June 23, 2010
The Japan-U.S. Security Treaty, the axis of the bilateral military alliance, on June 23 marks its 50th anniversary. Its half century history and current reality highlight the outdated characteristics of the alliance, which has nothing to do with the Japan’s defense.
Irrelevant to Japan’s defense
The force structure of U.S. troops, which are allowed to stay in Japan under the Treaty, is designed for their global deployment rather than for Japan’s defense. This will be clearly illustrated by the comparison between their force structure in Japan and that in Germany, which like Japan has accepted a large number of American soldiers.
In Germany, 70 percent of U.S. forces are in the army, while in Japan all four U.S. military service branches are deployed. The Marine Corps and Navy account for two thirds of all U.S. forces in Japan and are deployed overseas over half of the year. In addition, Japan is the only country in the world that hosts the U.S. Marine Expeditionary Force and Carrier Strike Group.
The Japanese government, however, has been insisting that the U.S. forces are stationed here to defend Japan, referring to the threats caused by the former Soviet Union, China, North Korea and others. Recently, it even started to justify the stationing of the Marine Corps in Okinawa as a deterrent against these threats.
Yet, for the 65 years since World War II, no country has threatened an attack on Japan. On the contrary, U.S. troops in Japan have been repeatedly dispatched to Asia and to the Middle East and killed many civilians. In many conflicts that have nothing to do with Japan, they have showed their combat readiness by swiftly dispatching strike forces.
The Navy’s Seventh Fleet, which has its command headquarters in Yokosuka, is operating over half of the globe, while the Marine Corps is conducting overseas exercises between about 70 and 80 times a year in addition to its operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Many military alliances disbanded
In 1960, when the current Japan-U.S. Security Treaty was concluded, networks of military alliances centered around the United States and the former Soviet Union were spreading all over the world. Countries under the alliances consisted of 60 percent of nations worldwide, accounting for 67 percent of the world population. These two percentages now are down to 16 percent.
The alliance system led by the Soviet Union disbanded while many U.S. centered alliances also have disappeared or stopped functioning. Today, in addition to the Japan-U.S. alliance, only the North Atlantic Organization Treaty (NATO), and the U.S.-South Korea and the U.S.- Australia alliances are actually operating.
Furthermore, as several of the main member states of the NATO alliance such as Germany and France opposed the U.S.-led Iraq War, the North Atlantic alliance has been reducing its dependence on the United States. The size of American bases is scaling down in NATO countries and in South Korea. In Australia, there is very little U.S. military presence. Nevertheless, Japan insists on maintaining its outdated alliance, under which it supports every U.S.-led war abroad.
- Akahata June 23, 2010
The force structure of U.S. troops, which are allowed to stay in Japan under the Treaty, is designed for their global deployment rather than for Japan’s defense. This will be clearly illustrated by the comparison between their force structure in Japan and that in Germany, which like Japan has accepted a large number of American soldiers.
In Germany, 70 percent of U.S. forces are in the army, while in Japan all four U.S. military service branches are deployed. The Marine Corps and Navy account for two thirds of all U.S. forces in Japan and are deployed overseas over half of the year. In addition, Japan is the only country in the world that hosts the U.S. Marine Expeditionary Force and Carrier Strike Group.
The Japanese government, however, has been insisting that the U.S. forces are stationed here to defend Japan, referring to the threats caused by the former Soviet Union, China, North Korea and others. Recently, it even started to justify the stationing of the Marine Corps in Okinawa as a deterrent against these threats.
Yet, for the 65 years since World War II, no country has threatened an attack on Japan. On the contrary, U.S. troops in Japan have been repeatedly dispatched to Asia and to the Middle East and killed many civilians. In many conflicts that have nothing to do with Japan, they have showed their combat readiness by swiftly dispatching strike forces.
The Navy’s Seventh Fleet, which has its command headquarters in Yokosuka, is operating over half of the globe, while the Marine Corps is conducting overseas exercises between about 70 and 80 times a year in addition to its operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Many military alliances disbanded
In 1960, when the current Japan-U.S. Security Treaty was concluded, networks of military alliances centered around the United States and the former Soviet Union were spreading all over the world. Countries under the alliances consisted of 60 percent of nations worldwide, accounting for 67 percent of the world population. These two percentages now are down to 16 percent.
The alliance system led by the Soviet Union disbanded while many U.S. centered alliances also have disappeared or stopped functioning. Today, in addition to the Japan-U.S. alliance, only the North Atlantic Organization Treaty (NATO), and the U.S.-South Korea and the U.S.- Australia alliances are actually operating.
Furthermore, as several of the main member states of the NATO alliance such as Germany and France opposed the U.S.-led Iraq War, the North Atlantic alliance has been reducing its dependence on the United States. The size of American bases is scaling down in NATO countries and in South Korea. In Australia, there is very little U.S. military presence. Nevertheless, Japan insists on maintaining its outdated alliance, under which it supports every U.S.-led war abroad.
- Akahata June 23, 2010
