Japan and US military strategy
By Reihana Mohideen
OSAKA — The post-Cold War US military strategy shifted sharply from one aimed at the Soviet Union to one focusing on regional conflicts. This strategy of the Bush administration (which was strongly influenced by the Gulf War) was further consolidated under President Bill Clinton as the ability to cope with two major regional conflicts simultaneously, e.g. the Middle East and the Korean peninsula. US military strategy in the Asia-Pacific region also reflected this shift towards regional conflicts.
A 1992 US Department of Defense report makes virtually no analysis of the Russian far eastern army. More recent reports focus on North Korea and China and propose to "work with Russia to develop mutually advantageous approaches that enhance regional stability".
According to a recent Department of Defense report, the restructuring of the military has resulted in an overall reduction (from 1989 to 1994 of around 27%) of troops stationed in the region, and a 15% reduction in troops on the west coast of the US mainland. (Europe experienced a larger reduction in the same period.)
But there has been one exception to this trend: Japan. The share of US Asia-Pacific forces stationed in Japan went from 44% to 58%. Today there are approximately 60,000 US troops stationed in Japan on some 105 installations (20 of them major). This includes the massive Seventh Fleet, with some 10,000 navy troops stationed on ships at two naval bases in Yokosuka and Sasebo.
According to a statement by assistant secretary of state Winston Lord to a Senate committee in June 1995, "Japan provides almost $5 billion a year in host nation support to our forces, more than any other ally. This covers approximately 70% of the costs of our forces and means that it is less expensive to maintain forces in Japan than in the US."
The US military also emphasise the benefits obtained from the high quality of technology and training facilities in Japan. According to a 1995 report, "US naval forces operating from Japan have access to some of the most sophisticated ship repair facilities in the world", which "contribute to our ability to maintain critical naval deployment, and have become even more important since the US withdrawal from facilities ... in the Philippines. This value was amply demonstrated ... during operations Desert Shield and Desert Storm [the Gulf War]."
For the first time, in 1992 a permanently deployed marine unit was set up in Okinawa by the Marine Forces Pacific, which also incorporate the marine component of the US Central Command and the US forces in South Korea. The marine component of the US Central Command covers the Persian Gulf, the Red Sea, the Gulf region, Egypt, Somalia, Sudan and other East African countries.
Regional conflicts in the Middle East and Korea were thus included under the Marine Forces Pacific, making joint exercises and personnel transfers possible. The marines in Japan and Okinawa were placed under this "umbrella" organisation. Marines stationed in Japan participated in the US intervention in Somalia. Placing the Okinawa units under the same command as the Middle East and Africa made it easier to transfer these troops without seeming to violate the US-Japan Security Treaty.
The previously mentioned report states, "Our Army, Airforce, Navy and Marine Corps bases in Japan support our first line of defense in Asia and the Pacific. These forces are prepared to deal with a wide range of local, regional and extra-regional contingencies extending as far as the Persian Gulf. Given the great distances involved in crossing the Pacific and Indian Oceans, the US emphasis on ..... more mobile force to respond to regional contingencies greatly increases the geographic significance of our bases in Japan."
Both governments today claim that they are trying to "redefine" the security treaty. This found concrete form in the joint declaration signed during Clinton's visit to Japan in April. According to peace activists here, one of the new provisions (known as the Acquisition and Cross Servicing Agreement, or ACSA) allows Japan's Self-Defence Forces and the US forces to supply each other with goods and services, such as fuel, food and weapons parts. This, they say, opens the way for Japan to undertake military cooperation with US forces in the global arena. Hence the "redefinition" of the treaty involves legitimising the expansion and strengthening of the military alliance.
Historically, in Australia, opposition to Japanese militarism has been coloured by anti-Asian xenophobia and racism. While Japanese imperialism will do whatever it can to defend its economic interests, today the driving force behind militarism in the region is the United States. To campaign effectively against militarism in the region, it is essential to build solidarity with the Japanese peace movement. Perhaps we can follow the example of the Philippines anti-bases activists who have organised peace delegations to Okinawa. This form of regional solidarity is indispensable in the campaign against militarism.