Wednesday, 28 October 2009
Japan stands up to US on military base
The standoff between Japanese Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama’s government and the Obama administration over the relocation of a US Marine Corps military base in Okinawa is being watched with keen interest throughout the Asia Pacific region - and for good reason. Much more is at stake than simply the logistics of where a military base is located.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Japan stands up to US on military base
28 October 2009
The standoff between Japanese Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama’s government and the Obama administration over the relocation of a US Marine Corps military base in Okinawa is being watched with keen interest throughout the Asia Pacific region - and for good reason. Much more is at stake than simply the logistics of where a military base is located.
On one level, the dispute may appear to be a ‘technical’ one concerning the extent to which any government should be bound by treaty obligations entered into by its predecessor. But the more fundamental issue involved is the future of the US-Japan relationship and the ability of Asian powers to manage regional security that does not rely so heavily on a US presence. Mr. Hatoyama had promised Okinawa residents during his Democratic Party of Japan’s (DPJ) victorious election campaign earlier this year to examine options such as moving the Futenma base to another part of Japan, or even out of Japan entirely. Once the DPJ came to power, however, Mr. Hatoyama came under intense US pressure to honour the deal made with the previous government. So far, he has refused to yield to pressure from US Defence Secretary Robert Gates to ratify that agreement quickly.
Thus Mr. Hatoyama has pushed Washington onto the defensive by his assertion of greater independence for Japan, not only on the issue of the Futenma air base but also by his emphasis on the desirability of creating an East Asian economic community that parallels the European Union, as well as by his criticism of ‘unfettered US-style capitalism’. Mr. Gates has shown impatience with Japan’s stance on the base issue, while Assistant Secretary of State Kurt Campbell has responded to Mr. Hatoyama’s call for an East Asian community by insisting that the US ‘expects to be invited’ to join any regional grouping. In other words, Washington does not welcome such assertions of independence.
Yet, this raises the question of when Japan is supposed to adopt a truly sovereign role with regard to its own national security as well as a mature security relationship with its Asian partners. Until that time, it is probably unreasonable to expect China, and possibly even North Korea, to enter into a true partnership of equals with Japan in security or other areas. It is often argued that Japan and other Asian states need a strong US security presence in Japan, as well as in South Korea, because of China’s military build-up or the continuing ‘threat’ from North Korea. But equally, it could be argued that both China and its ‘hermit’ neighbour themselves feel threatened by such a heavy US presence on their doorsteps.
It is argued also that residual distrust among some Asian countries towards Japan itself justifies a non-Asian military presence in the region. There may be elements of truth in these claims, and yet the idea that a militarily and financially stretched superpower like the US can continue indefinitely to substitute for mature security relations among Asian nations is naive.
Post a Comment