jpustalks2

Japan Press Service Co., Ltd. is the only news agency providing information of progressive, democratic movements in Japan

Shii talks on U.S. military realignment

In an interview with Asahi Newstar satellite TV aired on March 22, Japanese Communist Party Chair Shii Kazuo gave his view on the U.S. forces realignment.

Nationwide significance of Iwakuni referendum

Q: In the Iwakuni referendum, 87 percent of votes cast rejected the plan to relocate a U.S. carrier-borne aircraft unit from the U.S. Atsugi Base to the Iwakuni Base.

Shii Kazuo: If 57 carrier-based warplanes are to be moved to Iwakuni from Atsugi, it will bring the total number to more than 100 and the U.S. Iwakuni Base will become the most crowded air base in the world. It is very significant that a local municipality that had been forced to co-exist with a U.S. base voiced refusal to shoulder any additional burdens of the base. This victory will have a great influence on similar struggles in Okinawa, Kanagawa, and elsewhere in Japan.

Q: Could you comment on the government reaction claiming that it is no more than an opinion poll?

Shii: The government is persistent in refusing to change the decision. However, Iwakuni City has made the right decision since the primary role of a municipality is to defend the safety and living conditions of its residents. The government's refusal to respect the local opinion is tantamount to denying local autonomy.

The ruling parties are claiming that their major concern is for the peace and the security of Japan, but they are planning to bring in a carrier-borne aircraft unit to Iwakuni. It is the aircraft-carrier-born lead-off unit in the lawless wars on Iraq and Afghanistan. Opposing such a relocation plan is a just struggle to defend peace in Asia and other parts of the world.

Solidarity to block permanent use of homeport for aircraft carrier

Q: If Iwakuni rejects the relocation plan, Atsugi will have to continue to shoulder the base burdens. What do you think about this?

Shii: Look at the Japan-U.S. agreement made at the "two-plus-two" (Security Consultative Committee) meeting last October. It states that the aim of the relocation is to "ensure the viability of a long-term forward deployment of the U.S. aircraft carrier and its airwing." It means that Yokosuka will be permanently used as the homeport of a U.S. aircraft carrier, placing enormous burdens on the residents of Kanagawa Prefecture.

A major struggle is taking place to oppose the homeporting of a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier in Yokosuka. It is important for the residents of Kanagawa to recognize this connection and join forces with Iwakuni residents to reject the homeporting there of an aircraft carrier.

While urging the government to respect the Iwakuni referendum outcome and cancel the planned relocation, the Iwakuni mayor is calling for reducing noise pollution in Atsugi. I believe this Iwakuni-Atsugi solidarity is important.

'Minor changes' without changing the basic policy of perpetuating bases

Q: There is talk about "minor changes" over the realignment of U.S. bases in Okinawa.

Shii: Government officials are saying that it may be possible to make "minor changes" to the plan to construct a new U.S. base in the shoreline of the coast of U.S. Camp Schwab, but they are also insisting that the basic plan must not change.

The question is why Okinawans are rejecting the "shoreline" plan. The Japan-U.S. Special Action Committee on Okinawa (SACO) agreement suggested the concept of constructing a "removable base," not a permanent base. The alternative plan drawn up within the SACO framework was the construction of an on-sea base that can be removed when it becomes unnecessary. This is why Okinawa Governor Inamine Keiichi attached the condition that the base be removed in15 years.

The "2 plus 2" agreement states nothing about this condition. This shows that the Japanese and U.S. governments intend to construct a permanent base.

This is why even those who initially accepted the SACO framework are now firmly opposed to the "shoreline" plan, saying that it even conflicts with the SACO agreement. Most Okinawans are united in opposing the plan. The government says that "minor changes" are possible without making changes to the basic policy of using the base permanently. This is not a way in which the contradiction with the people of Okinawa can be resolved.

Q: What about the U.S. request for Japan to pay 7.5 billion dollars as part of the relocation cost? Some people argue that that amount of money is worth paying in return for the withdrawal of U.S. troops and ensuring reductions of burdens on Okinawans.

Shii: Okinawans are burdened with the presence of U.S. Marines that are stationed as operational forces. These forces have been sent to Iraq for combat. They are the source of the high rate of accidents, crimes, and other dangers. These operational forces will remain in Okinawa and only some command functions will be relocated. The most dangerous part of the basing structure will remain in Okinawa.

Another question is that from the U.S. viewpoint, the planned relocation of the command functions to Guam is aimed at strengthening the role of the U.S. forces in the Pacific, as made clear in the "2 plus 2"agreement. The document states that the U.S. Marine Corps need to be reorganized and strengthened to serve this purpose, and that the functions of the U.S. Marine Corps should be distributed to three centers: Okinawa, Guam, and Hawaii. Guam's geographical location is suitable to maintain command functions and carry out operations using forces in Okinawa. The relocation is not designed to reduce the burdens on Okinawans at all. The realignment is based on the arbitrary U.S. plan to strengthen U.S. bases abroad. It is absolutely wrong to use Japanese tax money for such a realignment.
- Akahata, March 24, 2006