politics

Japan, U.S. agree on cost of hosting American forces in FY2021

29 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© KYODO

©2021 GPlusMedia Inc.

29 Comments
Login to comment

great news for America and Japan, couldn't be better. well done

-6 ( +6 / -12 )

How many U.S. citizens are employed by Toyota, Nissan and Sony that are operating in the U.S.? How much are they contributing to U.S. economy?

In a similar vein and logic to "sympathy budget" or "the host-nation support", these companies should ask the U.S. government to share 74% of their operating costs. Reasonable?

Japan should follow in the footsteps of the 'Philippines and ask the U.S. to pay base usage fees.

2 ( +14 / -12 )

Have they been paying $2B per year since 1978? That's like $80B for what exactly?

-1 ( +6 / -7 )

Philippine president Duterte said an interesting thing. To host a foreign military, it is necessary the military of the country as strong as the hosted one. I agree.

4 ( +6 / -2 )

@ Japan should follow in the footsteps of the 'Philippines and ask the U.S. to pay base usage fees.

Your forgetting why the US is even here, It's called "Pearl Harbor" and Japan lost. Also the article doesn't mention that the costs are paid back to employee almost 90% of local Japan national workers who by the way have full Japan government benefits not available to those who study hard to get Japan government jobs for the same benefits. So perhaps a look at the old Master Labor Contract should be revised to keep your costs down and not just give the MLC's all the fringe benefits in the cost sharing.

-1 ( +6 / -7 )

I do not care about the money to host U.S. Forces. I more care about how long Japan leaves its defense to a foreign military. Japanese people became nonchalant and stopped thinking about it.

3 ( +6 / -3 )

@ I do not care about the money to host U.S. Forces. I more care about how long Japan leaves its defense to a foreign military. 

We the readers care about the lives of either or any nation that are lost or put at risk regardless of whose military it is. Why not send the politicians and let them come to blows and die for their country vs sending in a military.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

@I do not care about the money to host U.S. Forces. I more care about how long Japan leaves its defense to a foreign military. 

By the way, this kind of thinking is what got Japan in lots of trouble in the first place. Now it has all of its enemies mind you surrounding Japan eager for it to taste their steel for a change. Perhaps you need to think this over next time you send your son, daughter, wife, other relatives etc to the frontlines. IMO I'd rather see the politico's go to swing with the opposing force politico's and end it there.

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

rgcivilian1: Feb. 18 08:25 am JST,

It is agreed in SOFA that the U.S. will bear all costs incident to the maintenance of U.S. bases in Japan. So why should Japan shoulder 74% of the maintenance costs of U.S. bases in Japan?

But you seem to suggest U.S. forces are here as the result of "Pearl Harbor". Japan lost the war whereby the U.S. is entitled to maintain bases here for free and further has right to demand Japan pay more base maintenance costs

So in your opinion all these bilateral agreements, the Japan-U.S. Security Treaty and its accompanying document, the SOFA, are shams, nothing but a facade to camouflage the hard reality that the U.S. still militarily occupies Japan as it did from 1945 to 1952 or in the case of Okinawa from 1945 to 1972.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

Keeping a foreign military is a double edged sword.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Okinawa is still under occupation as the Japanese government never says no to the Americans demands.

0 ( +5 / -5 )

Japan, you are absolutely foolish politically. You should realize how dangerous America is ! Have you forgotten past history? If you go against American interest, they (America) will attack you, no doubt. Accept America, no country will attack you.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

did someone expect a different outcome?

i did not.

Japan reacted as expected - nothing new or special.

but question remains same for decades-what for Japan need US army on its soil and why still same time needs to fund JSDF?

War have ended in 1945....

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Charge them rent. Otherwise Japanese citizens should demand their rent, electricity, water, internet be paid by the Japanese government. 3.5% of Japanese land they hold could pay the pensions, health system.

2 ( +6 / -4 )

Have they been paying $2B per year since 1978? That's like $80B for what exactly?

Protection. This is a bargain for the level of protection the US provides Japan.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Protection from whom? What's a realistic scenario where Japan would be invaded? What would they do with Japan? What would they gain? There's not a single natural resource.

Does anyone actually think that Japan doesn't have nuclear weapon parts lying in close formation and ready to go in minutes? If so, you're living in a fantasy world.

Japan has enough plutonium to produce a staggering 6,000 nuclear weapons. That's more plutonium than is in the nuclear weapons of China, France, India, Israel, North Korea, Pakistan and the United Kingdom—combined.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

Who cares who pays the money, it’s 2021 and we now know that we can just print the money to pay for anything right?

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Japan gives jobs to millions of Americans. Japan might as well give this job to Mexicans. America gives Japan nothing but raping young girls and polluting Okinawa's environment

1 ( +2 / -1 )

re @ It is agreed in SOFA that the U.S. will bear all costs incident to the maintenance of U.S. bases in Japan. So why should Japan shoulder 74% of the maintenance costs of U.S. bases in Japan? But you seem to suggest U.S. forces are here as the result of "Pearl Harbor". Japan lost the war whereby the U.S. is entitled to maintain bases here for free and further has right to demand Japan pay more base maintenance costs So in your opinion all these bilateral agreements, the Japan-U.S. Security Treaty and its accompanying document, the SOFA, are shams, nothing but a facade to camouflage the hard reality that the U.S. still militarily occupies Japan as it did from 1945 to 1952 or in the case of Okinawa from 1945 to 1972.

Pretty simple on shouldering maintenance costs, Japan has not been attacked given what occurred. Occupation, please, it is Japan that does not let the US military leave or as many know it will be quickly occupied by yes, Russia or China in case you haven't been noticing they are knocking hard at the door for the US to leave so they can move and as it stands they are at your door knocking. If I had it my way which I dont' and I'm sure many out there are breathing with yes please don't, well, it I had my way this would be a real occupation, Japanese would be a second language and yes less and less of the traditional culture would be taking a backseat like what happened to the Ryukyu people and almost the Koreans on both sides. The SOFA, treaty, and accompanying documents are methods used by governments to well to say it nicely stick it to both hard working taxpayers. Like I stated I'd rather see the politicos go at head to head, arm and arm, what is the term "mano a mano" vs other means to settle the disputes. Imagine the saving of life. The US again if it was an occupier as you suggest, then we would be driving on the right side, your buildings and entire infrastructure to include the roach box homes would be much more convenient and yes no inkan, rights for disabled, rights for pets and other animals, but again no country is perfect either right?

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

Great!

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Like another poster said, what exactly would anyone gain from attacking or invading Japan? It's not like they have an empire to defend.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

If you go against American interest, they (America) will attack you, no doubt. Accept America, no country will attack you..

No. But if Japan were to go against the US at this juncture in history with Xi Jinping the absolute ruler of China, the Chinese will surely attack Japan. Chinese troops would be two steps behind departing US forces. Don't be naive. My wife is from Shanghai. When I told her Japan just had a big earthquake her first words were "good, I hope they all die". I was shocked. My wife has always been outspokenly anti-Japanese (even as she prefers appliances and cars from Japan) but that comment bothered me. No amount of sweet talking her would change it. She gets mad at me because I respect the Japanese and consider their nation to be America's friend and ally. So be careful what you wish for. The hatred of Japan among many of Japan's Asian neighbors is real. China in particular burns for revenge and because their press and what is taught in school is so heavily regulated, there are no countervailing views inside China. It is non-stop anti-Japanese propaganda from birth to death. A weak Japan is an invitation to a Chinese revenge attack. But as long as US forces are stationed in Japan in sufficient numbers and the Chinese believe the US will fight to defend Japan, there will be no attacks.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Like another poster said, what exactly would anyone gain from attacking or invading Japan? It's not like they have an empire to defend.

Revenge for the barbarities inflicted on China by the IJA during WWII. China considers the 18th and 19th Centuries to be a period in which China was humiliated and subjugated by foreigners including and especially the Japanese. There is a never again attitude nurtured by the CCP. Japan is universally reviled by the Chinese and they want revenge. In a more general sense, they also want to be in total control of the region and restore the pre-18th Century situation where all the nations surrounding China were tributary states and vassals. The relationship between the former Ryukyu Kingdom and the Xing is their model, where the Xing had a representative in Okinawa who controlled their government and who they traded with and who's approval was necessary for anointing their royalty.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

vanityofvanities Feb. 18 09:20 am JST

I do not care about the money to host U.S. Forces. I more care about how long Japan leaves its defense to a foreign military. Japanese people became nonchalant and stopped thinking about it.

Actually, many people do. Unfortunately, changing that is really very difficult. And all because of a rather incredulous political minority.

1). Change Article 9. In theory quite easy, if it were not for Edano's PDCJ. He is adamantly against doing so. It can also be applied to the Social Democratic Party.

2) A consensus pact LDP, Komeito, Ishin no Kai, is not enough. Numbers are not enough in the Diet. The PDCJ is needed to make those numbers sufficient for a constitutional amendment.

3) And it is that minority that stops Japan. To give it diplomatic strength, to force the US to make a significant troop reduction.

That is why Japan is hostage to the PDCJ. By refusing to see the reality that surrounds it. It makes it weaker. And unconsciously, more dependent on the US.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Sorry, why would China attack Japan, to steal their women?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sorry, why would China attack Japan

To create a unified Asia under Chinese rule.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

It is the fate of a 'defeated nation' to feel the boot heel of the 'winner' for as long as they will tolerate it. Germany is another example of this sort of EXTORTION which, after 70+ years, still continues. There is NO advantage to Nihon to have American troops based on Japanese soil because this makes Nihon a 'legitimate' target for Chinese attack if America increases its obnoxiousness, its constant provocations, in the China Sea. The demands by the U.S. for Japan to pay for America's advantage in basing troops so close to China would, in a sane world, be absurd and ridiculous.

You have it completely backwards. The only thing stopping China from attacking Japan is the presence of US forces and the credible threat to use them were China to ever attack. You seem utterly blind to the raw hatred the Chinese have of Japan. I know it because half of my family is Chinese and I hear their hatred often enough. I am disparaged for considering Japan a trusted friend and ally. If US forces leave, Chinese forces will be two steps behind and they will treat the Japanese like they treat the Uyghurs.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Perhaps both military aggressors, China and the US, could leave Japan the hell alone.

The majority of decent Chinese and Americans, are present company excepted, obviously.

Have to put that disclaimer in every time, in case some of the uber patriots get riled up.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The reality is that the US will lose its war of influence with China in advance if Japan (btw, 3rd largest economy) reverses. The United States today is a fallen bandit country.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites