Video: Message from Ginowan 宜野湾市からのメッセージ

Here is a great YouTube video in English that describes the problem of the US military bases in Okinawa, particularly Futenma Air Station in Ginowan City.

"What's going on with Futenma?" - a Meeting at Okinawa International University 「ちゃーすが普天間！？与党３党に問う」

A group called "Neoki no kai" is organizing a meeting with Okinawan citizens and three of the parliamentarians representing Okinawa, at Okinawa International University on March 20. The title is "Chaasuga Futenma! Ask the Three Coalition Parties." "Chaasuga" is an Okinawan phrase that means something like "What's going on?" or "What are we going to do?" The three guests are Kina Shokichi, an Upper House member of DPJ (Democratic Party of Japan, the leading party of the coalition), Teruya Kantoku, a Lower House member, SDP(Social Democratic Party), and Shimoji Mikio, a Lower House member, PNP(People's New Party).

In the last Lower House Election at the end of August 2009, all Okinawa's four election districts chose candidates who opposed expansion of military bases in Okinawa. DPJ, the leading party in the current coalition government, was clearly endorsing that any "relocation" site for Futenma Air Station had to be outside of Okinawa Prefecture of outside of the country. The coalition government, however, keep stressing they are considering options on the "zero-base" basis, meaning that no option is ruled out, even those within Okinawa. Citizens of Okinawa, including those of Nago, have expressed their opposition against a new base over and over for the past fourteen years since the SACO Agreement in which the return of Futenma was promised, but right now, the central government has been considering options of Futenma "relocation" within the prefecture and has kept Okinawans out of the scheme again.

This meeting is an important opportunity for people of Okinawa to ask important questions of there three parliamentarians from Okinawa, including "Chasuga! What's going on?"

Ryukyu Shimpo on March 18 reported the next Okinawan citizens' rally will be held at Yomitan Sports Park (Yomitan Undo Koen) at 3 PM on April 25, initiated by members of the Prefectural Assembly. Shinzato Yonekichi, chair of the organizing committee, is aiming for participation of 100,000 people. The event will call for a quick return of Futenma, and will oppose construction of a new base within Okinawa.

Below is the information of the March 20 meeting.
http://neokinokai.ti-da.net/e2986980.html

＝徹底討論＝
「ちゃーすが普天間！？　与党３党に問う」

○日時：３月２０日（土）午後２時～５時
○会場：沖縄国際大７号館２０１教室

○パネリスト：
喜納昌吉・参院議員（民主党・沖縄県連代表）
照屋寛徳・衆院議員（社民党・国対委員長）
下地幹郎・衆院議員（国民新党・選対本部長兼国対委員長）


　米軍普天間基地の「移設」問題が、混迷を深めています。

　１９９６年に日米が全面返還に合意したにもかかわらず、１４年近くたっても普天間の閉鎖・返還のめどは立たっていません。
　自公政権が進めてきた名護市辺野古への「移設」計画が、環境への甚大な影響や県民の根強い反対によって行き詰まる中、昨年８月の総選挙では多くの県民が、普天間の「県外・国外」への移設を掲げた民主党をはじめ、現在の連立３党の候補者に期待し、大切な一票を投じました。
　昨年１１月には、２万人余の県民が集まり、普天間の県内移設に反対する県民大会が開かれたうえ、今年１月の名護市長選では、名護市への「移設」に反対する新市政が誕生したことは、記憶に新しいところです。
　しかしながら、政府与党による普天間問題の検討委員会での議論は、「ゼロベース」で臨むという政府方針の下、沖縄県内への移設はけっして排除されておらず、むしろ沖縄県内の様々な「移設先」候補地が挙げられて連日、新聞紙面を賑わしているのが現状です。

　ここで、とても深刻な問題は、沖縄県民、名護市民が、これまで何度もこの問題で意思表示を強いられ、悩み苦しみながら答えを出してきたにもかかわらず、新政権においてさえ、沖縄の人々の意思表示が十分な尊重を受けないまま、県民が相変わらず蚊帳の外に置かれる形で、５月末とされる「結論」の期限に向け、県内を含む「移設先」の議論が収束に向かっていることです。
　仮にこのまま県民不在で「結論」がまとめられたとして、それがはたして真の解決に資するものなのか、あるいは政治不信を増大させ、普天間の問題をますます解決から遠ざけるだけなのか、多くの県民が疑問の余地なしとはしないでしょう。

　そこで、連立３党を構成する民主、社民、国民新の各党の中で、この普天間問題でも重要な役割を果たしている３人の沖縄選出の国会議員の皆さんをお呼びして、与党内での検討の現状をご報告いただくとともに、それぞれが考える普天間問題の解決への道筋と、そのためにどのような活動をされてゆくのかなどをじっくりとお話しいただく機会を設けました。
　当日は、３議員の間でも闊達にご議論をいただきたいと思いますし、会場にご参加の皆様からの率直なご意見・ご質問にも、議員各位にお答えいただきたいと考えています。

　ぜひ、この半年間、ひいては１４年間のワジワジーをすべて持ち寄って、活発な会にしていただくべく、多くの皆様のご参加を呼びかけます。

○参加無料
○主催：「ちゃーすが普天間」実行委員会
　　　　連絡先：neokinokai@yahoo.co.jp

Peace Philosophy Salon March 20 - "Foreigners in Japan"

This is the first "student-led" Peace Philosophy Salon. We hope many will be able to attend. RSVP to Arc info@peacephilosophy.com by March 19.
（はじめての学生主導による「ピース・フィロソフィー・サロン」です。トピックは、日本在住の外国籍の人たちのことです。ふるってご参加ください。出席の方は１９日までに info@peacephilosophy.com までお願いします）

Peace Philosophy Centre "Foreigners in Japan"

Date: Saturday, 20 March 2010
Time: 15:00 - 18:00
Location: Peace Philosophy Centre, Vancouver (email info@peacephilosophy.com for details)

* Free admission/donation welcome
* Tea will be served (snack donation welcome)

Hi everyone! I hope you enjoyed the Olympics, or are enjoying the Paralympics that are going on right now.

For the March 20th Salon, we decided we'd like to discuss the issues surrounding foreigners in Japan. We are going to explore a variety of topics concerning foreigners living in Japan, and we're really hoping for some varied and frank discussions on the topic.

While looking at the origins and situation of the Zainichi, we would like to explore culturally related perceptions about this group. We would also like to discuss possible cultural and social basis's for discrimination, as well as ethnic and racial topics.

The government position towards schools outside of the government curriculum and the funding and recognition of the diploma from these schools is an important topic for foreigners in Japan. This is also including the recent attack by right wingers near Kyoto on a Korean school, as this incident is especially related to all these issues.

This salon would be led and facilitated by students from UBC and SFU. Dan Aizawa (UBC) and Arc Zen Han (UBC) would be dealing with issues of policies of Japanese government towards Nikkeijin and Zainichi on national level, Shoko Hata (SFU) would talk about how Japanese society and people are conscious about their rights, and Andrew Livingston (UBC) would like to share his experience of living in Japan as a foreigner. Go Murakami (UBC) will also talk about the rights of foreigners in Japan.

For international students and immigrants in Vancouver, I believe your experience of living in abroad must have changed your point of views about issues associated with race, ethnicity, culture, and identity.

Also, some of you might have lived in Japan as a foreigner, "Gaikokujin", like Andrew. You might have some thoughts if there is any points that Japan as a state, Japanese society, and Japanese people need to change their attitudes towards non-Japanese people living in Japan to respect
their dignity.

We hope that this salon would be a great opportunity for all of us to reflect and share our experience and thoughts.

Peace Philosophy Centre

No Longer "Relocation" - An Idea of a Massive Artificial Island with Three Runways over 3,000 metres もう「移設」とはとても呼べない

Ryukyu Shimpo, on March 16, reported some details of the plan to build a massive artificial island off Katsuren Peninsula.

Unbelievable. As Miyagi Yasuhiro said, how can we call this "Futenma relocation site" any more?

The area to be reclaimed East of Hikashima Island is said to be 1,021 hectares. It is going to accommodate not only USMC (as "relocation" of Futenma Air Station) but also Air Self Defense Force (as relocation of ASDF Naha Base) and the US military port facilities (also relocation of Naha military port).

In the plan, there will be three runways to be built - one 3,000 meter, and two 3,600 meter ones. Bridges will be built from that artificial island to Hamahika Island and Miyagi Island.

Medoruma Shun sharply criticizes this "outrageous" plan makes no military sense. Osprey(V-22) and helicopters (the kind of aircrafts that were planned to be based in the V-shape Henoko runway plan) do not need such long runways. He wonders if there is a plan to base B52.

The plan was suggested by Ota Norio, Chair of Okinawa Chamber of Commerce to Chief Cabinet Secretary Hirano and Defense Minister Kitazawa. The same concept was embraced in 2005 by Robert Eldridge, who taught at Osaka University back then. Now Eldridge is Deputy G-5, U.S. Marine Corps Bases of Okinawa. Eldridge has also been meeting with Hirano to explain this possibility.

According to Medoruma, Ota has been endorsing the plan to build a base off Katsuren Peninsula. Medoruma suspects that Ota wants to expand the reclamation area to increase the construction costs for the benefit of related businesses. He also points out that in the March 13 edition of Rykyu Shimpo, Kokuba Koichiro, Supreme Advisor of the Terrace Hotel contributed an article promoting the reclamation project. He has previously assumed positions like President of Kokuba Construction and President of the association of Okinawa's construction companies. He is also known to be endorsing a plan to introduce a casino to Okinawa. "Those industries are becoming active around this plan," Medoruma warns.

琉球新報　３月１６日
【東京】米軍普天間飛行場移設をめぐり、地元経済界関係者から政府側に伝えられた勝連半島沖埋め立て案は、うるま市浜比嘉島の沖合１３００メートルのリーフ内に約１０２１ヘクタールを埋め立てて人工島を造成し、航空自衛隊那覇基地や米軍那覇港湾施設（那覇軍港）の機能も併せ持つ集約案であることが１５日までに分かった。滑走路は３０００メートル１本と３６００メートル２本の計３本を擁し、人工島は架橋で浜比嘉島と宮城島にそれぞれ接続させる。

　提案者は、日米特別行動委員会（ＳＡＣＯ）と米軍再編のころにも勝連半島沖埋め立て案を提唱していた沖縄商工会議所の太田範雄名誉会頭。民主党の犬塚直史参院議員の仲介で北沢俊美防衛相と会った。太田氏によると平野博文官房長官の側近にも説明したという。

　同じ場所を埋め立てて米軍と自衛隊の統合基地を造る構想は、米軍再編協議の２００５年当時、大阪大学准教授で、現在は在沖米海兵隊外交政策部（Ｇ５）次長を務めるロバート・エルドリッジ氏が提言していた。海兵隊の運用にもかなっているとされた。関係者によると、今回も同氏が平野官房長官に会い構想を説明しているという。

　太田氏の案では、名護市辺野古沿岸部への日米合意案の埋め立て面積１６０ヘクタールの６倍以上となる。平安座島と宮城島の間を埋め立て石油コンビナートを造った際の埋め立て面積約１９４ヘクタールの５倍ともなり、環境への影響は避けられない。

　人工島造成は２段階で、第１段階は普天間移設先として約４００ヘクタールを埋め立て、３０００メートルの滑走路を造る。その後、さらに造成して飛行場とヘリポート部分は最終的に７１０ヘクタールまで埋め立て、港湾施設区域に５０ヘクタール、米軍補給施設区域に１０２ヘクタール、自衛隊基地部分として１５９ヘクタールを造成し、軍港と空自那覇基地の部隊を移駐させる。人工島部分は、浮原島と南浮原島は埋め立てない。

　太田氏の構想では、空自と軍港を併設せず普天間を単独で移設させる案も用意しており、その場合、位置は浮原島と宮城島の間を約２００ヘクタール埋め立てて、１８００メートルの滑走路を造る。

Airbases, a Military Port, and a Casino 目取真俊さんのブログより

This is an abbreviated translation of the blog post "The plan to move Futenma to off Katsuren Peninsula, and a casino idea on Miyako" by Medoruma Shun, an Okinawan author and blogger.

Kina Shokichi, a DPJ MP from Okinawa, met with Chief Cabinet Secretary Hirano Hirofumi on March 10th. Hirano explained this plan to reclaim off Katsuren Peninsula for shared use as USMC airbase (as "relocation site" of Futenma), Air Self Defense Force (relocating from Naha) and as a US military port (also relocating from Naha). Hirano thought that this plan would be approved by Okinawans because the Air Self Defense Force, which shares the current Naha airport with civilian air services, will be returned.

I am appalled how shallow his understanding is about Okinawa. To build a USMC runway, then building another runway and a military port will require massive reclamation work, and the amount of drills would increase accordingly. How would he expect Okinawans to "understand" and accept such a plan presented immediately after the Henoko plan derailed? Hirano totally lacks any understanding of why voices against "relocating" Futenma within the prefecture have risen to this unprecedented level, and he seems even uninterested in knowing it.

Why has the plan to "relocate" Futenma Air Station stalled for the last 13 years? That was because Okinawa has already been saturated with US military bases and there simply isn't any more space to host more bases. Just "relocating" bases within the prefecture would not lead to any kind of "reduction of burdens" for Okinawans that politicians have been talking about. Returning Futenma may ease the burden for Ginowan City, but whichever community will host a new base will be burdened more. There always occurs a "division" in the community chosen as a host of a new base, between those who accept and don't accept the base. Knowing how Nago City was split around the new base plan in Henoko for the last thirteen years, Okinwans wouldn't want something like that happening in their own community.

Okinawans are angry over the discriminatory policy for the last 65 years of the Japanese and US governments that regards Okinawa as a scapegoat of the Japan-US Security Treaty. No matter what plan will be suggested, it won't be accepted by Okinawans as long as the relocation site is within Okinawa.

It is also reported that Hirano suggested developing a casino on Miyako Island. Miyako is the home town of MP Mikio Shimoji. Is this casino a reward for Shimoji for endorsing the "relocation within the prefecture?" This politician plans to prey on Okinawa by being part of the central government and profiting from the new base and the casino. This plan again involves massive reclamation, which will be associated with interests of the marine construction businesses.

Even if the government changes, there is no change in this structure of politicians, bureaucrats, and corporations flocking around the profits to be made by perpetuating the military bases in Okinawa. We must destroy such a structure.

(Photo: the ocean surrounding Miyako Island)

Medoruma Shun's Blog "Uminari no shima kara"

Building Another Base in Okinawa is Intolerable 沖縄に基地を増やすなど論外

Here is the map of Okinawa with U.S. military bases, from the website of Okinawa Prefecture.

Here is a good map of Okinawa in English (source here). Click for a larger view.

I trimmed the area so the currently discussed sites for building a new base are easier to see. At the centre if Katsuren Peninsula. Connecting with the narrow, reclaimed road east of the Peninsula, you see Miyagi Island ("jima" or "shima" means "island" in Japanese), and Ikei Island. South of those you see two more islands, Hamahika Island and Ukibaru Island. At the tip of Katsuren Peninsula is the area known as White Beach, where a US Naval facility is.

One of the plans that is reported that the government is considering is reclaiming between White Beach and Tsuken Island. See Japan Times report on March 16 .

There is another plan (see the maps of the Okinawa Times article on March 16) to reclaim off Katsuren Peninsula, somewhat between Miyagi and Hamahika Islands, to build a base that will be shared by USMC, US military port facility (to relocate from Naha military port facility) and Japan's Air Self Defense Force (to relocate from Naha Airport, currently shared for civilian and military use).

Earlier today there was another report that Prime Minister Hatoyama was considering Tokunoshima Island (belonging to Kagoshima Prefecture), between Okinawa and Kagoshima as a possible "kengai," or out-of-(Okinawa)prefecture plan, but later Hatoyama denied such a plan.

The central government has been coming up with different plans, or at least so the media reports, more often than I brush my teeth (and I brush at least twice a day), and it just disheartens me to think about the feelings of people of Okinawa when they keep hearing these ideas most of which are really about building another base within Okinawa.

The title of the above Japan Times Article is "White Beach base site said credible - Futenma option seen as way to ease Okinawa's overall burden." There cannot possibly be a way to ease Okinawa's overall burden by building another base there. Would you offer someone another bag to carry when that person is carrying 40 bags already and possibly think you would be doing that person a favour?

PeacePhilosopher

NHK Debate Program "Nippon no Korekara" on Japan-US Alliance NHK番組「日本の、これから」日米同盟特集

NHK broadcast a special debate program "Let Us Think Now About the US-Japan Alliance," from 10:00 - 11:30 PM on Friday, March 12, as the latest of the series "Nippon no Korekara"(Future of Japan). Six "yu-shikisha," or "experts" and about thirty citizens from all walks of life are loosely divided into the "left" and "right" sides - those who would generally agree on reducing military emphasis on the Japan-US relationship and those who would support status quo or more military alliance. Kimberley Hughes, author and translator, and one of our fellow Okinawa supporters, was among the citizen representatives on the "left" side (photo: Kim, second left of the upper panel). The experienced NHK anchor Tamio Miyake looks like he is conducting an orchestra in the photo, and indeed that was what he was doing - to navigate through the bursting opinions and emotions from the both sides.

I wanted to share the exchange of emails when Kim shared her reflection with me and a number of other Okinawa supporters:

• Kim: Hello all,
  I just wanted to send many warm thanks to each one of you for your support prior to my participation in NHK's Nihon no korekara program on Friday night.
  
  It was a very challenging experience because of the nature of the program (so many discussants and the ambiguous nature of the questions thrown at us, plus the cameras
  deliberately focused the majority of the time on the six "experts"). But I am still glad I did it!
  
  As some of you have seen, I managed to make one comment about my disappointment in the Japan-U.S. alliance being based upon militarism, due to the ways that this destroys the
  humanity of everyone involved, whether aggressor or victim.
  
  I would have also *loved* to point out Michael Green's hypocrisy in continually touting the U.S. as the grand purveyor of democracy while ignoring the democratic process in Okinawa on the Futenma issue...but by the time I was relaxed enough to speak, the hot debate had begun and we were all literally screaming over each other to get a word in. Rather exciting, but still frustrating!
  
  And I don't have adequate words to express my thoughts re. Yoshiko Sakurai. First of all: what decade is she living in, I wonder?! Given both her professed nostalgia for Ronald Reagan era politics and her quaffed hairdo, I felt like I was time traveling back to the mid-1980s! Very weird. I also was not impressed by the way she shushed the Okinawans who were trying to express their anger over treatment by the U.S. and Japanese government. Some of my friends pointed out that this was likely a deliberate strategy of NHK to try and make the U.S. position appear the most rational, by deliberately choosing screamers who would discredit their cause in the eyes of the Japanese viewing public. (One of them actually said something to the effect of "I wish I could chop Bush into pieces")!
  
  At any rate, if I were an actual public speaker instead of a writer, I could have been much more effective...but it was still an interesting experience nonetheless.
  
  Many thanks to you all again! (And an extra thanks to Martin for filming the clip of my comment!)
  
  Warm wishes,
  Kim

• My response: Dear Kim,
  
  I just watched it on TV Japan.
  
  Thank you so much for being the only one in the whole program who questioned the assumed nature of the military alliance itself. Former Defense University prof Magosaki said something meaningful in that regard, but you made that point very clear, thank you!
  
  Sakurai Yoshiko and Kang Sun Joong represented the most powerful speakers from the right and left side, respectively, of today's Japan. They must be tired of seeing each other in such occasions but I felt there was some kind of strange rhythm and trust between them. Thank Heavens Kang was there ... the only person perhaps Sakurai respected in the left team and was ready to give in to from time to time. Sakurai can be a lot more wicked and aggressive.
  
  Kang Sun Joong and Waseda's Ueki Chikako rightly stressed on the importance of departing from the Cold War thinking and diversifying the alliance to other forms than just military to deal with today's global challenges, many of which cannot be solved by forces, and Magosaki appropriately pointed out that the changed nature of the alliance from one for the security of Japan/Far East to one for the US's global hegemony makes the advantage of the alliance seriously questionable. Unfortunately these rational and current voices did not reach the minds of the three Cold-War team - Sakurai, Green and Tanaka. Tanaka Hitoshi, former top Foreign Ministry official shamelessly stated that Japan's cooperation with the Iraq War was inevitable because Japan could not afford to damage its relationship with the US in light of the threat of North Korea.
  
  What was most shocking was the complete lack of discussion of any sort on Okinawa - nothing on the Futenma issue. Kang did talk about the unfair burden of Okinawans, and a few Okinawans did talk about their experiences and feelings. Sakurai and Tanaka did talk about the usual "futan keigen," or easing of burdens, but went on to other topics as if mentioning that term was a ritual that the status quo supporters just had to go through once to purify themselves of the guilt. In the end, there was no discussion of how that "easing" could be achieved. It was all about the culture of "atamagoshi" (discussion and decisions over the heads of Okinawans) again. There should have been at least one expert from Okinawa on the left side, like Yoshida Kensei, Doug Lummis, Miyagi Yasuhiro, Gabe Masaaki or Sato Manabu. There would have been so many choices and it is unfair that NHK didn't invite one.
  
  To the simultaneous survey of the viewers on the question whether we should "deepen" the alliance or not, 65% answered yes, and 35% no. This question was ambiguous. Without defining the nature of alliance and without discussing what it meant by "deepening," the question is like one that asks whether we should change the Constitution or not. It was meaningless without discussion of specifics. To the question of whether the alliances was advantageous or disadvantageous, 75% of the viewer respondents answered "advantageous" and 25% "disadvantageous." Kang appropriately pointed out the answer would depend on where you live; if one lives in Okianwa, it would certainly be disadvantageous. Any advantage would lie on the sacrifice of Okinawans. But again, it was not discussed any further.
  
  To complement the lack of Okinawan voices in the program, I will quote from the feedback by Yoshida Kensei, former Obirin U. professor and author Medoruma Shun.
  
  
• Yoshida Kensei (abbreviated translation)
  (in his email to me and his email to NHK)
  "The program started with a statement "the Japan-US Alliance, which have facilitated Japan's security and prosperity for the last fifty years." This program was supposed to reexamine the Japan-US alliance, but the NHK started with a bald affirmation of the military alliance. What was most outrageous was Sakurai Yoshiko's view of China's threat. She stressed on the military build-up of China but totally disregarded the US threat against China, including its nuclear build-up and the presence of US military bases surrounding China. She did not mention the US sale of weapons to Taiwan either. There was no discussion on how reduction of the burdens of Okinawans could be achieved."

• Medoruma Shun (abbreviated translation)
  http://blog.goo.ne.jp/awamori777/e/08425113c4bae4bd08c5dd29601b4eaf
  "Someone in the program was suggesting a national referendum on Japan-US Security Treaty should be held. That suggestion made me wonder whether he was ready to accept a US military base in his own backyard. Even if we have such a referendum, it is obvious that most people will vote with the assumption that they will "benefiit" from the alliance by imposing the base burden on Okinawa, and other places like Sasebo, Yokosuka, Iwakuni, Atsugi, Yokota, and Misawa. Some people mentioned "easing of Okinawa's burden," but that phrase itself assumes that the burden had to be born by Okinawa. The program did not discuss at all what can be done to reduce the burden of Okinawa or to deal with the current Futenma problem. I suspect there was a prior agreement with NHK and the participants not to go deep into these issues. How can we talk about the Japan-US alliance without talking at all about the biggest problem we are facing right now? Yamato Japanese first need to face squarely their own discrimination and violence against Okinawans, and the political delusions that led to the concentration of base burdens in Okinawa."

• Kim's additional comment on my response:
  I think that the glossing over the Okinawa issue may have been deliberate...perhaps because the perspective represented by Green, Sakurai et. al does not really have a solid leg to stand on--which would have been made all too clear had an Okinawa expert been included on the panel. Again, it really felt like the whole thing was deliberately constructed by NHK in order to make the position of the U.S. government appear to be the only viable and trustworthy one. Disturbing indeed.

Many thanks to Kim Hughes, who made a precious contribution to the debate.

I would welcome feedback and comments.

PeacePhilosopher