An 8.9 Quake Could Have Irradiated the Entire US

By Harvey Wasserman from Commondreams.org

Had the massive 8.9 Richter-scale earthquake that has just savaged Japan hit off the California coast, it could have ripped apart at least four coastal reactors and sent a lethal cloud of radiation across the entire United States.

The two huge reactors each at San Onofre and Diablo Canyon are not designed to withstand such powerful shocks. All four are extremely close to major faults.

All four reactors are located relatively low to the coast. They are vulnerable to tsunamis like those now expected to hit as many as fifty countries.

San Onofre sits between San Diego and Los Angeles. A radioactive cloud spewing from one or both reactors there would do incalculable damage to either or both urban areas before carrying over the rest of southern and central California.

Diablo Canyon is at Avila Beach, on the coast just west of San Luis Obispo, between Los Angeles and San Francisco. A radioactive eruption there would pour into central California and, depending on the winds, up to the Bay Area or southeast into Santa Barbara and then to Los Angeles. The cloud would at very least permanently destroy much of the region on which most Americans rely for their winter supply of fresh vegetables.

By the federal Price-Anderson Act of 1957, the owners of the destroyed reactors---including Pacific Gas & Electric and Southern California Edison---would be covered by private insurance only up to $11 billion, a tiny fraction of the trillions of dollars worth of damage that would be done. The rest would become the responsibility of the federal taxpayer and the fallout victims. Virtually all homeowner insurance policies in the United States exempt the insurers from liability from a reactor disaster.

The most definitive recent study of the 1986 Chernobyl disaster puts the death toll at 985,000. The accident irradiated a remote rural area. The nearest city, Kiev, is 80 kilometers away.

But San Luis Obispo is some ten miles directly downwind from Diablo Canyon. The region around San Onofre has become heavily suburbanized.

Heavy radioactive fallout spread from Chernobyl blanketed all of Europe within a matter of days. It covered an area far larger than the United States.

Fallout did hit the jet stream and then the coast of California, thousands of miles away, within ten days. It then carried all the way across the northern tier of the United States.

Chernobyl Unit Four was of comparable size to the two reactors at Diablo Canyon, and somewhat larger than the two at San Onofre.

But it was very new when it exploded. California's four coastal reactors have been operating since the 1970s and 1980s. Their accumulated internal radioactive burdens could exceed what was spewed at Chernobyl.

Japanese officials say all affected reactors automatically shut, with no radiation releases. But they are not reliable. In 2007 a smaller earthquake rocked the seven-reactor Kashiwazaki site and forced its lengthy shut-down.

Preliminary reports indicate at least one fire at a Japanese reactor hit by this quake and tsunami.

In 1986 the Perry nuclear plant, east of Cleveland, was rocked by a 5.5 Richter-scale shock, many orders of magnitude weaker than this one. That quake broke pipes and other key equipment within the plant. It took out nearby roads and bridges.

Thankfully, Perry had not yet opened. An official Ohio commission later warned that evacuation during such a quake would be impossible.

Numerous other American reactors sit on or near earthquake faults.

The Obama Administration is now asking Congress for $36 billion in new loan guarantees to build more commercial reactors.

Harvey Wasserman's Solartopia! Our Green-Powered Earth, A.D. 2030, is at www.solartopia.org. He is senior advisor to Greenpeace USA and the Nuclear Information & Resource Service, and writes regularly forwww.freepress.org. He and Bob Fitrakis have co-authored four books on election protection, including Did George W. Bush Steal America's 2004 Election?, As Goes Ohio: Election Theft Since 2004 , How the GOP Stole America's 2004 Election & Is Rigging 2008, and What Happened in Ohio

Mass Rally in Okinawa Demands Base Closures

Mass rally in Okinawa demands bases pullout .
Tuesday, 27 April 2010
by Therese Hart
Marianas Variety News Staff


ABOUT 100,000 protesters attended a rally on Okinawa Sunday to demonstrate against a U.S. air base in a row that is dominating Japan's national politics and souring its ties with Washington, according to Kyodo News and AFP.

News wires reported that Sunday’s gathering was the largest demonstration on Okinawa since the island reverted to Japan in 1972 after 27 years of U.S. occupation.

The protesters joined local politicians in calling for the removal of U.S. Marine Corps Air Station Futenma and vent their anger against the central government for dragging the issue out, according to the foreign wire agencies.

Kyodo News reported that Okinawa governor Hirokazu Nakaima, the speaker of the Okinawa assembly and most of the mayors of the Okinawa prefecture's 41 towns joined the huge protest near Kadena Air Base, the Asia-Pacific region's largest US military facility.

Demonstrators held yellow banners with messages protesting against the US military presence, including: "No Base!" and "US bases leave Okinawa!"

Meanwhile, Japan’s Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama on Saturday denied a Washington Post story that Japan is close to supporting portions of the 2006 alliance to move U.S. Marines from Okinawa’s Futenma air base to the more northeast coast of Okinawa.

In a nationally televised news conference, Hatoyama said going along with the plan to build a new air facility on Camp Schwab — on the Henoko Peninsula and reclaimed land in Oura Bay — was unacceptable, according to the Stars and Stripes European edition.

"The report is not true," Hatoyama said. "We cannot accept the existing plan."

He said putting the air base on land reclaimed from the ocean would harm the marine environment.

The Washington Post stated that Foreign Minister Katsuya Okada met with U.S. Ambassador John Roos and outlined an alternate plan for closing the air station that involved accepting most of the 2006 plan.

Several Japanese media outlets reported Sunday that Okada admitted he met with Roos but denied he proposed accepting most of the 2006 agreement.

Hatoyama promised to reach a decision on an alternative site by the end of May.
"I do indeed have a plan in mind," he said earlier last week. "But we are still trying to convince the United States. I cannot relate to the local people a plan that the U.S. will not accept."

Sunday’s event had the support of Okinawa’s political spectrum. Gov. Hirokazu Nakaima, an independent backed in the last election by the conservative Liberal Democratic Party, shared the stage with the members of more left-leaning parties, including Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama’s Democratic Party of Japan.

It was the first time members of the LDP — the ruling party for more than 50 years before Hatoyama took office — attended an anti-base rally on Okinawa, according to the Stars and Stripes.

Just after Hatoyama took office in September, he initiated a review of a 2006 agreement with the U.S. to close Futenma and build a new airstrip for the Marine units on Camp Schwab and on reclaimed land in Oura Bay. The ministerial committee reviewing the plan scrapped the idea, and Hatoyama is studying alternatives.

He promised to come up with a plan acceptable to Okinawa, the U.S. and whatever community he selects to host the Marines by the end of May.

Okinawa Officials Push Tokyo on Marine Operations

Okinawa officials push Tokyo on removing Marine air operations
By David Allen and Chiyomi Sumida, Stars and Stripes
Pacific edition, Saturday, March 13, 2010

GINOWAN, Okinawa — Okinawa officials are unleashing a full-court press on Tokyo to let the government know they don’t want Marine air operations to remain on the island.

Okinawa Gov. Hirokazu Nakaima and members of the Okinawa Assembly were in Tokyo this week visiting government offices to make sure their unanimous voice is being heard as the government reviews a 2006 agreement with the U.S. to close Marine Corps Air Station Futenma.

Several alternatives to the present plan are being considered by a panel that is to submit its report to Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama by the end of the month. He has set a deadline of May for settling on a site with the United States.

The leading proposals are to build a smaller air facility on a portion of Camp Schwab away from the water, move the Marine air units to Kadena Air Base, or build a new air station on reclaimed land off the Navy’s White Beach port.

All are unacceptable to Okinawans, Nakaima told Chief Cabinet Secretary Hirofumi Hirano on Wednesday.

“The purpose of building runways off the shore of Camp Schwab was to reduce the danger and impact to the local communities,” Nakaima said, according to a spokesman for Okinawa’s Futenma Relocation Task Force. “Yet, the idea of moving the air operations to the ground area of the base is in the reverse direction, which is incomprehensible to me.”

The spokesman said Hirano, who heads the review committee, told Nakaima that options for moving the Marines outside Okinawa were still on the table and the government would wrap up its study by the end of the month and would consult with him prior to an announcement.

Meanwhile, a nine-member delegation from the Okinawa Prefectural Assembly met with Minister of Defense Toshimi Kitazawa and delivered its unanimous resolution opposing any move of the Marines to a new base on Okinawa.

Yonekichi Shinzato, the head of the Social Democratic Party’s Okinawa chapter, told reporters it seemed Tokyo was leaning toward an Okinawa site.

“They have no idea how much the Okinawan people have suffered from the heavy burden of shouldering military bases since the end of World War II,” he said. “I hope the government fully understands the meaning of our resolution.”

Okinawa is host to almost half the U.S. troops in Japan and 75 percent of the land used for bases.

The Futenma controversy is threatening to unravel Hatoyama’s ruling coalition. None of the alternative sites are acceptable to all three coalition parties. The Social Democratic Party has threatened to leave the coalition if an Okinawa site is chosen and the People’s New Party has pledged to follow if the current plan under the 2006 realignment plan remains in effect.

Even Hatoyama’s majority Democratic Party of Japan is fractured, with party secretary general Ichiro Ozawa, often called the power behind the throne, expressing his dissatisfaction over proposals to relocate the base within Okinawa.

Ozawa told party officials earlier in the week that any plan to keep the Futenma operations on Okinawa would hurt them in this summer’s Upper House elections.

On the other side of the Pacific, the U.S. continues to contend that the current plan is the only option that meets its regional security requirements.

Hot Button Henoko

Monday, Oct. 19, 2009
HOT BUTTON HENOKO
Opposition to Futenma move won't go away
By ERIC JOHNSTON
Japan Times Staff writer

First of Two Parts

To understand why the stalled relocation of the U.S. Marines' Futenma air base is now arguably the most entrenched political problem facing the Japan-U.S. relationship, it's a good idea to sit for a long time on the warm beach of Henoko in northern Okinawa.

On this beach next to Camp Schwab, where plans call for a new facility to be built on reclaimed land, a group of local residents opposed to moving Futenma's functions here have set up a tent and are maintaining a protest vigil that has surpassed 2,000 days.

"It's our responsibility to ensure that the Henoko bay area, which is home to coral reefs and endangered dugong, remains pristine for our grandchildren. For peace and environmental reasons, the last thing Okinawa needs is another U.S. military base, especially here," said Hiroshi Ashitomi, cochair of a citizens' group opposing construction of the new facility and one of the leaders of the sit-in.

The 20 to 30 protesters a day who are usually at the camp on the turquoise bay are often joined by visitors from mainland Japan and abroad. Ashitomi and the others often provide briefings to university students on the social and environmental issues related to the relocation plan, explanations of why they are opposed, and reports on what local Okinawan media are saying about the building of the new base with two runways in a V-shape, a plan the governments of Japan and the United States agreed to in 2006.

While largely a friendly, uneventful camp-out, protesters have occasionally been roused to action. One of the more dramatic incidents was a confrontation last year on the bay and underwater when Japan Coast Guard divers tried to set up cameras on the seabed.

On June 18, 2008, when coast guard boats appeared and divers began setting up cameras and other equipment on the seabed, protesters donned wet suits and air tanks, jumped into small boats and kayaks, and went out to stop them.

Video taken by the protesters shows seven divers surrounding a lone protester underwater and the physical confrontation that followed, as well as a standoff on the surface between other coast guard boats and protesters.

The confrontation fortunately ended without serious injury. But the incident galvanized local political opposition to the Henoko plan. Exactly one month later, on July 18, the prefectural assembly, which had just been captured by the Democratic Party of Japan and other parties opposed to the Futenma plan, passed a resolution calling for the replacement facility to be built outside Okinawa.

Last year, Yukio Hatoyama visited Okinawa and said that if he became prime minister he would work to have Futenma relocated outside Japan. In autumn 2008, Seiji Maehara, now minister of land, infrastructure, transport and tourism and state minister for Okinawa and Northern Territories affairs, told supporters that advisers to Barack Obama had indicated to him earlier that year they were willing to reconsider the entire 2006 agreement if Obama became president.

Such comments by Hatoyama and Maehara raised expectations among Henoko opponents that an Obama presidency and a DPJ-led government would lead to the cancellation of the relocation plan.

By June 2009, an opinion poll conducted by the local Okinawa Times and the Asahi Shimbun showed 68 percent of Okinawa residents opposed relocating Futenma within the prefecture, against only 18 percent in favor.

Survey respondents who were opposed said relocating to Henoko would not reduce the overall burden of the U.S. bases in Okinawa, which hosts 75 percent of all U.S. bases in Japan, and would destroy the marine environment.

Those who approved said relocating to Henoko would get Futenma out of crowded Ginowan, in central Okinawa, and into an area where noise and other problems would be much less of an issue. Others said that in exchange for allowing the Henoko facility to be built, Tokyo would hopefully reward Okinawa with subsidies for local economic development.

In addition to the DPJ-led coalition taking power on the national level, local political opposition to the Henoko plan was further strengthened in the Aug. 30 election when all five winning candidates from Okinawa announced they would oppose funding for the Henoko facility and negotiate with the U.S. to have Futenma relocated outside of not just Okinawa but Japan.

The changed political landscape means the only prominent politician in Okinawa still talking about relocating Futenma within the prefecture is Gov. Hirokazu Nakaima. But Nakaima finds himself surrounded by those who disagree with him and faces a tough re-election campaign in November 2010, where his opponents will likely to be more organized and better financed than they were in 2006 when Nakaima faced a split opposition and won partially by telling voters that he didn't support the current plan.

Today, however, Nakaima is caught in a tug or war.

The combatants are those in the prefectural assembly and Tokyo who oppose a Henoko facility, the mayor and residents of Ginowan who are demanding Futenma close as early as possible, and members of his Liberal Democratic Party and base supporters.

The latter worry that if the opposition gets its way, the money the U.S. military on Okinawa contributes to the local economy in the form of employment of local residents, base land lease payments, personnel-related spending, and base-related contracts with local businesses, will dry up, leaving what is already one of Japan's poorest prefectures even worse off.

According to the prefecture, the economic impact of the U.S. military amounts to at least $2 billion annually.

Nakaima has dealt with the pressure, and accusations that he has caved in to Tokyo and Washington, by attempting to convince Okinawans that the Henoko base agreement is a done deal.

"Relocating outside of Okinawa Prefecture would be best. But we can't resist accepting relocation within the prefecture. However, the central government needs to come up with a plan for resolving the issue as quickly as possible," Nakaima told reporters in Naha last Tuesday, the day he released his opinions of an environmental impact assessment report on the Henoko plan.

A decision by Tokyo, however, will not come soon despite pressure from both the Okinawans and Washington, which is viewing with increasing concern the growing political opposition in Japan not only to the Futenma relocation plan but also extension of the Maritime Self-Defense Forces refueling mission in the Indian Ocean.

On Friday, Hatoyama said a final decision on the Futenma issue is unlikely before next summer.

"I think we will need a conclusion around the midpoint of the period between the Nago mayoral election and the Okinawa gubernatorial election," he said.

On the one hand, Hatoyama has said he wants Futenma to leave the prefecture.

On the other hand, the DPJ's manifesto for the recent Lower House election did not specifically commit the party to carrying out his promise, merely to "review the realignment of the bases and the way they should be," which those who oppose the Henoko plan fear gives him wiggle room to get out of his verbal promise, but those who hope for a compromise with the U.S. can be reached see as a possible way out of the current stalemate.

Publicly, the United States continues to insist that it wants to stick to the 2006 agreement and the current plans for the Henoko facility. But privately, American officials who deal with Japan and Okinawa say relocating to Henoko is so fraught with logistic problems there is no way the agreement can be carried out by 2014 even if the political opposition in Japan is somehow overcome.

Alternatives to Henoko have yet to be floated by high-ranking policymakers on either side. Years ago, there was talk among some outside policy experts about consolidating the marines now at Futenma with the adjacent Kadena air force base and relocating them farther south to Shimoji Island, where an airport with a 3,000-meter runway is located. The runway and airport are currently used primarily for commercial aviation training. But for political and operational reasons, such proposals were rejected.

Though next year marks the 50th anniversary of Japan's security treaty with the United States, with political pressure in Okinawa and the rest of Japan on the rise to relocate the Futenma replacement facility outside Japan, highly visible celebrations and public discussion may lead to more political headaches all around for both Tokyo and Washington.

"Some in the U.S. have recently been promoting, a little too loudly, 2010 as the 50th anniversary of the security treaty. Given the current political atmosphere in Tokyo and Okinawa, this is a mistake and may further strengthen opposition in Okinawa and to the Henoko facility," said one Japan-based U.S. government official, speaking anonymously.

In the meantime, the sit-in protest at Henoko continues. Protesters say they will take to their boats again if construction proceeds. But despite the recent political changes that appear to favor their cause, none of those camping out there are ready to declare victory.

"We've been here for more than 2,000 days and have heard lots of promises from politicians in Okinawa and Tokyo, none of which have panned out. While we are hopeful the Hatoyama government will eventually close Futenma and relocate it outside the prefecture, nobody expects that to happen soon," said Ashitomi.

http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/nn20091019a4.html

Incoming Tokyo government threatens split with US

A split is emerging between the United States and Japan over the new Tokyo government's anti-globalisation rhetoric and its threats to end a refueling agreement for US ships in support of the war in Afghanistan.

By Julian Ryall in Tokyo
Published: 4:38PM BST 11 Sep 2009

Yukio Hatoyama, the leader of the Democratic Party of Japan, has caused alarm in Washington after publishing an article blaming the US for the ills of capitalism, the global economy and "the destruction of human dignity".

He also intends to examine an agreement that permits US warships to dock at Japanese ports, in violation of the nation's non-nuclear principles. Mr Hatoyama says he will also look again at the $6 billion cost faced by Japan to transfer thousands of US troops from their base in Okinawa to the Pacific island of Guam amid a wide-ranging review of the American military presence on Japanese soil.

His election campaign promised a more "independent" foreign policy from Washington and closer relations with Asian neighbours, including China. On Thursday, he repeated his intention to defy the US and end the Maritime Self-Defence Force's resupply mission in the Indian Ocean.

Mr Hatoyama will be sworn in on Wednesday after an historic victory that ended decades of near unbroken rule by the Liberal Democratic Party. He will have his first meeting with Barack Obama, the US president, at the United Nations on Sep 22.

The Pentagon reminded Japan of the expectations it faced as a "great power and one of the world's wealthiest countries". Geoff Morrell, a spokesman, said: "There is an international responsibility, we believe, for everyone to do their share, as best they can, to contribute to this effort to bring about a more peaceful and secure Afghanistan."

The Defence Department would not "prejudge" Japan's new political leadership, he added.

"We think that when the responsibility of governing comes about that people will appreciate, as we have every reason to believe they do, the importance of this alliance and the importance of working together on these [security] agreements," he said.

Makoto Watanabe, a professor of media and communication at Hokkaido Bunkyo University, said: "The US has been critical of new trends in Japan, but we are not a colony of Washington and we should be able to say what we want.

"The Japan-US relationship will remain our most important bilateral link, but while under previous governments Japan had become a yes-man to the US, this suggests to me that healthy change is taking place."

Election Don't Expected to Alter US-Japan Ties

Election not expected to alter U.S.-Japan ties
By David Allen and Chiyomi Sumida, Stars and Stripes
Pacific edition, Sunday, August 30, 2009

CHATAN, Okinawa — Even though Japan’s ruling Liberal Democratic Party is expected to get a spanking in Sunday’s Lower House election, don’t look for any immediate changes in the U.S.-Japan security relationship, political observers say.

The Democratic Party of Japan, which is expected to win about 300 of the 480 seats up for grabs, has backed off of previous calls for major revisions to the country’s military relationship with the United States.

Instead, it has campaigned on pledges that focus on domestic issues.

U.S. officials have taken a wait-and-see stand on the prospect of dealing with a new government, particularly in regards to plans to reduce the U.S. military footprint on Okinawa by transferring 8,000 Marines and their families to Guam by the end of 2014 and closing several bases.

In a broader agreement signed in May 2006, the so-called Roadmap to Realignment hinged on moving Marine air operations from Marine Corps Air Station Futenma to a new air facility to be built on Camp Schwab.

In the past, the DPJ has opposed the project that U.S. officials have called non-negotiable.

"It’s not maybe everything that everybody wanted," Lt. Gen. Edward Rice, commander of U.S. Forces Japan, said earlier this month. "But it certainly is progress in terms of both providing for the continued defense of Japan and security in the region and decreasing the impact of the presence of U.S. forces on the local communities."

Political observers say the DPJ will be treading cautiously on relations with the U.S. and international relations in general during the first few months it is in power.

That is because DPJ’s priority is domestic issues, said Kazuya Sakamoto, professor of international politics at the University of Osaka.

"Because of this, they would rather maintain the status quo in foreign affairs," he said.

The one change in international affairs, Sakamoto said, will be discontinuing the refueling operations conducted by the Japan Self-Defense Force in the Indian Ocean as part of Japan’s support of U.S. combat operations in Afghanistan.

"The DPJ announced earlier that refueling operations would be discontinued after January," Sakamoto told Stars and Stripes last week. But that will have little effect on relations between the two countries, he said.

"The operation has rather a symbolic meaning for U.S.-Japan cooperation," he said.

The DPJ has backed away from its previous call for sweeping changes in the status of forces agreement and host nation support for the U.S. bases.

The party’s current platform now calls for minor changes in the SOFA, including stronger requirements on the U.S. to restore property to its original condition when it’s turned over to Japan.

Okinawan DPJ candidates, although strongly against the Futenma relocation project, appear to be toeing the party line.

While Dennie Tamaki, the party’s candidate from the Okinawa City area, is strongly against the project and wants a drastic reduction in the U.S. military presence on Okinawa, he will not be pressing the issue, senior campaign official Masayoshi Ishikawa said Thursday.

"His priority will be on making sure the jobs of the Japanese employees of the bases are secure," Ishikawa said, adding that Tamaki wants to be sure there is replacement employment whenever a base is closed.

After the post-election confetti has been swept away, the DPJ will also be looking to the situation in North Korea, Sakamoto said.

"The most imminent matter for Japan is North Korea’s nuclear issue, not the realignment of U.S. Forces in Japan or the relocation of Futenma air station," he said. "Japan hopes for denuclearization of the peninsula to secure peace and stability in the region."

In an op-ed piece Friday in the New York Times, party leader Yukio Hatoyama, who is expected to be the next prime minister, said "the Japan-U.S. security pact will continue to be the cornerstone of Japanese diplomatic policy."

However, the country will no longer be the "yes man" he accused the LDP of being.

"We want a relationship where we can make suggestions because we are an ally of the U.S., and not a relationship where we dispatch the Japan Self-Defense Forces overseas having been told to do so by the U.S.," Hatoyama said recently during a news conference in Tokyo.

While the realignment of U.S. troops in Japan may continue, it won’t be at full speed, predicts Masaaki Gabe, professor of international relations at University of the Ryukyus.

Gabe said it will be difficult for the DPJ to abandon the Futenma relocation project, however.

"It’s already ongoing," Gabe said. "But, if they win more than 300 seats, they will likely meddle with the 2010 budget bill, which includes realignment related costs, scheduled to be submitted to the Diet in September."

That could affect Japan’s promise to contribute 60 percent of the $10 billion price tag placed on the relocation of Marines to Guam, Gabe said.

Likely New Japanese Prime Minister Could Stall Guam Buildup

Likely "Japan Prime Minister" Could Stall Guam Buildup
Guam News Factor
By Jeff Marchesseault
July 26, 2009

GUAM - On Thursday the Democratic Party of Japan announced a set of platform-basing policies that includes a potential stumbling block on the road to Guam's military buildup. It's a sticking point that could conceivably stall the scheduled transfer of the first of thousands of U.S. Marines and their families from bases in Okinawa to new, refurbished and expanded installations on Guam, beginning in the fall of next year.

Walking Softly With A Big Stick

A month before an election that's likely to topple Prime Minister Taro Aso and the five-and-a-half-decade reign of the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) that backs him, the rising opposition Democratic Party of Japan (DPJ) has toned down its stance against U.S. policies. Led by likely Prime Minister-Elect Yukio Hatoyama, the DPJ has also cut back its criticisms of the ruling party's generous investment in American military security for the region.

This quieting of the DPJ's rhetoric may have as much to do with the opposition's desire to secure as many votes as possible going into August 30th elections -- as it does with a stark realization that the 50-year-old U.S-Japan economic and security alliance is worth preserving. Especially in a Pacific region seething with lingering security questions.

Harbinger Of Hope

Communist Chinese naval power is on the rise while communist North Korea continues to advance and test its nuclear capability and long-range missile effectiveness. What better friend for democratic Japan to keep in this war of the ideologies than the one with the world's most-advanced defense technology, the world's biggest economy, and arguably the world's most ardent tradition of equality and human rights?

Wallowing In The Mire

But recent outward signs of 'playing it safe' haven't stopped the DPJ from including in its just-released election platform the kind of policy points that are apt to set the U.S. defense community on alert.

In particular, the Guam buildup could trip over a controversial plan to move a U.S. defense facility within Okinawa -- a plan the DPJ has opposed and is still making an issue of within its recently-released 57-page "INDEX 2009" policy stance.

The plan to move 8,000 Marines from Okinawa to Guam between 2010 and 2014 is tied to a larger bilateral agreement to realign U.S. armed forces in the Pacific. The realignment includes moving Futenma Air Station from the crowded Okinawan municipality of Ginowan City to a remote peninsula on the Japanese island near Camp Schwab.

According to today's Asia Times...

INDEX 2009 also mentioned the party's plan to raise the issue of the Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA), a long-standing issue of jurisdiction over the 37,000-strong US military presence in Japan.

The party has proposed relocation of the US Marine Corps Futenma Air Station in Ginowan City, Okinawa Prefecture, to outside the prefecture, and has opposed the agreement between the US and Japanese governments on the planned relocation of that station within the prefecture.

Under the US-Japan accord, 8,000 Marines and their 9,000 dependents will be transferred from Okinawa to Guam by 2014, while the US Marine Corps Air Station Futenma in the city of Ginowan will be relocated to Henoko district in Nago, Okinawa. Okinawa is home to 70% of the US military facilities in Japan. The DPJ has advocated reducing Okinawa's burden of hosting US military bases as a principal policy imperative.

DPJ May Seek Funding Cut for Troop Realignment

Japan’s Opposition Would Push U.S. to Renegotiate Troop Move
By Sachiko Sakamaki and Takashi Hirokawa

July 17 (Bloomberg) -- The Democratic Party of Japan will seek to cut the estimated $10.3 billion cost for transferring 8,000 U.S. Marines from Okinawa to Guam by 2014 should it win next month’s elections, the party’s shadow defense chief said.

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Japanese Foreign Minister Hirofumi Nakasone signed an agreement in February for Japan to provide $6.09 billion for the move and infrastructure. The costs include a projected $700,000 per housing unit for the troops, which is too much, DPJ legislator Keiichiro Asao said.

“Given the fact that the land is free, $700,000 is too expensive,” Asao, 45, said in a July 15 interview in his Tokyo office. “We’re ready to pay and aren’t calling for lowering the quality. But we cannot convince taxpayers unless we examine the grounds of such an estimation and cut what we can cut.”

Polls show the DPJ is poised to unseat Prime Minister Taro Aso and his Liberal Democratic Party in parliamentary elections on Aug. 30. The LDP has governed almost without interruption since 1955, with foreign policy centered around a U.S. security treaty that keeps 50,000 American troops stationed in Japan. DPJ leaders have called for a less subordinate alliance.

While echoing the call for “equal” ties, Asao said any concerns that a DPJ government would alter the fundamental relationship with the U.S. were misguided.

“We’re not going to be making major policy changes,” he said. The Japan-U.S. alliance “will be fine.”


Ending Refueling Mission

His party has opposed dispatching Japanese naval refueling vessels to the Indian Ocean to help the U.S.-led war in Afghanistan and will end it once in office, Asao said.

“We’ll stop the refueling mission,” he said. “There won’t be much of an impact because the amount of fuel Japan is providing is decreasing.”

Aso has made the DPJ’s opposition to Japanese military missions overseas a campaign issue. He criticized former opposition leader Ichiro Ozawa’s suggestion that the U.S. should eventually reduce its forces in Japan, saying it would weaken the country.

Asked who they would support in next month’s election, 37.4 percent of voters favored the DPJ compared with 19.5 percent for the LDP, according to a Jiji News survey published yesterday. Aso’s support rate fell to 16.3 percent from 24.1 percent last month, according to the survey, which didn’t provide a margin of error.

The DPJ will submit a bill to enable Japan to inspect North Korean ships suspected of carrying nuclear-related goods to implement a U.N. resolution against North Korea once the party takes power. A similar bill introduce by the LDP, which cleared the Diet’s lower house, is likely to die because the DPJ- controlled upper house stopped any debate after Aso on July 13 said he would dissolve parliament next week.

House Bill May Complicate Things at Camp Schwab

Bill may complicate planned Camp Schwab airstrip
By Leo Shane III and David Allen
Stars and Stripes
Pacific edition, Sunday, June 28, 2009

The House version of the Fiscal 2010 Defense Authorization Bill could hamper plans to replace Marine Corps Air Station Futenma on Okinawa with a new airstrip on Camp Schwab.

Under the bill, the Defense Department "may not accept … a replacement facility in Okinawa (for Futenma) unless the Secretary certifies to the congressional defense committees that the replacement facility satisfies at least minimum Naval Aviation Safety requirements."

The language was prompted by concerns raised by Naval Air Systems Command about hazards surrounding the new airstrip location, including utility poles in the proposed flight path, a nearby school and the planned V-shaped runway into Oura Bay, said Dave Helfert, a spokesman for U.S. Rep. Neil Abercrombie, D-Hawaii, a member of the House Armed Services Committee.

The bill allows for safety improvements to be made at Camp Schwab to make it an acceptable replacement for Futenma, Helfert said.

The House approved its version of the authorization bill with the Futenma language Thursday, by a 389-22 vote.

However, the White House Office of Management and Budget issued a statement Thursday citing concern that the clause would "limit the Secretary’s authority to exercise reasonable judgment regarding airfield operations."

"The current FRF (Futenma Replacement Facility) configuration was agreed to during bilateral negotiations with the government of Japan, and this provision places the resulting International Agreement at risk," the office stated.

A Pentagon spokesman echoed the White House concerns.

"There have been public reports in the U.S. pertaining to safety issues with the Futenma replacement plan," the spokesman said Thursday.

"There are processes in place to address these concerns without making changes to the agreement itself. Moving a runway or reconfiguring a facility would be examples of major changes that the U.S. would not support."

Madeleine Z. Bordallo, the House delegate from Guam, said House Armed Services Committee chairman Ike Skelton, D-Mo., raised concerns about the design of the facility. But, she said, the language in the bill is not mean to scuttle the far-reaching realignment plans.

"The continued commitment to the military build-up on Guam is evident in the significant military construction funding for Guam in the bill," Bordallo said. "The issue of the Futenma Replacement Facility is a provision that the committee leadership will continue to address in conference committee with the Department of Defense."

Japanese officials Thursday said the clause flies in the face of a bilateral plan to replace the air station, close U.S. military bases south of Camp Foster, and to transfer some 8,000 Marines and their families to Guam in 2014.

The plan is part of a well-thought-out agreement made by both governments, said a spokeswoman for the Ministry of Defense.

"The plan was not made by a suggestion from one side, but it was a fruit of discussions and studies from various aspects by both governments," she said.

Japanese opposition parties and some Okinawa officials have serious concerns about the safety of the current plan. Okinawa Gov. Hirokazu Nakaima has demanded the runways be placed farther offshore.

The 2010 appropriations bill allots $934 million for defense projects on Guam for the coming year. That’s just the start of some $4 billion the U.S. plans to spend to build housing and other infrastructure for the move of Marines, including several major Marine commands now based on Okinawa.

The total cost of relocation has been budgeted at $10.27 billion, with Japan paying $6.07 billion, or 59 percent.

But replacing MCAS Futenma has always been a sticking point. The United States and Japan have been searching for a way to replace the air station ever since they signed an agreement in 1996 for the return of some 21 percent of the land on Okinawa used by the U.S. military.

A spokesman for Japan’s Ministry of Defense said he was aware of the clause in the authorization bill, but was hopeful the realignment plan would move forward as planned.

"It has been affirmed by Prime Minister Aso and President Obama that both countries would steadily carry out realignment plans according to the road map, which both governments agreed to in 2006, including facility relocation and closure of the Futenma air station facility," he said.

"Also, it is stipulated in a pact signed by both governments, an international promise, that both governments have an intention to complete the replacement facility," he said.

Stars and Stripes reporters Chiyomi Sumida and Jeff Schogol contributed to this report.

AntiNuclear Groups Start Events in Japan

Antinuclear groups start events
Kyodo News

Two major antinuclear organizations have begun holding events to mark the 63rd anniversary of the U.S. atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

The Japan Congress Against A- and H-Bombs, or Gensuikin, held an international forum Saturday in Yokosuka, Kanagawa Prefecture, and adopted a resolution against the planned deployment of a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier at the U.S. Navy base in Yokosuka.

About 100 people participated in the forum, with six panelists, including activists from China, South Korea and the United States, exchanging views on denuclearization in northeastern Asia and the deployment of the USS George Washington.

The Japan Council against Atomic and Hydrogen Bombs, or Gensuikyo, meanwhile, held an international forum Saturday in Hiroshima with 250 people taking part.

The forums were held amid news reports that water with trace amounts of radioactivity may have leaked for months from a U.S. nuclear-powered submarine when it traveled around the Pacific to ports in Guam, Japan and Hawaii.

The two groups will each hold rallies and other events in Hiroshima and Nagasaki through next Saturday.

The Japan Times: Monday, Aug. 4, 2008
(C) All rights reserved

Trouble at the Tip of the Spear

"Trouble at the Tip of the Spear"
Tobias Harris
Observing Japan
March 23, 2008

Most of the concerns about the lack of progress in implementing the 2006 US-Japan realignment agreement have focused on political troubles in Japan, as Tokyo has struggled to get local governments involved in the relocation of US forces in Japan to accept the terms of the 2006 agreement. With the change of government in Iwakuni removing an obstacle (and, in accordance with Tokyo's tit-for-tat tactics, resulting in the restoration of frozen subsidies to Iwakuni) and the environmental survey at Camp Schwab in Okinawa proceeding, albeit irregularly, attention is now shifting to Guam, the receiving end of the realignment agreement.

A look at Guam shows that even if the Japanese side of the process was proceeding smoothly, the US still has substantial work to do to prepare Guam to host an additional 40,000 US service personnel, dependents, and contractors, a substantial increase from the 13,000 who are there presently (in addition to 173,000 civilians).

The stakes of the Guam buildup are enormous. For Guam's citizens, the expanded military presence will mean a massive boon to the territory's economy. For the US military, Guam will become an important hub for the Navy, Air Force, and Marines, a transformation already underway as far as the Air Force is concerned. Contractors are undoubtedly excited about the projected $13 billion price tag, a number that will likely increase. But preparing the island for the massive influx of US forces will require cooperation among the federal government, the Japanese government, Guam's government, and the US military — and for the moment, cooperation has been elusive, raising questions about whether the project will begin in 2010 as scheduled.

The Hill, a Capitol Hill publication, highlighted an additional problem: Madeline Bordallo, Guam's congressional delegate, is struggling to build a coalition that will support funding for the project. The article notes that Ms. Bordallo is having a particularly hard time gaining support in the Senate, where Guam has no representation. (Another problem is that many lawmakers know nothing about Guam, beginning with its location.)

Federal funding is indispensable, because this project is not just a matter of military bases. The influx of personnel will entail major improvements in the island's infrastructure, which is already stressed due to its position in Typhoon alley and a surprisingly costly snake problem. It will entail new homes and schools. (The Washington Post reviewed the infrastructure and funding problems in an article last month.)

What does this mean for the Japanese government? According to the 2006 agreement, of course, Japan is obligated to pay $6 billion towards the transfer of Marines to Guam, meaning that Tokyo will be paying for this massive construction project. Undoubtedly Washington is eager to receive Japanese funds. But given the coordination problems that have hampered the process to date, and the oversight problems that will undoubtedly dog the process in the future, is Japanese money worth what the Japanese contribution will cost in terms of efficiency? The debate in the Diet last year over Japanese fuel contributions that may have been diverted to the Iraqi campaign was in a sense a preview for the debate that will surround the use of Japanese funds in Guam. While most of the contribution will be in the form of loans from the Japan Bank of International Cooperation (JBIC), the GOJ's $2.8 billion direct contribution will come under intense scrutiny from the opposition — and if the DPJ and other opposition parties manage to form a government, the 2007 law authorizing the use of Japanese funds could be repealed (if the DPJ's opposition to the law's passage is any indication).

Admittedly, though, the efficiency gains for releasing Japan from its obligations are the least important argument in support of this idea, because as noted above the process is inefficient as is.

I think that the next president should offer to renegotiate the 2006 agreement and to release Japan from its financial contribution as a gesture of goodwill and a signal that the next administration will mark the beginning of a new, more equitable era in the alliance. For the Bush administration, a closer alliance has meant an alliance in which Tokyo is more subservient to Washington. The next administration can break from the past by recognizing Japan's financial difficulties and freeing Tokyo from having to pay for construction on Guam. While the Japanese financial contribution will be missed, particularly as the price tag grows, the change in tone that would result from renegotiation would yield long-term benefits from US-Japan cooperation (instead of the ill will associated with the current arrangement).

Meanwhile, the next president should make preparations on Guam a priority for US Asia policy and use presidential power to solve the coordination problems currently hampering the construction project, pressuring Congress to appropriate funds for the construction in order to expedite the process. (And the US might as well finance it from deficit spending and let China pay for the construction.)

Tobias Harris
I am an American, Chicago-born, and a fledgling Japan/East Asia specialist, who until recently worked as an aide to a member of the Japanese Diet. I have been published in a variety of publications, including the Wall Street Journal Asia, the Far Eastern Economic Review, and J@pan Inc. I can be contacted at observingjapan@gmail.com.
Posted by Added Entry at 7:56 AM

The Okinawa Factor

THE OKINAWA FACTOR
Love-hate ties bind Okinawans, U.S. military
Islanders forge enduring relationships with American personnel but are angered by crimes
By TAKUYA ASAKURA
The Japan Times

Sixth in an occasional series Staff writer OKINAWA CITY, Okinawa Pref. -- Many former American soldiers who once stayed at the Diego Hotel near the U.S. Kadena Air Base here regard the hotel's manager with a reverence usually reserved for their own mothers.

Yet they are probably unaware of some of the bitter memories harbored by the 71-year-old Takako Miyagi.

Miyagi said she just received another call from a former American guest who stayed at the hotel about 25 years ago and still refers to her as "Mama-san."

She said she remembers the homesick soldier sobbing on the stairs of the hotel after the Vietnam War.

He has called her almost every year since he returned to the U.S., although Miyagi said she does not understand his English very well.

Despite the bloody confrontation with U.S. forces, Okinawa's postwar occupation and problems involving U.S. military personnel even after its reversion to Japan, many residents of Okinawa have built warm friendships with U.S. soldiers over the past half century.

Some outsiders are puzzled therefore when this apparent affability is offset by the islanders' explicit anger toward members of the U.S. military over various crimes and misdemeanors.

Okinawans say, however, that these two faces constitute no contradiction given the history of the prefecture, which has always been forced to pander to the whims of Tokyo and Washington.

Miyagi has never forgotten April 2, 1945 -- the day after the U.S. forces landed on the main island.

Before dawn, Miyagi, then 14 and staying in an underground shelter, was told a shocking piece of news by her aunt.

While trying to lay their hands on some food, her mother and grandfather had been shot by American soldiers who had occupied their home.

Miyagi immediately set out from the shelter with her grandmother on a rescue mission.

"I was too young to be scared," she said. "And I was taught that the Japanese army was strong and Japan always wins."

She later learned that the Imperial Japanese Army had already retreated in the face of the U.S. landing.

As the pair approached the house, Miyagi's grandmother was shot dead.

Fortunately, Miyagi managed to hide under a bush and was not spotted by U.S. troops. She spent the whole day under the bush, holding her breath.

After darkness fell, Miyagi ran back to the shelter, bullets whizzing past her head.

When she finally reached the dugout where her young brother and relatives were waiting, she burst into tears.

Miyagi could not recover the bodies of her mother and grandparents. She instead retrieved pebbles from the ground where they were killed and placed them in their graves instead of ashes.

During the final throes of World War II, Okinawans were forced to sacrifice themselves to defend the Japanese mainland. Okinawa eventually lost about a quarter of its population in the ensuing battles.

"That is how the citizens of Okinawa fought," wrote Rear Adm. Minoru Ota of the Imperial Japanese Navy in his final telegram to Tokyo before his suicide. "(I hope they) are granted special consideration in the future."

During the postwar U.S. rule of Okinawa, Miyagi, like many Okinawans in the central part of the island, initially had no choice but to work on a U.S. base.

That was until she opened the Diego Hotel in 1958 with her late husband.

And yet, she said, she did not mind serving members of the U.S. military.

"Individual soldiers were not responsible (for the death of my family)," she said, adding that she does not know why she feels this way.

"We were tamed by them as they gave us food when we had nothing."

During the Vietnam War, she shined U.S. soldiers' muddy shoes when they returned from the battlefields on leave.

The young soldiers looked sad when they were sent back to Vietnam.

"I was sad because they looked so sad," she said.

"I like them personally" was a common answer uttered by many Okinawans when asked for their views on U.S. soldiers.

Many Okinawans viewed the American soldiers as being frank, easygoing and family-loving -- traits generally shared by Okinawans themselves.

Discontent over human rights infringements suffered under U.S. military rule was smoldering, however, among the local populace.

Instead of the "special consideration" specified by Adm. Ota, Tokyo approved U.S. rule of Okinawa under the 1952 San Francisco Peace Treaty.

A 1947 letter sent by Emperor Showa to the General Headquarters of the Allied Forces also shows that he hoped the United States would continue its military occupation of Okinawa to defend both Japan and the U.S. from the threat posed by the Soviet Union.

During 27 years of U.S. military rule, private property was confiscated and used for military facilities, while residents suffered violence and fatal accidents at the hands of U.S. service personnel.

Local police officers were powerless to counter the latter.

In December 1970, a minor car accident involving members of the U.S. military and a local man in Koza -- known today as Okinawa City -- led to an unprecedented riot.

A throng of local people surrounded the American driver, his passengers and military police who tried to clear the scene, accusing them of trying to evade charges.

Incidents of vandalism were triggered by warning shots fired by the MPs, with locals burning some 80 vehicles owned by Americans throughout the night.

This flash point came a week after a military court had acquitted an American service member of fatally running over a local woman in his car while drinking and breaking the speed limit.

The victim had eight children and had long looked after her sick husband.

In addition to the thousands of traffic accidents caused by U.S. service personnel, local police in 1970 were thwarted by the Japan-U.S. Status of Forces Agreement when they tried to arrest a U.S. soldier who brutally raped and stabbed a local high school girl.

Ko Yoshioka, a photographer who witnessed the vandalism in Koza, said it was "a struggle for Okinawans to retrieve their pride as humans."

Many people here still talk about the riot with pride.

This is partly because the frenzied rioters somehow retained some semblance of discipline, only burning vehicles carrying yellow license plates that identified them as being owned by U.S. service personnel.

Author Chihiro Isa, who depicted the riot scenes in his award-winning book "Enjo" ("Burning,") described the riot as a "one-night feast."

This was because the rioters vanished before dawn and returned to the world of U.S. rule the next day.

Okinawa's reversion to Japanese rule came about shortly after the riot. In contrast to the expectations of Okinawans, however, most of the U.S. bases remained and their green lawns still stretch through the central part of the prefecture even today.

The number of brutal crimes and tragic accidents involving military personnel gradually decreased after the 1972 reversion, but Japanese authorities are still bound by the SOFA treaty.

About a decade after the reversion, Isa remembers that an editor employed by a major Tokyo publisher asked him why Okinawans could not understand that Japan's prosperity -- including that of Okinawa -- is founded on the Japan-U.S. security alliance.

"Why don't you say it at a bar in Naha?" he responded.

"Whom do you think you owe for what you call economic prosperity? Isn't it the people on the mainland who rest on the sacrifice of Okinawa citizens?"

The anger and frustrations of Okinawans exploded again in 1995, when a 12-year-old girl was kidnapped and raped by three American soldiers.

The U.S. military refused at that time to hand over suspects to Japanese authorities before indictment under SOFA.

Tokyo has repeatedly shrugged off pleas by Okinawa for revisions to the bilateral agreement.

"Please give us back the quiet Okinawa, the island without military, and without tragedy," said Sugako Nakamura, then a senior at Ginowan High School near Futenma Air Station, to nearly 80,000 residents who gathered at the city's beach park in 1995 to protest the rape.

Nakamura said that she was chosen to represent Okinawa high school students at the rally accidentally.

She also appears in the documentary "Guntai no Nai Kuni" ("A Country Without Military,"), centering on Costa Rica, which has abandoned its own military since 1949. The film is now touring independent cinemas across the nation.

"I was just curious if the 'country without military' is really possible," she said, citing the reason behind her decision to accept the offer to appear in the film.

Nakamura used to live near the air station.

"Your television cannot be heard on full volume" while helicopters fly in formation, she said.

People on the mainland say the U.S. bases are there to bolster the "bilateral alliance" and "peace in the region," but Nakamura feels such views are phony.

"There are all kinds of opinions among the people of Okinawa, too," she said. "But at least there is no one who feels that they are protected by U.S. bases."

In fact, she added, many people on the mainland have canceled their trips to Okinawa, fearing terrorism in the wake of the Sept. 11 attacks.

Though Nakamura personally feels a distance between herself and activists who shake their fists and shout loud antimilitary slogans, she understands why people must adopt such confrontational positions to get their voices heard.

"We have no choice but to obey what the Japanese government and people on the mainland decide," she said.

"There are a lot of grandpas and grandmas in Okinawa still suffering pain from their experiences in the war. I wish we could bring back the islands of peace while they are alive."

The Japan Times: Thursday, May 16, 2002

Japanese City Opposes New Runway

Japanese city opposes new runway
UPI
Sep 8 05:22 PM US/Eastern

NAGO, Japan, Sept. 8 (UPI) -- Residents of a Japanese city remain opposed to plans to build a U.S. military runway near their homes, businesses and schools.

"We want the runway to be built offshore to prevent (noise from) the base from affecting local residents' daily lives," Nago's mayor, Yoshikazu Shimabukuro, Saturday told Defense Minister Masahiko Komura.

The runway is to be built as part of the relocation of the U.S. Marine Corps' Futenma Air Station to Camp Schwab in Nago on Okinawa, reported Mainichi Daily News.

Nago's demand for an offshore runway runs counter to an agreement made last year between Japanese and U.S. defense officials to build it at the camp, the newspaper reported.

Japan's minister ignores US demand to end criticism
Peter Alford,Tokyo correspondent
January 29, 2007

THE US Government has drawn a line in the sand over criticism from Japan's Defence Minister Fumio Kyuma, but the outspoken Mr Kyuma has immediately stepped across it. The Kyodo news agency reported yesterday the head of the State Department's Japanese affairs office, James Zumwalt, had lodged a protest about Mr Kyuma's comments critical of the US's Iraq campaign on Wednesday and last month.

Mr Zumwalt warned officials from Japan's Washington embassy that further provocative remarks would make it "difficult" to arrange security talks between Mr Kyuma, Foreign Minister Taro Aso, US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and new Defence Secretary Robert Gates. Strongly pro-American Prime Minister Shinzo Abe is pressing for fresh "two-plus-two" talks on bilateral security issues and is understood to have told the 66-year-old national security veteran on Friday to watch his words.

But 66-year-old Mr Kyuma was at it again on Saturday, saying the US "doesn't understand" the importance of local negotiations to resolve the problem of relocating a military airbase on Okinawa.

"We've been telling them, 'Please don't say things that are too cocky, we are talking to the (Okinawa) governor, so please wait for a while'," he said in a public speech referring to an argument about shifting a US Marines airbase from crowded Ginowan City to Nago.

Given American frustration at Japan's foot-dragging before the national Government agreed to the relocation last year and the protracted negotiations since with Okinawa's Government, Mr Kyuma's chiding is likely to infuriate the US administration.

The remarks followed his meeting on Friday with Mr Abe, after which he promised to take more care.

He offended the Americans by saying on Wednesday -- at virtually the same moment as President George W. Bush's State of the Union address -- that the President's decision to invade Iraq was wrong.

In December, Mr Kyuma criticised Japan's support for US invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq and claimed then prime minister Junichiro Koizumi had acted without government authority in sending a non-combatant contingent to southern Iraq.

Mr Kyuma's comments on Friday made clear that he continues to hold views critical of the US, though he suggested the strength of his remarks was unnecessarily amplified by English-language media translations.

"If they were taken (as criticism) I think I should be more careful how I say things," he told reporters. "Even if they were my thoughts, I think perhaps it might be better not to say them."

Mr Kyuma is one of many headaches the new PM created for himself by appointing perhaps the least impressive cabinet in years. He is actually one of the most popular of Mr Abe's team.

Possibly reflecting that Mr Kyuma's dim view of American military policy is widely held in his Liberal Democratic Party, though usually carefully repressed, Mr Abe has not publicly repudiated the Defence Minister's comments.