EDITORIAL: Futenma impasse

Just two weeks remain before the expiry of Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama's self-imposed end-of-May deadline for resolving the issue of relocating the U.S. Marine Corps Air Station Futenma in Okinawa Prefecture. This was a promise he made not only to the Japanese people, but also to Washington.

Hatoyama repeatedly said he would find a solution by working closely with the U.S. government, Okinawa and local communities in deciding the relocation site. But it is now clear that there is no hope for him to honor his promise.

As things stand, Hatoyama will probably have to start anew from scratch.

Hatoyama seems to be trying to keep up appearances with a hastily arranged relocation plan. Meantime, his talks with Okinawa and Washington will clearly extend beyond the deadline he set to allow for final adjustments in the policy.

The plan he apparently has in mind will call for building a pier-type runway off the Henoko district of Nago in Okinawa Prefecture. Drills currently conducted at the Futenma airfield in Ginowan would be transferred to Tokunoshima island in Kagoshima Prefecture and Self-Defense Forces bases in other parts of the nation.

In a desperate attempt to avoid being humiliated in the Diet for failing to fulfill his promise, Hatoyama is knocking out a plan that is designed only to gloss over his faults and is supported by nobody. This will achieve nothing. It will only delay reaching consensus and completing the actual relocation. Hatoyama's missteps have thrown the issue into the realm of the "not-in-my-backyard" fight.

Hatoyama must own up to his political responsibility. He failed, not only on his promise to move the facility "at least" out of the prefecture, but also in settling the issue by his own deadline.

Hatoyama should, in point by point fashion, explain how matters reached this stage and apologize to voters, especially those in Okinawa Prefecture.

No communication between the leaders

Saturday marks the 38th anniversary of the U.S. reversion of Okinawa to Japanese sovereignty.

Previously, people in Okinawa didn't openly demand the relocation of U.S. bases out of their prefecture. That's probably because they didn't have the heart to pass on their burden to others.

But in the latest Asahi Shimbun survey of residents in Okinawa, 53 percent of the respondents voiced support for moving some of the bases in the prefecture to elsewhere in the nation, up from 38 percent in a poll last year. Public opinion in Okinawa has changed dramatically.

When Hatoyama's Democratic Party of Japan took power from the Liberal Democratic Party last year, the Okinawan people had high expectations that the new government would finally ease their burden of hosting the bulk of U.S. military facilities in Japan. Those expectations are now unlikely to be fulfilled.

Bitter disappointment and deep anger have caused them to feel that people on the mainland are discriminating against Okinawa.

It is impossible to keep the Japan-U.S. alliance on a stable footing without the support and cooperation of the local communities hosting U.S. bases. From this viewpoint, Hatoyama has done a serious disservice to the nation. His clumsy approach has served only to rub local residents the wrong way.

In the meantime, Japan-U.S. summit diplomacy has hardly functioned. During his meetings with U.S. President Barack Obama, Hatoyama should have talked candidly about his decision to reconsider the 2006 bilateral agreement to move Futenma to Henoko and sought the president's understanding.

However, there is nothing to suggest that the two men have had meaningful communication on the Futenma issue since then. This has made it very hard for the Hatoyama administration to offer a convincing explanation to the audience at home about progress in talks with Washington. It has become even more difficult for the government to persuade local communities to accept a fresh burden.

Debate on fundamental security issues

It is impossible for Japan and the United States to resolve highly contentious political problems, such as those concerned with national security, when the leaders of the two nations are not communicating. Hatoyama is to blame for not realizing this point.

The prime minister must seize the initiative and reverse the situation promptly so that Tokyo and Washington can closely consult on this and other issues.

Hatoyama must act swiftly to review the government's posture and map out a new comprehensive strategy for tackling this challenge. He should initiate national debate from a broader perspective. This should be in terms of overall bilateral security and sharing of the burden.

What are the main security threats to both Japan and the United States in this region? How should the two countries respond to crises? What functions should U.S. Marines perform in terms of maintaining regional stability? Obviously, the Japan-U.S. security alliance is a major stabilizing factor in East Asia. There is no doubt about the need to keep U.S. forces stationed in Japan. Does that mean the Marines can only perform their core function if they remain in Okinawa forever? Is there really no other alternative?

It is vital that serious debate should start on these and other fundamental questions concerning the bilateral security alliance, not only between the two governments but also among members of the Japanese public. Without such debate, it will be impossible to find an acceptable answer to the intractable question of how the burden of the security alliance should be shared.

Hatoyama was not wrong in trying to find a way to move the Futenma base out of Okinawa. The 2006 agreement would have also been very difficult to carry out. But relocating the facility out of the prefecture would have required tremendous political power and time.

Diplomatic efforts to change the regional security environment under a long timeframe are also important for finding a way out of the current impasse over the Futenma relocation. Changes in the situation on the Korean Peninsula and the overall security landscape in East Asia could make it possible for the United States to deploy the Marines differently.

Making a fresh start on the relocation plan could delay the return of the Futenma base to Japan until after the 2014 deadline under the current agreement. If the government is to have any hope of persuading Okinawans to accept such a delay, it needs to offer a vision for the future relocation of the base out of the prefecture or out of Japan altogether.

Another challenge for the government is to figure out how to accomplish the planned transfer of 8,000 Marines stationed in Okinawa to Guam, as provided for under the bilateral pact. The issue of sharing the burden of national security should not be used as a surrogate for an election-year partisan battle. Nonpartisan efforts are needed to find a solution.

U.S. should show more understanding

We urge Washington to be more supportive of Japan's efforts to settle the issue.

The U.S. strategy to project its power globally is underpinned by its bases in Japan, which cover a wide range of areas from the Pacific to the Indian Ocean. Obama was right on the mark when he described the Japan-U.S. relationship as a cornerstone of his country's diplomacy.

Washington is also responsible for ensuring stable operation of the bilateral security treaty. We hope the Obama administration will be flexible in its thinking in working with the Japanese government to find a way to reduce the burden borne by Okinawa.

To improve the political environment for such cooperation, the Hatoyama administration must start by trying to repair its deeply tarnished credibility.

--The Asahi Shimbun, May 14