Thread by @toranosukev

My thanks to @softsoundingsea for bringing this article to my attention I don't know the author, and have nothing against them personally, but this seems a fine example of the kinds of things we see far too often in discussions of Okinawa & politics,

tokyoreview.net/2021/02/increa…

And an indication, perhaps, of the kinds of things that Tokyo Review publishes, i.e. the kinds of submissions they approve, or invite. I have been aware of the existence of Tokyo Review for a while, but only recently have started to get a sense of the character of the site.

As is very often the case with a certain brand of commentary on these issues, the article overall prioritizes the importance of the US-Japan alliance and security concerns over the well-being or democratic rights of the Okinawan people.

Like so many articles in this vein, it treats the Okinawan people and their desires as an obstacle, as a problem, rather than engaging with the colonialist unfair treatment of Okinawa as, itself, the problem.

Terms such as "colonized" appear nowhere in the article and the entire perspective is "how can Tokyo & Washington get their way?," less strongly addressing the Q of "how can Tokyo and Washington better respect the rights of the Okinawa people and do what is right for all?"

But, let's begin. For the rest of this thread, I'll be responding to what I'm attaching in screenshots. Please take a look at the screenshots first, and then read my response to them, in order for it to make sense.

Dauer places the word "burden" in quotes. I initially gave her the benefit of the doubt that she was simply quoting a widely-used term; but I think it becomes clear in the article that she doesn't believe this burden is unbalanced or unfair.

Next, Okinawans desire more dialogue with servicemembers. Sure, but acclimation to the American social and cultural presence doesn't excuse the severe threats and problems with the bases. Just because people are used to this social and cultural status quo, and ...

... may like American culture or work on base or may even be mixed-race themselves doesn't mean the bases aren't still occupying and polluting indigenous land, endangering Okinawa by making it a target, presenting the ever-present threat of aircraft crashes or other accidents...

not to mention the countless instances of sexual and other violence caused by servicemembers and others, the toxic impact on the economy (heavy on seedy nightlife, etc. serving the bases), and so forth.

We should not confuse social and cultural attitudes with the serious issues of safety, sovereignty, democratic rights and freedoms, indigenous rights, political equality, and environmental protection.

Next. Yes, the relocation of bases is essential to security policy in the region. And yet, the author treats Okinawan resistance as an obstacle to be overcome, giving no attention whatsoever to the idea of relocating bases to somewhere outside of Okinawa prefecture.

Correct me if I am wrong, but afaik the Okinawan gov't, as well as popular opinion, have never worked to "prevent or delay" the dismantling of the Futenma Air Base. They have, however, repeatedly, clearly, voiced their opposition to the construction of new bases in Okinawa.

It seems silly to me to not acknowledge the difference.
It has been 25 years since US & Japan agreed to dismantle the Futenma base, and yet bc of their refusal to do so w/o building the new, heavily opposed base at Henoko,

Tokyo + Washington, and venues like TokyoReview, push the narrative that it's the fault of Okinawan resistance. The construction at Henoko is not only strongly opposed by the Okinawan people, it is also grossly over-budget, grossly behind schedule,

and encountering heavy logistical problems due to the "mayonnaise-like" consistency of the seabed, ill-suited to having anything built on top of it. When will Washington finally give up on Henoko? Dauer doesn't ask this question, let alone address it.
apjjf.org/2018/10/Lummis…

Moving on. Casting the Oki pref gov't and not Tokyo as the ones being obstinate. What does it even mean to have "dialogue with Okinawa" but "around and not through" the dem.-elected gov't? Does this mean only dialoguing with those who support the bases? What does this even mean?

Yes. Okinawans have wanted a better relationship with the central gov't for more than a century and a half. Putting independence aside, if Okinawa is going to be part of Japan, they want to be treated equally. They want their voices to be heard and their desires respected.

Tokyo may not "crackdown" on Okinawans in as overtly violently a fashion as what is going on in HK, Xinjiang, and elsewhere, but the stubborn refusal to treat Okinawans as equal democratic citizens whose voice and well-being should be heard and respected, has parallels.

That, surely, is what left-leaning Okinawan newspapers' support for Hong Kong protestors is about. And, frankly, you shouldn't have to be left-leaning to support democracy in Hong Kong. Come on.

After a few rather good paragraphs about how Tokyo needs to do more to understand Okinawa's particular experience & needs, we then move on to a rather standard argument: the Okinawans are simple people and don't understand geopolitics. It should be explained to them. 😑

I think if one speaks to the protestors at Henoko, or others in Okinawa, one will find that they do understand the geopolitics rather well. They do understand the importance of deterrence against the PRC. They also understand that it can be achieved ...

w/o continuing the undue burden on the Okinawan people and their land. It can be achieved in a way that reduces the damage to the land and the threats to the people. Relocation to elsewhere outside the prefecture is one major avenue towards this.

The idea that the locals don't understand is, frankly, colonialist. The Okinawans are not simple, humble, natives in an Orientalist fantasy. They are full people, & they understand what's at stake, and the trade-offs, better than the average resident of mainland Japan I'd wager.

The article ends with a call for dialogue. I think that halting construction at Henoko and dismantling the base at Futenma would be far better first steps towards convincing the Okinawans that "the burden ... [is] not one that is born by Okinawans alone."

It is not difficult to listen to Okinawan people, to hear their voices, and to take them seriously.

It would be wonderful if venues like TokyoReview would do more to weed out pieces that refuse to make even the barest of efforts in that direction.