A life of Japanese journalist Kosuke Takahashi (高橋浩祐)

Asia Times Online :: Damage control, not the end of nukes

2012-03-02T11:58:00.000-08:00

My latest story Asia Times Online :: Damage control, not the end of nukes

(My latest stories for JDW) Japan urges Israeli restraint over Iran

2012-02-17T05:33:00.000-08:00

ASIA PACIFIC

Date Posted: 17-Feb-2012

Jane's Defence Weekly

Japan urges Israeli restraint over Iran

Kosuke Takahashi JDW Correspondent
Tokyo

Japanese Prime Minister Yoshihiko Noda has urged Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak not to attack Iran's nuclear facilities.

On 15 February Noda called on Barak, who was embarking on a five-day visit to Japan, to resolve the issue of Iran's nuclear programme "in a peaceful and diplomatic way" by stressing that military options would be dangerous and only aggravate the situation, according to a statement by Japan's Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

"A nuclear Iran is unacceptable, and Israel is determined to prevent it," Barak said on 16 February in a nationally broadcast interview with Japan's NHK television channel. "No options should be removed from the table."

Japan's Chief Cabinet Secretary, Osamu Fujimura, disclosed on 16 February that the government is considering despatching Japanese Maritime Self-Defence Force vessels to escort oil tankers and sweep for mines in the Strait of Hormuz if needed.

Date Posted: 10-Feb-2012

Jane's Defence Weekly

Update: Kawasaki loses AH-1S crash case

Kosuke Takahashi JDW Correspondent
Tokyo

Kawasaki Heavy Industries was ordered to pay JPY234 million (USD3.07 million) in damages on 31 January for its part in a Japan Ground Self-Defence Force (JGSDF) helicopter crash in June 2000.

The Tokyo District Court ruled that the crash was caused by a manufacturing defect in an engine provided by the company.

According to the ruling, a JGSDF Fuji-Bell AH-1S attack helicopter crashed from an altitude of around 75 m at the Higashi-Fuji manoeuvre area in Shizuoka Prefecture, seriously injuring two crew members. The judgement said that the AH-1S lost power after parts of the engine's fuel control system became detached as the helicopter was about to move forward from a stationary hover. The company claimed that it had designed the engine following Japan Ministry of Defence (MoD) instructions and so could not be held responsible for the crash.

This is the third major compensation suit between the MoD and a major Japanese defence company in recent years. In 2011 Toshiba sued the MoD for damages over the cancellation of contracts to remodel F-15J combat aircraft into reconnaissance platforms, while in 2009 Fuji Heavy Industries filed a suit against the MoD over its decision to reduce its order of AH-64D Apache attack helicopters from 62 to 13.

"I am afraid more and more firms will withdraw from the defence business," said military analyst Shinichi Kiyotani. "Firms can no longer anticipate big profits and business risks are growing due to the ministry's strict stance towards industry [in the face of] a shrinking defence budget."

This is an updated version of a story originally published on 3 February

Date Posted: 01-Feb-2012

Jane's Defence Weekly

Mitsubishi Electric banned from MoD projects after overcharging for SAMs

Kosuke Takahashi JDW Correspondent
Tokyo

Japan's Ministry of Defence (MoD), the Cabinet Satellite Intelligence Center and the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency have all barred Mitsubishi Electric from participating in open bidding after the firm admitted to overcharging in government defence and space-related contracts.

Mitsubishi Electric, Japan's second largest defence contractor after Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, announced on 27 January that it has started an in-house investigation after the MoD and the two other agencies on 17 January highlighted irregularities in the firm's cost calculations at its Kamakura Works in Kanagawa Prefecture.

"We are very sorry for causing so much trouble," the firm said in a statement.The firm overcharged the MoD and other two bodies for the design and production of a Type 03 medium-range surface-to-air missile (SAM) as part of a contact worth a total of JPY33.6 billion (USD440 million) in Fiscal Year 2009, an MoD spokesman said.

The three agencies said Mitsubish Electric would be suspended from taking part in public bidding until it paid back the overcharged amount and submitted a report on how it would prevent a recurrence.

(My latest story for Asia Times) Okinawans see duplicity in US withdrawal

2012-02-10T03:58:00.000-08:00

Hello my friends. Here is my latest story for Asia Times Online.
If you get time, please go over this.
Good weekend!
Cheers,
Kosuke

Okinawans see duplicity in US withdrawal
By Kosuke Takahashi

TOKYO - With the United States shifting its axis of security toward the Asia-Pacific by expanding its military footprint in Australia, the Philippines and Vietnam, it may be high time for the United States Marine Corps to leave Japan's Okinawa.
A shifting security dynamic in the region, most notably due to China's enhanced strike capabilities, will likely marginalize the marines' presence on the island.

Japan and the US this week agreed to move about 4,700 marines from Okinawa to the US Pacific territory of Guam, while sticking to fiercely opposed plans to move US Marine Corps Air Station (MCAS) Futenma to a new offshore base to be built in a coastal area off Camp Schwab, another marine base in Nago City, northern Okinawa.

The shift to Guam is a departure from a previous 2006 bilateral agreement on the realignment of US forces in Japan. Until now, the US had claimed that the transfer of about 8,000 Okinawa-based marines to Guam and the completion of Henoko airbase in Nago were a package deal. It had also demanded that Tokyo show "tangible progress" in the construction of a new heliport as a prerequisite for the transfer of the marines to Guam.

"The US has conducted a strategic review of its defense posture in Asia," the US State Department and the Japanese Foreign Ministry said in a joint statement on February 8. "Japan welcomes this initiative."

Why did the US change course by delinking the transfer of marines to Guam with the long-standing, thorny issue of the Futenma relocation?

Okinawan opposition
Necessity knows no law. First of all, the Pentagon is apparently impatient with the political impasse caused by Okinawans' opposition to the new airbase in Nago. Although Tokyo supports the plan, it has been strongly opposed by the Okinawa prefectural government and the vast majority of Okinawa residents for years.

"[I] expect both governments to have consultations based on local opinions," Okinawa Governor Hirokazu Nakaima said on February 8. "The relocation plan of Futenma base without local consent would be impossible. [We have] no change in demanding the new facility to move out of Okinawa."

The planned transfer of thousands of marines to Guam without progress on the Futenma relocation is also part of an ongoing US strategy to counter China's military build-up, especially its growing naval power in the West Pacific.

The Pentagon is closely watching China's "anti-access/area denial" strategy, which envisions blocking freedom of movement for US ships. By creating two lines of coastal defenses in the region, military analysts believe Beijing aims to nullify the capabilities of US aircraft carriers and air defenses within the zone.

The so-called AirSea battle concept combines US air and naval strengths. It departs from the Cold War-era AirLand Battle doctrine drafted to prepare for an invasion by the former Soviet Union.

The AirSea battle concept meant to combat China's growing military might doesn't fit with high troop levels on Okinawa, since the latter cannot be moved swiftly and could be easily targeted by China's middle-range ballistic missiles such as the DF-21.
The new battle strategy forces the Pentagon to keep key US forces out of China's strike range.
"It's better for US Marines to keep at a safe distance from China," Japanese military analyst Toshiyuki Shikata told Asia Times Online. "I expect the US to fortify Guam as a strong military base from now on."
Vague number of US Marines on Okinawa
Japanese media have reported that apart from moving 4,700 marines from Okinawa to Guam, the Pentagon is also considering rotating 3,300 to other overseas bases in the Pacific such as Hawaii, Australia and the Philippines.
Of the 3,300 marines, media have reported that 1,000 will be deployed to Hawaii and 800 to the US mainland. Meanwhile, other media have said 2,300 will go to Darwin in northern Australia and 1,000 to Hawaii.

It's also been reported that the US has sounded out Tokyo on transferring about 1,500 marines to the Iwakuni marine base in Yamaguchi Prefecture - the only Marine Corps Air Station on mainland Japan - with central and local governments flatly rejecting the idea.

Some US Marines stationed in Okinawa will likely move to South Korea, Chosun Ilbo also has reported. Pentagon spokesperson Leslie Hull-Ryde on Friday denied the South Korean newspaper's report by saying, "there has been no discussion between the US and the Republic of Korea [South Korea] on this issue".
Unclear figures on how many US Marines are actually on Okinawa - due to expeditions and rotating shifts - has also aggravated the Japanese public. While both the US and Japanese governments claim 18,000 marines are normally based on Okinawa, the Okinawa prefectural government says only 14,958 marines were based on the island as of September 2009.

Military experts estimate the number at 12,000-14,000 at best in recent years because of deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan. Then Japanese defense minister Toshimi Kitazawa said in February 2010 that there were only 4,000 to 5,000 marines stationed on Okinawa due to Iraqi and Afghanistan deployments.

The US and Japanese governments say there will be 10,000 marines in Okinawa even after shifting 8,000 marines around the island. But the claim could be just a pretext to avoid military budget cuts.
Plans for deep US defense cuts are another major likely reason why moving the marines out of Okinawa has been disconnected from the relocation of the Futenma airbase.

With the national budget deficit expected to exceed $1 trillion in 2012 for the fourth consecutive year, President Barack Obama on January 5 unveiled a new defense strategy that aims at significantly reducing the country's defense expenditure. It calls for a downsizing of the US military and for priority deployment of troops in the Asia-Pacific region.
The Pentagon is looking to cut defense spending by $487 billion over the next 10 years by eliminating almost 100,000 US ground troops as part of plans for a "smaller, leaner" military. Specifically, it plans to reduce the marine corps by 20,000 to 182,000 active-duty members.

Another reason for the realignment of US forces in Japan could be a change of Washington's top Asia officials. Wallace Gregson, a former US assistant secretary of defense for Asian and Pacific security affairs, and James Steinberg, a former duty Secretary of State, both resigned last year. The Pentagon on Monday also announced that Michael Schiffer, deputy assistant secretary of defense, Asian and Pacific Security Affairs, East Asia, will step down soon.
The shake-up of top policymakers who've been engaged in past negotiations with Japan might have brought about a policy change this time around. This is simply be down to bureaucrats' unshakeable belief in in their own infallibility.

Henoko plan is impossible
Almost all analysts agree that the transfer of the US Futenma air station to an off-shore location in Henoko Bay Nago would be impossible due to the strong opposition from Okinawans. But abolishing this unrealistic plan still seems a taboo among US and Japanese policy makers.

"My point is that we do not have to be paralyzed between the existing Futenma facility and the Henoko option that doesn't seem realistic," US Senator Jim Webb, Democrat of Virginia, said in a recent interview with Dispatch Japan.
"The Henoko plan is impossible," Ukeru Magosaki, the former chief of the Japanese Foreign Ministry's international intelligence bureau, told Asia Times Online. "But Japan cannot say, 'we cannot do it' to the US." Magosaki said.

As Tokyo sits on the fence, resentment towards the US military bases on Okinawa is rising, especially as official campaigning for the mayoral election in Ginowan City kicked off in February - the planned relocation of the Futenma airbase is the top issue. Both of the poll's two candidates want the Futenma air station, which occupies a quarter of the city's total land area, moved out of the prefecture.
With both Tokyo and Washington struggling to win the consent of Okinawans to the relocation plan, there are worries in Japan over the Futenma air station becoming fixed in its present location in Ginowan City.
The US also seems to have used this logic to advance the relocation plan. In the late 1990s, there were plans to just close the Futenma airbase, not relocate it, after three marines raped a 12-year-old schoolgirl; but in 2006, the US administration managed to make the closing of Futenma a package deal linked to the building of a new heliport in Henoko.
One fatal military accident at Futenma airbase, which is surrounded by more than 100 schools, hospitals and shops, could trigger very strong anti-US sentiment. This could severely damage the presence of the island's Kadena airbase, the largest and strongest US military base in the Far East.
To avoid such an aggravating situation just in case, the closing of the contentious Futenma air station without a new facility is the best way forward for both governments, as was once agreed in the late 1990s.

Kosuke Takahashi is a Tokyo-based Japanese journalist. His twitter is @TakahashiKosuke
(Copyright 2012 Asia Times Online (Holdings) Ltd. All rights reserved. Please contact us about sales, syndication and republishing.)

Japan, the US and Australia are boosting their security cooperation!

2012-01-22T08:15:00.000-08:00

Friday, January 20, 2012

Japan, U.S., Australia To Hold 1st Joint Aviation Training In Guam

TOKYO (Kyodo)--Japan's Air Self-Defense Force said Friday it will conduct joint training with the U.S. and Australian air forces for the first time in February in Guam, in a move believed to be aimed at keeping in check the rise of the Chinese military in the Asia-Pacific region.

The drill, which will take place over the U.S. Andersen Air Force Base on Guam between Feb. 11 and 24, will involve 330 ASDF members, eight of its F-2 fighters, six F-15 fighters and three E-2C airborne early warning aircraft, according to the ASDF.

ASDF Chief of Staff Gen. Shigeru Iwasaki said at a press conference it is important for Japan to ''strengthen its partnership with Australia, in view of the situation in the Pacific.''

The training exercise, which will cover aerial combat and defense, and electronic warfare, will also be held at a bombing range near the Andersen base, the ASDF said.

Japan's National Defense Program Guidelines, last updated in late 2010, state Tokyo intends to strengthen its defense cooperation not only with its key ally, the United States, but also with South Korea and Australia.

In July last year, the ASDF conducted a joint drill with the Australian air force for the first time.

Members of the Australian Army will also take part as observers in a Japan-U.S. joint command post exercise scheduled to begin later this month at a Japanese Ground Self-Defense Force garrison in Itami, Hyogo Prefecture, and other places, according to the GSDF.

ASIA PACIFIC

Date Posted: 20-Jan-2012

Jane's Defence Weekly

USMC to start training in Darwin in 2012

Sam LaGrone Jane's Naval Reporter
Washington, DC
Additional reporting by
James Hardy Asia-Pacific Editor
London
The US Marine Corps (USMC) will begin amphibious training in northern Australia this year, the head of the Marine Corps Combat Development Command (MCCDC) confirmed on 18 January.
Speaking at a briefing in Arlington, Virginia, MCCDC commander Lieutenant General Richard Mills said small unit training of about 250 marines would start at Robertson Barracks near Darwin. "The Australians have indicated a desire to get into the amphibious business and they want to train with us," Gen Mills said. "In the next 12 months we'll start to see some exercises taking place out there."
US President Barack Obama announced plans in November 2011 to train about 2,500 marines at Darwin in conjunction with the Royal Australian Navy (RAN) and the Australian Army. "Initially you're going to see 250 and you're going to see company level operations. That will develop into a longer-range programme that will develop into larger forces," Gen Mills said.
The USMC is still debating how to move and equip its personnel to operate at Robertson Barracks. Gen Mills said the marines will either establish a package of materiel and equipment at the training site or be allowed to travel with their own gear.
The USMC has had trouble finding large-scale amphibious training sites in the Western Pacific; Darwin's proximity to the South China Sea has raised suspicions in China that it is part of a strategy to place US forces in a strategically sensitive region. This perception has been reinforced by the new US defence strategy released in early January 2012 that emphasises American engagement in the Western Pacific.
Meanwhile, Gen Mills noted that the massive USMC relocation from Okinawa, Japan, to the US territory of Guam has been delayed due to a series of disagreements with the Japanese government over force realignment in Okinawa.
That disagreement centres on the future of the Marine Air Station Futenma, which under a 2006 agreement is to be replaced by a newly built offshore facility in the north of main Okinawa Island. Although Tokyo supports the plan, it is opposed by the Okinawa prefectural government and the vast majority of Okinawa residents.

COMMENT

While Gen Mills' confirmation could incur a response from China, the decision to press on with the planned training in Australia should not escalate tensions between Washington and Beijing.
Professor Steve Tsang, Director of the China Policy Institute at Nottingham University in the UK, believes the USMC training deployment shows US intent but in reality it is deploying quite a limited capability compared to the alternatives. It also does not compare in size to US naval and air forces forward-deployed in Japan and South Korea.
"A marine base is as unprovocative as you can be," Tsang told Jane's in December 2011. "Why a marine base? Why is it not a major naval and aviation facility, which would be far more useful than a marine base for the Americans?
"My reading is that it is more a matter of demonstrating to SE Asia and Australasia that its commitment remains but it is trying not to be provocative to China," he added.

(My latest for JDW) Japan sees in Chinese air incursions almost triple

2012-01-22T08:10:00.000-08:00

ASIA PACIFIC

Date Posted: 20-Jan-2012

Jane's Defence Weekly

Japan sees in Chinese air incursions almost triple

Kosuke Takahashi JDW Correspondent
Tokyo
Japan's Ministry of Defence (MoD) announced on 19 January that Japan Air Self-Defence Force (JASDF) interceptions of Chinese military aircraft in Japanese airspace had nearly tripled from April to December 2011 compared with the previous nine months.
Japan scrambled fighter aircraft 335 times, 45 more times than in the same period of 2010. It scrambled 143 times against Chinese aircraft, compared with 48 in the previous nine months.
Japan also scrambled fighters 175 times against Russia - 45 times fewer than the same period in 2010, but still the most by nationality - and five times against Taiwanese aircraft, along with 12 times against unspecified aircraft. The Joint Staff Office of the MoD said that while it counted JASDF scrambles, these did not necessarily correspond to confirmed airspace incursions.

COMMENT

The JASDF's increases interceptions of Chinese People's Liberation Army Air Force aircraft reflects increasing attempts by China to gather signals intelligence from the air near the Senkaku islands in the East China Sea. The islands are controlled by Japan, but claimed by China and Taiwan.

(My latest for JDW) Japanese PM replaces defence minister

2012-01-14T10:55:00.000-08:00

Japanese PM replaces defence minister

Kosuke Takahashi JDW Correspondent
Tokyo

Japanese Prime Minister Yoshihiko Noda sacked Yasuo Ichikawa as defence minister on 13 January after a series of gaffes led to his censure in Japan's upper house.

Noda appointed veteran lawmaker Naoki Tanaka to replace Ichikawa as part of a wider Cabinet reshuffle. Tanaka, 71, is expected to draw on his experience as chairman of the committee on foreign affairs and defence in the House of Councillors and as a parliamentary vice-minister for foreign affairs in addressing defence issues such as the deadlocked relocation of the US' Marine Corps Air Station (MCAS) Futenma in Okinawa.

Noda told reporters that Tanaka's "abundant political experience" was the key factor in his appointment. Outside policy circles, Tanaka is best known as the husband of Makiko Tanaka, a former foreign minister and the daughter of former Prime Minister Kakuei Tanaka.

Ichikawa was censured in the opposition-controlled House of Councillors on 9 December after he made a series of gaffes, including one relating to the 1995 rape of a 12-year-old girl by three US servicemen in Okinawa.

Marines to train with Japanese Ground Self-Defense Force at Camp Pendleton Jan. 16

2012-01-05T01:44:00.000-08:00

I got this from the press office of Pentagon(Defense Press Operations). Cheers, Kosuke

______________

CAMP PENDLETON, Calif. - The 15th Marine Expeditionary Unit is scheduled to begin training with the Japanese Ground Self-Defense Force as part of Iron Fist 2012 at Camp Pendleton, Jan. 16. This is the 7th iteration of the exercise and is a tribute to the U.S./JGSDF relationship that provides a unique opportunity for Marines to train with their Pacific ally on U.S. soil.

Throughout Iron Fist 2012, the forces will partake in exercises including a three-day evolution where troops will rehearse making safe exits from a sinking helicopter, conduct various boat training that enables the 15th MEU to demonstrate its amphibious capability and take part in other staff planning and integration exercises.

"We are excited to participate in an exercise that promotes interoperability and cooperation between JGSDF and Marine forces," said Col. Scott Campbell, commanding officer, 15th MEU. "This provides us the opportunity to exchange knowledge and learn from each other, as well as establish personal and professional relationships."

Iron Fist 2012 allows for effective bilateral training across the range of military operations, which are common training interests for U.S. Marines and the JGSDF.

"Bilateral amphibious training events between Marines and the JGSDF provide invaluable training for our Marines and sailors and builds on an existing friendship between the U.S. Marines and Japanese forces," said Campbell.

The Japanese GSDF unit participating in the training is the Western Army Infantry Regiment. The 15th MEU will command elements including 3rd Amphibious Assault Battalion and Combat Logistics Battalion 15, both based out of Camp Pendleton.

-USMC-

(My recent story for JDW) Lockheed Martin F-35A wins Japan's F-X competition

2011-12-31T11:58:00.000-08:00

Lockheed Martin F-35A wins Japan's F-X competition

Kosuke Takahashi JDW Correspondent
Tokyo

Gareth Jennings Jane's Aviation Desk Editor
London

Japan has officially selected the Lockheed Martin F-35A Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) as its next-generation mainstay fighter aircraft.

The Ministry of Defence (MoD) aims to deploy four F-35s by Fiscal Year 2016 (FY16), with plans to eventually acquire 42 aircraft, officials said. The total cost over 20 years, including purchasing, maintenance and repairs, is estimated at JPY1.6 trillion (USD20.5 billion), making it Japan's most expensive fighter procurement and one of the largest military contracts of 2011.

"We have focused most on performance criteria," Defence Minister Yasuo Ichikawa told reporters in Tokyo after a Security Council meeting chaired by Prime Minister Yoshihiko Noda.

"The security environment surrounding fighter aircraft is transforming. We wanted to choose an aircraft that is able to respond to these changes," Ichikawa said about the decision, which was confirmed on 20 December.

The F-35 overcame competition from the Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet Block II and the Eurofighter Typhoon after scoring highest according to four criteria: the performance of the aircraft and its weapons, price, local industrial participation, plus repairs and after-sales maintenance. The MoD's definition of performance criteria included stealth capability, kinematic performance and information-processing capabilities.

The MoD added that Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, IHI Corporation and Mitsubishi Electric would manufacture about 40 per cent of the F-35, with involvement in about 300 components.

Mitsubishi Heavy Industries will manufacture parts of the airframe, IHI will assemble the engine and Mitsubishi Electric is engaged in electronics, the MoD said, adding that the US government and Lockheed Martin had also agreed to allow the three companies to manufacture and complete final assembly and checkout of the main wing, tail surface and aft fuselage.

Tokyo's desire for a stealth fighter is well known. It spent years lobbying - unsuccessfully - for the US to sell it the Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor air-superiority fighter. The importance of stealth to Japan has been thrown into sharp focus by China and Russia's development of the Chengdu J-20 and Sukhoi T-50 PAK FA prototypes respectively.

The potential threat from these platforms was rammed home by MoD figures published in October showing that Japan Air Self-Defence Force (JASDF) intercepts of Chinese military aircraft entering national airspace had more than tripled to 83 from April to September. Japan also scrambled fighters 106 times against Russia - 43 times fewer than the same period in 2010 but still the most by nationality.

Lockheed Martin argues that the F-35 is the best platform to counter the emerging threat from Japan's much-larger neighbours.

"The F-35 has exceptional air-to-air capabilities based on its stealth, full-fighter aerodynamic performance, advanced sensors, sensor fusion and advanced datalinks," Lockheed Martin spokesman John Giese told Jane's . "US government analytical models show that, when flying against an advanced-threat aircraft, the F-35 is six times better than fourth-generation F-16, F/A-18 and Eurofighter aircraft."

Giese said that in terms of its modelled loss exchange ratio (LER), which measures effectiveness by dividing the number of enemy aircraft destroyed by the number of friendly aircraft destroyed, "the F-35 is six times better than fourth-generation aircraft."

Military analyst Toshiyuki Shikata told Jane's that, regardless of performance, the MoD had to choose a US platform. "Japan had no choice but to buy US aircraft if you consider the importance of interoperability with US military equipment and systems. This excludes the Eurofighter, while the stealth capabilities of the Super Hornet are weaker than those of the F-35."

ANALYSIS

Japan's decision to buy the F-35 comes as something of a surprise to many as, of all the contenders, it seems the most unlikely fit for the country's performance or timetable requirements.

With the Japanese looking to procure an air-superiority fighter to replace its ageing Mitsubishi/McDonnell Douglas F-4EJ Phantom IIs, many have suggested that the emphasis on interdiction and strike in the F-35's design may adversely affect its air-to-air capability.

Whereas the Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet and Eurofighter Typhoon were both developed to be fighters first and bombers second (particularly so with the Typhoon), the opposite is true for the F-35.

It has been proven in the past that, while it is possible to make a bomber out of a fighter (the F-4 Phantom, F-15 Eagle and F/A-18 Hornet being prime examples), the opposite does not hold true (the fighter variant of the Panavia Tornado did not acquit itself in the same manner as did the original strike variant).

For its part, Lockheed Martin dismisses such concerns, telling Jane's that the F-35 "was designed and built to counter the most advanced airborne and ground-based threats - exactly the air-defence environment that Japan faces today and in the future. The F-35 has exceptional air-to-air capabilities based on its stealth, full-fighter aerodynamic performance, advanced sensors, sensor fusion and advanced datalinks".

This may be true, but all of the attributes listed above, with the exception of "full-fighter aerodynamic performance", are primarily of importance in the beyond-visual-range (BVR) environment. This BVR environment is not normally encountered outside a full-scale war as pilots are usually required to visually identify potential targets before engaging them.

While Lockheed Martin talks up the aircraft's aerodynamic performance, it has been noted that the F-35's relatively small wing area will translate into high wing loadings during a turning dogfight. Such loadings are not good in an air-to-air combat scenario as they severely limit manoeuvrability. As such, questions have been raised over the F-35's ability to match the manoeuvrability of Chinese types such as the J-10 and J-11 during close-in aerial combat.

As for the programme's schedule, Japan has said it wants to field the winning fighter by Fiscal Year 2016 (calendar year 2016/17). Lockheed Martin is confident it can meet this deadline, but it has to be noted that the F-35's primary customer, the US Air Force, has already said that delays have meant its 2016 initial-operational-capability (IOC) date is no longer viable. So while Lockheed Martin may be able to deliver aircraft by 2016, it is doubtful whether Japan will be able to begin operating them at that point.

With these issues in mind, it has to be asked why Japan has opted to procure the yet-to-be-fielded F-35 over its in-service battle-tested competitors. Over recent years Japan has made no secret of its desire to procure the Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor but was continually rebuffed by the US government.

Of the F-22's many attributes, it was its low observability that made it so alluring to Japan. While both the Typhoon and the Super Hornet do have stealthy characteristics, the F-35 has been largely marketed on the back of its covert capabilities. Japan is currently in the early stages of developing its own indigenous ATD-X stealth fighter, so any expertise that can be gained from industrial participation in F-35 production will certainly be welcome. In all likelihood it is this, coupled with Japan's long-standing political and industrial allegiance to the US, that secured F-X success for the F-35.

· Update: Japan sees increase in Chinese air incursions, www.jdw.janes.com, 14-10-2011

· Update: Japan has opted for F-35 in F-X contest, say media reports, www.jdw.janes.com, 15-12-2011

(My recent story for JDW) Update: Japan presses ahead with ATD-X programme

2011-12-31T11:55:00.000-08:00

Update: Japan presses ahead with ATD-X programme

My most recent stories for Jane's Defence Weekly and International Defence Review

2011-11-12T10:09:00.000-08:00

Here are my most recent stories for Jane's Defence Weekly and Jane's International Defence Review.

*Japan presses ahead with ATD-X programme
The Japanese Ministry of Defence (MoD) and Mitsubishi Heavy Industries will begin manufacturing the airframe of the Advanced Technology Demonstrator - X (ATD-X) fighter...
11-Nov-2011

Japan's TRDI reveals details of 'Shinshin'
A senior official at Japan's Technical Research and Development Institute (TRDI) has briefed Jane's on new details of Mitsubishi's next-generation Advanced Technology Demonstrator-X (ATD-X) ...
11-Nov-2011

I wrote that Japan is eyeing at developing the sixth-generation fighter, called the F-3, as neighbouring China and Russia are accelerating efforts to deploy their own new fifth-generation multi-purpose fighters.

The Japanese Ministry of Defence (MoD) is about to start manufacturing the airframe of the Mitsubishi Advanced Technology Demonstrator – X (ATD-X) fighter known as ‘Shinshin’ “very soon”, Lt. General Hideyuki Yoshioka told me on November 4.

Rethink U.S. military base plans for Japan

2011-11-12T08:26:00.000-08:00

This is one option to solve the Futenma problem, which has reached a deadlock. Hope Panetta-san will read this. Cheers, Kosuke

Rethink U.S. military base plans for Japan

Editor's Note: Mike Mochizuki is Associate Dean, Professor, and Sigur Chair at George Washington University specializing in U.S.-Japan relations; Michael O'Hanlon is senior fellow at Brookings and author of The Wounded Giant: America's Armed Forces in an Age of Austerity.

The views expressed in this article are solely those of Mike Mochizuki and Michael O'Hanlon.

By Mike Mochizuki and Michael O'Hanlon – Special to CNN

On his inaugural trip to Asia as secretary of defense, Leon Panetta offered reassuring words throughout the region that America’s presence in the Western Pacific will not decline as a result of the ongoing military budget reduction process in the United States.

The current U.S. strength of almost 30,000 soldiers in South Korea, closer to 40,000 in Japan, and several thousand more sailors and Marines typically aboard ships patrolling the area’s huge waters will remain as is, according to the Pentagon’s new leader. At a time when “sequestration” threatens to cut up to one trillion dollars from the Pentagon’s previous ten-year spending plan, such words of resolve and continuity are understandable, and mostly right on.

But they are not completely correct. Mr. Panetta should seek to honor their spirit rather than their letter in the crucial months ahead.

Troop numbers should not be confused with capability or commitment. American officials make a mistake by unnecessarily constraining their options when making such statements. Sustaining, and indeed increasing, American capability should be the leitmotif guiding future defense policy decisions. In some cases that may mean more numbers, and in other cases less.

The specific area where current American basing arrangements should in fact be thoroughly revisited is in regards to the presence of nearly 20,000 U.S. Marines on Okinawa. In fact, due to ongoing war efforts in Afghanistan, the actual number of Marines in this Japanese island prefecture has been typically much less than that figure - which American officials should seize on as an opportunity to downsize without in fact downsizing.

Keeping 5,000 to 10,000 Marines on Okinawa while relocating the rest makes the most strategic sense. Right now, Japanese and American officials in Tokyo and Washington agree; and they have a plan to relocate about 8,000 of the Marines to Guam in the coming years. But a better approach would be to bring those Marines home to California where the inevitable downsizing of the broader U.S. Marine Corps will create space for them at existing bases.

American capabilities in East Asia - the crucial matter - can then be sustained (if not actually enhanced) if Japan and the United States purchase extra equipment for those Marines and place it on maritime prepositioning vessels in Japanese waters where it can be quickly put to sea in the event of conflict and sailed to where forces are needed. Equipment could then be quickly unloaded and the Marines in California could fly over to meet needs even faster than they could currently reach regional hotspots in a place like Korea or Southeast Asia.

The Guam relocation plan is a complex relocation of Marine assets. Not only would almost half the Marines move to American territory about 1,000 miles away, but the remaining Okinawa Marines would use a brand new airfield. The existing site at Futenma Marine Air Station in southern Okinawa, which has over the years become even more surrounded by Japanese urban dwellers than has LaGuardia in New York or National Airport in DC, would close and be replaced by V-shaped airfield constructed on the shore of Henoko Bay near Nago City.

There are however two major problems with the existing plan. First, Okinawan politics will not tolerate it. Not only did voters in Nago City elect in January 2010 a mayor who is adamantly against this new airfield, but also every head of Okinawa’s cities, towns and villages are also opposed. Okinawan Governor Hirokazu Nakaima was re-elected in November 2010 on a platform opposing the current relocation plan; and he is almost certain to reject the upcoming application for a landfill, which is necessary to build the new airfield.

If the Japanese government were to force the construction of proposed Henoko facility, this is likely to provoke a physical clash with anti-base activists and erode the willingness of Okinawans to host more important U.S. bases on Okinawa, such as Kadena Air Force Base.

Second, and just as importantly in the era of American budgetary austerity, the Guam/Henoko plan is way too expensive. Lots of costly construction would be needed to make it happen - about $15 billion for each of the two countries. Keeping U.S. forces at existing bases in Japan is in fact a bargain, since Japan pays most of their local costs and since having Navy and Air Force capabilities in particular in forward-deployed locations is a big net positive for the United States.

They can operate in the region from existing facilities on Okinawa and Japan’s main islands, with aircraft within combat radius of North Korea and the Taiwan Straits and ships within a couple days’ sail of each place. But moving Marines to different places in the region costs big money - money that Washington in particular does not now have.

A better policy would bring much if not most of the Marine combat capability back to America, where the added forces could partly counter what appear to be pending cuts of up to 30,000 in total Marine Corps uniformed strength in the years ahead. If Tokyo and Washington shared in the costs, equipment for the relocating Marines and ships to hold it in Japanese ports until needed could be purchased for around $5 billion, far less than the costs of the new construction projects.

The incorrect perception that the United States was weakening its commitment to the Western Pacific with such a move could be countered in several ways. First, more attack submarines could be located on Guam, as could more unmanned aerial vehicles and various other assets. Second, the capabilities of the maritime prepositioned ships could be widely advertised. Third, America’s potential access to Japanese military and civilian facilities on Okinawa and other Japanese prefectures, already legally permitted, could be beefed up with pre-stationing of more supplies and with a gradual hardening of fuel depots and the like in such places. Fourth, U.S. Marine units could fly from California to Japan on a regular basis to participate in exercises - and many of them could be conducted jointly with Japanese Self-Defense Forces. Other steps are surely possible as well.

It is time that Tokyo and Washington break out of the Okinawa Marine Corps policy swamp, where they have been enmeshed and entrapped far too long. And there is a better way that can save each side around $10 billion in the process. That would make for a meaningful dent in the coming budget reduction process, and make for good strategy and good alliance politics as well.

The views expressed in this article are solely those of Mike Mochizuki and Michael O'Hanlon.

My latest story for Jane's Defence Weekly

2011-10-22T04:46:00.000-07:00

Japan, China re-establish military exchanges
Japan and China have resumed military exchanges after they were suspended for a year over a territorial dispute. Japanese Defence Minister Yasuo Ichikawa met ...
21-Oct-2011

My recent stories for Jane's Defence Weekly

2011-10-16T19:09:00.000-07:00

Lockheed Martin emphasises industrial support in Japan F-X bid

Japan agrees to air refuelling of US forces

New Japanese PM appoints Ichikawa as defence minister

Analysts link China's Senkaku intrusions to Japan's political travails

Japanese White Paper denounces 'assertive' China

Cracks may delay deployment of Japan's P-1s

Japanese F-15 crashes in training

(My latest story for Asia Times) Fighters duel for Japan air defense contract

2011-10-11T04:06:00.000-07:00

Here is my latest story for Asia Times. I wrote about Japan's multibillion dollar contract on its next fighter jets. If you have time, please go over this. Cheers, Kosuke

Fighters duel for Japan air defense contractBy Kosuke Takahashi

TOKYO - Across the globe, defense industry players, military experts and potential adversaries are eagerly watching Japan's decision on its next mainstay fighter jet.

While Japan is still in the final selection process for a state-of-the-art combat plane for the Japan Air Self-Defense Force (JASDF), United States defense contractor Lockheed Martin's F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) is already seen as a clear front-runner, mainly due to its high-tech stealth capabilities.

Aiming to strengthen its efforts to win the multibillion-dollar contract, Lockheed Martin last week made a strong public appeal in Tokyo, saying it would license Japanese companies to perform engine assembly and manufacture major components if the F-35 were to be selected.

The F-35 has been developed jointly by nine nations: the US, Britain, the Netherlands, Italy, Canada, Norway, Denmark, Australia and Turkey. Potential buyers of this stealth fighter currently include Israel, Singapore, Japan and South Korea.

"We received US government approval to offer Japan, the first country outside the partnership, a very robust industrial opportunity," John Balderston, the director for Lockheed's Japan F-35 Campaign, told reporters on October 6 in a Tokyo hotel where the company was displaying a one-seater flight simulator of the warplane for media.

Asked about what the company could offer Japanese firms, Balderston said, "Final assembly and checkout of the airplane, manufacture of major components, engine assembly, integration and test, depot-level sustain, modification, repair and overhaul, and upgrade capabilities."

Japan has been worried that delays in the F-35's development would jeopardize its planned 2016 introduction. But company officials were upbeat. "We are confident that we will meet Japan's requirements, including delivery," Lockheed's Balderston said.

Tokyo could get the F-35 fighter jets at an average cost of US$65 million each, he added.

Japan's delayed F-X procurement
Japan's Ministry of Defense (MoD) aims to procure its first jet as early as fiscal year 2016, with plans to acquire a total of 40-50 aircraft at a cost of around US$4 billion.

It will choose the next mainstay fighter jet for the JASDF by the end of next month. This procurement will replace JASDF's aging fleet of 67 Mitsubishi/McDonnell Douglas F-4EJ fighters, which entered service in the early 1970s during the Vietnam War and are scheduled to be retired from 2013.

The MoD originally scheduled replacement of its F-4 fleet for fiscal year 2009. Tokyo had long made clear its preference for Lockheed's F-22 Raptor.

But the October 2009 decision by US President Barack Obama to halt F-22 production due to budgetary constraints officially ended any Japanese hopes of obtaining the aircraft, which while costly is seen as the world's most advanced air-superiority fighter.

Critics say the MoD's obsession with the F-22 caused years of delay in the next-generation fighter program, called the F-X in Japan.

The MoD will buy 12 fighters in the next five years, according to the new mid-term defense program for fiscal 2011-2015. The MoD on September 30 requested 55.1 billion yen (US$718 million) in fiscal 2012 budget appropriations to acquire four new fighter jets to replace the F-4.

Four selection criteria
Lockheed, Boeing and BAE Systems have met a September 26 deadline to submit bids for Japan's F-X fighter competition.

BAE Systems is leading the Typhoon bid for the Eurofighter consortium, with support from the British government and Japan's Sumitomo Corporation, while Boeing is offering its F/A-18E/F Super Hornet Block II in conjunction with the US Navy.

The MoD has identified four selection criteria: the performance of the aircraft and its weapons, maintenance costs, level of participation of domestic firms and after-sales support. Regarding performance criteria, the MoD is focusing on stealth, kinematic performance and information-processing capabilities.

On October 5, Japanese Defense Minister Yasuo Ichikawa stressed the need to protect the domestic fighter-jet-related industry.

All three bidders have pledged to allow fighters to be built under license in Japan. The question is how much production they will allow. Boeing says 70-80% could be done in Japan.

The JASDF has 202 Mitsubishi-Boeing F-15Js, 93 Mitsubishi F-2s and 67 Mitsubishi-McDonnell Douglas F-4EJ Kai Phantoms, according to the MoD's 2011 White Paper.

Aside from domestic production, other factors loom large. Firstly, the March 11 tsunami damaged 18 F-2s at the JASDF Matsushima Air Base in Miyagi prefecture, forcing the MoD to scrap 12 of them. The F-2 cost about 12 billion yen, or US$156 million, per unit.

While the F-4s have been in service since the early 1970s, the F-15Js have been a part of the fleet since the early 1980s, making both difficult and expensive for the JASDF to maintain.

In addition, on September 27, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Ltd handed over its last F-2 fighter to the MoD at the Komaki Minami plant in Aichi prefecture, ending more than five decades of fighter-jet production since 1956. The Japanese media reported about two dozen parts suppliers and manufacturers had exited from the fighter-jet market.

As if to illustrate Japan's strains in air defense, a F-15J Eagle based at Naha Air Base in Okinawa prefecture crashed in the East China Sea on July 5 during combat training. More recently, an F-15 fighter lost an empty auxiliary fuel tank and part of a mock missile on October 7 during a training flight over Ishikawa prefecture.

Russia and China appear to have exploited the weaknesses in Japan's air defense. The number of scrambles the JASDF had to launch increased dramatically in recent years to intercept intruders, as Russian and Chinese military aircraft toyed with Japanese airspace. Japan scrambled fighters 386 times in fiscal year 2010, the highest number since 1991.

Russia is jointly developing a fifth-generation fighter T-50 (PAK FA) with India, while China is developing its own new fifth-generation multi-purpose fighter, the J-20. For Japan, the threat from the air is increasing.

Japan has never procured European fighters. More than a few experts have pointed out the Eurofighter may lack full interoperability with US military equipment, which Japan relies on. However, British ambassador David Warren has stressed that this is not the case.

Maintenance and repair is another worry for the Eurofighter since Japan is accustomed to US equipment.

As for Boeing's F/A-18E/F Super Hornet, it is little more than the F-2, or Japan's most advanced 4th-generation multirole fighter based on the F-16. The stealth capabilities of the Eurofighter and Super Hornet are weaker than the F-35.

"Considering all the various factors together such as the state of the domestic fighter-jet-related defense industry, the interoperability with US equipment and China's air capabilities, which Japan needs to be most aware of, the F-35 is the most likely winner," said Hideshi Takesada, a professor at Yonsei University of South Korea.

Kosuke Takahashi is a Tokyo-based Japanese journalist. His twitter is @TakahashiKosuke

(Copyright 2011 Asia Times Online (Holdings) Ltd. All rights reserved. Please contact us about sales, syndication and republishing.)

Japan's largest mega-solar debuted in the heart of the Tokyo metropolitan area

2011-08-26T22:43:00.000-07:00

I visited Japan's largest mega-solar power plant in Kawasaki City, adjoining Tokyo.

I also visited the first urban-type biomass power plant in Japan.

(My latest stories for Jane's Defence Weekly)

2011-07-22T09:39:00.000-07:00

Briefing: Big birds

Japanese F-15 crashes in training

Japan, US delay Futenma move, choose new site for 7th Fleet landing training

Here are more photos of my favorite Kawasaki XC-2 aircraft.
Photo Credit: Technical Research and Development Institute, Ministry of Defense, Japan

(My latest story for Asia Times) Japan-South Korea ties hit turbulence

2011-07-22T09:24:00.000-07:00

Japan-South Korea ties hit turbulence
Japan has banned diplomats from using South Korea's Korean Air after the airline directed the maiden flight of an Airbus A380 service over disputed islands called Takeshima by Japanese and Dokdo by Koreans. The flare-up of the long-simmering East Asian island feud impacts on the nations' united front against North Korea's military ambitions and benefits China's muscle-flexing in the Pacific. - Kosuke Takahashi (Jul 15, '11)

Japan-South Korea ties hit turbulence
By Kosuke Takahashi

TOKYO - The flaring up of a long-simmering territorial dispute between Japan and South Korea over a group of small rocky islets threatens to roll back recent rapprochement between the neighbors seen in economic deals and cross-cultural exchanges.

The Japanese Foreign Ministry on July 11 instructed ministry officials to boycott Korean Air flights for one month in protest at the airline's demonstration flight last month above disputed islets called Takeshima by Japanese and Dokdo by Koreans that are located in the Sea of Japan (known in Korea as the East Sea).

The controversy could damage a culture boom in Tokyo called the Han-Ryu (Korean wave). Young Korean idol groups such as Girls' Generation and KARA are very popular in Japan. More importantly it could cause a significant geopolitical split.

The united front Tokyo and Seoul present against North Korea's nuclear and missile ambitions could be impacted, with China muscle-flexing in both the East China Sea and the South China Sea also benefiting from the East Asian feud.

This was Japan's first-ever step against a private airline in connection with the territorial dispute. The islets are claimed by both Japan and South Korea, but have been occupied by South Korea since 1954.

Korean Air was testing its new Airbus A380 - the world's largest passenger plane - and entered airspace above the contested islets on June 16, or a day before it went into service between Seoul Incheon International Airport and Tokyo Narita International Airport. The jet carried executives of the airline as well as South Korean and foreign reporters and photographers such as Reuters.

On Thursday, Japan's State Foreign Secretary Chiaki Takahashi said at a press conference that the ministry would not invite Korean Air officials to events it will host. He described the June 16 test flight as "a violation of Japan's airspace".

Ukeru Magosaki, the former chief of the Japanese Foreign Ministry's international intelligence bureau, criticized the ministry's sanctions against Korean Air.

"The boycott makes it more difficult to solve the territorial dispute," Magosaki, the former diplomat told Asia Times Online on Friday. "For the ministry, reducing tensions is more important than any other. The ministry is, in an opposite manner, escalating the problem."

The Asahi Shimbun, which first reported this issue on Wednesday, said Japan's conservative opposition had pressured the ministry to take further action, resulting in the move to boycott the airline.

This ministry has confirmed the boycott does not violate the Agreement on Government Procurement of the World Trade Organization, commonly known as the GPA, focusing on the subject of government procurement.

The gesture is purely symbolic, as Japanese diplomats use domestic airlines such as All Nippon Airways and Japan Airlines.

South Korea's reaction
As expected, the harshest reaction has come from the South Korean government.

"The Japanese measure, regarded as a sort of sanction against a private company, can hardly be understood," Foreign Ministry spokesman Cho Byung Jae on Thursday told reporters, demanding an immediate withdrawal of the Japanese foreign ministry's measure.

Cho said the South Korean government will take "stern" measures regarding the issue, but did not specify what measures it would take. "We will watch what measures Japan will take," the spokesman said.

Seoul also sent a message of protest against the measure on Tuesday to Kanehara Nobukatsu, minister for general affairs at the Japanese Embassy in Seoul and urged its cancelation.

The prelude of the recent flare-up first occurred in March when Seoul strongly protested against Tokyo's approval of history textbooks containing territorial claims to South Korean-controlled islets.

Then, in early April, South Korea's Yonhap News Agency reported construction work on a 2,700-square-meter maritime science facility on the disputed islets was expected to start later that month and set to be complete by December next year. Tokyo on April 5 lodged a protest with South Korea over Seoul's plans to build the facility.

More than 10 South Korean lawmakers, including several ministers, have visited the disputed territories since April.

Furthermore, three South Korean lawmakers on May 24 visited Kunashiri island, one of four islands off the coast of Hokkaido controlled by Russia but claimed by Japan - to the fury of Tokyo. It was the first time members of the South Korean National Assembly had set foot on the islands, which are known as the Northern Territories, called the Southern Kurils by Russians.

Given the saga that erupted from Japan's arrest of a Chinese fishing captain last year, Tokyo's reaction to the Korean Air flight may reflect internal wrangling over foreign policy. South Korean politicians also cannot make major concessions to Japan ahead of upcoming key elections in 2012 for parliament and the presidency.

Kosuke Takahashi is a Tokyo-based Japanese journalist. His twitter is @TakahashiKosuke

(Copyright 2011 Asia Times Online (Holdings) Ltd. All rights reserved. Please contact us about sales, syndication and republishing.)

(Jane's Defence Weekly) North Korea could be preparing the site for a third nuclear test

2011-07-01T02:32:00.000-07:00

ASIA PACIFIC

Date Posted: 23-Jun-2011

Jane's Defence Weekly
________________________________________

Satellite images show continued activity at North Korea's nuclear test site

Allison Puccioni Jane's Image Analyst

California

James Hardy JDW Asia-Pacific Editor

London

Key Points

• Images taken of North Korea's nuclear test site on 10 June 2011 show significant excavation since October 2010

• The images suggest that North Korea could be preparing the site for a third nuclear test following similar tests in 2006 and 2009

Satellite images provided by GeoEye show continued activity at the site of North Korea's 2006 and 2009 underground nuclear tests.

A comparison of 10 June 2011 images with those taken by DigitalGlobe on 16 October 2010 shows significantly more excavation at two sites: one just south of the test site operations base and one about 900 m east of the main base. The latter site also has three new buildings.

The 10 June GeoEye image shows 25-30 per cent more excavation extending far closer to the adjacent road. This may suggest that a tunnel is being excavated in preparation for a nuclear test.

North Korea tested nuclear devices in 2006 and 2009 in tunnels at the site, which is on the slopes of Mount Mantap-san about 42 km northwest of Kilchu, North Hamgyong province. Ahead of the 2006 test, it was reported that the North Koreans had excavated a 700 m-long horizontal tunnel under Mantap-san.

ANALYSIS

Jane's analysis of the site comes after diplomatic sources reported rumours of nuclear weapon-related activity in the past three months. Jane's reported on 10 June that satellite imagery showed no activity at two known missile test sites in North Korea; the imagery of the Kilchu site illustrates that, if there is activity, it is taking place at the nuclear test site.

Scott Snyder, director of the Center for US-Korea Policy in Washington, DC, said it was unclear what Pyongyang would gain from holding a test now.

"A new nuclear test would result in a drive to ratchet up UN sanctions and would test China's strategic commitment to North Korea," Snyder said.

"Given the poor prospects for inter-Korean relations for the foreseeable future, it is possible that the North Koreans might see heightened tensions as a vehicle for getting around South Korea and drawing new attention from the US, but this sort of strategy has proven increasingly ineffective in drawing the sort of attention that North Korea wants."

A diplomatic source told Jane's that recent weeks had seen no major changes in North Korean rhetoric, most of which referred to retaliation for propaganda balloon releases into the North by South Korean political groups and demands for the return of nine North Korean refugees who sailed into South Korean waters in mid-June.

(My latest story) Asia Times Online : Mage Island another tinderbox for Japan

2011-06-24T05:57:00.000-07:00

Asia Times Online :: Mage Island another tinderbox for Japan

A Japanese-United States plan to use a small island in Kagoshima prefecture for carrier-borne landing practice suggests the allies have learnt little from the US presence on Okinawa. While entrenched local opposition to the militarization of Mage Island is mobilizing in earnest, there are good military reasons - such as the island's vulnerability - to find a better realignment strategy for US forces. - Kosuke Takahashi (Jun 24, '11)

Mage Island another tinderbox for Japan

By Kosuke Takahashi

TOKYO - Across the globe, bureaucrats tend to make up fascinating armchair plans. But without regard to local input, that's just a castle in the air - however ingeniously conceived. Without regard for the environment or consideration of local people, no mere desk plan will do.

A very good example is the long-standing controversial relocation issue of the United States Marine Corps Air Station (MCAS) at Futenma in Okinawa prefecture in Japan's south.

But now, foreign and defense policymakers of the US and Japan are about to repeat the same failure, as they have caused another friction with local governments over a small island of western Japan called Mage Island.

Although it's hard to spot in news headlines, the US and Japan on June 21 for the first time named Mage Island - or an uninhabited island in Nishinoomote City of Kagoshima prefecture - as the candidate site for US carrier-borne aircraft landing drills.

The joint statement, issued by four foreign and defense ministers of the US and Japan after the so-called two-plus-two security meeting in Washington, for the first time specifically mentioned the name of Mage Island for the "use by US forces as a permanent field carrier landing practice site".

Yet another Futenma?
"Mage Island could be yet another Futenma," Japanese military analyst Toshiyuki Shikata told Asia Times Online. "The government, led by the ruling Democratic Party of Japan, has made no serious efforts to convince local people of the plan. They ignored democratic process."

Mage Island covers about 800 hectares and is located around 12 kilometers west of Tanegashima between Kyushu and Okinawa. It was picked as the permanent site for the so-called Field Carrier Landing Practice (FCLP) of the US Navy's Carrier Air Wing 5 (CVW-5) based at Naval Air Facility Atsugi of Kanagawa prefecture, southwest of Tokyo, or the largest US Naval Air Facility in the Pacific. Most of the island is privately owned by a land developer headquartered in Tokyo. Permission from this company is required to land on the island as a general rule.

Under the 2006 bilateral road map agreement on the realignment of US forces in Japan, CVW-5 squadrons, together with their 59 US carrier-borne jet fighters such as the Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet, are set to be transferred from the Atsugi naval base to the MCAS Iwakuni in Yamaguchi prefecture.

The two nations plan to replace Iwo Island, under the jurisdiction of Tokyo, where the FCLP by CVW-5 is provisionally conducted, with Mage Island. The 2006 bilateral realignment road map said that a permanent location would be picked by 2009 - a delay that Japanese officials can catch a lot of heat for, as they face strong pressure from the US.

Mage Island is only about 400 kilometers from MCAS Iwakuni, while Iwo Island is around 1,200 kilometers away from the Atsugi naval base, thus making flight drills on Mage Island more convenient for the US Navy.

Local opposition
Just as Okinawans have opposed the relocation of the Futenma base to a new helicopter base scheduled for construction off the shores of the beautiful Henoko bay, local officials and residents in Nishinoomote City are beginning to protest the plan to transfer the drills to Mage Island in earnest.

Chikara Nagano, mayor of Nishinoomote City, has said, "We harbor strong resentment against the government's high-handed tactics ignoring local communities' will, and we will never permit it."

Kagoshima governor Yuichiro Ito also voiced his opposition, by saying "it's needed to protest against the plan, together with local people".

Eleven groups such as civic, tourist and medical associations in Nishinoomote City on June 22 jointly issued a letter of protest, under which they pledged to remain adamantly against the plan.

Under the plan, the Japanese Ministry of Defense plans to build a Self-Defense Forces (SDF) facility on Mage Island and conduct the landing practice as part of its efforts to boost security around the Nansei Islands in Okinawa prefecture, and in the East China Sea near China and Taiwan, a move that is apparently aimed at countering China's growing naval power.

In the meantime, the US also plans to conduct the field carrier landing practice there.

Talk of Mage Island as a candidate site for the envisaged flight drill facility arose in 2007 under the administration of the Liberal Democratic Party and its coalition partner the New Komeito party.

But it disappeared soon due to strong local opposition from the Nishinoomote and nearby municipalities. Then, in December 2009 under the former Yukio Hatoyama administration, the island was even considered as a candidate for the Futenma transfer. But again this idea was scrapped because of strong local protest.

Japanese military analyst Shikata said it is militarily nonsense to build the drill site on an uninhabited island such as Mage Island.

"Small islands are vulnerable to external attacks," Shikata said. "Terrorists can easily attack them. Moreover, the US needs the SDF troops for their own safety, just as the US forces in Okinawa are protected by the SDF troops there. You cannot easily build the drill site for the US in such an uninhabited island without SDF personnel."

Kosuke Takahashi is a Tokyo-based Japanese journalist. His twitter is @TakahashiKosuke

(AFP) U.S. Senate Moves to Freeze Japan Base Move - Defense News

2011-06-19T08:01:00.000-07:00

U.S. Senate Moves to Freeze Japan Base Move - Defense News

AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE

Published: 18 Jun 2011 11:21

WASHINGTON - U.S. senators said June 17 that they have taken a major step to halt a controversial military base plan on Japan's Okinawa Island and called on the Pentagon to make a fresh assessment.

Brushing aside insistence by the two governments that plans should go ahead, the Senate Armed Services Committee agreed to bar any funds to move troops from Japan to Guam and ordered a new study on Okinawa's flashpoint Futenma base.

The language was part of an annual defense funding act approved June 16.

It needs approval from the full Senate and House of Representatives, but senators involved said that their actions on Asian bases enjoyed broad support.

Sen. Carl Levin, a member of President Barack Obama's Democratic Party who heads the committee, said that the base plan in Japan increasingly appeared unfeasible and that the United States needed to control costs.

"This is a major step to put all these changes on hold and to require some analysis of cost and to take an honest look at what the current plans are and what the alternatives are," Levin told reporters on a conference call.

The Senate intervened even though the Obama administration had put its foot down with Japan, insisting that the base plan could not be changed. One Japanese prime minister, Yukio Hatoyama, resigned last year after failing to fulfill campaign promises to come up with a new plan on the Futenma base.

"I think people have kind of hidden their heads in the sand because everyone just says, 'We've got a plan, we're going to keep going.' But the problem is the current plan isn't affordable, it's not workable," Levin said.

Okinawa is home to around half of the 47,000 U.S. troops stationed in Japan under a post-World War II security treaty. Futenma, a Marine Corps air station, is a particular source of grievance as it lies in what has become a crowded urban area.

Under a 2006 plan first approved by President George W. Bush's administration and a previous conservative government in Japan, the United States would close Futenma and move its aircraft to an isolated beach elsewhere in Okinawa. Some 8,000 Marines would leave Okinawa for Guam, a U.S. territory, in 2014.

The Senate bill prohibits funds for the Marine move until commanders provide an updated plan for Guam - where public support has been dwindling - and the Defense Department certifies "tangible progress" on the Futenma riddle.

Amid a push by lawmakers to tame a soaring debt, the Senate committee also cut $150 million during the year starting in October for projects linked to the shift to Guam.

The bill requires the Defense Department to study an alternative, drafted by Democratic Sen. Jim Webb of Virginia, to close and return Futenma's real estate and move its air assets to Okinawa's existing Kadena Air Base.

Under Webb's proposal, some air assets would be moved from Kadena to other parts of Japan and Guam - a solution he argued would reduce both congestion and costs.

"These recommendations are workable, cost-effective, will reduce the burden on the Okinawan people and will strengthen the American contribution to the security of the region," Webb, a former combat Marine who heads a subcommittee on East Asia, said in a statement.

In South Korea, the Senate bill would end funding obligations for troops to bring their families. Starting in 2007, military commanders have allowed many of the 28,500 troops stationed in South Korea to be accompanied.

A recent study by the non-partisan Government Accountability Office said that the Defense Department did not sufficiently study the costs of the change, which could total $22 billion through 2050.

The Senate bill does not freeze the overall base shift in South Korea, as initially proposed by Webb, Levin and Republican Sen. John McCain who voiced concern about mounting costs.

The U.S. military plans to start shifting next year to a base in the city of Pyeongtaek, eventually closing the huge Yongsan base in Seoul which was set up for the 1950-53 Korean War but now lies in the heart of a bustling metropolis.

My latest stories for Jane's Defence Weekly

2011-06-10T06:16:00.000-07:00

ASIA PACIFIC
Date Posted: 09-Jun-2011

Jane's Defence Weekly

Japan keeps eye on PLAN flotilla as it passes Okinawa

Kosuke Takahashi
JDW Correspondent
Tokyo

The Japanese Ministry of Defence (MoD) said that 11 Chinese naval vessels sailed through international waters

between the islands of Okinawa and Miyako on 8-9 June: the largest flotilla of Chinese warships seen passing in the area.

According to the MoD, the People's Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) ships, including four frigates and three Russian built Sovremenny-class guided-missile destroyers, were observed by the Japan Maritime Self-Defence Force (JMSDF) over a two-day period. The presence of a submarine rescue ship suggests that submarines were also part of the flotilla, but this was not confirmed.

General Ryoichi Oriki, Chief of the Japan Self-Defence Force (JSDF) Joint Staff, said the JSDF would continue to monitor the PLAN's intensifying activities in waters off Japan.

On 9 June the Chinese Ministry of Defence said a PLAN fleet would conduct exercises in the west Pacific in mid-tolate June. "This will be a regular drill according to the [PLA's] annual plan," the ministry statement said.

Copyright © IHS Global Limited, 2011
ASIA PACIFIC

Date Posted: 09-Jun-2011

Jane's Defence Weekly

Marines to station Ospreys at Futenma

Kosuke Takahashi
JDW Correspondent
Tokyo

The US Department of Defense (DoD) said it plans to station the MV-22 Osprey at the controversial US Marine Corps air station at Futenma in Okinawa Prefecture, Japan, from late 2012 as part of an ongoing replacement of its ageing CH-46 Sea Knight helicopter fleet.

"The Marine Corps is in the process of phasing out the CH-46 and replacing it with the MV-22," Pentagon spokesman Colonel Dave Lapan said in a 6 June statement. "This process is beginning with units based at CONUS [continental US] air stations."

Japanese Defence Minister Toshimi Kitazawa said on 7 June he would visit Okinawa to explain the US plan to Okinawa Governor Hirokazu Nakaima.

Okinawans have opposed the deployment of Ospreys at Futenma, which is located in a densely populated part of Ginowan City, citing concerns about safety and noise pollution of the MV-22: a tilt-rotor vertical take-off and landing (VTOL) transport aircraft. During its development the Osprey suffered a series of accidents.

Futenma is due to close in 2014 under plans agreed in 2006 by the US and Japanese governments. However, this schedule is unlikely to be realised due to continuing disagreement about the marines' new home.

"According to the current USMC Aviation Plan, the MV-22 will replace the CH-46 within III MEF [Marine Expeditionary Force] in late 2012," Lapan said. "We have recently begun discussing the mechanics of the notification process involved with introducing this important Alliance capability to Okinawa.

"In comparison to the CH-46, the MV-22 is even safer, generally quieter and considerably more capable," he said.
ASIA PACIFIC

Date Posted: 20-May-2011

Jane's Defence Weekly

Kitazawa says Okinawa relocation deadline is unrealistic

Kosuke Takahashi
JDW Correspondent
Tokyo

Additional reporting by James Hardy
Asia-Pacific Editor
London

Japanese Defence Minister Toshimi Kitazawa said on 19 May that it will be ''physically difficult'' for Japan to comply with a 2006 agreement with the US to relocate US Marine Corps Air Station Futenma within Okinawa by 2014.

"The 2006 road map calls for the completion of a replacement facility for Futenma by 2014, but 2014 is on our doorstep," Kitazawa told the House of Representatives Committee on Security. "The Japanese government and Okinawa have not reached a deal," he added, in reference to strong local opposition to the relocation plan.

Okinawa's strategic location in the East China Sea has led to decades of conflict between the Japanese and US governments and residents, who have protested against noise and air pollution and crimes by US military personnel.

However, the US says that the transfer of about 8,000 Okinawa-based marines and 9,000 dependants from Okinawa to Guam will not occur unless the heliport functions of the Futenma base are moved to a coastal area off the marines' Camp Schwab in Nago City, northern Okinawa.

Kitazawa said that Guam's lack of infrastructure made this plan unrealistic. He proposed a "frank discussion" on the deadlocked plan at a "2-plus-2" security meeting between the two countries' foreign and defence ministers scheduled for late June.

Kitazawa's comments come a week after senior US senators condemned the planned relocation of the Futenma heliport to Camp Schwab. They propose integrating it into the nearby US Air Force base at Kadena: a suggestion that was rejected by the host municipality's mayor.

(My latest story for Asia Times) Ten reasons for Japan's revolving door

2011-06-10T02:44:00.000-07:00

Asia Times Online published my latest story about Japanese politics. If you get time, pls go over
Ten reasons for Japan's revolving door As seen above, I made an image of Japan's revolving door. (^^)

As Naoto Kan pledges to step down as Japan's fifth prime minister in five years, many voters wonder if the short tenures suggest a systemic problem with the country's politics, or just a crop of poor leaders. Here are 10 reasons why Japan's door to the top job keeps on revolving - and why his successor will need unwavering guts. - Kosuke Takahashi (Jun 10, '11)

Ten reasons for Japan's revolving door
By Kosuke Takahashi

TOKYO - Going by the revolving door of prime ministers who keep resigning after very short tenures, the top job in Japan should be the world's hardest post.

A year since he took office, Naoto Kan has been forced to pledge to step down once the nation has recovered from the worst of a triple whammy: earthquake, tsunami and nuclear meltdown.

Kan will be the fifth prime minister in five years, should he quit by late September. Why does Japan politics play musical chairs with a new prime minister every year? Is there any systemic problem with Japan politics? Or has the nation just had poor leaders?

Many wonder.

Here are 10 reasons for the revolving door.

1. Economic doldrums
Poorer economies weaken already vulnerable governments anytime and anywhere. This was especially true during Japan's post-bubble "lost decades" since early 1990s. The country headed into a downward deflationary spiral, which is far worse than an inflation spiral because there is no way to break the flight from borrowing and spending until it bottoms out and consumers begin to consume again.

With the national economy and budget shrinking, Japanese politicians became more and more inward-looking and began to engage in internal fighting. They always get in each other's way. Japan has had 14 prime ministers in the past 20 years of post-bubble downturn.

2. Very short primary election campaigns with no fierce battles
The Japanese political system is unique in that, unlike the United States, the party that gains a majority of seats in a general election produces the next prime minister under a parliamentary cabinet system. Thus, the majority party's presidential election is quite significant, as the outcome of that race will essentially decide Japan's next leader.

But the election time of the party presidential race tends to be very short. For example, following the former prime minister Yukio Hatoyama's resignation announcement on June 2, 2010, the ruling Democratic Party of Japan (DPJ) had just a two-day election campaign for presidency before selecting Kan as the next party leader on June 4. This is in contrast to the US presidential campaign, which spans around one year including primary elections.

Without enough election time, voters cannot sort out any good politician from multi-candidates. Candidates also cannot be tempered by trials and tribulations such as money scandals.

3. The twisted Diet
In recent years, many prime ministers such as Yasuo Fukuda resigned because of a political deadlock called "the twisted Diet (parliament)", where the ruling party has a majority of seats in the House of Representatives (lower chamber) while opposition parties maintain a majority of parliamentary seats in the House of Councilors (upper chamber).

This makes it almost impossible for any prime minister to get key bills through. Unlike the US, Japanese political parties' headquarters order their lawmakers on whether to support or vote against bills. Lawmakers who don't follow their party's decision are punished. Cross-party voting is not permitted.

Japanese politicians act in a group, not as individuals. They form political factions and usually don't vote on the basis of personal convictions.

4. No lawmaking in the Diet
The Japanese constitution says the Diet is the only legislative authority and the cabinet is a policy-implementation organization. But in reality, Japanese lawmakers usually do not make laws. Central government bureaucrats make laws.

The misnomer is heightened by the sense that all lawmakers do is criticize the cabinet, which is evident in current attacks on the Kan administration by opposition parties and some ruling Diet members. This has sunk Japanese politics to new depths.

5. Hereditary politicians
Japanese political cycles are full of hereditary politicians. In one account, nearly 20% of lower house members are hereditary politicians, whose family members used to be national lawmakers. This hereditary ratio is especially high in the opposition Liberal Democratic Party (LDP). Nearly 40% of LDP members are hereditary politicians.

This well-entrenched hereditary system works negatively, especially at the time of disaster. Preppy Japanese politicians fail to understand the public mindset and have little grasp of the tasks that disaster victims at evacuation centers most expect the government to fulfill.

Public perceptions that their politicians spinelessly relinquish the reins of government when times get tough have provoked anger. Ordinary Japanese cannot abandon their jobs and are forced to tighten their belts.

6. No civic journalism
Japanese media have exacerbated domestic problems by concentrating on what central ministries and agencies announce passively. Rather than going out into the town and pouring into the streets, many reporters heavily plump onto seats and sofas at the in-famous press club, or Kisha club in Japanese.

Central ministries and agencies, as well as local cities, prefectural polices and economic organizations, provide plenty of space for the benefits of those exclusive media clubs, along with facilities such as phone and faxes. This system causes Tokyo-oriented reporting and authority-focused journalism, rather than "man-on-the-street" journalism.

Moreover, control of the national daily newspapers, commercial television and most radio stations is in the hands of several Japanese media conglomerates. With media power so concentrated and strong, politicians who are not liked by reporters find it hard to get the air time needed to raise their popularity among voters.

7. US pressure
Japanese premiers of the post-World War II period with long tenures were those who preserved the golden era of US-Japan relations. Among them were Yasuhiro Nakasone, who was best known for his strong relationship with president Ronald Reagan, popularly called the "Ron-Yasu" friendship, and Junichiro Koizumi, who nurtured a close personal accord with George W Bush.

In sharp contrast, the late prime minister Kakuei Tanaka, who signed the Japan-China joint communique and achieved the normalization of diplomatic relations with China in 1972, was kicked out of office because of the so-called Lockheed bribery scandal. Japanese political analysts believe many allegations of bribery over Lockheed originated from the US administration, because Tanaka put relations with China ahead of the US-Japan alliance.

Most recently, former prime minister Yukio Hatoyama, who tried to move the controversial US Futenma Marine air base from Okinawa prefecture and campaigned for an East Asia community involving China, had a tenure of less than nine months.

8. National treacheries by bureaucrats
The WikiLeaks documents have shown high-ranking officials in Japan's foreign and defense ministries were very critical of the ruling DPJ-led administration, which originally called for a more equal partnership with the US.

A WikiLeaks document revealed the views of Akitaka Saiki, director general of the Asian and Oceanian Affairs Bureau of the Foreign Ministry at the time:

Saiki theorized that the DPJ, as an inexperienced ruling party, felt the need to project an image of power and confidence by showing it had Japan's powerful bureaucrats under control and was in charge of a new and bold foreign policy that challenged the US. Saiki called this way of thinking "stupid" and said "they will learn".

Moreover, sentiments of the then-Defense Ministry's defense policy bureau director general Nobushige Takamizawa were reported as suggesting, "The US delegation ought not to take [Akihisa] Nagashima's assessment of current realignment plans at face value" and that Takamizawa had "cautioned against premature demonstration of flexibility in adjusting the realignment package to be more palatable to the DPJ Government."

Nagashima was then vice minister of defense. Takamizawa spoke to a US delegation in a lunch meeting when Nagashima was absent.

Japanese voters last August ended the one-party domination of the LDP by giving a massive victory to the DPJ. Should national bureaucrats not follow the orders of politicians, who were chosen by historical national elections, for whom are bureaucrats working for? In Washington, it is said around 3,000 bureaucrats are moved from office once voters eject a government. In Tokyo, bureaucrats stay on-site, where they neutralize nationally elected politicians.

9. The nail that sticks out gets banged down
Japanese society cherishes groupism and tends to beat those who break from traditional social rules. This social norm works negatively on such politicians as Ichiro Ozawa, who boldly try to address national problems through strong-arm tactics and risk-taking to confront and rein in the bloated bureaucracy. More than a few political analysts, along with the mainstream mass media, say that in the arrest of his aides over political donations, Ozawa is the real target.

10. Japanese people quick to catch a trend
Japanese people are prone to follow the trend of the times and to try to make sure "I'm one of the guys". Thus, once a political and economic climate changes, they tend to follow the new fashion by throwing out the old. The popularity of politicians is also usually short-lived.

Political leaders of true merit are difficult to find at any time and anywhere. This is a universal, not Japanese problem. However, as the hard times roll in Japan anyone seeking the top job needs iron-clad political mettle, extra special spiritual strength and unwavering guts.

Kosuke Takahashi is a Tokyo-based Japanese journalist. His twitter is @TakahashiKosuke

(Copyright 2011 Asia Times Online (Holdings) Ltd. All rights reserved. Please contact us about sales, syndication and republishing.)

(My latest story for Asia Times Online) Futenma: Time on Okinawa's side

2011-05-20T02:54:00.000-07:00

Futenma: Time on Okinawa's side
Pressure is rising on Washington over its plans to build a new United States military base on Okinawa, with influential senators proposing that for budgetary reasons the controversial Futenma marine base instead be integrated into an existing facility. While neither plan is favored by Okinawans, the US insists it needs to maintain a forward presence in the region. - Kosuke Takahashi (May 20, '11)

Futenma: Time on Okinawa's side

By Kosuke Takahashi

TOKYO - If you've been listening, Okinawans have for years been sounding an alarm over the presence of huge United States military bases on their island. Finally, key American legislators are coming round to their point of view, with both the US and Japan's ballooning budget deficits raising doubts over the current US base relocation plan.

Time is on Okinawa's side for sure.

Three influential senior US senators last week condemned the planned relocation of US Marine Corps Air Station (MCAS) Futenma to a new offshore base to be built on the same island as "unrealistic" and instead proposed integrating it into the nearby US Kadena Air Base.

The existing US-Japanese plan was criticized in a May 11 joint statement by Carl Levin, a Michigan Democrat and chairman of the Senate Arms Services Committee; Jim Webb, a Virginia Democrat and chairman of the committee's personnel subcommittee; and John McCain, the committee's ranking member and the 2008 Republican presidential candidate. The committee has influential power and authority on legislation and expenditure regarding the US military.

They also called for a delay in the realignment of US military forces in South Korea, pending a further review, and a reduction in the Marine Corps presence on Guam by rotating combat units that are home-based elsewhere.

"The proposals would save billions in taxpayer dollars, keep US military forces in the region, greatly reduce the timing of sensitive political issues surrounding MCAS Futenma and reduce the American footprint on Okinawa," the senators' joint statement said.

Levin said the enormous financial burden imposed on Japan by the disastrous March 11 earthquake and tsunami "also must be considered".

The relocation of the Futenma base has been deadlocked for more than a decade due to strong local opposition. The US had demanded that the transfer of around 8,000 Okinawa-based Marines to Guam would not occur unless the heliport functions of the Futenma base are moved by 2014 to a coastal area off the Marines' Camp Schwab in Nago City, northern Okinawa - as agreed in a 2006 bilateral pact with Japan.

But last September the US Department of Defense (DoD) unilaterally announced it would postpone completion of the transfer originally planned for 2014 due to Guam's poor preparedness on infrastructure, as it cannot accept the sudden influx of 8,000 Marines, their 9,000 dependents and construction workers.

Webb, a former US Marine who's visited Okinawa many times, said on his website that the US "DoD should immediately examine the feasibility of moving the Marine Corps assets at Futenma into Kadena Air Force Base, while dispersing a percentage of air force assets now at Kadena into other areas of the Pacific region."

James Jones, US President Barack Obama's former national security advisor, has also repeatedly said the consolidation of Futenma and Kadena bases would be the best option.

Why now?
What led three veteran US senators to reconsider the existing plan? In a whirlwind of international politics, domestic politics matters most. The Obama administration has to overcome mounting political and economical difficulties for a number of domestic issues in the coming months.

First, it needs to firmly proceed to trim the fat off the spending budget, especially on the military, which accounts for about two-thirds of the discretionary federal budget. The US government projects its financial deficit will exceed $1 trillion for four consecutive years in the fiscal year 2012 starting October as it continues to run at the highest level in history.

As the budgetary assessment for 2012 starts this month, US legislators are seeking any room for budgetary spending cuts.

There has been strong criticism against the current relocation plan, which calls for spending of more than $10 billion in Japanese and US funding, with Japan paying 60% and the US bearing the rest. Many experts expect that planning on Guam's military buildup is constantly shifting and the overall price tag will likely rise, as almost always happens in military spending.

Admiral Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, has warned against the rising financial deficit, saying that "the biggest threat we have to our national security is our debt". This illustrates the seriousness of the US financial situation.

Second, the senators' appeal came shortly before US Defense Secretary Robert Gates is expected to leave the Pentagon by June 30, to be replaced by Central Intelligence Agency director Leon Panetta. By taking advantage of the occasion of a change of defense chief, they appear to be urging a policy shift on US bases in East Asia. The killing of Osama bin Laden and the start of a US troop withdrawal from Afghanistan in July also give the US administration a break in the fight against terrorism. This, along with a new defense chief, may bring about a new US global strategy, including on US bases abroad.

Third, in the so-called two-plus-two security meeting between foreign and defense ministers in May 2010, the two nations agreed to decide the specific location and construction method for a Futenma replacement facility before the next two-plus-two meeting, which is scheduled to be held by the end of June this year. The senators urged both nations' officials to look at the reality of the endless political stalemate over the Okinawa base relocation issue.

Okinawans against Futenma consolidation
The initial Okinawan response to the integration plan involving Kadena was not so bad. Okinawa Governor Hirokazu Nakaima said the proposal could be considered if it resulted in less fighter aircraft traffic at Kadena, reduced noise and base functions and eased of the burden on local communities.

However, he has gradually cooled on the idea, stressing the problems of noise pollution and the crimes of certain US soldiers.

In late April, more than 22,000 residents around the Kadena base filed a lawsuit demanding a night-time flight ban and a combined 44.6 billion Japanese yen (US$540 million) in compensation from the Japanese government, arguing their health has been affected by aircraft noise. The number of plaintiffs accounts for about one third of Kadena Town and around one in every 70 Okinawans. This put pressure on the governor not to make any compromise with the US. The Kadena base occupies 83% of Kadena Town.

Japanese Defense Minister Toshimi Kitazawa said on Thursday it will be "physically difficult" for Japan to comply with its agreement with the US to complete the planned relocation of the Futenma base by 2014 within Okinawa.

"The 2006 road map calls for the completion of a replacement facility for Futenma by 2014, but 2014 is just in front of our eyes," Kitazawa told the House of Representatives Committee on Security. "The Japanese government and Okinawa have not reached a deal," he said, referring to the strong local opposition.

He pointed out Guam's lack of infrastructure, which could also delay the original relocation plan, and he proposed that the two nations frankly discuss how to proceed with the deadlocked plan at the two-plus-two security meeting scheduled to be held in late June.

The initial Pentagon response was not encouraging for those who hope the senators' intervention may change US policy.

"We appreciate the perspectives of the senators, but the press release does not change our commitment to current plans to maintain a forward presence in the region that is geographically distributed, operationally resilient, and politically sustainable," Pentagon spokesperson Leslie Hull-Ryde told Asia Times Online.

"Current agreements and policies have been carefully developed over many years in close consultation and coordination with our allies and within the US government, including with the military services and with congress," she said. "This release does not change our commitment to our current approach."

Talk of the consolidation of the Futenma and Kadena bases has disappeared every time it has arisen in the past. To make it a politically feasible solution, the US needs to reduce the prospect of noise pollution. More importantly, as the US and Chinese militaries begin to recognize the necessity of working together, perhaps Japan and the US should be reconsidering the entire raison d'etre of massive US bases in Okinawa.

Kosuke Takahashi is a Tokyo-based Japanese journalist. His twitter is @TakahashiKosuke

(Copyright 2011 Asia Times Online (Holdings) Ltd. All rights reserved. Please contact us about sales, syndication and republishing.)

My latest stories for Jane's Defence Weekly

2011-05-17T19:32:00.000-07:00

Here are my latest stories for JDW. I wrote about recent proposal by three influential US senators to integrate the Futenma base into Kadena Air Base in Okinawa.

Just FYI. The Pentagon spokesperson Leslie Hull-Ryde gave me the following official comments.

"We appreciate the perspectives of the senators, but the press release does not change our commitment to current plans to maintain a forward presence in the region that is geographically distributed, operationally resilient, and politically sustainable. "

"Current agreements and policies have been carefully developed over many years in close consultation and coordination with our allies and within the U.S. government, including with the military services and with Congress. This release does not change our commitment to our current approach. "

Senior US senators call for Futenma rethink

Japan draws down troops involved in tsunami relief effort

Japan, US conduct third major search for missing tsunami victims

Japan Focus: Economic Crisis Shakes US Forces Overseas: The Price of Base Expansion in Okinawa and Guam

2011-05-15T01:14:00.000-07:00

This is a very impressive story. I'd sure like my American friends to read this.
Japan Focus
Cheers, Kosuke

Economic Crisis Shakes US Forces Overseas: The Price of Base Expansion in Okinawa and Guam

By Yonamine Michiyo
Translated by Rumi Sakamoto and Matthew Allen
‘Debt is the Largest Threat’

On August 31, President Obama delivered a speech from the White House. Because he was expected to declare the end of the Iraqi war, the entire nation focused its attention on the content to the speech. ‘Operation Iraqi Freedom is over. … We have spent over a trillion dollars on this war, often financed by borrowing from overseas. This, in turn, has short-changed investments in our own people, and contributed to record deficits.... Our most urgent task is to restore our economy, and put the millions of Americans who have lost their jobs back to work’. It marked the beginning of a new era, and under other circumstances this speech would have impressed people. The president, however looked troubled, and the atmosphere was gloomy – hardly the context for a forward-looking policy announcement; this was largely due to the severity of the economic crisis the US currently faces.

The US financial deficit has exceeded one trillion dollars for two consecutive years and continues to run at the highest level in history. The unemployment rate is around 9%, with the most recent figure (November) being 9.8%, up 0.2 percentage points over the previous month. There were 143 bankrupted financial institutions in November, a significant increase over the previous year. There is no sign of improvement. Rebuilding the nation’s financial system is the top US priority.

In these difficult times, criticism of the massive military budget, which currently accounts for about two thirds of the discretionary federal budget has been publicly aired for the first time.

It is understandable that people are criticising military spending, which has increased year after year since the end of World War II, yet had been considered ‘inviolable’ in budget discussions. This year, though, Admiral Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, warned against increasing the financial deficit, stating that ‘the biggest threat we have to our national security is our debt.’ In short, a senior US military leader has publicly declared that the biggest threat faced by the US is neither Iraq nor North Korea but the ‘debt of the state’. This illustrates the urgency of US state finances.

In Washington, more voices are demanding cuts in military spending. In May, a non-partisan group of congressional representatives, convened by Democrat Barney Frank, and Republican Ron Paul, formed the ‘Sustainable Defense Task Force’ (SDTF). Together with some military specialists, they closely scrutinised military spending and concluded that it was possible to cut 1 trillion dollars in spending over the next 10 years by reducing US Forces stationed in Europe and Asia, and by not pursuing contracts for military airplanes such as the MV-22 Osprey.

In October 57 congressional representatives from ruling and opposition parties who advocate cuts in military spending sent a letter to the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform (NCFRR). It asked: ‘Why does the US continue to station troops overseas in Asia and Europe despite the collapse of the Cold War?’ and argued that national defense needs to reflect the new era. The NCFRR is an advisory body created by president Obama to identify strategies for rebuilding the economy. The non-partisan group asked this committee to reconsider the scale of military spending and the status of US Forces.

The view that the US is the policemen of the world is outdated; it is a leftover from the Cold War. 15,000 Marines aren’t going to land on the Chinese mainland and confront millions of Chinese soldiers. We don’t need Marines in Okinawa. They’re a hangover from a war that ended 65 years ago.

As Chairman of the House Financial Services Committee he was the driving force behind the Financial Regulatory Reform Act that passed Congress in 2010. This act is referred to as the Dodd-Frank Act. Ron Paul, a fellow member of the SDTF, is known as an isolationist who advocates withdrawal of US Forces overseas. He is a nationally known congressman who became well known during the 2008 presidential election.

In July, Frank and Paul wrote an article ‘Why We Must Reduce Military Spending’ for the Huffington Post, the influential political website. In it they explained that 2010 military spending was about $693 billion, over 42% of total government spending, and this is damaging the US economy and reducing people’s quality of life. They also pointed out that US intervention in other countries as a superpower often generates anger directed at the US, and concluded that ‘rebuilding our economy and creating jobs remains the nation’s top priority. It is essential that we begin to address the issue of excessive military spending.’ In confronting this national crisis, two people from different sides of the political spectrum are thus cooperating in urging reform.

In response to the letter from Frank et al., the NCFRR produced a chairman’s draft proposal in November. They recommended one trillion dollar cuts in defense spending by FY2015. The recommendation included reduction of military personnel stationed at bases in Europe and Asia by one-third, and ending procurement of the MV-22 Osprey – a combat assault transport for the Marines – which is projected to be based at the replacement facility for Futenma Air Station. Although the detailed list of military expenditure items was removed from the committee’s final report released on December 1, the report strongly advocated cuts in defense spending: ‘No exceptions. We must end redundant, wasteful, and ineffective federal spending – including defense’. This proposal, which incorporated reduction of the budget including tax overhaul, lacked the votes for approval in the voting two days later. However, it was put forward as a blueprint for public discussion, and brought to light the inevitability of drastic measures to reform national defense spending.

Similarly, a significant non-aligned, non-profit think tank, the Bipartisan Policy Centre, founded by Senators Dole, Mitchell, Baker, and Daschle, in November also called for a freeze on defense spending. Another think tank specialising in national security, ‘The Stimson Center’, has also published an article entitled ‘Choosing Defense Mission Priorities,’ which proposed cuts in the defense budget and called for the reduction of US military bases overseas. These and other organisations propose cuts in military spending and stress the necessity for a ruthless examination of the purpose and use of military spending–a view shared by ordinary citizens.

Reform Trends in a Military Environment

With all this pressure, not even the DoD can ignore the criticism. Defense Secretary Gates has announced $100 billion budget cuts over the next five years by reducing DoD personnel, slimming the organisation and reducing contract figures. On top of this, they are also re-examining the role of the military, in particular the Marine Corps, which in recent wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, has become a ‘second land army’. The Marines are known as an ‘expeditionary force in readiness’ and are characterised by their high mobility and ability to invade shorelines rapidly. However, recently they have been entering foreign lands on military airplanes, fighting on the ground, heavily armed, and deviating from their original purpose. The Marine Corps has become too large and the cost continues to increase.

Concerned with this situation, Gates in his speech to the Army in May asked, ‘What makes the role of the Marines different from that of the Army?’ The last amphibious landing was at Inchon during the Korean War. He explained that since then, for 60 years, there has been no Marine amphibious expedition.

Subsequently, in a lecture delivered in August, Gates revealed that he had ordered the leaders of the Navy and Marine Corps to review the mission of the Marines, including expeditionary forces, in the context of changing global threats and new technologies.

If defense spending is curtailed, the arms industry will suffer. Sensing the coming change, the industry has mobilised quickly. Lockheed Martin, the world’s largest defense manufacturer, with its main office in Washington state, recently offered its employees voluntary redundancy packages, and more than 600 employees, or 25% of the targeted employees, rushed to take the option. With Lockheed Martin leading the way, the arms industry is now engaged in restructuring; cutting the work-force; rationalising the workplace through incorporating units, abolishing redundant sectors; and canceling large projects.

At the same time, because the reduction in the scope of the military industrial sector and cost-cutting measures applied across the board mean reduced employment, some regions with no other large companies have objected. Congressional representatives from such regions have opposed the cuts, and both supporters and opponents are jockeying to influence decisions about the military’s future. Since summer, the move towards reduction of military spending has been widely reported in the US media. The Financial Times has also taken up the US defense environment on its front and analysis pages. Military spending has become an economic issue.

For the first time, serious discussion is about to take place concerning military spending, which rapidly increased since 9/11 with no questions asked; this discussion will also address the role of the military, with special emphasis placed on the significance of overseas Forces. A reform hurricane is brewing!

Diverse Opinions in the US

While questions are raised in Washington on the roles of Marines, US and Japanese governments are proceeding with plans to build new USMC facilities in Northern Okinawa.

I have explained the situation in the US at some length because this reform trend can affect other parts of the world that host US Forces overseas. It is therefore highly relevant to Japan, where many US troops are stationed. The most pressing base problem in Japan is Futenma Air Base. Both Japanese and US governments are still hewing to the principle of relocation to Henoko in Nago City. Many Japanese may think that the US must be irritated by the slow progress on the relocation. Besides, there is no way that the US bases will leave Okinawa. However, as the US itself re-examines many problems associated with military costs, adhering to the old framework means that we might miss the significance of this new trend. In fact, the overwhelming majority of American scholars and experts I interviewed believed that it was impossible to relocate to Henoko, and that the Marine Corps in Okinawa no longer plays any role in US military strategies. Such voices have become more strident since the beginning of this year. Let me introduce some of these voices below.

Mike Mochizuki (Professor, George Washington University):
I do not think that the Henoko relocation is practicable because gaining support of the democratically elected governor is crucial. The US government’s perspective is unrealistic. None of my American friends who specialise in Japan-US relations believe the agreement to relocate the bases will be carried out. [..] What does it (the Marines in Okinawa) deter? If it’s North Korea, there is the Korean Army. US Forces are stationed there, too. If the Futenma problem is going to weaken Japan-US relations, then even if the military presence is maintained, deterrence will be weak, because deterrence involves political elements as well. Nor do I believe that the Marines are in Okinawa to anticipate and resist an attack by China. I do recognize the importance of the Marines for humanitarian support, disaster relief and other emergency rescue operations. To perform those roles, however, it is possible to transport Marines from Camp Pendleton (in California) – there is no need to station them in Okinawa. Japan itself can provide rescue support logistics, too.

Morton Halperin, a former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense, who was involved in the 1972 negotiations over the return of Okinawa said:

I am quite surprised that after many decades since Okinawa’s reversion, the structure of the bases has not changed at all. This is because of government inaction. We need to pay attention to the burden on Okinawa. I visited Okinawa in 1968, and observed almost all the islands from a helicopter. My impression of Okinawa was that it was ‘empty’ because residents were concentrated in small areas. The rest was all bases. I asked a high ranking Navy officer, “Why do we have bases in Okinawa?” He answered, looking very serious, “You misunderstand. The military doesn’t have bases in Okinawa. The island itself is the base.” It was no exaggeration; the military really did think of the whole island as a base. The military intended to maintain Okinawa until there were no more disputes in Asia – that is, they planned to keep the bases forever. The structure of the bases in Okinawa is based on the assumption that Okinawa is a base and will continue to be a base forever. The US put bases on the mainland, too; but they were aware that it was Japanese territory. If they had an awareness that Okinawa was not a base but Japanese territory, they would have been able to ask themselves what sort of structure the base should have. But they are still not thinking about this seriously.

Richard Samuels, a prominent Professor of Japanese Politics at MIT followed a similar line:

The US needs to realise the political difficulty of Okinawa and consider training the helicopter units in other places like Guam. Futenma needs to be closed down as soon as possible. If there is any victim, the government’s forbearance will become an issue. It is time for the US to step back and consider a Plan B such as training in Guam, San Diego or Hawaii. We need to change direction. For that we need political leadership. [..] We can apply pressure through US negotiations with Japan. The Democratic Party of Japan wants an “equal Japan-US alliance”. If Japan can become more responsible towards the US and can say no, that would be an ideal alliance relationship. Germany sometimes says no, and France always does; this does not end the alliance. This is an honest and healthy relationship. The US always demands and Japan always says “yes”. The US should realise that Japan has lost its sense of self-governance. If the two countries do not share an understanding of the importance of their roles, the cost and benefit of their alliance, that is not a healthy relationship. Okinawa is disproportionately bearing the burden of security. It is possible to ask to lighten such a burden. Japanese people need to understand what a real burden means.

Professor Barry Posen, a specialist in Security Studies at MIT also supports this line of argument:

Even if the Marine Corps left Okinawa, if the Air Force and the Navy were to stay in Kadena and mainland Japan, there would be no change in deterrence. I cannot see what role the Marine Corps might play in military actions that are likely to take place in the context of Japan-China or China-Taiwan relations. I have heard that the Marines have tasks to perform in case of emergency on the Korean Peninsula; however, considering the size of today’s Korean military and their technological capabilities, it is not possible that the defense of Korea relies on a single US Marine force. [..] Of the three US Marine Corps divisions, the Okinawa division is the weakest in terms of combat strength. [..] In the plan to relocate parts of Futenma’s capacity to Guam, the Marine Corps in Okinawa will be divided into two (command unit and combat unit): it will take some time to coordinate the two units to act together; rather than wasting time in logistics it would be much less time-consuming if the whole division is withdrawn from Okinawa. [..] The US is maintaining too many bases and military forces overseas. We need to reduce them.

Professor Andrew Bacevich, Boston University (and a former US Army Colonel) had similar views:

Those in Washington believe that forward deployment of military forces will promote stability of the region. This may be true to some extent, but at the same time, overseas forces also contribute to regional instability. DoD consistently insists that the existing bases are strategically irreplaceable. Today’s Marine Corps, too, would say that Okinawa is strategically vital. But in reality, US forces have already given up some overseas bases and have managed to find ways of adapting to such losses. The US used to maintain two large bases in the Philippines – Subic Naval Base and Clark Air Base. Despite strong local opposition, the DoD used to insist that they were ‘important, irreplaceable bases.’ However, after the 1991 eruption of Mr. Pinatubo, when the bases were destroyed by the ashes, the US military decided that the cost of repairs would be too high and simply withdrew the forces. The argument that they were irreplaceable had suddenly vanished. [..] The mistake we Americans made after the end of the Cold War was our belief that military power is effective for solving problems. If the US were to adopt a low profile, including reduced military power, we could avoid a situation that leads to instability. Bureaucrats have too much faith in military power.

Listening to different people’s opinions from diverse fields in the US, it is clear that the US government’s explanations and policies do not necessarily have the support of the American people. In Japan, we still hear voices that extol the deterrence power of the Marine Corps in Okinawa; but we must change our thinking to fit changing times.

The US also has some domestic issues

Having said that, even the US government, which had been insensitive to Okinawan opposition, has finally begun to realise that it is difficult to implement the Japan-US agreement. When Governor Nakaima Hirokazu was re-elected in the November 28th Okinawa gubernatorial election, some US media reported that ‘the possibility of relocation has survived’, based on Nakaima’s previous acceptance of the relocation of Futenma Air Base to Henoko. However, Washington is not really that optimistic. Since before the election, Washington was less concerned about which candidate would win than about what measures the Japanese government might take in response to the election result.

On the day Nakaima’s projected victory became certain, the US State Department said that ‘Okinawan concerns will be reflected in the adjustment (of the U.S. military on Okinawa),” indicating that they were not going to take drastic measures. Crowley, the US Department of State spokesperson, said that ‘dialogue with Okinawa is the Japanese government’s job’, and Lapan, a DoD spokesperson, also avoided referring to Okinawa saying that it was a ‘domestic issue’. A senior US military officer in Japan said rather dispassionately, ‘we have already given them two options for runway layouts: V-shaped and I-shaped. We are waiting for the Japanese government’s decision’. They are all watching the Japanese government carefully. Unanimously calling Okinawa ‘Japan’s domestic issue’ may mean that the US government is already sensing an impasse around the Japan-US agreement and is preparing a contingency position.

The US domestic situation is also relevant. Given US plans to strengthen the bases on Guam, including transferring the Okinawa Marines there, it has no resources to spare to intervene in other countries. In September the DoD announced it would postpone completion of the transfer originally planned for 2014 due to lack of preparedness on Guam. The infrastructure cannot cope with the sudden influx of the Marines, their families and construction workers.

Prior to this, relevant congressional committees approved cutting the cost of relocation by 70 percent. With operations not progressing according to US government plan, the plan itself is now being questioned. Committee reports have severely criticised the government, stating: ‘Guam’s water and waste water facilities, electrical system, roads and other infrastructure are already inadequate. There is no consideration of the environment’ (US Senate Appropriations Committee); ‘It is a serious concern when and how the DoD will respond to the poor evaluation it received regarding the environmental impact of the Guam construction plan. They have not addressed its impact on residents either’ (House Committee on Appropriations).

Inadequate infrastructure and environmental concerns are not the only problems. Another issue is the construction of a Marine firing range for East Guam. The US military originally planned to construct the range inside the base, but in the 2008 plan it became clear that construction was to be outside the base. Part of the planned construction site was state-owned land. This land was originally meant to be allocated for landless Chamorros and descendents of those whose land was requisitioned by the US military after the war.

The Guam government in August sent a letter to the US Department of the Navy expressing concern over the new land acquisition that was to accompany the Marine relocation and the ‘move to extend the US bases on the island’. This was despite the original promise that the Marine relocation would involve no additional land acquisition or extension of military facilities. The Guam government’s position is to accept Marine relocation; but distrust is intensifying because of the discrepancy between the US government’s explanation to the locals and the actual plan. I visited Guam in April 2009 and spent one week gathering information; even then the firing range was a huge issue. The military has yet to satisfactorily answer questions about the situation.

The US military’s pattern of extending bases in accordance simply with their perceived military and strategic value, without any understanding of local circumstances, history and culture, is precisely what is happening in Okinawa. Regarding the construction of replacement facilities in Henoko, Japanese and US governments say that this is ‘not construction of a new base but relocation to the pre-existing Camp Schwab’; but since they are constructing runways where there was nothing before, extending the base in this way is the same as what is occurring on Guam. The US government’s argument that “the transfer to Guam is not progressing because the Futenma issue is stagnating” can no longer be accepted. This is a situation unique to the US. And if the delay is due to domestic circumstances in the US, packaging Guam with Futenma will not work. Four and a half years on since the 2006 announcement of the restructuring of US Forces, the agreement is coming apart at the seams.

Time to reconsider Futenma

As the US faces a financial crisis with no sign of recovery, and a number of difficult related issues, the trend of domestically-oriented policies and national consciousness will continue to accelerate. Even the Republican Party, which believes that a large defense budget is the barometer of state power, and which opposes defense budget cuts, has to accept that there is no such a thing as a ‘sacrosanct’ sector these days. If the inward-looking philosophy that ‘money should be spent only on our own country’ spreads further, overseas military forces will undoubtedly become a target to rationalise. Voices calling for ‘abolishing overseas forces’ have emerged even from within extremely conservative Tea Party groups that influenced recent midterm elections.

However, it would be premature to think that this will lead directly to the return of Futenma Air Base or the withdrawal of the Marines from Okinawa. Japan provides the world’s largest sympathy budget and is offering to construct a new US base in Henoko for free. In such favorable conditions, there is no need for the US to change things in Japan. In fact, in the public hearing of the House Armed Services Committee in July, Assistant Secretary of Defense Wallace Gregson flatly rejected committee members’ questions such as ‘Do the Marines need to be in Okinawa?’, by noting Okinawa’s geopolitical significance. He emphasised that ‘Japanese defense spending is only 1% of GDP. We would like to ask them to increase the sympathy budget’, thus turning the attention of Congress away from withdrawal towards the increase in the sympathy budget.

Regarding Okinawa’s geopolitical importance and the importance of the Marines stationed in Okinawa, the aforementioned scholars think that the Marines can be replaced with current military technologies or other, less specialised forces. Some people even question the necessity of the existence of Marines in Okinawa.

Peter Kuznick, a historian at American University says:

Japan is bearing substantial cost for US base relocation and maintenance. The US-Japan Mutual Security Treaty identified the purpose of US Forces in Japan as maintaining security in the Far East; but in reality they have turned into a military force that fights all over the world – Korea, Vietnam, the first Gulf War, Afghanistan, and Iraq.

He pointed out that the role of the US Forces in Japan has gone beyond the framework of a sympathy budget.

When the US government arrogantly tells us ‘we are protecting Japan; Japan should pay for it’, we may feel intimidated. But if we listen to various opinions outside the US government, we can clearly see that this is simply pressure that originates in self-righteousness. Naturally, diplomacy prioritizes national interest; there is no way that US diplomacy supports other countries, or Okinawa, for that matter.

But this also means that, in today’s situation concerning Japan and the US, the possibility exists that the prevailing logic is reversed. Namely, the US is short of funds. Cuts in military spending are inevitable. So is the review of forces overseas. The US Marines’ role needs to be reviewed. Marines in Okinawa are in a state of suspended animation. Okinawan people fiercely oppose relocation of Futenma Air Base to Henoko. The Prime Minister of an important allied nation was driven to resign over the US bases (Abe). US bases continue to be a huge political issue. As the US no longer has overwhelming power, and cannot do without the cooperation of its allies, it is not in US interest to continue pressing the base issue.

We often hear the threat that ‘if the Henoko relocation fails, Futenma will remain as is’; but it would take only one airplane crash to put the US government in a very difficult position. Closing down risky Futenma as soon as possible and restoring the unstable Japan-US relationship must surely suit US national interests. If Japan adheres to the existing logic – not to mention its Chief Cabinet Secretary asking Okinawa to accept the burden of the bases – Japan will not find a solution to the Futenma problem. It deserves to be criticised for its sycophantic diplomacy following the US. Fourteen years after the agreement to return Futenma base land to the people, with absolutlely no progress, the situation is ripe for change. If we link the new defense trends in the US with the ‘all-Okinawa’ opposition to relocation inside the prefecture, it is natural to conclude that it is time for reconsideration of the Futenma problem.

This is a slightly abbreviated version of an article that appeared in Sekai, February 2010.

Yonamine Michiyo (b.1966) was a journalist in Okinawa and Tokyo before being posted to Washington in 2010 as correspondent for the Ryukyu Shimpo. She is presently reporting from Okinawa.

Rumi Sakamoto is a senior lecturer in the School of Asian Studies, the University of Auckland, New Zealand, and a Japan Focus associate. Matt Allen is professor and head of the School of History and Politics, University of Wollongong, Australia, and a Japan Focus associate. Rumi and Matt are coeditors of Popular Culture, Globalization and Japan.

Recommended citation: Yonanime Michiyo, Economic Crisis Shakes US Forces Overseas: The Price of Base Expansion in Okinawa and Guam, The Asia-Pacific Journal Vol 9, Issue 9 No 2, February 28, 2011.

I went to a tsunami-hit school in Ichinomaki City, where 74 elementary school kids were killed by the giant tsunami

2011-05-12T06:22:00.000-07:00

Remembering March 11

2011-05-11T09:10:00.000-07:00

I, at the center of this photo, was stunned by the huge impact of a giant tsunami. The photo was taken in tsunami-hit Minamisanrikucho of Miyagi Prefecture on May 4.

On May 5 I went to Okawa Elementary School of Ishinomaki City, where 74 kids were killed by tsunami. We Japanese often fly carp streamers outside our homes to wish for children's growth on May 5, or Children's Day in Japan...

Visiting Mishima Yukio (三島由紀夫) Literature Museum

2011-05-01T02:16:00.000-07:00

Went to the Mishima Yukio Literature Museum down by Lake Yamanaka. I was surprised at his various activities such as acting on the movie. Around 1960s when Japan enjoyed the high economic growth, he opposed the nation's emerging mercantilism(重商主義), which he thought disrespected the Japanese way of living and culture...I assume the same kind of person may soon appear in China as well.

By the way, lots of domestic tourists and some foreigners are visiting Lake Yamanaka and Lake Kawaguchi, where Mt. Fuji is nearly located.

My latest stories for Jane's Defence Weekly

2011-04-22T04:43:00.000-07:00

The press office of Japan's Ministry of Foreign Affairs barred me from covering the Clinton-Matsumoto joint press conference on April 10.

It was really disappointing.

I quit the Asahi Shimbun 12 years ago, because I wanted to send more info from Japan to the rest of the world by working for some foreign media as an English-language writer.

To me, Japan still seems like a "black hole" to receive info from abroad almost unilaterally. As a Japanese citizen I wanted to change this by writing more articles on Japan in English.

Japan is being criticized as providing too little too late info on the Fukushima nuke crisis. I like to help solve this problem as an English-language writer.

But the Ministry of Foreign Affairs barred me from covering the joint press conference by Clinton and Matsumoto on April 10, anyway. The MoFA really disappointed me.

Hey MoFA press people! Here is an accrediation letter, which proves I am the Tokyo correspondent for Jane's Defence Weekly. Take a look at it!

Jane’s Defence Weekly — Accreditation 2011

Three contenders step up for Japan's F-X fighter programme

Analysis: China White Paper hints at platform, strategic developments

Pentagon despatches marines nuclear team to Japan

The history of the big earthquakes and those aftershocks

2011-04-19T05:41:00.000-07:00

I compiled the history of the big earthquakes and those aftershocks. As you can see below, the powerful aftershock occurred just two months later at the earliest. So we need to be very cautious about the aftershock this time around.

The name of earthquake                                                   Aftershock

Ansei-Tōkai earthquake on Dec 23, 1854                        Nov 7, 1855
  (M8.4)                                                                            (M7.0〜7.5)

Meiji-Sanriku earthquake on June 15, 1896                      Aug 31, 1896
  (M8.2〜8.5)                                                                    (M7.2)

Great Kantō earthquake on Sep 1, 1923                           Jan 15, 1924
(M7.9)                                                                              (M7.3)

Sumatra earthquake on Dec 26, 2004                               Mar 28, 2005
(M9.1)                                                                               (M8.6)

Great East Japan earthquake on Mar 11, 2011                             ?
(M9.0)

Better listen to Professor Ishibashi's warning

2011-04-07T19:36:00.000-07:00

Kobe University's professor Ishibashi is the only seismologist who correctly predicted and warned of
any earthquake-induced nuclear disaster happening in Fukushima.

(No.1)
Genpatsu-Shinsai: Catastrophic Multiple Disaster of Earthquake and Quake-induced Nuclear Accident Anticipated in the Japanese Islands

(No.2)
http://historical.seismology.jp/ishibashi/opinion/0307IUGG_slides.pdf
By Katsuhiko ISHIBASHI

(My latest story for Asia Times) Fukushima marks a 'nuclear ice age'

2011-04-04T05:45:00.000-07:00

Hello my friends. Here is my latest story for Asia Times Online. Please go over this, if you get time.
Thanks and regards, Kosuke

Fukushima marks a 'nuclear ice age'

While workers are still battling the crisis at Japan's Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant, it may be too late to save global confidence in nuclear power, with safety reviews, suspensions and closures underway around the world. The only positive is that the Rokkasho Reprocessing Plant was spared - if ruptured it is huge enough to spread deadly fallout around the world.
- Kosuke Takahashi (Apr 4, '11)

Fukushima marks a 'nuclear ice age'
By Kosuke Takahashi

TOKYO - The era of nuclear renaissance is over. The Fukushima shock marks the beginning of the "nuclear ice age".

The ongoing nuclear crisis at Japan's Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant following an earthquake and tsunami is stirring up energy policy of almost all countries that use nuclear power. The repercussions from Fukushima are being strongly being felt at home and abroad, just as aftershocks are still being felt in northern Japan, including Tokyo.

There are 432 nuclear plants operating in 30 countries across the globe, with 66 reactors under construction. Prime Minister Naoto Kan said last Thursday he will rethink from bottom up the government's plan to build at least 14 more nuclear reactors by 2030, as Japan scrambles to overcome its worst nuclear crisis.

In the United States, President Barack Obama's pro-nuclear stance is coming under fire. His plans to go ahead with more nuclear plants in the US are facing mounting opposition.

The US has 104 commercial nuclear reactors, the most in the world. Of these, 23 were built to an identical design as the crippled Fukushima nuclear reactors. Each uses the "Mark I containment system", designed by General Electric decades ago.

ABC News and the New York Times, among other media, reported last month that experts had long criticized the ability of this containment system to withstand the events that cascade from what nuclear experts call a "station blackout" - where the loss of power cripples the reactor's cooling system. This "station blackout" scenario was unfortunately realized when a massive tsunami destroyed all emergency power systems at the Fukushima.

In Germany, the Fukushima shock has forced Chancellor Angela Merkel to change a pro-nuclear position. She suspended government plans to extend the lives of the nation's 17 nuclear plants until the completion of a thorough three-month investigation into reactor safety. She also ordered the closure of all seven plants that began operating before 1980.

French President Nicolas Sarkozy is also facing a predicament. France has 59 nuclear reactors, five more than Japan. Due to both public and private sector support, nuclear energy currently contributes nearly 80% of electric power supply. This is the world's highest dependency on nuclear energy surpassing Japan's 29%, the US's 20% and the United Kingdom's 18%. For France, nuclear reactors, fuel products and services are a major export.

This is why Sarkozy and French nuclear energy giant Areva NC are stepping up assistance to cool Fukushima's reactors, and find a solution for the contaminated water seeping out of the troubled nuclear facility. Besides a humanitarian standpoint, this is damage control for French business.

Sarkozy and Japanese Prime Minister Naoto Kan said last Thursday that the upcoming meeting of the Group of Eight industrialized countries on May 26-27 will take up the issue of global nuclear safety and discuss the need for a global safety standard for nuclear plants.

The Fukushima shock has also sparked foreign interference in domestic affairs. Greek President Karolos Papoulias last month urged neighboring Turkey to reconsider plans to build its first atomic power stations.

In South Korea, the debate has focused on a "nuclear cooperation agreement" with the US - set to expire in 2014 - that forbids South Korea from possessing spent fuel reprocessing facilities. South Korea has 20 nuclear reactors at present and nuclear energy produces about 40% of the country's electricity.

Seoul's biggest problem is that its nuclear power plants are running out of space to store spent nuclear fuel. Sources say South Korea will likely establish interim storage facilities as a stop-gap measure, but this will become a big issue again as the deal's end draws near.

The list goes on. Nuclear power plant exporters such as the US, France, Canada, Russia, Japan and South Korea are caught in a major backdraft.

The "nuclear renaissance will diminish," Tetsuya Endo, former governor of the International Atomic Energy Association (IAEA) told Asia Times Online on Friday. "Should any nuclear accident happen somewhere in the world, it becomes an accident of the whole globe."

Sweeping overhaul of Japan's nuclear fuel cycle
Japan is experiencing a big irony of history. The only country in the world that has suffered from atomic bombs is now fighting a nuclear disaster caused by nature. The situation at the nuclear plant remains precarious, as plant engineers, Self-Defense Forces (SDF) members, firefighters and the police continue desperate efforts to cool down the overheating reactors and spent fuel.

Even if the country gets the plant under control, an emotional public will be wary of nuclear power forever.

Japanese people were already extremely sensitive about anything nuclear as the only country in human history to have ever been attacked with nuclear weapons. Older generations especially have a "nuclear allergy" over the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Their memories of the "A-bombs" are still raw.

Despite this resentment towards nuclear technology, Japan was forced to expand nuclear power generation after the two oil shocks in the 1970s, which exposed Japan's heavy reliance on the Middle East for energy resources.

Petroleum provided about 60% of the whole nation's electricity in 1970, but now it only provides about 10%. Japan imports 99% of its oil from abroad. Although Japan aimed to reduce the dependency rate on petroleum from the Middle East after the oil shocks, it still imports nearly 90% of oil from the Middle East.

The Fukushima plant will be decommissioned and no local government or community is likely to accept the building of a new nuclear power plant in their area now.

The Fukushima incident will be a severe setback for Japan's nuclear fuel cycle, Endo said. The nuclear fuel cycle starts with the mining of uranium and ends with the disposal of nuclear waste. With the reprocessing of used fuel, the stages form a true cycle. Japan has been implemented this program since 1956, according to Endo.

However, the nation has been unable to locate a site for a second nuclear reprocessing plant after the Rokkasho Reprocessing Plant of Aomori Prefecture, which managed to escape damage from the March 11 earthquake.

Takashi Hirose, a well-noted Japanese writer on nuclear problems, has pointed out there are about 3,000 tons of highly radioactive used nuclear fuel stored in Rokkasho that could overheat and catch fire if the cooling systems fail. This amount could spread nuclear fallout or "ashes of death" to the whole world, he said.

Kosuke Takahashi is a Tokyo-based Japanese journalist. His twitter is @TakahashiKosuke

(Copyright 2011 Asia Times Online (Holdings) Ltd. All rights reserved. Please contact us about sales, syndication and republishing.)

Chile's Que Pasa magazine published my story on the 3/11 earthquake

2011-04-02T23:55:00.000-07:00

My story on the 3/11 earthquake appeared in Chile's Que Pasa magazine.

OPINIÓN & POSTEOS
Mundo: Crecer en un país nuclear
Sufrimos con las bombas atómicas, pero nos hicimos independientes con la energía nuclear. Hoy tenemos miedo a la radiactividad de Fukushima. Nuestra historia sigue escribiéndose con ironías.
Por Kosuke Takahashi, desde Tokio
Periodista japonés
31/03/2011

This became my first article in Spanish http://t.co/YiRkN6H

Cheers,

Kosuke

My latest story for JDW: Pentagon despatches marines nuclear team to Japan

2011-04-02T03:53:00.000-07:00

Here is my latest story for Jane's Defence Weekly. Sorry, only subscribers can read the whole story.

Pentagon despatches marines nuclear team to Japan

The US Department of Defense (DoD) on 30 March ordered a US Marine Corps unit specialising in emergency nuclear response to deploy to Japan, ...

01-Apr-2011
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pentagon spokeswoman Navy Commander Leslie Hullryde sent reporters the following email the other day. You might be interested in this. Just FYI. Although Pentagon announced 155 members would be dispatched to Japan, Japanese media have said around 140 members would be dispatched. They just followed the MoD announcement as always.

On March 30, a 155-person Initial Response Force (IRF) comprised of Marines from Naval Support Facility, Indian Head, Md., was directed to deploy to Yokota, Japan. As a smaller element of the Chemical, Biological, and Incident Response Force, the IRF is specifically trained in the areas of chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear and high yield explosion operations.
The IRF will support the U.S. on-scene commander by providing a rapid response capability, and if requested, can assist and advise Japanese authorities. The IRF can provide capabilities for monitoring support for agent detection and identification; casualty search, rescue, and personnel decontamination; and emergency medical care and stabilization of contaminated personnel. The IRF is expected to arrive in Japan as early as April 1.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I also closely read Kurt M. Campbell's recent testimony before the House Committee on Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific. I highlighted some parts, which I thought interesting. Cheers, Kosuke

Kurt M. Campbell

Assistant Secretary, Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs

Testimony Before the House Committee on Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific

Washington, DC

March 31, 2011
_____________________________________________________________
Mr. Chairman, Mr. Faleomavaega, and Members of the Subcommittee, thank you very much for inviting me here today to testify about the vital importance of Asia-Pacific countries to the United States and for the opportunity to underscore key aspects of our engagement strategy for the region.

I want to also use this opportunity to underscore the United States’ unwavering commitment to Japan. Twenty days ago today, Japan experienced a “triple blow” from an earthquake, tsunami, and the subsequent challenges associated with the Fukashima Daichi nuclear reactors. By themselves, any of these incidents would have been enough to bring a country to its knees. In Japan, we have seen the opposite. The Government and people have responded bravely and, with the help of the United States and the international community, committed to building an even stronger Japan in the future. Japan is the cornerstone of our strategic engagement in East Asia, and we are committed to standing side-by-side with our ally in its time of need.

It is clear that America’s success in the 21st century is tied to the success of the dynamic Asia-Pacific region. As Secretary Clinton has noted, much of the history of the 21st century will be written in Asia. There is no question that the region’s influence is growing and holds the key to our shared future. Asian nations are vital to the life-blood of the global economy. Their opinions and decisions have profound influence from Latin American to the Middle East and Africa on addressing complex and emerging transnational challenges, like climate change.

Despite the Asia-Pacific region’s tremendous growth, the region still faces some of the most pressing challenges of the 21st century. North Korea and Burma remain outliers to the region’s prosperity and continue to be sources for insecurity and instability. Many of today’s most critical issues -- military competition, nuclear proliferation, violent extremism, financial crises, poverty, weak and ineffective governments, unresolved territorial disputes, growing competition over energy and natural resources, climate change, and disease -- transcend national borders and pose a common risk in the region. The rapid emergence of transnational security risks and threats demands collective action, and it is critical for the United States to work with our allies and partners in the region to address and meet these significant challenges.

Essential to our long-term national interests is to make sure that the United States remains true to its identity as a Pacific power. The Obama Administration, following a long history of bipartisan commitment to Asia, has articulated a five-part framework for our engagement in the Asia-Pacific:

First, deepen and modernize our alliances with Japan, the Republic of Korea, Australia, Thailand and the Philippines.

Second, broaden our engagement with increasingly important partners like Indonesia, Vietnam, Mongolia, New Zealand, Singapore, Malaysia, and most notably India.

Third, develop a predictable, stable, and comprehensive relationship with China.

Fourth, engage and invest in the region’s burgeoning multilateral architecture.

And, fifth pursue a confident and aggressive trade and economic strategy.

Underpinning our strategy is a steadfast commitment to our belief in the universality of democracy and our respect for human rights. The U.S. commitment to these values defines the unique aspect of U.S. relations with Asia-Pacific nations and is an intrinsic and indispensable aspect of our character as a nation. It is one of the best and most important contributions that we can offer the region. We are working to promote fundamental human rights in the region and support the region’s own efforts to promote and protect human rights, democratic principles, and freedom of religion and of expression.

In order to ensure that the promotion of human rights and the rule of law as well as the development of civil society remain strong pillars of our engagement, we will continue to adopt new and creative approaches that seize the opportunities presented by advances created in our dynamic information age. The freedom to speak one’s mind and to choose one’s leaders, the ability to access information and worship how one pleases are the bases of stability. The United States will continue to speak for those on the margins of society, encouraging countries in the region to respect the internationally recognized human rights of their people while undertaking policies to further liberalize and open their states. We will continue to work with countries to combat the scourge of trafficking in persons, to promote the rights of women and children, and foster greater religious dialogue among the many communities of faith in the region. We continue to press for the restoration of democracy in Fiji, as well as to promote good governance, rule of law, and respect for human rights in Vietnam and China. We have already seen positive signs reflecting greater internalization of human rights with the recent establishment of such institutions as Indonesia’s Bali Democracy Forum and the ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights (AICHR), which we welcomed for an official visit to the United States last November. In Burma, we have intensified efforts to promote human rights and democracy both through diplomatic engagement with key stakeholders in Southeast Asia and by delivering our message to the Burmese government via direct engagement. At the same time, we maintain extensive financial, trade, and visa sanctions that target regime authorities and their cronies who thwart democracy and disrespect human rights. Our message remains clear and consistent: absent concrete progress in key areas of democracy and human rights, our sanctions will remain in place.

I will use the remainder of my testimony to describe how we are implementing this strategy through an aggressive “forward-deployed diplomacy,” and the steps we are taking to ensure U.S. leadership in the Asia-Pacific.

U.S. Strategic Framework for Engagement in the Asia-Pacific Region – The pace of our engagement in this critical region signals the renewed emphasis we place on developing and deepening partnerships. As Secretary Clinton has articulated, our forward-deployed diplomacy in Asia seeks to leverage these relationships to underwrite regional security, heighten prosperity, and support stronger democratic institutions and the spread of universal human rights in the Asia-Pacific region. The region offers the United States tremendous opportunities in a number of areas, including expanding markets for U.S. economic interests and forming new strategic partnerships.

First, our alliances remain the foundation for our strategic engagement in the region, and the Obama Administration is committed to strengthening and modernizing our alliances to address both continuing and emerging challenges. Also, we must recognize that those alliances are, at their core, security alliances. . Our alliances have underwritten peace and stability for over a half-century and continue to provide a context for the region’s tremendous economic growth and vitality.

Our treaty alliance with Japan remains a cornerstone of our strategic engagement in Asia. The U.S.-Japan relationship is both strong and comprehensive; it links two of the world’s three largest economies and is supported by our people-to-people exchanges and our shared commitment to democracy and human rights. The cooperation between the Government of Japan and the United States in the aftermath of the March 11 events demonstrates the value of our security alliance with Japan. The United States stands resolved to assist Japan in its reconstruction efforts and to taking steps to further strengthen our alliance relationship. The pictures on the front-pages of Japanese newspapers that show U.S. military forces and Japanese soldiers working hand-in-hand to assist those in need is a potent symbol of the importance of this relationship. As we help Japan in its time of need, our two governments will continue to conduct open and direct discussions on a number of important strategic and alliance issues, including the roadmap for realigning U.S. forces in Japan. In addition, we are working to create a durable and forward-looking vision for the alliance that builds upon Japan’s important global role in several areas, including climate change, non-proliferation, and humanitarian and development assistance programs. We have intensified high-level engagement between our two governments to address regional and global security challenges, and Japan is a lead contributor to the efforts to bring reconciliation and reconstruction to Afghanistan. Secretaries Clinton and Gates look forward to hosting their Japanese counterparts this year for an important “2+2” meeting where both sides will issue a detailed framework statement for the alliance going forward.

We are also working vigorously with our other critical ally in Northeast Asia, the Republic of Korea (ROK), both to modernize our defense alliance and to achieve a partnership that is truly global and comprehensive. The United States remains steadfastly committed to the defense of the ROK and to an enduring military presence on the Peninsula. The relationship continues to evolve from one solely focused on peninsular challenges to an ever more global and dynamic partnership that builds on our shared values and strategic interests. The ROK now has forces deployed overseas in over a dozen countries, with 200-to-300-person peacekeeping and reconstruction contingents in Haiti, Afghanistan, and Lebanon. The ROK understands that global challenges such as counter-piracy, nuclear nonproliferation, and development fundamentally affect Korea’s interests and involve an obligation to be actively engaged around the world.

Our respective alliances with the ROK and Japan, as well as increasing trilateral coordination, play an essential role in maintaining peace and stability in Northeast Asia, including responding to the destabilizing policies and provocations of North Korea (Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, DPRK). The DPRK’s sinking of the ROK corvette Cheonan in March 2010, its November 2010 disclosure of a uranium enrichment program, and its November 2010 shelling of Yeonpyong Island underscore the threat that the DPRK’s misguided policies and provocations, including its nuclear and ballistic missile programs and proliferation activities, pose to regional stability and global security. Effective trilateral engagement in the wake of these provocations demonstrated to North Korea that its belligerent actions will be met with collective resolve. During an important U.S.-Japan-ROK Trilateral Ministerial meeting in December 2010, the three countries jointly declared that the DPRK’s belligerent actions threaten all three countries and will be met with solidarity. The three countries jointly condemned the DPRK’s uranium enrichment program as a violation of the DPRK’s commitments under the September 2005 Joint Statement of the Six-Party Talks and its obligations under UNSCR 1718 and 1874.

We have also worked closely with Japan, the ROK, and our other partners in the Six-Party Talks to achieve the verifiable denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula in a peaceful manner. We are working closely with our partners and allies to make clear to the DPRK that its uranium enrichment program violates its commitments and obligations. We continue to urge the international community to fully and transparently implement UNSCR 1718 and 1874 to curb the DPRK’s conventional and WMD-related proliferation efforts, as well as its illicit activities.

Australia remains a strategic anchor for regional stability and plays an incredibly important role in maintaining global security. U.S. and Australian forces fight side-by-side, extending a legacy of cooperation that goes back a century, and Australia is the largest non-NATO contributor to the coalition effort in Afghanistan. The U.S. commitment to Australia was on clear display during the visit of Prime Minister Gillard to Washington last month. Prime Minister Gillard had a very productive meeting with President Obama, in which they reviewed the many areas in Asia and around the world in which our two countries work together. She demonstrated Australia’s respect for our past joint efforts through a generous contribution to the new Vietnam Veterans Memorial education center here in Washington. In addition, Secretaries Clinton and Gates visited Australia for the 25th Australia-U.S. Ministerial Consultations (AUSMIN) in November. That meeting was essential to our objective of modernizing and deepening our alliance, and our two governments announced the launch of the Australia-U.S. Force Posture Review Working Group, which is now exploring the potential for expanded U.S.-Australia military cooperation to optimize our U.S. force posture in the Asia-Pacific region.

We are also working to invigorate the Trilateral Strategic Dialogue with Japan and Australia, as well as to deepen security partnerships throughout the region. Our alliances with the Philippines and Thailand, our long-time Southeast Asian treaty allies, continue to evolve to meet modern challenges from violent extremism to infectious disease. We are working closely with our Philippine partners to improve maritime security and disaster response capabilities. In January of this year, we launched the first ever joint State-DOD strategic dialogue with the Government of the Philippines to help create a framework to enhance our alliance partnership. In Thailand, our oldest treaty ally in East Asia, we partnered to deploy Thai naval vessels, with U.S. Navy personnel aboard, to join Combined Task Force-151 to combat piracy off the Horn of Africa. Thailand has also provided a full battalion of peacekeepers to Darfur to assist with UN humanitarian relief operations. Our robust and mutually beneficial military relationships with both allies include joint exercises, ship visits, information sharing, logistics assistance, and a broad slate of training and capacity-building activities in such areas as peacekeeping and anti-piracy operations.

Second, the Obama Administration is committed to broadening our relations with growing powers like Indonesia, Malaysia, Mongolia, New Zealand, Singapore, Vietnam, and most notably India.

- India: The Administration has taken significant steps to enhance our engagement with India, which is playing a key role in the Asia-Pacific. We have launched a dialogue on Asia-Pacific strategic issues, and I will travel to New Delhi next week to have further discussions and consultations. As a growing international player, engagement with India on a wide array of global issues is increasingly in the strategic interests of the United States.

- Indonesia: Our engagement with Indonesia continues to mature. The President’s historic trip to Jakarta last fall highlighted the broadening and deepening of the U.S.-Indonesia relationship. The launch of the Comprehensive Partnership by President Obama and President Yudhoyono will further boost our growing partnership on bilateral, regional, and global issues. We look forward to working with Indonesia this year in its role as ASEAN chair and host of the East Asia Summit and value its emerging, positive voice on global topics, such as democracy and climate change.

- Malaysia: In addition, the Administration is working hard to enhance our bilateral relationship with Malaysia. We are in the process of launching a major English-language initiative that will place more young Americans in Malaysia to teach English and expose primarily rural Malay students to American culture. The Malaysian government, under the leadership of Prime Minister Najib, has also taken a number of steps to create more stringent export controls and play a constructive role in the international non-proliferation regime. Medical personnel from the Malaysian Armed Forces are currently deployed to Afghanistan. Our two countries are also working together closely in the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) negotiations.

- Mongolia: Recently, I visited Mongolia, an ancient country yet a relatively young democracy on the verge of an economic boom that offers opportunities for American companies. According to some estimates, Mongolia has about $400 billion worth of minerals in the ground. Mongolia provides 190 troops to the International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan and hosts training for peacekeeping operations. Mongolia also cooperates closely with us in international organizations such as the UN and International Atomic Energy Agency. And, Mongolia will chair the Community of Democracies starting this year. Mongolia is a reliable, democratic partner with a bright future.

- Vietnam: Over the last several years, we have broadened and deepened our engagement with Vietnam on a wide ranges of issues, including trade, security, nonproliferation, health, education, and the environment. Vietnam is also among our eight negotiating partners in the TPP talks. During their meetings in Hanoi last year, Secretary Clinton and Prime Minister Dung agreed to elevate the relationship further by moving toward a strategic partnership. However, we remain deeply concerned about the lack of progress in the human rights front. We continue to make it very clear to the Vietnamese government that political freedoms are not a source of instability but of strength.

- New Zealand: Last fall, Secretary Clinton visited New Zealand where she launched the Wellington Declaration. This visit effectively culminated the thaw in our relationship with New Zealand, after a 25-year freeze since the mid-1980s. New Zealand is an important friend and partner of the United States, especially in the South Pacific, and the Wellington Declaration establishes a framework for a new United States-New Zealand strategic partnership that will enhance our practical cooperation and political dialogue. Likewise, the United States and New Zealand are working to deepen our economic relationship through the TPP negotiations. In response to the tragic earthquake that struck New Zealand earlier this year, the United States deployed a USAID Disaster Assistance Response Team (DART) that included the Los Angeles County and the Fairfax County Urban Search and Rescue teams (USAR), transferred equipment and supplies, and committed more than $1 million for humanitarian assistance to support relief and recovery efforts.

- Singapore: The Administration is also taking steps to enhance our bilateral engagement with Singapore. In addition to being a strong partner on non-proliferation and other regional security matters, Singapore has participated in global security operations, including in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Gulf of Aden counter-piracy efforts for which Singapore will chair the International Contact Group in July. Singapore is hosting the sixth round of TPP negotiations this week.

Third, an important component of our efforts in the Asia Pacific is an approach to China that is grounded in reality, focused on results, and true to our principles and interests. Through this approach, we are pursuing a positive, cooperative, and comprehensive relationship with China. As Secretary Clinton has said, the U.S.-China relationship is at a critical juncture; how we manage the relationship today – with its elements of both competition and cooperation – will have a large impact on the future of the region.

Over the past year, we have taken solid, tangible steps to translate these words into action. Through steady diplomacy, we worked with Beijing to move the relationship in a positive direction, with President Hu attending the Nuclear Security Summit in April and China voting in favor of strengthened sanctions on Iran at the UN Security Council in June. The success of our approach is most clearly illustrated by President Hu’s January state visit to Washington. Through that visit, China for the first time expressed concern about the DPRK’s uranium enrichment program; we also gained Chinese agreement to respect the results of the referendum in southern Sudan, and strengthened cooperation with the Chinese on Iran through both the P5+1 process and enforcement of UN Security Council Resolutions. We also held firm to the principles that are important to us as Americans, making strong statements in both public and private about our concerns on China’s human rights record. President Hu’s visit was a success in large part because of our concerted effort since the beginning of the Administration to get this relationship right – in a manner that ensures U.S. interests are protected and advanced.

Related to our interactions with China is our consistent approach to Taiwan. As Secretary Clinton has noted, we are encouraged by the greater dialogue and economic cooperation between the Mainland and Taiwan – as witnessed by the historic completion of the Cross-Strait Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement last year. Our approach continues to be guided by our One China policy based on the three joint communiqués and the Taiwan Relations Act. In the period ahead, we seek to encourage more dialogue and exchanges between the two sides, as well as reduced military tensions and deployments, and we have and will continue to meet our responsibilities under the TRA.

We will continue to make clear our views on the principles of freedom of navigation in the South China Sea. Recent events in China, including the forced disappearances of rights lawyers and crackdowns on Chinese and foreign journalists, have only further increased our concerns about human rights. And we continue to press China for further action on the DPRK’s actions in violation of the September 2005 Joint Statement and UN Security Council Resolutions, as well as the need to more tightly enforce sanctions on Iran.

On the economic front, we continue to make lowering trade barriers a high priority in all our engagements with China, including the Strategic and Economic Dialogue (S&ED), the U.S.-China Joint Commission on Commerce and Trade (JCCT), and the G-20. Our embassy in Beijing and consulates throughout China reinforce the importance of maintaining a level playing field for U.S. companies on a regular basis and at all levels of the Chinese government. The State Department also works closely with other federal agencies to monitor China's compliance with U.S. and international trade rules. In 2010, the Department of Commerce initiated six investigations against imports from China (three antidumping and three countervailing duty) in order to provide relief for U.S. companies from unfair trade practices. Moreover, following consultations with the State Department and other Executive Branch agencies, USTR initiated WTO dispute settlement proceedings against China in three separate cases.

As a result of these efforts, during the December 2010 meeting of the JCCT and the January visit of President Hu, China made significant commitments on key trade issues, agreeing to ensure that Chinese government agencies use legitimate software, delink innovation policies from government procurement preferences, and include sub-central entities in its revised offer to join the WTO Government Procurement Agreement. China is a key export market for U.S. goods and services and a focus of President Obama’s National Export Initiative that calls for doubling U.S. exports in five years to support millions of American jobs. In 2010, exports from the United States to China approached $92 billion, an increase of 32 percent from 2009.

An important element of our engagement with China is the S&ED(=Strategic and Economic Dialogue), which brings together cabinet members and agency heads across both of our governments, not only to discuss a range of issues critical to our bilateral relationship, but also to inculcate the habit of cooperation across our two governments. Secretaries Clinton and Geithner will host the third S&ED in Washington in May and will build on the successes of the second S&ED last May, including cooperation in addressing the global economic crisis in the framework of the G20. In our preparation for the next S&ED, the U.S. Government will continue to press China for demonstrable progress on economic issues, including further advancements on trade and investment and full implementation of commitments it made during President Hu’s visit on trade, investment, and economic rebalancing, including exchange rate reform.

Fourth, the Obama Administration is committed to enhancing engagement in Asia-Pacific multilateral organizations. In her speech in Hawaii in January 2010, Secretary Clinton highlighted the importance of the United States’ involvement in the development of the regional institutions and architecture. APEC remains the premier economic organization in the Asia-Pacific region, and the United States remains committed to it. We have also taken a series of steps to deepen U.S. engagement in regional institutions such as ASEAN, which the Secretary Clinton calls “the fulcrum” for the region’s emerging architecture, the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF), the ASEAN Defense Ministers Meeting (Plus), the East Asia Summit (EAS), and the Pacific Island Forum (PIF).

U.S. membership in the EAS will allow us to work with ASEAN and other EAS members to foster engagement on pressing strategic and political issues of mutual concern, including nuclear nonproliferation, maritime security, and disaster assistance. Last year, Secretary Clinton attended the EAS as the first-ever U.S. representative to the organization. This year, President Obama will attend the EAS in Indonesia and will focus on steps the organization can take to advance regional maritime security, capacity of countries to respond to humanitarian and natural disasters, and non-proliferation. In addition, we will seek to work with ASEAN to identify ways we can supports its Plan of Action. The President will also co-host the third U.S.-ASEAN summit, a regularized feature of our bilateral engagement with ASEAN.

Regional engagement can also be an effective way to enhance our efforts to deal with transnational security challenges such as climate change, pandemics, or environmental degradation, and disaster management. Humanitarian assistance and disaster preparedness will continue to play a role in the region’s economic well-being. With the cooperation of the ARF, we supported the ARF Disaster Exercise in Indonesia earlier this month. We are looking at ways for the ARF to strengthen its capacity in managing crises, which is critically important in light of the spate of recent natural disasters that have battered the region. Another regional effort is the Lower Mekong Initiative (LMI), one of Secretary Clinton's signature priorities for U.S. engagement in Southeast Asia. Over the last year, the Secretary convened several meetings of the LMI with her counterparts from Laos, Thailand, Cambodia, and Vietnam to chart the way forward to advance shared goals for the region in environment, education, health, and infrastructure.

In August 2010, I led the largest-ever U.S. delegation to the Pacific Islands Forum Post-Forum Dialogue in Vanuatu. The delegation included not only Department of State officials, but also key defense and development personnel. We plan to take an even larger delegation to the 2011 meeting this September in Auckland to demonstrate our whole-of-government approach to addressing shared concerns in the Pacific. Building on the urgent request for support from the Pacific Small Island States, we have committed funds specifically for climate adaptation projects and related programs in Pacific Island countries. To help administer these new programs, USAID is finalizing plans for a new office in Port Moresby, Papua New Guinea this year. Funding to address climate adaptation will be an essential component of our strategy – and a critical element in the regional effort both to meet increasingly severe climate-related challenges and to maintain American pre-eminence in a region wooed by other suitors with deep pockets.

In this regard, the Compact of Free Association between the United States and Palau is a vital component of our growing presence and engagement in the Western Pacific. Our existing defense arrangement with Palau makes a valuable contribution to U.S. and international security. The Administration has submitted to the Congress legislation covering the results of the recently concluded fifteen-year review of the Compact. Enacting the proposed legislation will uphold our partnership under the Compact, underscore the United States’ renewed commitment to the region, and keep Palau allied with the United States at a time when other, international interests are aggressively courting Pacific Island countries.

Fifth, we are pursuing an aggressive economic and trade agenda in Asia. 2011 is a year of consequence for the United States to demonstrate economic leadership in the region and shape the agenda for future years to accelerate regional economic integration. We are taking a three-pronged approach to driving successful engagement with the region: securing ratification of the U.S.-Korea Free Trade Agreement, achieving milestone progress on the Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations, and concluding a successful APEC host year.

Today, the 21 APEC economies, with approximately 2.7 billion consumers, purchase almost 60 percent of U.S. goods exports. Seven of the United States’ top fifteen trading partners are in APEC. Strong Asian participation in APEC, the WTO, and the G-20 reflects the increasing importance of Asian economies and their centrality to strengthening the multilateral trading system and sustaining our own economic recovery. We must ensure our competitiveness in this vital region and promote continued integration of the U.S. economy with APEC economies, which will benefit workers, consumers, and businesses in the region and create jobs back here in the United States.

The region is essential to the success of President Obama’s National Export Initiative, and our goal of doubling U.S. exports by 2015 to create new American jobs. In the first year of the National Export Initiative, U.S. exports to APEC members grew much faster than U.S. exports to the rest of the world (non-APEC member economies). U.S exports to APEC economies last year totaled $774 billion, up 25 percent from 2009, while U.S. exports to non-APEC member economies grew only about 15 percent to reach $503 billion. We are working with governments in the region to ensure an environment in which this trend can continue.

As we seek to achieve the President’s goal of doubling exports over the next five years, a tremendously important concrete step toward reaching this goal is the U.S.-Korea Free Trade Agreement (KORUS). In December the Administration achieved important new commitments from the Koreans on outstanding issues that will level the playing field for U.S. automakers and autoworkers, and the Administration will submit the agreement to Congress soon. This agreement represents a major accomplishment for both countries and is an historic opportunity to boost exports, create jobs, and bolster our economy. It eliminates tariffs on 95 percent of U.S. consumer and industrial exports to Korea within five years and significantly reduces tariffs on our agricultural exports to Korea. KORUS is expected to increase exports of American goods by up to $11 billion based on the tariff cuts alone of KORUS and to support at least 70,000 additional jobs on the U.S. side alone. In addition, this agreement will support many more American jobs by opening Korea’s $580 billion services market to U.S. companies in express delivery, telecommunications, insurance, and other services industries. The economic benefits for the ROK are also considerable. This trade agreement will deliver immediate, significant economic benefits, but will also deepen our engagement and strengthen our partnership with a central ally in a volatile and rapidly growing region. In strategic terms, it will underscore our commitment to prosperity and security in the Asia Pacific and fortify our leadership role and influence in the region.

Another important pathway to expanding U.S. economic engagement in Asia, and increasing U.S. exports to dynamic Asian markets, is the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement, or TPP. The nine APEC economies involved – Australia, Brunei, Chile, Malaysia, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, Vietnam, and the United States – represent almost 40 percent of APEC’s total goods and services exports. With these economies we are negotiating a new template for a high-quality, high ambition, 21st century trade agreement. This is a strategic agreement that is central to enhancing the 21st century supply chain and new economies of IT and green growth, and one that supports high labor standards and the environment. We have now had a number of rounds of TPP negotiations, and we look forward to working in partnership with Congress as we continue towards realizing this important agreement.

And, in 2011, the United States is hosting APEC for the first time in 18 years, providing us with unique opportunities to demonstrate our commitment to and engagement in the region and to shape the organization’s agenda in ways that reflect our values, promote regional economic integration, and create opportunities for U.S. businesses and workers in this dynamic region. The first round of Senior Officials Meetings took place here in Washington earlier this month, and we will have a busy APEC schedule as we build to the APEC Leaders Meeting, which President Obama will host in Hawaii in November. We have set an ambitious agenda that challenges APEC to maximize tangible, practical results, particularly in the area of removing trade barriers, promoting green growth, and building regulatory convergence among APEC economies. To that end, the President has laid out three priority areas to guide APEC’s agenda in 2011 to build towards a seamless regional economy: (1) strengthening regional economic integration and expanding trade; (2) promoting green growth; and (3) expanding regulatory cooperation and advancing regulatory convergence. We are looking to conclude specific and ambitious initiatives in each of these three priority areas this year. We want to ensure that APEC will continue to benefit American businesses, especially small and medium size enterprises, and will remain focused on specific, practical outcomes. Through APEC, we can continue to advance regional economic integration, and by reducing barriers to trade and investment in the region, we can increase U.S. exports and support jobs at home at the same time.

Conclusion

American leadership in the Asia-Pacific is essential to our long-term national interests. The Administration is committed to investing in and playing an engaged and active role in the region. The shift of geopolitical forces from the West to the East is a defining feature of the 21st century’s international landscape – and Asia will be the main stage for these transformations. These changes will present both tremendous challenges and opportunities for the United States. We are committed to meeting these challenges and seizing opportunities through high-intensity and comprehensive engagement. We have demonstrated to the region that as a global power, we can “walk and chew gum at the same time.” We can, and will continue to be forced to, juggle multiple challenges at once. We are committed to taking steps to further strengthen our linkages to the Asia-Pacific region to ensure the preservation and promotion of our interests.

I look forward to working with you, Mr. Chairman, and with Members of this Subcommittee and Congress to seek opportunities to influence positively the future direction of the region to deliver more benefit to more of our people. Thank you for extending this opportunity to me to testify today on this vitally important issue. I am happy to respond to any questions you may have.

GE's responsibility must be severely questioned

2011-03-26T10:50:00.000-07:00

Hi my American friends. You might be interested in the following three sites. Thanks and regards, Kosuke

No.1
Fukushima: Mark 1 Nuclear Reactor Design Caused GE Scientist To Quit In Protest
Damaged Japanese Nuclear Plant Has Five Mark 1 Reactors
No.2
http://www.democracynow.org/2011/3/15/this_could_become_chernobyl_on_steroids
No.3
General Electric Mark I Reactors in the United States
http://www.nirs.org/reactorwatch/accidents/gemk1reactorsinus.pdf

SHARIF ABDEL KOUDDOUS: How similar is the plant in Japan, the Fukushima Daiichi plant, to many of the nuclear power plants in this country?
ARNIE GUNDERSEN: It’s almost identical to 23 of them. For instance, the Quad Cities and the Dresden plant in Illinois, the Vermont Yankee plant here in Vermont, Oyster Creek in New Jersey, Pilgrim in Massachusetts—it’s almost identical to those and more than a dozen others.

You know, this reactor design, this containment design, has been questioned since 1972. The NRC in 1972 said we never should have licensed this containment. And in 1985, the NRC said they thought it was about a 90 percent chance that in a severe accident this containment would fail. So, that we’re seeing it at Fukushima is an indication that this is a weak link. It’s this Mark I, General Electric Mark I, containment. And we have—essentially one-quarter of all of the nuclear reactors in the United States, 23 out of 104, are of this identical design.

universal brotherhood

2011-03-24T21:06:00.000-07:00

Although I have thought Japan should reduce its security dependence on the US military gradually and embark on its own defense policy as a normal country, this time we Japanese really appreciate American military support for earthquake and tsunami victims.

Under the Koizumi cabinet, we Japanese strongly supported the US in the wake of 9/11. Americans must remember that. This time, the US is strongly suppporting us. Thanks a lot.

Let's hang on, Japan! Let's hang on Tohoku!

2011-03-20T03:26:00.000-07:00

I am not a computer geek at all. But afer spending one hour, I managed to make this graphics.

This says, "がんばろう、日本！がんばろう、東北！

(Ganbarou, Nippon! Ganbarou, Tohoku!)"

In English, this means "Let's hang on, Japan! Let's hang on, Tohoku!"

Please spread out this graphics to your friends.

Thanks and regards,

Kosuke

Ukrainian Week published its interview with me

2011-03-19T07:10:00.000-07:00

The interview was conducted before the earthquake hit Japan on March 11.

Russia is now in a hurry to restore its influence before China becomes a super power - World - Ukrainian Week

March 15, 2011
Viktor Kaspruk

Russia is now in a hurry to restore its influence before China becomes a super power

Japanese political analyst Kosuke Takahashi talks to the Ukrainian Week about current geopolitics in the Asia-Pacific region

-Mr. Takahashi, Japan's territorial dispute with Russia has prevented the two nations from concluding a post-World War II peace treaty. Russian government having assumed an increasingly aggressive posture regarding the country's territorial dispute with Japan in recent months, the question naturally arises, Why?

- The biggest reason is that Russia now has a long-term national strategy mentioned in the new Russian Military Doctrine, which was approved in February 2010. By 2025, China is expected to become the world’s largest economy surpassing the US. If that situation becomes true, China will occupy the West Pacific and the US will occupy the East Pacific as a natural step of power balance. Russia needs to have some strong footing in the East Asia, going into the West Pacific. This is why Russia is now aggressive regarding the issue of those disputed islands.

- The victorious Soviet Union acquired the islands as well as the southern half of Sakhalin Island (the northern half was already Soviet territory before the Second World War) as justly deserved spoils of war?

We Japanese don’t think so. But the tricky thing is that at the February 1945 Yalta Conference involving Stalin, Roosevelt and Winston Churchill, the US and Britain are said to have acceded to the Soviet plan to invade and occupy these Japanese lands as a reward for Soviet participation in the war. So it’s hard for Tokyo to criticize such secret agreement made in Yalta, which involved the US, Japan’s current biggest ally. If Japan criticizes Russia now, it means Japan also criticizes then US foreign policy.

- Moscow and Tokyo agreed in their joint declaration of 1956, which restored their diplomatic relations, that the Soviet Union would return the disputed islands to Japan upon conclusion of a bilateral peace treaty. Whether it is possible in general to agree with Russia?

- Yes, Russia agreed the return of two smaller islands in that declaration of 1956 and has kept saying so. But Japan will not accept the return of just two smaller islands.

- Ironically, the Russian leaders’ visits to the disputed islands demonstrate Moscow’s commitment to develop the long-neglected economy of the Russian Far East, including the southern Kurils…

Yes. As I said above, this is Russia’s long-term strategy. The Southern Kuril Islands are very significant militarily.

But theescalation of a long-running territorial dispute between Japan and Russia is sending relations between the neighbours to their lowest point in decades and may lead to new areas of tension in northeast Asia.
The dispute relates to four islands that Japan calls the Northern Territories and Russia the Southern Kurils. The Soviet Union annexed Kunashiri, Etorofu, Shikotan and the uninhabited Habomai islets after the Second World War, fomenting a dispute that has prevented the two nations from concluding a post-war peace treaty.

The Pacific Fleet is tasked with protecting the Southern Kurils.

The islands' rich mineral and fishing reserves and strategic position make them a valuable prize. The straits between them do not freeze during winter, allowing Russia's Pacific Fleet to access to the Pacific Ocean from the Sea of Okhotsk.

Similar, that Medvedev is combining the political advantages of playing a nationalistic card ahead of 2012 elections with an awareness that Japan's new defence policy focuses on meeting Chinese territorial ambitions in the East China Sea.

- Upcoming elections - in 2011 for parliament and in 2012 for the presidency - make it especially difficult for Russian politicians to make major concessions to Japan. Medvedev's political team is concerned that he lacks the hard-line credentials that make Prime Minister Vladimir Putin and his coterie so popular. But with the president unwilling to sacrifice improving ties with the United States and NATO or Russia's important relationship with China at the nationalist altar, confronting Japan over the Kurils represents the safest alternative?

- Yes, Russia has China in East Asia now. China is Russia’s third-largest trading partner. Japan is Russia’s 11th trading partner. For Russia, Japan’s attractiveness especially in terms of economic ties is declining.

-Russian policymakers are also annoyed that the Democratic Party of Japan (DPJ), which is in power for the first time in its history, has not changed Tokyo's policy toward the islands, despite expectations that it would make more concessions than previous Japanese governments?

- The DPJ government is still fresh and politically venerable and weak. It cannot make any concession especially before April 2011 local elections, including Tokyo gubernatorial election. This is the same situation as Russian politicians who will have the state Duma (lower house) elections at the end of this year, to be followed by a presidential election in the spring of 2012.
- The Japanese government's strained ties with other key countries may also explain Moscow's harder line? Russian officials have calculated that the Japanese government cannot respond strongly to Moscow's moves given its current strained relations with China and North Korea, and lingering tensions with South Korea?

- No. Japan and South Korea’s relations are becoming much better, as they started talks on military cooperation already. China and Russia are strengthening their ties against the US, Japan and South Korea. This is the most recent security situation in East Asia.

- The Russia-Japan territorial dispute escalated shortly after the Sino-Japanese confrontation over the Senkaku Islands - referred to as the Diaoyu Islands in China - became more acute?

- Yes, Russia is aiming to take advantage of Japan-China conflicts. One of the motivating factors for Moscow could be Japan's new defense policy for the next decade, adopted by the government last December. Tokyo plans to reduce Cold War-era equipment and organizations, especially the Japan Ground Self-Defense Force (JGSDF) personnel in Hokkaido prefecture, the northernmost part of Japan facing Russia. Under its new policy, Japan plans to boost security around the Nansei Islands in Okinawa prefecture in the country's south, and in the East China Sea near China and Taiwan, a move that is apparently aimed at countering China's growing naval power.

- Another likely explanation for Moscow's growing assertiveness regarding the islands is that Russia is succeeding in raising its profile in East Asia more generally, even without resolving its dispute with Japan?

- Compared with China, I do not think Russia is succeeding in doing so. Rather it’s losing influence in East Asian affairs such as North Korea’s nuclear issues. So Russia is now in a hurry to restore its influence before China becomes a super power in this region.

- Mr. Takahashi, Russia has little incentive to change its approach to the island dispute, and many reasons to maintain its tougher stance?

- At least until after 2012 elections in Russia, there will be no progress. And if Russian economy becomes bad in coming years, for example, led by a sharp fall in oil and gas prices, then it might rely on Japan’s money and technology by giving Tokyo some concession regarding those islands. Otherwise it would be really hard for both nations to solve this issue.

Political scientistKosuke Takahashi, a former staff writer at the Asahi Shimbun and Bloomberg News, is a Tokyo-based expert, who writes in both English and Japanese. He visited the Northern Territories, the disputed lands between Russia and Japan, in June 1998 as representative of the Asahi Shimbun and reported on the situations there. He currently works for Asia Times Online and Jane's Defence Weekly as Tokyo correspondent and Nikkei CNBC (news television channel broadcast in Japan)as TV commentator. He graduated from Columbia University's Graduate School of Journalism and the School of International and Public Affairs as a dual master's degree student.

On March 20, the biggest full moon since March 1993 will occur

2011-03-18T12:20:00.000-07:00

On March 20 in Japan (March 19 in the US), the biggest full moon since March 1993 will occur. It’s called a super "perigee moon.” The tide will come in more than usual. People on the coastline hit by tsunamim, just in case, better watch the tide .

日本時間の3月20日(米国時間19日)は1993年3月以来の満月の大きさとなる。その分、大きな満ち潮となる。津波被害にあった海岸地域の方々、ぜひ頭に入れておいてください。

A list of Twitter hashtags on Japan earthquake

2011-03-18T09:42:00.000-07:00

#jishin : 地震情報(info on earthquake)

#j_j_helpme : 救助要請(a call for help)

#hinan : 避難情報(info on evacuation)

#anpi : 安否確認(safety confirmation)

#311care : 医療支援(medical support)

(My latest story for Asia Times) Record-high yen assaults Japan

2011-03-17T04:21:00.000-07:00

Very, very good news. This afternoon I just got a phone call from my relative in Miyagi Prefecture. He and his mother survived. I was pretty much relieved to hear they are safe.

Mitsunori Goto, 48, my relative, who survived the earthquake one week ago, said his car was swept by the tsunami but he managed to escape alive. At that time, he was in Ishinomaki City of Miyagi. He gave me a phone call today. He is a former SDF member.
Also, my late grandma's house located in Tome City of Miyagi did not collapse during the earthquake. My mother and I always go to this house every Obon season around mid-August.

Here is my latest story for Asia Times. I criticized speculative FX trading, which took advantage of nuke fears in Japan. Cheers, Kosuke

Record-high yen assaults Japan
By Kosuke Takahashi

TOKYO - Greed and fear move markets, one popular proverb on Wall Street says. Speculative market players, taking advantage of greed and fear, are now assaulting Japan, seeking to gain in the wake of the country's worst recorded earthquake, subsequent big aftershocks, massive tsunami, tremendous loss of life and nuclear panic.

With nuclear fears on the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant rising, speculators are aggressively buying the Japanese yen amid　cat-and-dog surging demand for the currency, pushing up the yen to a record post-World War II high of 76.25 to the US dollar on early Thursday in Tokyo. The yen at this level will likely hit the profitability of Japanese exporters such as Toyota and Sony in coming months, although it can help lower prices of imported crude oil and other raw materials.

Why do speculators buy the yen, instead of selling it, as geopolitical risks of Japan on nuclear radiation are rising and the Japanese economy is expected to slow down in coming months due to massive earthquake damage?

The prevailing notion in the markets is that global money managers and hedge funds, as well as Japanese mom-and-pop investors, are increasingly seeking to reduce investment risk due to the global downturn in stocks, and that those investors are unwinding so-called yen carry trades, which under less volatile financial times allow traders to capitalize on Japan's ultra-low interest rates to buy higher-yielding assets in Australia and elsewhere.

But the real reason is not a simple yen-buying based on risk aversion. They are actually taking big speculative risks to bet on the yen's further rise by buying it. They simply buy the Japanese currency, as they think that people want to buy the yen in times of emergency world-wide.

Yen-buying and losses in the stock markets started to pile up late morning New York time on Wednesday after European Union Energy commissioner Guenther Oettinger warned of "further catastrophic events" in the coming hours in Japan, saying they "could pose a threat to the lives of people on the island".

He said that one of Japan's nuclear plants was "effectively out of control", and that the situation could continue to deteriorate. Europe's energy chief later played down his warning, as his spokeswoman said his comments were based on media reports, his personal fears and so forth after the comments alarmed global financial markets.

Then, losses in the stock markets and yen-buying accelerated after the United States Embassy in Japan urged American citizens living within 80 kilometers of the quake-hit Fukushima nuclear power plant to evacuate as a precautionary measure.

Nuclear pundits around the globe have mentioned Japan’s possible nuclear crisis as being equivalent to the 1986 Chernobyl accident. They seldom mention a basic but important fact. Unlike Chernobyl, Japan managed to automatically shut down all the nuclear power reactors in Fukushima immediately after the earthquake on March 11. This is quite different from Chernobyl.

"The yen is being bought as nuke fears are exaggerated abroad," said Yuji Saito, director of the foreign exchange department in Tokyo at Credit Agricole Corporate & Investment Bank. "By taking advantage of those exaggerated fears, speculators aimed to trigger massive stop-loss orders of yen-buying at the level of a previous record-high of 79.75 yen against the dollar. They succeeded in doing so by triggering those stop orders amid very thin trading between New York and Tokyo times."

Saito said now that speculators had finished hitting another record-high of the yen against the dollar, they fear intervention by the Japanese authorities in the currency markets by selling the yen, and have already started to sell the yen by riding on possible future intervention by the Ministry of Finance and the Bank of Japan.

"Crucially, FX [foreign exchange] carry positions have likely been wiped out, without a severe jump in volume, so overall, conditions for risk appetite/releverage actually appear to be reasonable and there will be investors with strong interest in buying cross-JPY," UBS wrote in a report on Thursday. "Of course, if the news flow deteriorates yet again, the market could yet turn, but overall last night's price action seems very FX-specific and stops/barriers driven than any indication of fundamental fear-induced deleveraging."

Expectations are rising that central bank officials and the Group of Seven finance ministers will decide to assist Japan's recovery efforts and also approve, or at least understand, Japan's currency intervention at an emergency meeting by phone on Friday. The Group of Seven is composed of the United States, Japan, Germany, France, the United Kingdom, Italy and Canada.

"Japan will be forced to sell US Treasuries if it really needs the costs of its reconstruction," Saito said. "This would be severely damaging to the US. So I think the world led by the US will help Japan this time."

As of January 2011, Japan holds $885.9 billion of US Treasuries, the second-largest holder, following China's $1.15 trillion.

Kosuke Takahashi is a Tokyo-based Japanese journalist. He is a regular TV commentator at Nikkei CNBC in Tokyo. He previously was a currency reporter for Bloomberg News in Tokyo under the pen name of Kosuke Goto.

(Copyright 2011 Asia Times Online (Holdings) Ltd. All rights reserved. Please contact us about sales, syndication and republishing.)

Greed and fear move markets..

2011-03-16T12:36:00.000-07:00

Nuke fears are exaggerated abroad. Unlike the 1986 Chernobyl accident, remember that Japan managed to shut down all nuke plants in Fukushima immediately after the earthquake. This is a basic fact and quite different from Chernobyl.

Well, some people need such fears, especially market players on the Wall Street, as greed and fear move markets...

Here is a search site to find missing persons in Japan

2011-03-12T11:17:00.000-08:00

Here is a search site to find missing persons in Japan.

Please spread out this with Twitter and Facebook and whatever.

http://japan.person-finder.appspot.com/ (Japanese)
http://japan.person-finder.appspot.com/?lang=en (English)
http://japan.person-finder.appspot.com/?lang=zh-CN (Chinese)
http://japan.person-finder.appspot.com/?lang=ko (Korean)

Thanks and regards,

Kosuke

Japan hit by largest earthquake in country's history

2011-03-11T10:17:00.000-08:00

On Friday afternoon Japan was hit by the biggest earthquake ever.
I was at home on the 17th floor of an apartment building when the earthquake hit. At that time I'd just finished off writing a story for Asia Times Online(ATol), which I posted here, and submitted it to ATol's desk. I was dead tired around that time because I had worked all through the night. The previous night, or Thursday night, I was working on a story for Jane's Defence Weekly. But this earthquake made me completely awake. I felt big waves for a couple of minutes. I thought I would die. My mother, 67, became pale and could not stand up. Flower pots, books, fluorescent lights all came down from shelves and the ceiling.

This earthquake is, for sure, the biggest I have ever experienced. (I went to Kobe in 1995 to cover stories on the Great Hanshin Earthquake, which killed 6,434 people, as staff writer of the Asahi Shimbun, but that was a few weeks after the Great Hanshin Earthquake. So I did not experience that exact moment of happening.)

I went out to the streets to make sure how people are coping with this situation. Many people just kept walking on the streets after this major earthquake and subsequent dozens of aftershocks. All public transportations such as trains, subways and most buses are still being stopped. Aftershocks make it very dangerous to use them. People just needed to walk to go home on cold Friday night. The photo below was taken in my hometown Kawsaki City, adjoining Tokyo.

Softbank, my mobile phone service, didn't work including SMS/MMS(intermittent emails/text msgs) .
My IPhone 4, my favorite item, became useless. It was not connected until just before mid-night. My home phone was also disconnected until night.

Well. here is my latest story for Asia Times.

Scandals strain US-Japan relations

By Kosuke Takahashi

TOKYO - A new division is developing in the Japan-United States relationship after Kevin Maher, policy chief on Japan affairs at the US State Department, said it would be bad for the US if Japan's war-renouncing peaceful constitution was changed because Japan would not need the American military.

Anti-US sentiments are particularly flaring up again in Okinawa, Japan's southernmost island, after Maher, director of the Office of Japan Affairs at the State Department and former consul general in Okinawa, described Okinawan people as "masters of manipulation and extortion" in their dealings with the long-standing, thorny issue of the relocation of the US Marine Corps' Futenma Air Station on Okinawa.

Maher gave a lecture to American University students in Washington on December 3, 2010. He was sacked from his position by the State Department on March 10, four days after Kyodo News first reported Maher's statement.

"Maher's remarks on the constitution surely cast a shadow on Japan's long-term national security," Ukeru Magosaki, the former chief of the Japanese Foreign Ministry's international intelligence bureau, told Asia Times Online on Friday. "His comments hurt the Okinawa people's feeling severely. This would make it further difficult to put the US base relocation plan into practice."
Japan, meanwhile, has its own problems. It took a stop-gap measure by promoting Takeaki Matsumoto on Wednesday as foreign minister from his deputy position at the ministry to succeed Seiji Maehara, who abruptly resigned on March 6 over a scandal involving a political donation from a South Korean resident of Kyoto.

The scandals from both sides of the US and Japan surfaced at a time when the significance of closer ties between two nations cannot be overemphasized to cope with the rapid rise of the Chinese military, the warmongering from North Korea against South Korea and Russia's movement towards the south by strengthening its military presence on four disputed islands, known as the Southern Kuril islands in Russia and the Northern Territories in Japan.

Tense incidents
Most recently, two Chinese military planes - a Y-8 surveillance aircraft and a Y-8 anti-submarine aircraft - on March 2 flew to about 55 kilometers (34 miles) from the Senkaku/Diaoyu islands. This prompted the Japan Air Self-Defense Force (JASDF) to scramble F-15J fighters.

In addition, a Chinese State Oceanic Administration helicopter on Monday flew to just within 70 meters of the Japanese Maritime Self-Defense Force (JMSDF) destroyer Samidare. Military experts said China tested Japan's reflexes amid Tokyo's weakening diplomatic power caused by its domestic political turmoil.

According to the Japanese Defense Ministry's Joint Staff, it was the first time Chinese military planes had approached so close to the Senkaku islands. Defense Minister Toshimi Kitazawa on Tuesday slammed the Chinese helicopter's buzzing of a Japanese destroyer, saying, "It was an extremely dangerous act."

China's Foreign Ministry spokesperson Jiang Yu, meanwhile, said that China's right to claim the islands is "indisputable" and that its actions were in accordance with international law.

The number of scrambles the JASDF conducted against Chinese airplanes reached 48 from April to December of the 2010 fiscal year, which ends on March 31. This is already the highest in the past five fiscal years, and it does not yet include the January to March figures.

Damage-control
The US was forced into damage-control mode by swiftly sacking Maher. US Assistant Secretary of State for East Asia and Pacific Affairs Kurt Campbell, Maher's superior, offered an apology during a meeting with new Japanese Foreign Minister Matsumoto in Tokyo on Thursday. The US ambassador to Japan, John V Roos, also flew to Okinawa and apologized in person to Okinawan governor Hirokazu Nakaima, who is calling for relocating US Marine Corps Air Station Futenma out of Okinawa.

About half of the 50,000 American military personnel in Japan are located on the island of Okinawa.

"I don't think Article Nine of the Japanese constitution should change," Maher said. "If the Japanese constitution was changed the United States would not be able to use Japanese land to advance US interests. The high host nation support the Japanese government currently pays is beneficial to the US. We've got a very good deal in Japan."

The two nations last December agreed that Tokyo will maintain the annual costs of hosting US bases at the current level of 188.1 billion yen (US$2.3 billion) for a five-year period from fiscal 2011 starting April.

He also said, "Okinawans are too lazy to grow goya." Goya is the bitter cucumber vegetable and a local specialty of Okinawa.

Japan and the US last May agreed that the Futenma base would be moved from a densely populated district in Ginowan to a coastal area in the Henoko district of Nago, but local people are fiercely opposed to the plan and want the base to be moved outside of Okinawa.

Reconciling the local demand to move the base with US strategic interests appears impossible, especially after Maher's controversial remarks.

"I was shocked that a diplomat could say such hurtful things about our allies," Tori Miyagi, a 20-year-old American University student who attended the meeting and who also helped compile the memo, told Asia Times Online. "Our alliance with Japan is the foundation of American foreign policy in the Asia-Pacific, so I was amazed Mr Maher would use such strong language to describe our friends. That type of thinking is not productive to the Japan-US partnership."

Miyagi, a fourth-generation Japanese-American whose family came from Okinawa, also said, "It's unfortunate that Mr Maher has to be removed."

"He did not have to be removed, but the State Department should try to remove that type of thinking," he said. "I think the alliance managers do not realize or do not care about the growing frustration in Japan and they are the ones to blame and they are the ones who are preventing a stronger US-Japan alliance. As Campbell is saying the US and Japan are partners, so it's time the US starts treating Japan like a partner and a friend."

Speaking of the memo, Miyagi said, "We did not have a recorder with us, so the memo is not a transcript, but it is accurate. Other students have now come forward and have confirmed what has been reported."

Kan's days may be numbered
Japanese Prime Minister Naoto Kan on Wednesday promoted Matsumoto, State Secretary for Foreign Affairs, to succeed Maehara, who stepped down on the news he had accepted donations from a South Korean resident in Kyoto in violation of Japan's campaign-fund laws.

Japanese media increasingly have pointed out Kan's days in office might be numbered, especially after the Asahi Shimbun reported on Friday that Kan also accepted donations of 1.04 million yen (US$12,600 ) from a South Korean resident in Yokohama City in violation of Japan's campaign-fund laws. Opposition parties have demanded that Kan resign.

A major earthquake, which hit Japan on Friday, may benefit Kan's administration as opposition parties are forced to stop political battles amid the government’s emergency measures.

Matsumoto, 51, is a member of the ruling Democratic Party of Japan (DPJ) and is close to former DPJ leader Ichiro Ozawa, Kan's political rival. Matsumoto supported Ozawa, not Kan, in the party leadership election in September 2010.

Matsumoto served as a secretary of his father Juro Matsumoto, who served as Defense Agency chief from 1989 to 1990. He is a cousin of Japanese ambassador to the US Ichiro Fujisaki. He is known as well-versed in issues ranging from financial affairs to foreign and security policies.

"My policy is to further promote the deepening of the Japan-US alliance," Matsumoto said at an inaugural press conference on Wednesday. "I intend to make efforts toward the deepening of the Japan-US alliance in a way that is appropriate in the 21st century."

One of his immediate tasks is to make preparations for Kan's visit to the US scheduled for the first half of this year.

Matsumoto is due to attend a two-day meeting of foreign ministers from the Group of Eight nations from March 14 in Paris and host two days of trilateral foreign ministerial talks with China and South Korea from March 19 in Kyoto.

Kosuke Takahashi is a Tokyo-based journalist. Besides Asia Times Online, he also works for Jane's Defence Weekly as Tokyo correspondent.

(Copyright 2011 Asia Times Online (Holdings) Ltd. All rights reserved. Please contact us about sales, syndication and republishing.)

Hey Mr. Kevin Maher, you should resign right away!

2011-03-08T04:15:00.000-08:00

Hey Mr. Kevin Maher, you should resign as your discriminatory remarks on Okinawans caused a big fuss in Okinawa and elsewhere.

U.S. diplomat said to have likened Japanese idea of harmony to extortion

TOKYO (Kyodo) -- A U.S. official in charge of Japanese affairs at the State Department is said to have likened the Japanese culture of maintaining social harmony to a means of "extortion" and described the people on the southern island of Okinawa as "lazy" in a speech given in Washington late last year.

According to a written account compiled by some students who attended the lecture at the department, Kevin Maher, who heads its Japanese affairs office and served as consul general in Okinawa Prefecture, also described people in Okinawa as "masters of manipulation and extortion" in their relations with the central government.

Maher told Kyodo News, "I am not in a position to comment on the record at this time," saying his briefing was an off-the-record event. He said the account made available to (Kyodo) -- News is "neither accurate nor complete."

Maher has been involved in bilateral negotiations with Japan over the controversial issue of relocating the U.S. Marine Corps' Futenma Air Station and is known to advocate a plan to relocate the base to another location within the prefecture, an idea widely opposed by local residents.

The remarks attributed to Maher are being seen as provocative in Japan. They are "racially discriminating against Okinawa," said Teruo Hiyane, a scholar on postwar Okinawan history. Ukeru Magosaki, a former Japanese diplomat, said Maher's reported views on Japan were "biased and completely distorted."

Maher spoke on Dec. 3 at the request of American University to a group of 14 students just before their roughly two-week study tour to Tokyo and Okinawa.

In the speech, Maher was quoted as saying, "Consensus building is important in Japanese culture. While the Japanese would call this 'consensus,' they mean 'extortion' and use this culture of consensus as a means of extortion."

"By pretending to seek consensus, people try to get as much money as possible," he said.

Maher also criticized people in Okinawa as "too lazy to grow 'goya' (bitter gourd)," a traditional summer vegetable in the southern prefecture, saying other prefectures in Japan grow more than Okinawa, according to the account.

On the Futenma base, located in a crowded residential area of Ginowan, Maher allegedly said while Okinawans claim the base is the most dangerous in the world, they know that is it not true.

Civilian airports in Fukuoka and Osaka are "just as dangerous," he reportedly said.

Maher was quoted as saying that the Japanese government "needs to tell the Okinawan governor, 'if you want money, sign it," in reference to the Futenma relocation plan.

Students who produced notes of Maher's speech said he definitely made the remarks, with at least one saying it was surprising to hear statements full of bias from a person with a position in the U.S. government.

Maher, 56, served as consul general in Okinawa from 2006 and 2009 after joining the State Department in 1981 and being posted to Tokyo and Fukuoka.

Maher said of the account provided to Kyodo that he "cannot control how individual students themselves might interpret remarks" and "it would therefore not be appropriate" to attribute any specific remarks to him "based upon secondhand information coming from students or others."

In the summer of 2008, while he was posted in Okinawa, Maher sparked controversy after questioning why the local authorities were allowing the construction of homes in the residential area around the Futenma base. Plaintiffs seeking damages over noise from the U.S. base presented him with a written demand calling on him to immediately leave Okinawa.

Hiroshi Ashitomi, who leads a local group in Nago opposed to the relocation of the base to a coastal area of the city, said of Maher's alleged statements, "They indicate that he views Japan and Okinawa as a (U.S.) colony. If the U.S. government is crafting its policies on Japan and Okinawa based on such views, we will have to ask the U.S. military to get out entirely."

Magosaki, former head of the international intelligence office at the Foreign Ministry, said he had the impression that "U.S. officials in charge of recent U.S.-Japan negotiations shared ideas like those of Mr. Maher," adding "in that sense, his remarks were not especially distorted."

Hiyane, professor emeritus of the University of the Ryukyus, said he "cannot overlook" remarks describing Okinawans as "lazy" and "masters of manipulation and extortion," adding Maher's remarks represent "a blatant mentality of occupation."

"The U.S. military has for over 60 years after the war occupied land best fit for agriculture in Okinawa," he said. "Were it not for (U.S.) bases, the (local) economy including agriculture would have been different."

(South China Morning Post) Beijing to track all mobile phone users' movements

2011-03-03T10:08:00.000-08:00

Beijing to track all mobile phone users' movements

Government to monitor 20m people

Stephen Chen

Updated on Mar 03, 2011

Talk about Big Brother! Every Beijing mobile phone user will be tracked through the use of the latest global positioning technology, the municipal government announced on Tuesday.

The project, called the Information Platform of Real-time Citizen Movement, aims to watch over more than 20 million people in Beijing 24 hours a day, local media said yesterday. Wherever you are - whether in the bathroom, on the subway or in Tiananmen Square - the government will know.

Wireless communication experts said the system would be particularly useful not only for following the whereabouts of individuals but also in detecting any unusual gathering of a large number of people.

It is unknown whether the government launched the project to prevent a "jasmine revolution" or other social unrest, but with the help of supercomputers, officials will know where the next gathering spot is before protesters get there.

Li Guoguang - deputy director of the Beijing Municipal Science and Technology Commission, which worked on the project with China Mobile and, presumably, the two other state-owned mobile service providers, China Unicom and China Telecom - told the Beijing Daily that the project would be used only to ease traffic jams.

Using data provided by mobile service providers, the government would know the population distribution and movement of the city with unprecedented accuracy, Li said.

"To some degree, [the project] can effectively increase citizens' travelling efficiency and ease traffic jams" by giving officials information such as which subway line was crowded, which bus line was filled and which road was congested, Li was quoted by the newspaper as saying.

Citizens could get the information but would have to pay, he said.

Li said sensitive information, such as who was where and in which direction they were heading, would be kept within the government.

How many people were in the Wangfujing shopping district, heading to the front door of the McDonald's restaurant there and staying for a couple of hours - information related to calls for a Chinese "jasmine revolution" on the past two Sundays - would not be available to the public, even for a fee, but government agencies such as the Public Security Bureau would know.

China National Radio said the municipal government hoped to start the project in the densely populated Tiantongyuan and Huilongguan areas in the first half of this year.

Chen Derong , professor of wireless communications at the Beijing University of Posts and Telecommications, said mobile positioning technology was based on a simple theory of radio communication.

A mobile phone constantly beams out signals to radio receivers built by service providers, mostly antennae on steel towers. Each radio wave arrives with different timing, and by calculating these differences, the service provider can pin down the location of an active phone.

"Beijing's plan is to integrate the three different mobile service providers into one platform so that everyone with a power-on cell phone can be tracked," Chen said.

"Certainly the use of the platform will not be limited to gathering traffic information. Officials in other areas, such as anti-terrorism and stability maintenance, will also find it useful."

My Chinese friend exposes corruption involving Chinese justice and military.

2011-03-01T03:30:00.000-08:00

My Chinese friend exposed corruption involving Chinese justice and military.

我的中国的朋友，公布了中国的司法的当局和军部的腐败。

成都にいる中国の友人が中国の司法当局と軍部の腐敗を明らかにしてくれました。

http://www.kosuke.net/chinacorruption.html

http://www.zc.em-net.ne.jp/~cozy/chinacorruption.html

10变0钱钱权交易官推磨亲历的官场腐败，独家内幕

朋友经历了一个短暂的婚姻，那里面竟充满了一段的平民难以想象的官场腐败：她家附近的某军工厂职工孟*和周*二人共同个人受贿35万，该案业经辖区检察院刑侦且证据确凿，却被空军装备部政治部的某位将军以伪造的假公文包庇至当地的军事检察院美其名曰‘另案处理’，实际是立即无罪释放，以及一系列后来的干涉地方刑侦，干涉地方司法公正等等自上而下的腐败。因为她是15万行贿人刘*当时的妻子，她亲历了那笔35万元贿赂（15万和20万）的收受，被刑侦，被收监以及后来被‘捞’出的全过程。我向她打听来了她经历的腐败的全程。

一、受贿人的犯罪事实（她是08年11月结的婚，

5.12汶川地震后，她认识了刘*，并结婚，某天刘*去银行取钱，她同行。事发后她才知道那天她和刘*在银行取的钱，刘*交给了周钊35万，这钱是行贿款。

周*和孟*的利用分管工程的权力勾结当地包工头侵吞瓜分灾后重建的军费。其2009年元月受贿35万元的行为被彭州人民检察院刑侦。二人对自己的受贿犯罪行为供认不讳：为了拿到灾后重建的工程，包工头刘*找到周*，承诺好处费请周帮忙拿重庆建科院承包的军工厂的灾后重建的工程，在周的帮助下，刘如愿拿到工程，于2009年元月底从军工厂转来的工程款里取出15万好处费给了周，周当时从刘手里还同时接过了另外一笔20万元的行贿款，那是将工程违规分包给刘*的重庆建科院（蒋文学和丁金堂）给周、孟的行贿款，重庆建科院行贿周、孟，是通过刘*的账户过的帐（请刘转交的），是单位行为。周收下35万后立即与孟分了脏。行受贿人09年7月下旬所作的口供是环环相扣彼此应证的。

二、检察院刑侦受贿证据确凿

周和孟的受贿行为在彭州市检察院已刑侦结束，证据确凿，却在关押两天后被离奇释放。行贿人刘*却铁证如山面临10年徒刑的指控，而利用职权大肆受贿的罪犯分子却蹊跷逃脱了法律的制裁。

周和孟的刑侦口供都对35万受贿认罪不讳，且再三承认其犯罪行为是自己的个人行为与工厂无关，是个人受贿工厂毫不知情。作为家属我朋友亲眼拜读了周和孟的认罪供词，还拜读了行贿人丁金堂，蒋文学，刘*的认罪口供。行，受贿人双方的口供是环环相扣彼此相应证的。

09年 8月24日检察院的反贪局给公诉科的《起诉意见书》上写的是刘触犯了《刑法》第389条移送公诉科起诉。称孟*和周*是“另处”（移交成都空军军事检察院‘另案处理’）。9月28日检察院的《公诉书》称刘触犯《刑法》第389条规定，犯罪事实清楚证据确实充分，提到周*是“另处”。触犯《刑法》第389条规定，按律该判罪10以上，且刘无任何从轻量刑的情节（见刘的口供）。

三、造假为受贿人开脱罪责且干涉地方司法公正

空军装备部政治处的某位将军大人，来到彭州检察院以‘军事秘密’为由强行将受贿人移至成都空军军事检察院“另案处理”并立即释放，将军伪造了一份公文，称周和孟是为国家做出特殊贡献的专家，享有豁免权，成空检察院‘依法’没有对二人的犯罪行为立案。受贿35万却不领刑！ 5719军工厂，又依仗空军装备部为后台向地方法院施压，要求枉法判行贿人监外执行。在权贵们的活动下最终行贿人刘*也被枉法判成了缓刑！行、受贿双方都不用坐牢，一起重大的刑事案就这样不了了之。

09年7月20日为了‘捞’行贿人刘*出来， 5719厂的前任厂长刘义贵召集行贿人家属和相关朋友，他要求家属及家属的任何朋友的任何社会关系都不许插手‘捞’刘；待刑侦结束后他自有办法捞行贿人刘出来。

09年7月28日，刘义贵告诉家属受贿人孟和周已经恢复了自由，还介绍了孟*是5719厂的现任厂长向*的丈夫张*的心腹，2人之间有着20，30年的狼狈交情。

09年9月9日军工厂的在职职工刘某和辩护律师刘明刚向家属介绍孟被保释的秘密是因为当时正值全国创奖评选的关键，任何污秽都不容呈现。‘不是成空来的人，是上面的大人物亲自来的’, ‘是将军!’ 。

09年10月12日，刘义贵介绍，孟和周在厂里头连公职都没开除，都还是干部。刘*的辩护律师苟吉伦非常不解：‘彭州市检察院把受贿人不是移交给军工厂，而是移交给了军事法庭，军事检察院应该有个司法处理结果。’刘义贵：‘（军事检察院）不敢继续审他俩，否则很多人和事都会被牵扯进去…会有人掉脑袋…现任厂长的乌纱帽保不住的…

刘义贵向行贿人妻子承诺,他将通过他昔日栽培提拔起来的老部下杨胜宇（现在彭州市的开发区书记），出面请他的现在的哥们李光辉（主管公检法的政法委的书记）向受他领导的法院院长张志伟施压并承诺好处费。要法院设法把行贿人刘枉法判成监外执行。

09年11月3日，法官张扬告诉刘*的辩护律师刘明刚，成都空军军事检察院负责处理周，孟案子的人正好是张扬的同学，是因为空军装备部的政治处出了一个文，说周和孟是为国家做出特殊贡献的专家，被依法豁免不予立案。在行受贿人的双方口供早就足以判案的前提下，刘明刚律师应张杨法官的要求向法庭写了一份延期庭审的申请。他请求彭州法庭去调取受贿人的军事司法的处理结果，不仅调取5719厂的厂内的行政处理。刘律师告诉刘妻，他打听到，军工厂对受贿人的行政处理，是只针对了与军工厂有直接合同关系的重庆建科院的那20万单位行贿，并没提及刘*以及刘的15万贿额，是于刘的行贿案不相干，没有参考意义的。刘*的个体工商户不是重庆建科院的子公司，双方是的两个独立实体，军事检察院或军事法院对受贿人的司法结论才于行贿人的判案有参考意义。

09年11月16日晚饭时，家属们纷纷都得到第二天将判缓刑的消息，17日上午宣判刘*判二缓三，并当庭释放，凯旋而归。（判决书上的文字游戏诡称彭州市检察院把受贿人移交给了军工厂处理，继而就参考了军工厂那份很失偏颇且不具司法效力的行政处理来驳斥了彭州市检察院的司法公诉，再故意把重庆建科院和刘*的个体户混为一体，从而认定刘*是违反刑法第390条，驳回了检察院的违反刑法第389条的公诉。故枉法判刘*的行贿行为是对单位行贿。检察院不抗诉默认了法院对自己的歪曲和污蔑。）

在空军装备部政治处的干涉下，一桩巨额行贿案被关照成了皆大欢喜的闹剧：包工头行贿15万的罪行被花30多万买成缓刑，军企职工受贿35万（15万+20万）却无罪。怎么对老百姓的法律这么重酷对军人的法律那么轻？

换上军人的马甲就能犯罪而不用领刑！制造假公文的将军是谁？军人或专家真有豁免权？哪条哪款？

公权横行无司法公道！

My latest stories for Jane's Defence Weekly

2011-02-20T00:50:00.000-08:00

Japanese Prime Minister Naoto Kan delivers a speech at a rally marking Northern Territory Day in Tokyo on 7 February. Japan has reiterated its demand to Russia for the return of the four islands, known as the Northern Territories in Japan and the Southern Kuril islands in Russia. (PA)

Japan, Russia stir up a storm over Kuril islands

Kosuke Takahashi
JDW Correspondent
Tokyo

The escalation of a long-running territorial dispute between Japan and Russia is sending relations between the neighbours to their lowest point in decades and may lead to new areas of tension in northeast Asia.

The dispute relates to four islands that Japan calls the Northern Territories and Russia the Southern Kurils. The Soviet Union annexed Kunashiri, Etorofu, Shikotan and the uninhabited Habomai islets after the Second World War, fomenting a dispute that has prevented the two nations from concluding a post-war peace treaty.

Tensions resurfaced in November 2010 when Dmitry Medvedev became the first Russian president to visit the islands with a trip to Kunashiri. Russia's first deputy premier, regional development minister and defence minister followed with trips of their own.

Japan's reaction has been predictably angry, with Prime Minister Naoto Kan describing Medvedev's visit as an "unforgivable outrage" at a 7 February rally in Tokyo. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov described Kan's comments as ''undiplomatic'' and on 8 February demanded Japanese authorities investigate anti-Russian protests in front of the Russian Embassy in Tokyo.

Medvedev on 9 February instructed the defence ministry to strengthen Russia's military presence on the islands, describing them as a part of "a strategic region". The Interfax news agency on 10 February quoted a Russian Defence Ministry source as saying that Russia planned to set up a military airport and deploy helicopter gunships with a transport capability on Etorofu island: the largest island of the four. It also said Moscow will also boost air-defence capabilities on Etorofu and Kunashiri by upgrading the current machine gun and artillery regiments.

The Itar-Tass news agency, meanwhile, reported on 9 February that Russia will deploy French-built Mistral-class amphibious assault vessels, the first of which is due to enter service by late 2013, to Russia's Pacific Fleet headquartered in Vladivostok. The Pacific Fleet is tasked with protecting the Southern Kurils.

The islands' rich mineral and fishing reserves and strategic position make them a valuable prize. The straits between them do not freeze during winter, allowing Russia's Pacific Fleet to access to the Pacific Ocean from the Sea of Okhotsk.

Russian experts in Tokyo say Medvedev is combining the political advantages of playing a nationalistic card ahead of 2012 elections with an awareness that Japan's new defence policy focuses on meeting Chinese territorial ambitions in the East China Sea.

"This territorial dispute was so sensitive for the Japanese people that Russian presidents have avoided visiting these islands," Ukeru Magosaki, a former head of the Japanese Foreign Ministry's international intelligence bureau, told Jane's .

Magosaki also suggested that "since Russia is getting along with NATO ... it may think raising tensions with Japan will not affect its diplomatic relations worldwide. It may think this is just a bilateral issue".

The US has signalled that it is keen for Japan to choose the F-35 for its next-generation fighter. (Lockheed Martin)

Japan, US sign NDA over F-35

Kosuke Takahashi
JDW Correspondent
Tokyo

Key Points
•Japan's foreign minister and the US ambassador have signed a non-disclosure agreement relating to the F-35 II Lightning Joint Strike Fighter

•The announcement comes after US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates told reporters he would recommend the F-35 to his Japanese counterpart

Japan and the US have exchanged notes that require Tokyo to ensure confidentiality of systems, technologies and other information concerning the Lockheed Martin F-35 II Lightning Joint Strike Fighter.

Japanese Foreign Minister Seiji Maehara and US Ambassador to Japan John Roos exchanged documents based on the 1954 US-Japan Mutual Defence Assistance Agreement that specify protecting data related to the F-35 fighter, Japan's Foreign Ministry announced on 18 January.

The Foreign Ministry statement confirmed that the F-35 was "one of the candidates for Japan's main next-generation (FX) fighter". The F-35 is being developed by Lockheed Martin for nine partner nations including Australia, the UK and the US. Other candidates for the FX programme include the Eurofighter Typhoon and Boeing's F-15 and F/A-18E/F Super Hornet platforms.

In remarks made during his Asian trip in January, US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates suggested he would recommend the F-35 to Japan as its main next-generation fighter.

The Japanese Ministry of Defence (MoD) has allotted about JPY600 million (USD7.3 million) for research costs to select the FX fighter in its Fiscal Year 2011 (FY11) budget starting April, with an eye to securing a procurement budget in Fiscal Year 2012 (FY12). The MoD says it plans to select the new fighter by the end of the calendar year.

Japan will buy 12 fighters during the next five years, according to a new mid-term defence programme approved by the Cabinet of Prime Minister Naoto Kan in December.

My latest story for Asia Times: Rocky barriers to Russo-Japanese peace

2011-02-19T22:54:00.000-08:00

Rocky barriers to Russo-Japanese peace

A long-simmering diplomatic feud between Japan and Russia over four Kurils islands has re-awakened, with Japan's Prime Minister Naoto Kan calling Russian visits to one an "unforgivable outrage" and the Kremlin instructing the military to build-up its installations there. While the islands are believed to have significant oil and gas deposits, electoral concerns may be behind the latest flare-up. - Kosuke Takahashi (Feb 14, '11)

Rocky barriers to Russo-Japanese peace

By Kosuke Takahashi

TOKYO - Unnecessary provocations by Japanese Prime Minister Naoto Kan and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev are being blamed for the reawakening of a decades-old island feud between the countries, with both leaders accused of pandering to nationalism ahead of key elections.

Japanese Foreign Minister Seiji Maehara landed in Moscow on Friday to meet his Russian counterpart, Sergei Lavrov, in hopes of defusing tensions over Tokyo's claim to four Russian-occupied islands that are reportedly host to large quantities of gold and rhenium, and whose waters have significant oil and gas deposits.

Japan calls the islands, comprising Etorofu, Kunashiri, Shikotan and the Habomai islets, the Northern Territories. Russia has occupied the islands, which it calls the Southern Kurils, since August 28, 1945, days after Japan accepted the Potsdam Proclamation and surrendered to the Allied Powers in World War II.

The territorial dispute has prevented the two nations from concluding a post-World War II peace treaty. In a 1956 Joint Declaration, both countries ended a state of war and restored ties. They agreed to continue negotiations for a peace treaty and that Russia would hand over Shikotan and the Habomai islets. However, a peace treaty was never signed.

The dispute was reawakened last November when Medvedev visited Kunashiri, the first such trip by a Russian president. Following his visit, Russia sent more senior officials to Kunashiri, including its first deputy premier, regional development minister and defense minister. "There are so many beautiful places in Russia! Here is Kunashir," Medvedev posted on Twitter.

Medvedev insists that his visit to Kunashiri was a purely domestic matter, and Russian experts in Japan say he indeed focused on Russian politics ahead of the state Duma (lower house) elections at the end of this year, to be followed by a presidential election in the spring of 2012.

"This territorial dispute was so sensitive for the Japanese people that Russian presidents had avoided visiting these islands," Ukeru Magosaki, the former chief of the Japanese Foreign Ministry's international intelligence bureau, told Asia Times Online. "Medvedev forsook this traditional practice. With Russians seeking a strong leader, he tried to boost his image among the public ahead of key elections."

"Since Russia is currently enjoying improved relations with North Atlantic Treaty Organization nations in Europe, it may think raising tensions with Japan would not affect its diplomatic relations worldwide," said Magosaki, also a former professor of Public Policy at the National Defense Academy.

Medvedev may have considered two other factors. One is the upcoming 2012 Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit in Vladivostok. Russia may be aiming to boost oil and gas exports to Japan as it hosts the APEC meeting for the first time. Moscow could see a hardline stance on the territorial dispute as boosting its position in economic negotiations.

A second motivating factor for Moscow could be Japan's new defense policy for the next decade, adopted by the government last December. Tokyo plans to reduce Cold War-era equipment and organizations, especially the Japan Ground Self-Defense Force (JGSDF) personnel in Hokkaido prefecture, the northernmost part of Japan facing Russia. Under its new policy, Japan plans to boost security around the Nansei Islands in Okinawa prefecture in the country's south, and in the East China Sea near China and Taiwan, a move that is apparently aimed at countering China's growing naval power.

Medvedev on Wednesday instructed the ministry to build up strength on the disputed Kuril Islands, saying they are part of "a strategic region" and “an inseparable part of [the] Russian Federation". Russia's Interfax news agency on Thursday reported plans to set up a military airport and deploy helicopters on Etorofu, the largest island among the four, quoting a Russian Defense Ministry source.

'Unforgivable outrage'
Russia had in the past made conciliatory gestures to the Japanese government over the islands, suggesting the return of two of the four. But Tokyo has stuck to its traditional demand for the return of all four.

Confounding the situation was a speech Kan made in response to Medvedev's visit, calling it an "unforgivable outrage". Russian officials appear to have taken Kan's remark as a personal attack against Medvedev. On the same day, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov criticized Kan of being "undiplomatic".

On Friday, Lavrov said that the Kremlin wanted Chinese, South Korean and even Japanese investment in the islands, drawing a sharp response from Maehara.

Maehara said investments from "a third country" would "complicate the situation." He said that the islands were "indigenous territories of Japan," and dismissed Russia's call for historians to resolve the dispute.

A few days earlier, Lavrov had demanded that Japanese authorities investigate what he called an insult to the Russian flag by a Japanese rightist group in front of the Russian Embassy in Tokyo.

"People who are engaged in diplomacy should try to improve foreign relations," Magosaki said. "What Prime Minister Kan did was just the opposite."

However, the second day of Maehara's visit saw tensions ease, with the foreign minister saying said he agreed with Sergei Naryshkin, chief of staff of the Russian Presidential Executive Office, that their countries need to boost mutual confidence and bolster bilateral ties.

Maehara told reporters after meeting with Naryshkin that they reaffirmed the two countries' intention to work towards signing a post-World War II peace treaty.

Kosuke Takahashi is a Tokyo-based journalist. Besides Asia Times Online, he also works for Jane's Defence Weekly as Tokyo correspondent.

(Copyright 2011 Asia Times Online (Holdings) Ltd. All rights reserved. Please contact us about sales, syndication and republishing.)

(JoongAng Ilbo) Missiles matter a lot

2011-01-20T21:01:00.000-08:00

The US forbids South Korea from possessing not only mid-range missiles, but also spent fuel reprocessing facilities. South Korea is an independent country. The US should listen humbly and earnestly to the voice of the South Korean people. Cheers, Kosuke

Missiles matter a lot (in English)

【社説】時代錯誤的な「韓米ミサイル指針」　必ず改めるべき (in Japanese)

January 20, 2011

When it comes to missiles, South Korea is an elementary student while its northern counterpart is a student getting his doctoral degree. This sad reality is the result of an anachronistic clause in the 2001 missile guidelines, which prohibits South Korea from developing or possessing a military-purpose ballistic missile with a range of 300 kilometers or more or with a warhead weighing more than 500 kilograms.

However, North Korea is developing intercontinental ballistic missiles that can reach the U.S. mainland. When the security environment changes, missile guidelines should change too. Fortunately, South Korea is reportedly negotiating with the United States to raise the ceiling. We call on our government to abolish or sharply ease the restriction.

North Korea has already developed and deployed more than 700 Scud Bs and Cs, short-range missiles with a range of 300 to 500 kilometers. It has also completed the deployment of Rodong missiles with a range of 1,300 kilometers and Musudan missiles that have an intermediate range of 3,000 to 4,000 kilometers. The North even test-launched its long-range missile Taepodong-I in 1998 and the far-advanced Taepodong-2 in 2006 and 2009.

U.S. Defense Secretary Roberts Gates recently said that the U.S. government expects North Korea will develop ICBMs capable of hitting the U.S. west coast within five years. Our missile technology, however, still lags far behind North Korea’s since our Hyunmoo-I and II missiles can hit targets only 180 to 300 kilometers away. ATACMS missiles, imported from the U.S., have a range of a mere 165 to 300 kilometers. Though we have developed Hyunmoo III, a cruise missile with a range of 1,500 kilometers, it is still dwarfed by ballistic missiles in terms of fire power and speed, making it susceptible to interceptor missiles.

South Korea will take back wartime operational control of forces on the peninsula soon. Considering our current missile capability, however, it will be difficult to handle that control properly. Therefore, our military should extend the range of our missiles while increasing the weight of the warheads they carry. It was China and North Korea that raised deep concerns about the security of Northeast Asia with their military buildups. If we want the capability to target all of North Korea, our missiles’ range should be more than 1,000 kilometers, and the weight of the warheads should exceed 1,000 kilograms. We urge the government to do its best in the negotiations with the U.S.

Remarks by Secretary Gates at Keio University, Tokyo, Japan

2011-01-17T06:27:00.000-08:00

This was a very interesting speech. Pls see the parts below, which I highlighted. Kosuke

Remarks by Secretary Gates at Keio University, Tokyo, Japan

MODERATOR: Good morning ladies and gentlemen. My name is Masayuki Tadokoro, professor of international relations teaching at this university. Today I have the honor of moderating this session.

It is indeed a great pleasure and honor and a privilege to welcome Secretary of Defense Robert Gates to this campus this morning. It is very well known that the job of secretary of defense of the United States of America is a very heavy responsibility and very demanding job. According to the website of DOD, which I consulted with yesterday, over the last four years, Secretary Gates has flown nearly 600,000 miles, visited 104 countries, spent 244 days for travel and spent 1,373 hours in the air.

These figures clearly demonstrate how extremely difficult for him to find a time slot for addressing students here and how extremely lucky we are to see him taking trouble to address our students. Therefore, I do not want to waste time by making a lengthy introduction of him.

I just want to say a few words. He is a native of Kansas and he earned first degree in the College William and Mary and master degree from Indiana University in history and Ph.D. in Soviet studies from Georgetown University. He joined the Central Intelligence Agency in 1966 where he spent nearly 27 years in the intelligence profession. He finally rose to the director of the agency in 1991. He became secretary of defense in 2006 -- yes, 2006. That is under the previous administration. He was appointed by President George Bush and was asked to remain in his office even by the newly elected president, current President Obama, which I understand is rather unusual in American history.

Now, I think the -- I just want to say a few words about the organization of this session. After we listen to the secretary's -- Secretary Gates' address for I expect 15, 20 minutes, we are hoping that we will have still some time left for a few questions and answers. I encourage the students to ask questions. Questions can be asked either in Japanese or in English as there is very effective-efficient simultaneous translations are being provided. However, I ask questions to be concise, to the point and related to security issues.

Now, without -- and also, he has to leave at 9:40 at the latest, therefore we have to be very precise in time. Now, without further ado, may I invite Secretary Gates to the podium?

Ladies and gentlemen, please welcome Secretary Gates. (Applause.)

SEC. GATES: Thank you for that kind introduction and thank you to Keio University for all the work you have put into hosting this event– in particular Professor Seike and Professor Kokubun.

As a former university president, I always look forward to visiting the academy and hearing from students. One large similarity between my current responsibilities as U.S. defense secretary and my previous job as president of Texas A&M University is that in both instances I have been responsible for the well-being of large numbers of college-aged men and women. It is a responsibility I have taken very seriously and continue to take serious today, especially with so much at stake for our young men and women in uniform and for our country.

This is my third visit to Japan as secretary of defense and my fourth trip to Asia over the past eight months. It is a privilege to be the latest in a series of U.S. senior leaders who have visited Japan over the past 12 months, including President Obama, Secretary of State Clinton, Treasury Secretary Geithner, Commerce Secretary Locke, and Energy Secretary Chu.

This past year, we marked the 50th anniversary of the Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security between the United States and Japan, as well as the 150th anniversary of the first Japanese diplomatic mission to the United States. Notably, one of the younger members of that first Japanese delegation was Fukuzawa Yukichi, the founder of this university. As you know, Fukuzawa drew on his experience and subsequent visits to the United States to become Japan's preeminent expert on the institutions and values of American democracy, and to shape this great institution of learning.

Writing more than a century ago, Fukuzawa saw extraordinary promise in the future bilateral relationship between Japan and the United States. This promise was tragically interrupted by war, but fulfilled 50 years ago when our two nations forged a partnership that has fostered stability, prosperity, and growing political freedom in Asia for most of the last half century.

Ours is an alliance based not just on economic and military necessity, but on shared values with respect to how governments should treat their own people and deal with other nations in the conduct of international affairs; a belief in democratic ideals and the pursuit of peace and prosperity through international norms and organizations, rather than through militarism and coercion.

I think it is important to remember those basic truths, indeed the wide, deep and rich array of values and interests that bind our two countries together, especially since news headlines about our alliance are often dominated by difficult issues such as host nation support, the Futenma relocation, and funding for Guam.

So what I'd like to do this morning, before taking your questions, is to provide some strategic context to the U.S.-Japan defense partnership.

First, I want to discuss the complex array of regional security challenges we face together, and the benefits of addressing those challenges between and among nations of shared interests. And second, I want to explain the ways the U.S.-Japan defense relationship -- partnership must adapt to meet those challenges, to include modernizing the alliance's military capabilities and basing arrangements.

Over the course of its history, the U.S.-Japan alliance has succeeded at its original core purpose: to deter military aggression and provide an umbrella of security under which Japan -- and the region -- can prosper. Today, our alliance is growing deeper and broader as we address a range of security challenges in Asia. Some, like North Korea, piracy or natural disasters, have been around for decades, centuries, or since the beginning of time. Others, such as global terrorist networks, cyberattacks, and nuclear proliferation are of more recent vintage. What these issues have in common is that they all require multiple nations working together, and they also almost always require leadership and involvement by key regional players such as the U.S. and Japan.

In turn, we express our shared values by increasing our alliance's capacity to provide humanitarian aid and disaster relief, take part in peacekeeping operations, protect the global commons, and promote cooperation and build trust through strengthening regional institutions.

Everyone gathered here knows the crippling devastation that can be caused by natural disasters, and the U.S. and Japan, along with our partners in the region, recognize that responding to these crises is a security imperative. In recent years, U.S. and Japanese forces delivered aid to remote earthquake-stricken regions in Indonesia, and U.S. aircraft based in Japan helped deliver assistance to typhoon victims in Burma. We worked together in response to the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami, earthquakes in Java, Sumatra, and Haiti, and most recently following the floods in Pakistan. These efforts have demonstrated the forward deployment of U.S. forces on Japan is of real and life-saving value. They also provide new opportunities for the U.S. and Japanese forces to operate together by conducting joint exercises and missions.

Furthermore, U.S. and Japanese troops have also been working on the global stage to confront the threat of failed or failing states. Japanese peacekeepers have operated around the world, including the Golan Heights and East Timor and assisted with reconstruction in Iraq. In Afghanistan, Japan represents the second largest financial donor, making substantive contributions to the international effort by funding salaries of the Afghan National Police and helping the Afghan government integrate former insurgents.

Furthermore, Japan and the United States also continue to cooperate closely to ensure the maritime commons are safe and secure for commercial traffic. Our maritime forces work hand-in-glove in the Western Pacific as well as in other vital sea passages such as the Strait of Malacca between Malaysia and Indonesia, where more than a third of the world's oil and trade shipments pass through every year. Around the Horn of Africa, Japan has deployed surface ships and patrol aircraft that operate alongside those from all over the world, drawn by the common goal to counter piracy in vital sea lanes.

Participating in these activities thrusts Japan's military into a relatively new and at times sensitive role as an exporter of security. This is a far cry from the situation of even two decades ago when, as I remember well as a senior national security official, Japan was criticized for so-called checkbook diplomacy -- sending money but not troops -- to help the anti-Saddam coalition during the First Gulf War.

By showing more willingness to send self-defense forces abroad under international auspices -- consistent with your constitution -- Japan is taking its rightful place alongside the world's other great democracies. That is part of the rationale for Japan's becoming a permanent member of a reformed United Nations Security Council.

And since these challenges cannot be tackled through bilateral action alone, we must use the strong U.S.-Japanese partnership as a platform to do more to strengthen multilateral institutions -- regional arrangements that must be inclusive, transparent, and focused on results.

Just a few months ago, I attended the historic first meeting of the ASEAN Plus Eight Defense Ministers Meeting in Hanoi, and I'm encouraged by Japan's decision to co-chair the Military Medicine Working Group. And as a proud Pacific nation, the United States will take over the chairmanship of the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation Forum this year, following Japan's successful tenure.

Working through regional and international forums puts our alliance in the best position to confront some of Asia's toughest security challenges. As we've been reminded once again in recent weeks, none has proved to be more vexing and enduring than North Korea.

Despite the hopes and best efforts of the South Korean government, the U.S. and our allies and the international community, the character and priorities of the North Korean regime sadly have not changed. North Korea's ability to launch another conventional ground invasion is much degraded from even a decade ago, but in other respects it has grown more lethal and more destabilizing.

Today, it is North Korea's pursuit of nuclear weapons and the proliferation of nuclear know-how and ballistic missile equipment that have focused our attention, developments that threaten not just the peninsula, but the Pacific Rim and international stability as well.

In response to a series of provocations -- the most recent being the sinking of the Cheonan and North Korea's lethal shelling of a South Korean island -- Japan has stood shoulder to shoulder with the Republic of Korea and the United States. Our three countries continue to deepen our ties through the Defense Trilateral Talks, the kind of multilateral engagement among America's long-standing allies that the U.S. would like to see strengthened and expanded over time.

When and if North Korea's behavior gives us any reasons to believe that negotiations can be conducted productively and in good faith, we will work with Japan, South Korea, Russia, and China to resume engagement dialogue with North Korea through the six party talks.

The first step in the process should be North-South engagement. But to be clear, the North must also take concrete steps to honor its international obligations and comply with U.N. Security Council Resolutions.

Any progress towards defusing the crisis on the Korean Peninsula must include the active support of the People's Republic of China, where, as you probably know, I just finished an official visit. China has been another important player whose economic growth has fueled prosperity in this part of the world, but questions about its intentions and opaque military modernization program have been a source of concern to its neighbors.

Questions about China's growing role in the region manifest themselves in territorial disputes, most recently in the incident in September near the Senkaku Islands, an incident that served as a reminder of the importance of America's and Japan's treaty obligations to one another. The U.S. position on maritime security remains clear: we have a national interest in freedom of navigation, in unimpeded economic development and commerce, and in respect for international law. We also believe that customary international law, as reflected in the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea, provides clear guidance on the appropriate use of the maritime domain, and rights of access to it.

Nonetheless, I disagree with those who portray China as an inevitable strategic adversary of the United States. We welcome a China that plays a constructive role on the world stage. In fact, the goal of my visit was to improve our military-to-military relationship and outline areas of common interest. It is precisely because we have questions about China's military -- just as they might have similar questions about the United States -- that I believe a healthy dialogue is needed.

Last fall, President Obama and President Hu Jin Tao made a commitment to advance sustained and reliable defense ties, not a relationship repeatedly interrupted and subject to the vagaries of political weather.

On a personal note, one of the things I learned from my experience dealing with the Soviet Union during my earlier time in government was the importance of maintaining a strategic dialogue and open lines of communication. Even if specific agreements did not result -- on nuclear weapons or anything else -- this dialogue helped us understand each other better and lessen the odds of misunderstandings and miscalculation. The Cold War is mercifully long over and the circumstances with China today are vastly different -- but the importance of maintaining dialogue is as important today.

For the last few minutes I've discussed some of the most pressing security challenges along with the most fruitful areas of regional cooperation facing the U.S. and Japan in Asia. This environment, in terms of threats and opportunities, is markedly different than the conditions that led to the forging of the U.S-Japanese defense partnership in the context of a rivalry between two global superpowers.

But on account of the scope, complexity and lethality of these challenges, I would argue that our alliance is more necessary, more relevant, and more important than ever. And maintaining the vitality and credibility of the alliance requires modernizing our force posture and other defense arrangements to better reflect the threats and military requirements of this century.

For example, North Korea's ballistic missiles, along with the proliferation of these weapons to other countries, require a more effective alliance missile defense capability. The U.S.-Japan partnership in missile defense is already one of the most advanced of its kind in the world. It was American and Japanese AEGIS ships that together monitored the North Korean missile launches of 2006 and 2008.

This partnership, which relies on mutual support, cutting-edge technology, and information sharing in many ways reflect our alliance at its best. The U.S. and Japan have nearly completed the joint development of a new advanced interceptor, a system that represents a qualitative improvement in our ability to thwart any North Korean missile attack. The co-location of our air and missile-defense commands at Yokota and the associated opportunities for information sharing, joint training, and coordination in this area provides enormous value to both countries.

As I alluded to earlier, advances by the Chinese military in cyber and anti-satellite warfare pose a potential challenge to the ability of our forces to operate and communicate in this part of the Pacific. Cyberattacks can also come from any direction and from a variety of sources -- state, non-state, or a combination thereof -- in ways that could inflict enormous damage to advanced, networked militaries and societies. Fortunately, the U.S. and Japan maintain a qualitative edge in satellite and computer technology, an advantage we are putting to good use in developing ways to counter threats to the cyber and space domains.

Just last month, the government of Japan took another step forward in the evolution of the alliance by releasing its "National Defense Program Guidelines" -- a document that lays out a vision for Japan's defense posture. These guidelines envision a more mobile and deployable force structure; enhanced intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance capabilities; and a shift in focus to Japan's southwest islands.

These new guidelines provide an opportunity for even deeper cooperation between our two countries and the emphasis on your southwestern islands underscores the importance of our alliance force posture.

And this is a key point. Because even as the alliance continues to evolve in strategy, posture and military capabilities to deal with this century's security challenges, a critical component will remain the forward presence of U.S. military forces in Japan. Without such a presence North Korea's military provocations could be even more outrageous or worse. China might behave more assertively towards its neighbors. It would take longer to evacuate civilians affected by conflict or natural disasters in the region. It would be more difficult and costly to conduct robust joint exercises, such as the recent Keen Sword exercise, that hone the U.S. and Japanese militaries' ability to operate and, if necessary, fight together. And without the forward presence of U.S. forces in Japan, there would be less information sharing and coordination and we would know less about regional threats and the military capabilities of our potential adversaries.

Given its importance to our alliance, we are pleased to have come to an agreement on host nation support, Japan's contribution to the financial cost of our shared defense efforts. This support is a tangible sign of Japan's commitment to our security relationship and it enables the U.S. to continue deploying our most advanced military capabilities in your defense. We are committed in return to using these funds efficiently, effectively, and transparently. As part of our Green Alliance agenda, we will together explore ways to make the U.S. military presence more environmentally friendly.

The Realignment Roadmap issued five years ago was designed to modernize our presence by updating U.S. basing arrangements the most significant being the relocation of the Air Station Futenma. Communities that host our bases make critical contributions to Japan's security and peace in the region, but we are constantly seeking ways to reduce the impact the U.S. military activity imposes on the local populations.

The Futenma relocation plan will return land and facilities to the Okinawan people, move thousands of U.S. troops and their dependents out of the most densely populated southern part of the island, and move the air station to the less populated north. As a result, after the relocation is completed, the average citizen of Okinawa will see and hear far fewer U.S. troops and aircraft than they do today.

Finally, as our alliance grows and deepens further still, it will be important for Japan to take on even greater regional and global leadership roles that reflects its political, economic and military capacity. In the United States we are engaged in a robust debate about the size, composition and cost of our military. Even as President Obama has committed the U.S. to a strategy of engagement and cooperation with special emphasis on Asia, we will continue to maintain the military strength necessary to protect our interests, defend our allies, and deter potential adversaries from acts of aggression and intimidation. To do this we need a committed and capable security partner in Japan.

I would close by noting that the world has changed to a truly remarkable extent since our partnership was first forged. Just as no one in 1960 could have predicted the need for cyber-security or the challenges of a truly global economic order, we can't know with certainty what next threats and opportunities our nations will face.

Shortly after it was signed at the White House, President Dwight Eisenhower hailed the Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security as the fulfillment of a goal to establish an indestructible partnership between our two countries. I would say that over the last 50 years we have been faithful to that vision. And whatever the next 50 years hold, I'm certain that our alliance will remain an indestructible force for stability, a pathway for promoting our shared values, and a foundation upon which to build an ever-more interconnected and peaceful international order.

Thank you. (Applause.)

MODERATOR: Thank you very much. Thank you very much, Secretary Gates. Now we still do have about 20 minutes and with your permission, I think I'm going to take a few questions from the floor.

Those of you who want to ask questions please raise your hands and go to the microphone.

Okay. So the lady over there first and then there, there, second, and then there, third. And fourth is over there. And I close by fifths and if by some luck you may have another round. All right. So please come to the microphone immediately and line up there. And without wasting time, you can go ahead. Please identify yourself before you ask questions please.

Q: Thank you very much for today's speech. I'm a third grade student in Keio University in the Lawyer Faculty. Sorry. Which case would be more threatening to U.S. policy: first, Japanese remobilization without U.S. alliance or, two, Chinese further development in major technology?

SEC. GATES: Well, I think that, first of all, we will see China further developing technology, both for economic purposes, but also for military purposes. We've just seen earlier this week a demonstration of advances in Chinese technology in the test flight of their J-20 stealth aircraft. So I think this is inevitable and the truth is most countries will continue to advance in their technology as well, including the United States.

I think that the experience of the past 50 years has demonstrated the value of the partnership between the United States and Japan and were -- just among other things, were Japan to decide to go at it alone, believe me, the costs of its defense would rise dramatically. Because of our alliance, Japan has been secure against foreign threats for over half a century at a cost of less than 1 percent of its GDP. I would say in economic terms this alliance has been a very good deal for Japan.

And I think that there are also larger strategic issues that make clear that our partnership makes the two of us far stronger together than either of us would be operating independently. So I think that for a variety of both strategic and economic reasons this alliance makes a lot of sense.

MODERATOR: Thank you very much. The second question. Do you speak in English or in Japanese? English? Okay.

Q: Mr. Gates, thank you very much for today's lecture. I have three questions which I would like Mr. Gates to answer. You have mentioned that it is wrong for America to take hostile attitude towards China. My first question is in what concrete aspects would it be possible to reach cordial agreements with the Chinese authority?

My second question is in what points would it be impossible for the United States to compromise, since the United States and China are quite different to each other in terms of political system, sense of values and governance? It has been pointed out that harmonization is very much limited.

My final question is, would harmonization be really practical?

SEC. GATES: I'm sorry. What was the third question?

Q: First? Second?

SEC. GATES: Third.
Q: Third. Since the United States and China are quite different to each other in terms of political systems, sense of values and governance, it has been pointed out that harmonization is very much limited. My question is, would harmonization be really practical?

SEC. GATES: Well, first of all, I think there already have been a number of agreements between the United States and China over the years going back to the time of normalization. We have cooperated in certain security arenas, particularly when the Soviet Union was still in existence. Clearly we have a very close and huge economic relationship. There are an extraordinary number of Chinese students studying in the United States and there are very close ties between many United States universities and their counterparts in China.

So I think there's a wide range -- a wide array of relationships between the United States and China that underpin the relationship between the two countries and provide opportunities for us to get to know each other better and also to cooperate in a number of areas.

When I was in China, we looked at areas where we could work together, where even our militaries could work together and agreed that we would pursue joint efforts in humanitarian assistance and disaster relief, in counterterrorism, in counter-piracy and in dealing with some of these other challenges that these nations all face in common.

And while we don't have a formal agreement, I think it is apparent, as I said yesterday, that the United States and China, along with Japan and South Korea and Russia, very much have in common the need for stability and peace on the Korean Peninsula and have worked together to bring about that goal and will continue to do so.

Areas where it's impossible to compromise, I would say one area that has been a fundamental principle for the United States of America virtually since its founding is the freedom of navigation, the freedom of the global commons for commerce and trade and for shipping. And we feel very strongly about this. This is a common principle that is enshrined in the U.N. Law of the Sea Treaty. And it is an area where I think there is very broad agreement among nations. So I would give that as an example where it would be very difficult for us to compromise.

I think there are always opportunities for nations that have different economic and political systems to cooperate and to work together. I think that we saw a lot of areas of cooperation, particularly in the 1980s and the 1990s, even between the United States and the Soviet Union in trying to deal with common problems and in trying to reduce the level of nuclear weapons and get better control of regional conflicts.

So I think that there is -- the fact that two countries have different political -- and particularly different political systems is no obstacle to a harmonious relationship. And I think what we all work for is to ensure that those kinds of relationships are strengthened and expanded to the extent we possibly can.

MODERATOR: All right. Next time, but don't ask three questions, just one, right?

Q: Okay.

MODERATOR: Go ahead.

Q: Thank you for today's opportunity. My name is Katsuya Nagano from the Faculty of Law. Since you mentioned about outlining common interests and sustaining and constructing the relationship with China, I would like to ask you how you are looking at the current situation of China's civilian control over its army. And I ask this question because if truly the civilian leaders, including President Hu, had no prior intel on the test flights of the stealth fighters, then doesn't that represent the opaqueness and the prominence of China's military, even within its own country, as it is to the world? Would you remind sharing your perspective?

SEC. GATES: This is an area where over the last several years we have seen some signs of -- I guess I would call it a disconnect between the military and the civilian leadership. We think that the civilian leadership was not aware of the aggressive approach by Chinese ships to the U.S.'s Navy ship Impeccable two or three years ago. We think that -- our information is that the civilian leadership may not have known about the anti-satellite test that was conducted about three years ago. And as I indicated yesterday, there were pretty clear indications that they were unaware of the flight test of the F-35 -- of the J-20, rather.

I think that part of this, based on my experience, very long experience in government, is -- can be explained by bureaucratic mistakes. There have been more than a few occasions when the United States military was conducting an exercise or carrying out an activity, and not sensitive to the fact that a foreign visitor might be in Washington at the same time. But on the whole, I do think that this is something that is a worry.

And one of the reasons why I have pressed so hard for there to be a deeper, senior-level civilian-military dialogue with both civilian and military representatives from both sides, from both countries is that we have no forum right now on security issues or military issues that includes senior civilians and military. And I think that, one of the questions I was asked by the Chinese is, how do you differentiate this from all of the other mechanisms for dialogue in the military-to-military arena? And my argument back was this would be -- this is -- this would be the only one where senior civilians and military are sitting together. And I think that has great benefit.

And I think that -- you know, I don't -- I don't question the party's control of the PLA military or of the PLA. I have no doubts about the fact that President Hu Jintao is in command and in charge. But I just know from our own system at times there are disconnects between military information flowing to our civilian leaders. Frankly, this has been one of the benefits over the decades for the United States of the National Security Council and the National Security Council staff, where the civilian and military sides of the government are brought together routinely and where information about military operations is shared in detail not just with the White House, but also with the State Department. So we are tied closely together.

So I think there are opportunities in this dialogue to advance that kind of civilian-military cooperation. And I think it would also enhance military-to-military relationships.

MODERATOR: Thank you very much. The next one?

Q: My name is Mitsuhiro Watanabe from Faculty of Policy Management. My question is, considering the Japan's new defense strategy that was published last year, I want to know, what is the role of Japan? And what do you exactly expect from Japanese government about the Air Sea Battle Concept? Thank you.

SEC. GATES: Well, first of all, we are fully cognizant of the terms of Japan's constitution, and that that imposes limits in terms of what the self-defense forces can do. By the same token, as I mentioned in my remarks, one of the things that we have applauded has been the growing willingness of the Japanese government to employ its military capabilities under international auspices for peacekeeping and counterpiracy and dealing with some of these other issues. These are the kinds of responsibilities great powers must assume.

I think that our close working relationship, the exercises we do together clearly are in the framework of the defense of Japan and allowing us to be able to fulfill our obligations under the mutual security treaty. Clearly, over the years we have discussed on many occasions with the Japanese whether the limits of the constitution extend, for example, to if U.S. and Japanese forces are exercising or operating together, and the U.S. forces are attacked, do the -- do the Japanese forces come to their assistance? And frankly, we're still working through some of these issues.

But I think this is the value of the dialogue we have. Our relationship with the Japanese self-defense forces has gotten better and better every single year, and frankly has, I think, improved fairly dramatically in recent years. And we'll continue working together. So our expectations of Japan is, first of all, that they will do what is necessary in terms of their own interests to defend Japan. But we also welcome their broader interpretation of Japan's international responsibilities as well.

MODERATOR: Thank you. I am afraid that this is going to be the final question, as time runs out, so I am sorry for the rest of you, but you are the last.

Okay.

Q: Thank you. Thank you for the opportunity. I want to ask you about the gap between the Chinese military, PLA, and political leaders. And there's arguments about -- I mean, the --America's -- United States' foreign strategy caused that gap. And some people believe that America is one of main causes of the -- creating the gap. I would like to ask how you think about this.

SEC. GATES: Well, I wish we had that much influence. (Laughter.) The -- I think the United States has -- to the degree that there is some kind of a gap, I can assure you that we have had no role in creating it, and see it in our interest to close it. But this is a matter -- this is an internal matter for the Chinese. And as I indicated earlier, although on some specific operational issues, there -- we think there have been some communication gaps, in the larger sense of who controls the Chinese military and who has the ultimate authority, there is no doubt in my mind that it is President Hu Jintao and the civilian leadership of that government.

So -- but I think that the dialogue that I'm talking about and that I proposed to the Chinese has the potential to reduce the chances of miscommunications, as well as deal with some of the larger issues that we've been talking about, whether it's freedom of navigation or technological developments and capabilities. But I just want to underscore I believe we've seen instances where specific events took place where the Chinese civilian leadership may not have known about them in advance. But in terms of overall control of the Chinese military forces, I have no doubt whatsoever that President Hu and the civilian leadership are fully in command.

Thank you very much.

MODERATOR: Thank you very much indeed.

(Transcript) Joint Press Conference with Secretary Gates and Minister Kitazawa from Tokyo, Japan

2011-01-17T05:45:00.000-08:00

Presenter: Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates and Japanese Minister of Defense Tosihimi Kitazawa January 13, 2011
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Joint Press Conference with Secretary Gates and Minister Kitazawa from Tokyo, Japan
(Note: Minister Kitazawa’s remarks are provided through an interpreter.)

MODERATOR: We shall now start the joint press conference. Minister Kitazawa and Secretary Gates will make their respective opening statements. First Minister Kitazawa will make a statement.

Minister, please.

MIN. KITAZAWA: Good day to all of you. Thank you for coming. Today I had the pleasure of welcoming Secretary Gates to the Defense Ministry and we just had the Japan-U.S. defense ministers’ meeting. This is the first time that I meet with Secretary Gates since at the ADMM [ASEAN Defense Ministers' Meeting] -plus meeting in Hanoi last October. And this is the fifth meeting that I’ve had with Secretary Gates.

And it is extremely meaningful that we are able to have such frequent meetings in view of the difficult regional situation as well as security challenges that we face in this region. And so I heartily welcome Secretary Gates to Japan. Having said that, cabinet shuffle it’s reported is pretty soon with regard to Japanese political situation, so I don’t know if I will meet Secretary Gates in the days ahead.

Now, with regard to the defense ministers’ meeting today, we had a very frank exchange of views on the following topics: first with regard to the response to the regional situation, I explained to Secretary Gates my meeting with the ROK [Republic of Korea] defense minister on the 10th of January and we confirmed the importance of Japan-U.S.-ROK cooperation. Secretary Gates explained to me the results of his visit to China until yesterday and exchanged views.

On the deepening of Japan-U.S. alliance we agreed that we shall accelerate consultations between Japan and the United States on the deepening of Japan-U.S. alliance in the security area and so that we’ll be able to advance a vision for the Japan-U.S. alliance in the 21st century at the time the prime minister visits the United States.

On the Futenma relocation issue, we confirmed that we shall implement the Japan-U.S. agreement of May last year. With regard to the relocation of aviation training, we also confirmed that we will engage in – or we confirmed the currently ongoing work in order to add Guam – for relocation after expanding the training and agreed to step up the efforts to finalize. And also explained the Japanese government efforts with regard to gaining understanding of Okinawa and asked for Secretary Gates’ cooperation to reduce impact and also discussed HNS [host nation support] ballistic missile as well.

And let me conclude by saying that Japan will build on the results of the exchange of views in order to further strengthen Japan-U.S. alliance.

GEOFF MORRELL [Pentagon Press Secretary]: Mr. Secretary?

SEC. GATES: I’d like to thank Minister Kitazawa and the people of Japan for, as usual, their warm hospitality. This is my fourth visit to Tokyo since becoming U.S. defense secretary and the latest of many trips I’ve taken to Japan in both a public and private capacity since my first visit here more than 30 years ago. Each time it is a pleasure to be with old allies and meet new friends.

This morning I had a very productive series of meetings with Prime Minister Kan, Foreign Minister Maehara and Minister Kitazawa. We had a full agenda and much to discuss including the appropriate response to North Korea’s continued belligerence and nuclear weapons program, the challenges associated with China’s growing military strength, our collaboration on ballistic missile defense where the U.S. and Japan are jointly developing a new advanced interceptor, opportunities to cooperate in areas such as counter-piracy, peacekeeping, disaster response, humanitarian assistance and other important multinational efforts, to include Afghanistan, where Japan is making a substantial financial contribution.

Also, the recently issued Japanese “Defense Program Guidelines,” a forward-thinking document that reaffirms the importance of our alliance, including the U.S. military presence to Japan’s defense.

And finally, the alliance force posture generally, to include our efforts to implement a realignment roadmap.

On the last note, we helped move forward with the relocation of U.S. forces in Okinawa in ways that are more appropriate to our strategic posture while reducing the impact on the communities nearby. In the past year, I’m also pleased, we’ve come to an agreement on host-nation support that will enable the United States to continue deploying our most advanced capabilities in Japan’s defense.

In the months ahead we look forward to Prime Minister Kan’s visit to Washington, when our heads of government will unveil a new alliance vision statement. It has been about five years since the last vision statement and the world and circumstances in Northeast Asia have evolved a good deal since then, so it is appropriate to update our alliance at this time.

As I will state in my speech at Keio University tomorrow, while issues associated with Okinawa and Futenma have tended to dominate the headlines this past year, the U.S.-Japan defense alliance is broader, deeper and indeed richer than any single issue. In this, the 51st year of the U.S.-Japan alliance, it is important to remember that ours is an enduring and equal partnership based on interests and values that unite our two peoples.

Thank you.

MODERATOR: I’d like to move on to questions from the floor. And please move to the close microphone in front. First, questions from the Japanese press.

Q: Representing the MOD press club, I’d like to ask a question for both Minister Kitazawa and Secretary Gates. Minister Kitazawa, you visited the ROK recently, and Secretary Gates, you visited China. And right after your visits, you had this meeting.

And I wonder what sort of exchange of views you had with regard the Chinese military – (inaudible) – on North Korea situation or the recent East Asian situation. You have talked about strengthening the Japan-U.S. alliance and also strengthening Japan-U.S.-ROK cooperation. In view of the current situation in the region, what sort of issues do you see in the situation and what’s the response that you’ve discussed?

MIN. KITAZAWA: Let me respond to that question. As you pointed out, I think it’s the perfect timing. I just visit ROK. Secretary Gates just visited China. And then we had this meeting – bilateral meeting here in Tokyo.

And I first explained the interlocution I had with the Korean counterpart and that there was this wanton act on the part of DPRK [Democratic People's Republic of Korea], two incidents last year and I engaged in full exchange of views with the ROK and confirmed that we fully support ROK’s position on this.
For the stability of the Korean Peninsula, Japan, South Korea and Japan-U.S. and South Korea defense cooperation needs to be strapped up. This would be very important and that’s a point we agreed.

With regard to China, we had an explanation from Secretary Gates in a very frank and candid manner, a very easy to understand manner. And with regard to China, we agree that we need to encourage – the entire international community needs to encourage China to behave in a cooperative manner with the international community as a responsible power.

With regard to the remarks I made the day before yesterday, with regard to the amendment of the law regarding the situations around Japan, it is not that we are engaged in concrete discussions of concrete content, but as minister responsible for the defense of a nation, we need to raise the interest in matters of this sort. And as the one responsible for Japan’s defense, responsible for security, that is a point that is indispensable. That is what I stated in my lecture the day before yesterday.

As defense minister in charge of defense of Japan, I explained my recognition. I hope that you’ll understand it that way.

SEC. GATES: Let me just say a word in addition. Minister Kitazawa has just come back from Korea. I will go there tomorrow. If there is a common theme in my visits, it is the common interest of the United States, Japan, the Republic of Korea and China for there to be stability and peace on the Korean Peninsula. This requires that the North cease its belligerent behavior and its provocations that have killed innocent victims, both military and civilian, in Korea.

We are supportive of negotiations and engagement between the North and South, but there must be concrete evidence on the part of the North that they are finally serious about these negotiations. But all four of these countries have a common interest in a peaceful outcome and stability on the Peninsula in each place we have talked about how to pursue that.

With respect to China, I talked to the minister as well as the prime minister and foreign minister about the constructive talks that I had in China and that I believe there is the opportunity for further cooperation between the Chinese and U.S. militaries going forward in the context of a much larger positive relationship between the United States and China.

At the same time, I explained that the United States will sustain its military presence in Northeast Asia and look to enhance it in Southeast Asia and will firmly defend the principle of freedom of navigation.

MR. MORRELL: A question from our traveling press now. Dan Deluce of Agence France-Presse.

Q: Defense Minister Kitazawa, your country has moved towards more military cooperation with the United States and South Korea. But given the Japanese constitution, what can your government really do in the event of a North Korean attack?

And Defense Secretary Gates, you have described a sea change in public attitudes in South Korea due to North Korean provocations. In the event of another incident, is the United States opposed to South Korea responding with air power or other escalatory steps?

MIN. KITAZAWA: Let me lead off. We have in Japan Article Nine of the constitution and we have to only maintain exclusively defensive forces. So we really have built up only our defense capabilities, as I’m sure you’ll understand.

Having said that, there are also forces in our neighborhood who might resort to any action. And the Japan-U.S. alliance, the Japan Security Treaty has had a history of more than half a century. This, I believe, is extremely important for the defense of Japan in view of the situation around Japan. And so this landmark here I think it is urgently necessary to further advance our security relationship.

Now, between Japan and ROK we have not really reached a level of military cooperation the day before yesterday. It is not that we agreed on that sort of thing. As we advance international cooperation, what we discussed is that it is very important to have an ACSA [Acquisition and Cross-Servicing Agreement] or a cross-servicing agreement and therefore following Japan-U.S. and Japan-Australia ACSA, I suggested that we also have an ACSA with ROK, a friendly country for Japan. And we came to the understanding on the part of ROK on this point.

SEC. GATES: With respect to the question that you asked me, it’s a longstanding principle that every country has the right to protect itself and defend itself against an unprovoked attack. I think the key on the Korean Peninsula, as I discussed in China and discussed here in Japan, is to prevent another provocation from happening. We have seen this cycle over and over again and I think the objective that we all have in common is how do we prevent another provocation from taking place? How do we move the process forward on the peninsula in a way that shows that the North Koreans are serious about engagement, serious about negotiation, and that this is not just a repeat of what we have seen so often in a past after a provocation of trying to reset the clock, if you will, back to where it was before?

So I think we need, as I’ve said, a concrete manifestation of North Korean seriousness, but I think the central objective of all involved parties should be to prevent another provocation from taking place in the first place.

MODERATOR: Second question from the Japanese press, please.

Q: I’m – (inaudible) – from Fuji TV. A question about Futenma relocation. First, Minister Kitazawa. A question about measures to reduce impact on Okinawa. Maybe you’ll confirm the work to relocate aviation to Guam. I wonder what the conclusion was with regard to the relocation of part of training of F-15 fighters at Kadena to Guam. And I’d like to ask what timeline is for implementation of specific measures. And you mentioned you discussed BMD [ballistic missile defense]. What sort of discussion did you have?

A question for Secretary Gates, yesterday, Mr. Secretary, you suggested that would delink the common strategic objectives and Futenma relocation. I wonder how – where you place the Futenma relocation issue in the Japan-U.S. relationship.

MIN. KITAZAWA: Let me lead off on the Futenma relocation issue. The reduction of burdens on Okinawa, on that question we are considering all sorts of options and negotiating with the U.S. You referred to the Kadena based F-15 fighter aircraft and relocating part of that training to Guam. We are engaged in discussions with the United States on this matter and we communicated to the U.S. side Japan’s intent to further advance such discussions.

On BMD, on missile defense, I explained the Japanese views on this and that is with regard to transition to production and deployment, we’ll consider that and take necessary measures that the mid-term defense program specifically refers to that point. And with regard to third-party sales, I also stated that it’s necessary to consider the introduction of mechanisms for consultations regarding the necessity for prior consent.

SEC. GATES: Excuse me. I heard the – your reference to and statement about my delinking the strategic – the common strategic objectives, but I didn’t get your question. Could you repeat that, please?

Q: Yesterday, I think you mentioned that you will delink the common strategic objectives that you’re working on with the Japanese side and the issue of Guam, and I wonder where you place the Futenma relocation issue in this context.

SEC. GATES: Well, first of all, as I mentioned in my opening statement, we read a lot about Okinawa and Futenma relocation, but the alliance is broader than this. And I think what I said in China was that I felt that after – since the last common strategic objectives had been put together in – agreed in 2005, that clearly events in the meantime indicated the importance and the value of updating that document. And I think that is independent of the Futenma issue.

By the same token, the realignment roadmap is important. We do understand that it is politically a complex matter in Japan and we intend to follow the lead of the Japanese government in working with the people of Okinawa to take their interests and their concerns into account, and that obviously needs to happen.

By the same token, I would just underscore the benefits to the people of Okinawa of the realignment roadmap. Thousands and thousands of United States Marines and their dependents will depart the island. Significant land and facilities will return to the people of Okinawa. The U.S. presence will be less visible on the island. So there are very real benefits to people of Okinawa in this realignment roadmap. And as I say, we will work with the Japanese government and follow their lead as we work our way through this to make progress.

MR. MORRELL: Final question from Satoshi Ogawa traveling press corps from Yomiuri Shimbun.

Q: Secretary, with regard to the European missile defense system, there are plans to implement the U.S.-Japan jointly developed interceptor SM-3 Block 2A. Besides, the U.S. hoped some Europe countries would buy this interceptor, but Japan’s prior consent is needed to export the missile to Europe. So my question is, did you ask for the Japan’s consent to Mr. Kitazawa?

And next question is, you mentioned you agreed to accelerate defense posture discussion on the contingency. So what kind of cooperation do you look to from Japan?

And Mr. Kitazawa, how would you respond to the U.S. request on the contingency cooperation? Thank you.

SEC. GATES: First of all, I – we have this joint development program on a very sophisticated interceptor. It makes economic sense to make it available to others. And we will be working toward that end with the Japanese government. Because it’s a joint development program, this is a matter that needs to be agreed between us and we will continue working on that, but I think there is – I think it’s fair to say that the minister acknowledged the economic benefit of being able to make it available, but we understand that there are certain processes that have to be gone through here in Japan before that is possible.
All I’ll say on the second issue is that we’ve agreed that as part of the deepening of our alliance that we need to do more planning together and not just for the defense of Japan, but for regional contingencies. We need the planning to be realistic and effective and we will pursue it with our counterparts in the ministry of defense.

MIN. KITAZAWA: On missile defense, let me respond to the question. As you’re aware, the previous administration with regard to transition to production and deployment, that will be treated as an exception to the three principles on arms exports. The question is how to transfer that – the system to third parties. And on this matter, as I mentioned earlier, before the end of the year as a target, we will strive to come up with a conclusion. That’s what I told the secretary.

MODERATOR: We’ve already exceeded the scheduled closing time, so with this, we shall conclude the joint press conference. Please remain seated until the two ministers have left the hall. Thank you very much for your kind cooperation.

Kurt Campbell Says No Deadline on Futenma Move

2011-01-17T05:08:00.000-08:00

With the Futenma base never moved out, Okinawans will suffer most and the US will benefit the most. For Okinawans and the rest of the Japanese people, it's a danger of continuing the status quo. The Asahi Shimbun should have grilled him about this point, but they did not...
Thanks, Kosuke

WASHINGTON-- The United States will not insist on resolving the Futenma relocation issue before a planned visit by Prime Minister Naoto Kan to the United States this spring, according to a senior State Department official.

In an interview with The Asahi Shimbun, Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs Kurt Campbell said Washington is "not going to again get into the business of setting deadline and timing" on relocation of the U.S. Marine Corps Air Station Futenma now in Ginowan, Okinawa Prefecture.

According to a report issued by the two governments in late August 2010, the two sides had agreed to reach a final decision on the location and construction of the alternative airfield before the next two-plus-two defense and foreign ministers' meeting.
A two-plus-two meeting is scheduled to be held ahead of Kan's visit.

Campbell went on to say the two sides have spent too much time focusing on the relocation issue at the cost of stalling progress in addressing other pressing issues facing the alliance, such as changes in the security environment in the East Asia and Pacific region.

"We found it difficult to make progress on the many challenges in the U.S.-Japan relationship because we were so focused on one issue: the challenge of Futenma," Campbell said.

The statements suggest Washington is ready to shelve Futenma for the time being, and discuss separately how Japan and the United States should address more global issues.

They also back up previous comments by Defense Secretary Robert Gates that Washington is ready for deliberations, separate from the Futenma issue, on revising the Common Strategic Objectives set in 2005 to meet recent security challenges posed by China and North Korea.

Meanwhile, Campbell declined to comment on Okinawa Governor Hirokazu Nakaima's calls to have the airstrip relocated outside of the prefecture.

As the Kan Cabinet has no apparent means to persuade Okinawa to accept a relocation within the prefecture, the latest U.S. position suggests that the relocation will not be completed before the 2014 deadline set by Tokyo and Washington.

Washington's change of heart appears to reflect a growing sentiment that it would be better to press Japan to take on a larger share of the burden in resolving global problems, than to drive it into a corner over an issue with no apparent exit.

With the worst fiscal deficit on record, the administration of President Barack Obama is looking to cut ballooning defense spending while fighting simultaneous wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Gates earlier this month announced a plan to cut defense spending by $178 billion (about 14.8 trillion yen) over a five-year period starting fiscal 2012. A feature of the controversial proposal is to cut up to 47,000 Army and Marine personnel from the military payroll.

While the White House has not changed its stance on maintaining the presence of its armed forces on mainland Japan and Marines on Okinawa, it hopes to cut back on forward deployed troops worldwide.

Despite a shortage of personnel and funding, U.S. forces are faced with growing challenges, including China's naval expansion and North Korea's nuclear development program. To ease the pressure, Washington is looking for specific cooperation from Japan.

Regarding Futenma, the underlying sentiment seems to be that if relocation is not feasible, then the current facility, located in a densely populated area, will have to stay.

My latest stories for Jane's Defence Weekly

2011-01-16T06:17:00.000-08:00

I've uploaded my recent stories for Jane's Defence Weekly to my website kosuke.net
Thanks, Kosuke

Japan establishes FX project team
The Japanese Ministry of Defence (MoD) on 7 January announced the establishment of a project team to select the Japan Air Self-Defence Force's next-generation ...
07-Jan-2011

Japan and South Korea consider defence pact
Japanese Foreign Minister Seiji Maehara responded on 4 January to reports that Japan and South Korea are to sign a defence co-operation accord, saying ...
07-Jan-2011

Japan defence budget drops to 18-year low
Japanese defence spending will drop for the ninth consecutive year in Fiscal 2011 (FY11) to an 18-year low due to budget cuts on bulk ...
05-Jan-2011

A life of Japanese journalist Kosuke Takahashi (高橋浩祐)

Asia Times Online :: Damage control, not the end of nukes

(My latest stories for JDW) Japan urges Israeli restraint over Iran

Japan urges Israeli restraint over Iran

Update: Kawasaki loses AH-1S crash case

Mitsubishi Electric banned from MoD projects after overcharging for SAMs

(My latest story for Asia Times) Okinawans see duplicity in US withdrawal

Japan, the US and Australia are boosting their security cooperation!

USMC to start training in Darwin in 2012

(My latest for JDW) Japan sees in Chinese air incursions almost triple

Japan sees in Chinese air incursions almost triple

(My latest for JDW) Japanese PM replaces defence minister

Japanese PM replaces defence minister

Marines to train with Japanese Ground Self-Defense Force at Camp Pendleton Jan. 16

(My recent story for JDW) Lockheed Martin F-35A wins Japan's F-X competition

Related Articles

(My recent story for JDW) Update: Japan presses ahead with ATD-X programme

My most recent stories for Jane's Defence Weekly and International Defence Review

Rethink U.S. military base plans for Japan

My latest story for Jane's Defence Weekly

My recent stories for Jane's Defence Weekly

(My latest story for Asia Times) Fighters duel for Japan air defense contract

Japan's largest mega-solar debuted in the heart of the Tokyo metropolitan area

(My latest stories for Jane's Defence Weekly)

(My latest story for Asia Times) Japan-South Korea ties hit turbulence

(Jane's Defence Weekly) North Korea could be preparing the site for a third nuclear test

(My latest story) Asia Times Online : Mage Island another tinderbox for Japan

(AFP) U.S. Senate Moves to Freeze Japan Base Move - Defense News

My latest stories for Jane's Defence Weekly

(My latest story for Asia Times) Ten reasons for Japan's revolving door

(My latest story for Asia Times Online) Futenma: Time on Okinawa's side

My latest stories for Jane's Defence Weekly

Japan Focus: Economic Crisis Shakes US Forces Overseas: The Price of Base Expansion in Okinawa and Guam

I went to a tsunami-hit school in Ichinomaki City, where 74 elementary school kids were killed by the giant tsunami

Remembering March 11

Visiting Mishima Yukio (三島由紀夫) Literature Museum

My latest stories for Jane's Defence Weekly

The history of the big earthquakes and those aftershocks

Better listen to Professor Ishibashi's warning

(My latest story for Asia Times) Fukushima marks a 'nuclear ice age'

Chile's Que Pasa magazine published my story on the 3/11 earthquake

My latest story for JDW: Pentagon despatches marines nuclear team to Japan

GE's responsibility must be severely questioned

universal brotherhood

Let's hang on, Japan! Let's hang on Tohoku!

Ukrainian Week published its interview with me

On March 20, the biggest full moon since March 1993 will occur

A list of Twitter hashtags on Japan earthquake

(My latest story for Asia Times) Record-high yen assaults Japan

Greed and fear move markets..

Here is a search site to find missing persons in Japan

Japan hit by largest earthquake in country's history

Hey Mr. Kevin Maher, you should resign right away!

(South China Morning Post) Beijing to track all mobile phone users' movements

My Chinese friend exposes corruption involving Chinese justice and military.

My latest stories for Jane's Defence Weekly

My latest story for Asia Times: Rocky barriers to Russo-Japanese peace

(JoongAng Ilbo) Missiles matter a lot

Remarks by Secretary Gates at Keio University, Tokyo, Japan

(Transcript) Joint Press Conference with Secretary Gates and Minister Kitazawa from Tokyo, Japan

Kurt Campbell Says No Deadline on Futenma Move

My latest stories for Jane's Defence Weekly