. Military Space News .
SUPERPOWERS
Outside View: Is U.S. a serious nation?

US says needs base to defend Japan
Washington (AFP) March 17, 2010 - The United States said Wednesday that it needed to maintain a base on the Japanese island of Okinawa to defend the region, as the new government in Tokyo considers scrapping a previous plan. Senior US officials told Congress that while they respected the decisions of Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama's six-month-old government, they hoped to go ahead with a plan to move the Futenma air base within Okinawa. Michael Schiffer, a senior Pentagon official, told a congressional panel that troops in Okinawa were the only ground forces "between Hawaii and India" which the United States could quickly deploy.

"Futenma may be but one base and one part of a larger alliance relationship, but peace and stability in the region depend in no small part on the enduring presence of forward deployed US forces in Japan," said Schiffer, the deputy assistant secretary of defense for Asia. "The United States cannot meet its treaty obligations to defend Japan, cannot respond to humanitarian crises or natural disasters, cannot meet its commitments for regional peace and stability without forward deployed ground forces in Japan," he said. He said the Futenma move was a "lynchpin" of a 2006 deal under which more than 8,000 US troops would leave Okinawa for the US territory of Guam. Under the agreement, Futenma would move from the crowded urban hub of Ginowan to a quiet village. Schiffer said the deal was the best solution to ease the burden on Okinawa while defending the region.

But some of Hatoyama's left-leaning allies want the base moved entirely out of Japan, blaming the troops for noise and crime. Despite US President Barack Obama's support for the 2006 deal, several lawmakers from his Democratic Party have voiced sympathy for Okinawans' grievances. Congressman Eni Faleomavaega, who heads the House Foreign Affairs subcommittee on Asia, pointed out that Okinawa accounts for one percent of Japan's land but two-thirds of US bases. "The Okinawans feel like they're always being the whipping boy for the last 50 years. We just put our military people there and don't have to worry about it," Faleomavaega said. An independent kingdom until the 19th century, Okinawa was under US administration from 1945 until 1972. The United States stripped Japan of its right to a military after World War II and now stations some 47,000 troops in the country under a security treaty.
by Harlan Ullman
Washington (UPI) Mar 17, 2009
To many, THE issue confronting the United States is a government that is dysfunctional and even badly broken. To others, the immense and swelling fiscal debt and deficits must redressed before the nation slips into bankruptcy. Still others argue that values are the centerpiece of America and unless differences over guns, gays, gestation periods and God can be fixed, the United States is headed for moral purgatory. Meanwhile wars in Afghanistan and Pakistan and less so in Iraq and the healthcare debate in Congress still rage.

No matter what one believes is the wolf closest to the collective national sled, the question is whether the United States can act in a serious way with serious understanding and action to deal with issues that conceivably could do untoward damage to the nation. Or, as happens too readily, will the country duck, defer, water down or ignore reality and put the toughest choices off to a future date unlikely to be met except if a real crisis intervenes?

The United States, however, has acted with due seriousness at crucial times in its history. Two-hundred-and-thirty or so years ago, a relatively small band of extraordinarily courageous and visionary individuals known as the founding fathers, realized that American colonists would never achieve the rights of Englishmen that they believed were due. So, as Thomas Jefferson wrote in the Declaration of Independence, "when government becomes destructive, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it and establish a new one." That is what happened.

Some 70 years later, the flaws and unfinished business of the U.S. Constitution that brought the United States into being into 1789 ignited the Civil War -- arguably the most serious and dangerous threat to the Union and the bloodiest war in U.S. history. After that, it still took a century to begin the final implementation of civil rights with the passage of that legislation in mid-1960s.

And despite U.S. isolationism, the nation became deadly serious in defeating and destroying the heinous threat of Nazi and Japanese military fascism in World War II.

Each of these periods required serious leaders to motivate publics whose views were as diverse as divisive. Washington, Jefferson -- who has just been edited out of certain Texas textbooks -- Franklin and others were determined to "hang together." Lincoln by force of personality and will kept the Union from being ripped asunder. And FDR cleverly and even deviously prepared an unwilling nation for a war it did not wish to wage until Japan's "dastardly attack" on Pearl Harbor, Dec. 7, 1941, forced its hand.

Today, those who believe the U.S. government is broken or dysfunctional are correct. Yes, debt and deficits will lead to a disaster unless checked. Healthcare must be fixed or repaired to assure both physical and national financial well-being. And if the United States doesn't get Pakistan right, success in Afghanistan will be illusive, if not impossible.

But the forcing question is whether the country is serious in taking on each or some of the above as our predecessors were in 1776, 1861 and 1942. On that the jury is out and may not convene in our lifetime. Is there anything that can be done to avert disaster?

First, while it is politically correct to call for bipartisanship and non-partisanship, on tough issues with profoundly different and opposite ideological views, neither will follow. The gaps are too wide. For example, to some, the free market is meant to be free. To others, markets require regulation. Congress cannot decide on how to make a Solomonian division of that baby.

Second, in the absence of real non-partisanship, it would be useful to focus on what is really the serious center of gravity for each of these tough problems. For example, in healthcare, the health of the American public is the largest factor from which solutions can follow. Yet, by most measures, the national health is poor given the huge percentages of obesity, preventable diseases and other controllable factors. We know and talk about this perhaps heaviest drain on the health system. If the United States were serious, it would do something about it.

Similarly, in terms of the wars the country is fighting, it is clear that Pakistan is vital to success. Yet, the United States has been incapable of providing the capacity for the Pakistanis to succeed both on the military and economic fronts. The reason is that despite the rhetoric, the United States is not really serious.

Politicians of both parties and branches of government will of course argue they are doing their level best. But, they will complain, it is the system, the government or the opposition that make progress impossible. Where then is a Jefferson when needed most -- at a time that this government sadly has become destructive?

(Harlan Ullman is senior adviser at the Atlantic Council and chairman of the Killowen Group, which advises leaders of government and business. He was co-chairman of the group that created the doctrine of shock and awe. His newest book due out this year is "A Modern Version of the Emperor's Handbook for CEOs and Leaders: 12 Principles to Avoid the Pitfalls and Traps That Have Nearly Ruined America.")

(United Press International's "Outside View" commentaries are written by outside contributors who specialize in a variety of important issues. The views expressed do not necessarily reflect those of United Press International. In the interests of creating an open forum, original submissions are invited.)



Share This Article With Planet Earth
del.icio.usdel.icio.us DiggDigg RedditReddit
YahooMyWebYahooMyWeb GoogleGoogle FacebookFacebook



Related Links
Learn about the Superpowers of the 21st Century at SpaceWar.com
Learn about nuclear weapons doctrine and defense at SpaceWar.com



Memory Foam Mattress Review
Newsletters :: SpaceDaily :: SpaceWar :: TerraDaily :: Energy Daily
XML Feeds :: Space News :: Earth News :: War News :: Solar Energy News


SUPERPOWERS
Walker's World: Obama is losing India
Washington (UPI) Mar 15, 2009
The Obama administration is trying to play catch-up in its relations with the country that could become its most important long-term ally. But it may be leaving it too late, after India last week agreed a $7 billion deal in arms, nuclear reactors and space technology with Russia. India's strategic importance can hardly be exaggerated. More than just the other Asian economic giant after ... read more







The content herein, unless otherwise known to be public domain, are Copyright 1995-2010 - SpaceDaily. AFP and UPI Wire Stories are copyright Agence France-Presse and United Press International. ESA Portal Reports are copyright European Space Agency. All NASA sourced material is public domain. Additional copyrights may apply in whole or part to other bona fide parties. Advertising does not imply endorsement,agreement or approval of any opinions, statements or information provided by SpaceDaily on any Web page published or hosted by SpaceDaily. Privacy Statement