March 7, 2009
JCP Chair Shii Kazuo says that there is no change in U.S. policy toward Japan under the Obama administration, which is committed to further promoting the strengthening of the functions of U.S. military bases in Japan under the name of U.S. military transformation and realignment as well as the military integration of Japan and the United States.
In the report to the Japanese Communist Party Executive Committee meeting on March 5, JCP Chair Shii Kazuo stated the JCP view on the U.S. Obama administration’s policy toward Japan, and in particular the Japan-U.S. military alliance as well as the role of the JCP which calls for a new democratic and peaceful international order in opposition to U.S. domination. The following is an excerpt from the Shii report to the JCP Executive Committee meeting:
U.S. Obama administration’s policy on Japan and JCP views
At the inauguration of the U.S. Obama administration we made clear that we will attentively look to the type of change President Obama might pursue in implementing domestic and foreign policies. Regarding Japan-U.S. relations, we said that we would like to draw the new U.S. administration's attention to the urgent need to replace the present relationship of domination and subservience with one based on equal rights.
If we are to give a critical assessment of the Obama administration regarding its global policy, we need to look carefully at how it is applied to concrete issues. However, it is already clear that there is no change in the new administration’s policy toward Japan. It says it will further promote the strengthening of the functions of U.S. military bases in Japan under the name of U.S. military transformation and realignment as well as the military integration of Japan and the United States. Clearly, Japan will be forced to share greater burdens and costs of this policy of strengthening Japan-U.S. alliance.
The JCP has been confronting this situation in the Diet. In particular, we have revealed that Japan is forced to shoulder the huge financial burden of the planned relocation of a part of the U.S. Marines to Guam from Okinawa, including the construction of a base for U.S. combat forces. We have emphasized that the relocation is designed to reinforce the capabilities of U.S. forces in Japan and that the Japanese and U.S. governments were lying when they promised to reduce Okinawa’s burden of U.S. bases. Our analysis have drawn media attention. We have been able to do this because we hold fast to the call for the Japan-U.S. military alliance to be abolished.
Choice between making Japan-U.S. military alliance absolute and ending Japan’s subservience to U.S.
Let us examine the positions of the ruling Liberal Democratic and Komei parties and the opposition Democratic Party toward Japan-U.S. relation?
It is humiliating that the Aso government, which sees Japan’s alliance with the United States as absolute, is accepting every U.S. demand. That was the case with the recent Japan-U.S. foreign ministers talks that was highlighted by the signing of an agreement on the implementation of realignment of U.S. forces, and the subsequent Japan-U.S. summit meeting.
What about the Democratic Party of Japan? While talking about the need for the Japan-U.S. relations to be structured on an “equal footing,” the DPJ is taking a very dangerous path on this issue. It is insisting on the Japanese Self-Defense Forces’ participation in the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) for Afghanistan, which means deploying Ground Self-Defense Force units to Afghan. The DPJ took the initiative in sending the SDF to waters off the coast of Somalia. The DPJ has argued in the Diet that it will push ahead with making legal arrangements as well as interpretational amendments to the Constitution to pave the way for Japan to constitutionally use force on overseas missions sanctioned by U.N. resolutions. Its leader has argued that the further reinforcement of the SDF will make it possible to take the place of the U.S. forces in the defense of Japan.
The DPJ has told the United States that it is in favor of a stronger Japan-U.S. alliance. This argument is even more dangerous than that of the ruling LDP. The DPJ is actually calling for Japan to be more subordinate to the United States than ever before. It is therefore deceptive for the DPJ to argue that the Japan-U.S. relations should be on an “equal footing.”
In view of the global movements demanding a democratic and peaceful international order and rejection of U.S. domination, Japanese political parties are being tested over choosing between the two directions, maintaining the policy of regarding the Japan-U.S. military alliance as absolute or calling for breaking away from the military alliance with the United States in order to end Japan’s subordination to the United States.
U.S. Obama administration’s policy on Japan and JCP views
At the inauguration of the U.S. Obama administration we made clear that we will attentively look to the type of change President Obama might pursue in implementing domestic and foreign policies. Regarding Japan-U.S. relations, we said that we would like to draw the new U.S. administration's attention to the urgent need to replace the present relationship of domination and subservience with one based on equal rights.
If we are to give a critical assessment of the Obama administration regarding its global policy, we need to look carefully at how it is applied to concrete issues. However, it is already clear that there is no change in the new administration’s policy toward Japan. It says it will further promote the strengthening of the functions of U.S. military bases in Japan under the name of U.S. military transformation and realignment as well as the military integration of Japan and the United States. Clearly, Japan will be forced to share greater burdens and costs of this policy of strengthening Japan-U.S. alliance.
The JCP has been confronting this situation in the Diet. In particular, we have revealed that Japan is forced to shoulder the huge financial burden of the planned relocation of a part of the U.S. Marines to Guam from Okinawa, including the construction of a base for U.S. combat forces. We have emphasized that the relocation is designed to reinforce the capabilities of U.S. forces in Japan and that the Japanese and U.S. governments were lying when they promised to reduce Okinawa’s burden of U.S. bases. Our analysis have drawn media attention. We have been able to do this because we hold fast to the call for the Japan-U.S. military alliance to be abolished.
Choice between making Japan-U.S. military alliance absolute and ending Japan’s subservience to U.S.
Let us examine the positions of the ruling Liberal Democratic and Komei parties and the opposition Democratic Party toward Japan-U.S. relation?
It is humiliating that the Aso government, which sees Japan’s alliance with the United States as absolute, is accepting every U.S. demand. That was the case with the recent Japan-U.S. foreign ministers talks that was highlighted by the signing of an agreement on the implementation of realignment of U.S. forces, and the subsequent Japan-U.S. summit meeting.
What about the Democratic Party of Japan? While talking about the need for the Japan-U.S. relations to be structured on an “equal footing,” the DPJ is taking a very dangerous path on this issue. It is insisting on the Japanese Self-Defense Forces’ participation in the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) for Afghanistan, which means deploying Ground Self-Defense Force units to Afghan. The DPJ took the initiative in sending the SDF to waters off the coast of Somalia. The DPJ has argued in the Diet that it will push ahead with making legal arrangements as well as interpretational amendments to the Constitution to pave the way for Japan to constitutionally use force on overseas missions sanctioned by U.N. resolutions. Its leader has argued that the further reinforcement of the SDF will make it possible to take the place of the U.S. forces in the defense of Japan.
The DPJ has told the United States that it is in favor of a stronger Japan-U.S. alliance. This argument is even more dangerous than that of the ruling LDP. The DPJ is actually calling for Japan to be more subordinate to the United States than ever before. It is therefore deceptive for the DPJ to argue that the Japan-U.S. relations should be on an “equal footing.”
In view of the global movements demanding a democratic and peaceful international order and rejection of U.S. domination, Japanese political parties are being tested over choosing between the two directions, maintaining the policy of regarding the Japan-U.S. military alliance as absolute or calling for breaking away from the military alliance with the United States in order to end Japan’s subordination to the United States.
