Jun 29, 2009On Okinawa, US move may lead to nixing of Futenma relocation plan

WASHINGTON - A key U.S. congressional committee has added an amendment to the fiscal 2010 defense budget that would make it hard to realize an agreement reached by the Japanese and U.S. governments over the relocation of the U.S. Marine Corps' Futenma Air Station in Ginowan, Okinawa Prefecture. Japan and the United States have already agreed the facility will be relocated to the shoreline off Camp Schwab in Nago, in the prefecture.

By Satoshi Ogawa, for Yomiuri Shimbun

The amendment says the U.S. defense secretary should not give its approval to the alternative facility as long as it fails to comply with minimum flight safety requirements. The office of Rep. Neil Abercrombie, D-Hawaii, who proposed the amendment, told The Yomiuri Shimbun that the alternative facility under the current plan contravenes safety standards on the following points:
-- The runways are too short.
-- A school, Okinawa National College of Technology, is located nearby.
-- There are obstacles, such as utility polls, along the flight path.

As a result, Abercrombie has stated that Camp Schwab is not an appropriate candidate for the alternative facility and that a new transfer location should be sought.

A Japanese government source said, "The content of this amendment suggests the transfer to the alternative facility agreed by Japan and the United States won't be permitted."

The defense budget, including the amendment, was adopted by the U.S. House of Representatives Armed Services Committee on June 16. Discussion of the budget at the Senate Armed Services Committee was due to start Tuesday. After joint committee discussions, the budget will be voted on in both chambers.

According to sources close to the matter, the Defense Department will try to persuade Congress to remove the amendment from the final defense budget. If Congress passes the budget intact, the focus will shift to whether President Barack Obama decides to veto it.

comments add comment
If you have an account please login before adding a comment. login
name
comment
captcha
Fred Jakobcic wrote on Jul 01, 2009:
Get rid of these bases...they are an anachronism and a sign of fear and bad foreign policy that our government and others think is necessitated by such policies based on conditions and times that really are also an anacrhonism...an era past that we perpetutate to perpetuate bases based on an anachronistic era.
CopyRight© 2009 No Bases. This site is an initiative from No Bases and was developped by EasyMind.