US bases to Okinawan control.

The provisions of the 13-years-in-the-making-agreement are interconnected and one part cannot be changed without threatening the whole agreement.

Since the Marines (unlike the other services) operate in combined-arms units, the removal of any of these units from Okinawa would have a very negative effect on its (Marines) rapid response capabilities. In short, one cannot willy-nilly move a highly integrated component without affecting the whole.

Relocating the Futenma unit to Guam would also mean that the plan to build two new runways at Camp Schwab to replace the one lost at Futenma would be scrapped, eliminating a "strategic [Japanese] national security asset" negatively affecting the augmentation of US or Japanese security forces during a crisis. The distance form Guam to Okinawa would cause a further in force capabilities. "The DPJ advocacy for removing Marine helicopter units from Okinawa...but still expecting the same level of protection, which is impossible given the tyranny of the distance."

A point which is often forgotten in this debate is that the US is obligated under the security treaty not only to defend Japan, but that it also gives the US broader regional responsibilities. In bilateral agreements from 2005 other objectives beyond the defense of Japan were "affirmed."

He ends with the concern that further delays will be more likely to turn public opinion against the US presence and by leaving the Futenma Marines in their current location during the delay risks another military-related incident.

One can argue that whether or not the US should even have forces in Japan (or in nearly every other corner of the world), but that is not what this dispute is about. There is, however, a fear that a delay will "inflame" the left to "expand the debate to a more comprehensive reassessment of the US-Japan alliance." That is perhaps long overdue, but it's doubtful that either government wants that now or in the near future---if ever.

And that is the main problem in my opinion. The government and the populace want to continue to have the US provide a military for Japan sixty-five years after the end of WW2. The whole set-up is one that cannot last forever.

1606: Edited because neither I nor Blogger spellcheck can spell.

Another perspective on Obama's bow

I am behind the times as usual, but Armchair Asia has a very interesting perspective on Obama's bow to the emperor as being an unintended (Obama likely following what he considered good manners and being culturally sensitive) slight to Hatoyama and the DPJ and a possible nod to the right. The author notes (roughly paraphrasing) that although many mainstream US conservatives objected to the bow, the neoconservative Japan experts did not.

A different line of thought from someone who has a more inside view of US-Japan relations. Hmmmm. Couldn't possibly be right....????

A solution for Futenma etc?

...the American public is turning more isolationist and unilateralist than it has at any time in decades, according to a new poll released Thursday.

The survey by the Pew Research Center found a plurality of Americans -- 49 percent -- think that the U.S. should "mind its own business internationally'' and leave it to other countries to fend for themselves.

It was the first time in more than 40 years of polling that the ranks of Americans with isolationist sentiment outnumbered those with a more international outlook...MiamiHerald

No, we don't wanna go as far as having the US, like, totally leave Japan (and South Korea and...) as its presence is vital to regional stability. Besides, even though PM Hatoyama has said that he wants Japan to have an equal relationship with the US, we don't mean so equal that Japan would have to provide for its own security to the extent that the US has to provide for its own.

Anyway, we know the US presence in Japan is vital 'cause everybody who is anybody has said so for decades and decades. Who would counterbalance the Soviet Union, oops! I mean North Korea, no, wait, it's Rising China this week...err, no, it's North Korea 'cause of the nukes, no, it's Rising China and the DPRK and also the bogeyman. Anyone who questions the US obligation to save the world from itself has to be some sort of naive leftwing loony, a minivan driving soccer mom or dad, a disillusioned vet, or a rightwing-wacko America firster. They might even be one of those rare few in today's US who might actually have to go fight in an overseas adventure.

Those darned stupid Americans.

18 Dec 09 James Fallows takes this poll as proof that 44% of Americans are crazy.

The world is ending. Martin Fackler makes sense.

in his latest NYT article:

...fundamentally, the recent strains [between the US and Japanese governments] have revealed how little the two allies are used to the give and take commonly found in America’s relations with other allies, like Britain or Australia. Japan’s new government has disrupted the old rhythms of the alliance by thrusting its problems out into the open for the first time in years...

He even quotes Tobias Harris of Observing Japan, whom we have to assume was not disguised as a vending machine when interviewed.

Is it too much to hope that a NYT article would be enough to reassure certain experts in the US government and academia that Hatoyama and the DPJ are not the anti-Christ and may be a much better ally than the nonLunDP ever was---even if it doesn't pretend to agree with nearly everything the US says or does concerning security? A more open democratic government certainly can't be bad for the relationship. If it were then it wasn't much of a relationship to begin with.

It must be about time for Fackler to be transferred so we can start all over again. Perhaps a new reporter with a long overdue article about the funny English used in ads and on clothing?