Text Fwd: Allies reassess NK military threat

Korea Times
Allies reassess NK military threat
By Jung Sung-ki, Staff reporter
June 27, 2010

An agreement by the leaders of Seoul and Washington to delay the transfer of wartime operational control (OPCON) by some three and a half years to Dec. 1, 2015 comes after the allies reevaluated the threat posed by North Korea's asymmetrical and irregular warfare capability.

Foreign Affairs and Trade Minister Yu Myung-hwan confirmed last week that talks have been under way between Seoul and Washington to reschedule the transfer of wartime control, saying Seoul had begun rethinking the issue as a result of North Korea conducting a second nuclear test last year.

Moreover, the sinking of a South Korean warship in March in the West Sea apparently propelled the reconsideration of the timeline for the transfer of OPCON of South Korean troops during wartime from the U.S. military to Korean commanders, officials and experts here said.

A multinational investigation team concluded last month that the Cheonan ship was sunk by a torpedo fired from a North Korean submarine.

The incident revealed loopholes in the defense readiness and intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) capability against North Korean warfare tactics on top of the communist regime's missile and nuclear programs, they said.

"To take over the OPCON, our military has prepared to secure enough independent capability regarding ISR, C4I digital command structures and precision striking since the 2007 agreement," an official at the Ministry of National Defense said. "But the original plan has turned out to be not realistic, and that's why we've agreed to delay the timeline to 2015."

Follow-up measures for the delay of the OPCON transition will be discussed at the "2+2" meeting of foreign and defense ministers from the two countries in July in Seoul and the annual Security Consultative Meeting (SCM) of defense ministers in October in Washington, D.C., he said.

For South Korea, securing independent ISR assets has been referred to as a daunting task to retaking the wartime command that was handed over to the U.S. military with the outbreak of the 1950-53 Korean War.

But the planned acquisition of ISR systems has been postponed due largely to budget shortfalls. Major ISR assets, including U.S.-built Global Hawk high-flying unmanned aerial vehicles and domestically-built signal intelligence surveillance aircraft, are scheduled to be introduced by 2014 and 2015, respectively.

Both militaries have also been struggling to set up new C4I digital command structures to make them interoperable following the OPCON transfer.

The timeline for 2015 also coincides with the changed timetable for the relocation of U.S. bases and facilities to Pyeongtaek, Gyeonggi Province. The relocation project had been set for 2008, but the plan has been deferred due to budget problems and opposition from Pyeongtaek residents.

Under the Defense Reform 2020 plan, the South Korean Army was to launch an integrated command for ground operations, as the U.S. Forces Korea would shift its role to a naval- and air-centric one after the 2012 OPCON transition. But this plan has also been stalled.

After several years of negotiations, the governments of South Korea and the United States agreed in 2007 that Seoul would execute independent OPCON beginning April 17, 2012. Washington had called for the transfer by 2009.

The two sides also agreed on command rearrangement after disbanding the Combined Forces Command, which is to be replaced by a South Korean-U.S. "military cooperation center," a joint body for combat operations.

South Korean conservatives regard the command changes as a U.S. move to reduce its security commitment to South Korea.

They have argued that the smaller role of the U.S. military amid lingering threats posed by the reclusive North could tip the military balance on the Korean Peninsula.

gallantjung@koreatimes.co.kr

Emergency News: KAPM Under Oppression and Arrest

* Image source: Cho Jung-Hoon, Tongil News on June 29, 2010


* Image source: Cho Jung-Hoon, Tongil News on June 29, 2010

* Image source: Korean Alliance for Progressive Movement

Office and staff houses of the Korean Alliance for Progressive Movement (http://www.jinbocorea.org/)were forcefully searched by the National Intelligence Service at 6:30am, June 29, 2010(Korean time) and three staffs were arrested (Representative, Han Choong-Mok, Jung Dae Yeon, former Executive Chairman, and Choi Young-Ok, Vice Chairman of the Self-Reliance Reunification Committee). The Lee government is attempting to oppress the civil organizations under the National Security Law with the defeat of June 2 local election and excuse of the Cheonan ship.

Text Fwd: N. Korea warns of attack ahead of S. Korea-U.S. naval drill

Yonhap News
N. Korea warns of attack ahead of S. Korea-U.S. naval drill
By Sam Kim

SEOUL, June 29 (Yonhap) -- North Korea warned Tuesday it would attack "the stronghold of invaders" if the United States provoked a war in the process of a joint naval drill with South Korea, as tension persists on the Korean Peninsula over the deadly sinking of a South Korean warship.

South Korea and the United States are planning joint naval exercises following Seoul's ongoing efforts to punish North Korea for the sinking through the U.N. Security Council.

* Related articles

Yonhap News
_ N. Korea accuses U.S. of bringing heavy arms into truce village
_China voices concern over S. Korea-U.S. naval drill

Text Fwd: Release: Korcom-transformation-2009

* The source was informed in the site of the Solidarity for Peace And Reunification of Korea


Click the below
Korcom-transformation-2009
Released Secret Document on the Current Situations of the USFK Force (2009~2020) and Re-Deployment Plan

Photos Fwd: Pan-Korean Petition Campaign and Press Interview to urge to wholly reinvestigate the Cheonan Ship Incident

* All the Image sources: Solidarity for Peace And Reunification of Korea, June 29, 2010


'Pan-Korean Petition Campaign and Press Interview to urge to wholly re-investigate the Cheonan Ship Incident and to Stop the Military Confrontation'
June 29, 2010
_______________________________________________________________

* The Anatakara site in Japan has the English and Japanese version of the original Korean article.
Thanks very much, M.

Special Committee for Investigation on Cheonan incident was closed, only receiving a 7-page report. June 25, 2010

天安艦特別委、7ページの報告書一冊を受け取って終了
"付着物、1番の存在理由など、科学的な根拠を維持できない状態", 2010.06.25

국문 원문 기사: 참세상
천안함 특위, 7쪽짜리 보고서 하나 받고 종료
“흡착물, 1번 존재 이유 등 과학적 근거 유지할 수 없는 상태” (김용욱 기자 2010.06.25 12:04)

Photos Fwd: Internationals in the Jeju Island Visit the Gangjeong Village on June 26

All the image source: Kim Kyung-Duk, Seogwipo Daily Newspaper, June 28, 2010










* The below is from No Jeju Naval Base Vigil (Facebook) before the visit. Thanks very much, N.

Date:	Saturday, June 26, 2010
Time:	6:00pm - 9:00pm
Location:	Gangjeong-dong, Seogwipo-si, Jeju-do,

Description:

New leadership is coming to Jeju with the June 2nd gubernatorial elections, with that leadership can come change.The current administration has put into motion plans to develop a naval base in Gangjeong for the use of U.S. and South Korean Aegis destroyers outfitted with missile defense systems. For months the people of Gangjeong village have protested this development. So far the village has garnered support from more than 1,000 people walking the olle trail, which passes the site, in signatures alone. These individuals have done a small part by signing petition against the proposed base. (*Note: The petition now has more than 7,000 signatories for less than two months)

On [June 26th, starting at 6:00pm] the people of Gangjeong Village and I ask that you come to the village to learn more about the proposed plan and display concern regarding the repercussions of such development. The naval base would undoubtedly;

-- Add to the unnecessary stimulated interest in worldwide military expansion
--Destroy natural habitat and environmental sites deemed precious by the UNESCO world heritage site.
--Inevitably create Jeju as a target in lieu of military conflict
--Contradict Jeju's notion of representing a "peace island."
--Create opportunity for commercial development that would inevitably increase the cost of living and social divide.

The event will start off by inviting whomever to dine at the local restaurant from 7:30 to 8:30.

--After dinner the vigil will begin at the local community center (directions and map coming soon.)
--Here the mayor of the village will speak on behalf of the community to inform us why the naval base is not only not necessary but destructive to the well being of Gangjeong.
--After the Mayor speaks Sung Hee Choi, a leading activist against the base will discuss how the issue is not just a local issue but global. The floor will then be open for discussion.
--Wilkine Brutus and Josh Fisher will perform poetry regarding the power of peace.
--After the performance we ask that you sign the petition.

Information on the proposed plan will be available as well as works created by local artists in opposition to the development.

There will also be an opportunity for individuals to write a letter to the South Korean ambassador of your home to convey your concerns. We will mail the letters and provide a sample letter you may reference.

This vigil is meant to provide more information on a topic that is significant to all of us. Please Please come, if not for only an hour to show concern. There will be a few people driving and can give rides if needed.

For more information please refer to the articles below.

http://www.jejuweekly.com/news/articleView.html?idxno=395

http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/jan2010/2010-01-18-01.html

http://www.rjkoehler.com/2010/01/19/proposed-naval-base-causes-uproar-on-jeju-the-island-of-peace/

http://www.creative-i.info/2010/03/23/jeju-island-navy-base-proposal-reaching-boiling-point-your-help-urgently-neeeded/

http://nobasestorieskorea.blogspot.com/2010/05/photos-gangjeong-jeju-snapshots-on-may.html

______________________________________________________________
* Related blog

Saturday, June 26, 2010
[Jeju Update][국문 번역]Text Fwd: A Letter and A Poem: Stop to Build the Naval Base

Text Fwd: S.Korea may shoulder expenses for USFK Yongsan Garrison relocation

'Residents of Pyeongtaek City, Gyeonggi Province members of civic organizations hold a banner that states, “The U.S. Army should leave immediately,” during a demonstration, November 2007. The demonstration was held to voice opposition to the plan to relocate the U.S. Forces Korea (USFK) Yongsan Garrison in Seoul to Pyeongtaek.'

Hankyoreh
S.Korea may shoulder expenses for USFK Yongsan Garrison relocation
Posted on : Jun.29,2010 12:13 KST

The Cheong Wa Dae under President Lee Myung-bak and the Ministry of National Defense have repeatedly stated that South Korea will not be bearing any additional burden if the schedule for the transfer of wartime operational control (OPCON) is postponed until Dec. 1, 2015. Many observers, however, have been saying that the country has found itself at a great disadvantage in discussions on the expenses of relocating U.S. military bases to Pyeongtaek City.

Sejong Institute Senior Researcher Hong Hyun-ik said on Monday that while the relocation of the Pyeongtaek base was postponed due to the U.S. financial situation, “since the wartime operational control transfer was postponed at South Korea’s request, the conditions have been formed for the expenses of building the Pyeongtaek base to be shifted to South Korea.”

The Cheong Wa Dae (the presidential office in South Korea or Blue House) cited the completion of the United States Forces Korea (USFK) base relocation to Pyeongtaek in 2012 as one of the reasons for postponing the date of the transfer of wartime operational control three years and seven months past the agreed-upon date of April 17, 2012. Both South Korea and the United States agree on the relocation of the Yongsan Garrison to Pyeongtaek, scheduled to take place around 2015. Discussions, however, have remained difficult as South Korea has called for the relocation of the U.S. Second Infantry Division headquarters in Uijeongbu to Pyeongtaek in 2015 and the U.S. has called for relocation in 2016.

The reason for the stalemate in relocation discussions is the difference in opinions on the two countries’ share of the expenses for the move. According to a project management firm’s December 2008 comprehensive facilities plan, the relocation of the Yongsan garrison is set for completion in late 2014, and the U.S. Second Infantry Division headquarters in 2016. For several years, however, South Korea and the United States have been unable to agree upon their shares of the construction costs.

During the discussions, the United States argued that completing the Pyeongtaek base construction by 2015 would require a budget of $600 million per year, and that it would have to extend the construction period because it was only able to secure $300 million. This applied indirect pressure upon South Korea to pay additional expenses if it wanted to finish the relocation by 2015.

Military officials and experts predict a greater likelihood that the United States will use the Cheong Wa Dae’s policy of completing the Pyeongtaek relocation by 2015 as a means to transfer relocation expenses to South Korea during the discussion process. There is also a chance it will call for additional amendments not in the existing agreement, such as lodging for family members accompanying the U.S. forces.

Also noteworthy was the fact that on June 16, ten days before the announcement of the agreement to postpone the transfer of wartime operational control, U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates announced that he would be cutting the U.S. defense budget by around $100 billion over the next five years due to the fiscal deficit. The War on Terror has caused the U.S. defense budget to balloon from $316 billion in 2001 to $693 in 2010.

“The relocation of the Yongsan Garrison and U.S. Second Infantry Division headquarters has nothing whatsoever to do with the wartime operational command transfer issue, and has been delayed due to issues such as the construction plans,” said Deputy Defense Minister Jang Kwang-il.

The Ministry of Defense has not given any official explanation to date on the specific date of the relocation or the scale of expenses shared between South Korea and the United States. It has cited as a reason for the lack of explanation the fact that discussions have remained “under way” on the USFK relocation since beginning in 2008.

Please direct questions or comments to [englishhani@hani.co.kr]

__________________________________________________________

* Related article

Hankyoreh
[Editorial] Ratify OPCON transfer delay at the National Assembly
June 29, 2010

Excerpts:

“The Lee Myung-bak government and conservative newspapers have claimed that wartime operational control has nothing to do with military sovereignty, but this is a falsehood. They have stated that wartime operational control is exercised in accordance with agreed upon guidelines from the South Korean and U.S. presidents within the framework of the Security Consultative Meeting (SCM) and Military Commission (MC). This, however, is merely a formality. It is self-evident that the commander of Combined Forces Command (CFC), who is also the commander of the U.S. Forces Korea (USFK), will follow the directions of the U.S. president in an emergency. It is a reality that OPLAN 5027, which is a plan of action for a full-scale war on the Korean Peninsula, is being planned by United States Pacific Command (USPACOM). The fact that the United States would push a security response in an emergency on the Korean Peninsula in accordance with their own strategic judgment is also a source of instability resulting from the deferment of military sovereignty.”

“In particular, it is necessary to make public the entirety of the negotiating process and what was discussed, if only to reduce suspicions of a political exchange through major South Korea-U.S. Free Trade Agreement (KORUS FTA) concessions. The Lee administration has merely stated that Kim Tae-hyo, presidential secretary for national security strategy, began discussing a delay in the transfer of wartime operational control in early February. Despite the fact that the United States likely requested something in return from South Korea when the country first requested the delay in wartime operational control transfer, there has been no explanation. There has also been no explanation about the progress of the KORUS FTA negotiations.”

Text Fwd: [Japan Focus]:Okinawa and Guam: In the Shadow of US and Japanese "Global Defense Posture"

* Text informed by Martha Duenas on June 28, 2010

Japan Focus
Okinawa and Guam:
In the Shadow of U.S. and Japanese “Global Defense Posture”

Kensei YOSHIDA

Okinawa is Japan’s southernmost prefecture lying between mainland Japan and Taiwan off China’s east coast. The main island measures twice the size of Guam and has a population roughly seven times greater, or one-third the size of New York’s Long Island with 50,000 more people. On its slender, irregularly shaped island, which constitutes a mere 0.3 per cent of the country、Okinawa hosts 75 per cent in size of all U.S. only military bases in Japan, exclusive of sea and air space. U.S. bases include the Marine Corps jungle training, aviation, bombing and shooting ranges, landing training grounds and an ammunition depot, the largest Air Force base in the region with its own ammunition site, a naval station often visited by nuclear submarines and Army facilities, adding in sum to roughly one-fifth of the densely populated island. It is home to an estimated 24,600 U.S. service personnel, out of a total of 36,000 in all of Japan, many of them living with their dependents in fenced-in “American towns” with schools, gyms, golf courses, shopping centers and churches. Nearly 90 per cent (about 15,000 in number) of the Japan-based Marines are concentrated in Okinawa.

Marine Corps Air Station Futenma, located in the middle of a residential area of the city of Ginowan (population 91,000) north of the capital Naha, reportedly stations 2000 to 4000 personnel of the 1st Marine Aircraft Wing of the III Marine Expeditionary Force. Helicopters and fixed/wing aircraft are constantly flying low in circles over the residences, schools and hospitals for embarkation and touch-and-go exercises, creating roaring noise and the danger of crashes. People are so concerned that they have long been demanding its closure and return, with particular urgency since 2004 when one of Futenma’s heavy helicopters spiraled into the wall of the administration building of a university right across the fence and splattered its broken pieces all over during the summer break. In 2006, the Japanese and U.S. governments agreed to relocate many Okinawa-based Marines to Guam by 2014 to lessen the Okinawan people’s burdens or to accommodate “the pressing need to reduce friction on Okinawa.” MCAS Futenma would be returned, but only after being replaced by a new facility that Japan would construct within Okinawa.

* MORE READING

Text Fwd: Christina Illarmo: USSF Presentation at the 'American Lake' or Ka Moana Nui?: Demilitarization Movements in the Asia-Pacific Workshop

* Text informed by Corazon Valdez Fabros on June 28, 2010

Christina Illarmo: USSF Presentation at the 'American Lake' or Ka Moana Nui?: Demilitarization Movements in the Asia-Pacific Workshop
June 28, 2010 at 10:44 am

Presentation at the
USSF - United States Social Forum
24 June 2010

'American Lake' or Ka Moana Nui?: Demilitarization Movements in the Asia-Pacific

The Pacific island of Guahan, where I was born and raised, has been touted to mainstream audiences as "the tip of the spear," "the unsinkable aircraft carrier," or as a kind of "gas station" for U.S troops. But this island is more than a military outpost, it’s place of waterfalls, fresh water caves, thick jungles, and warm sandy beaches. It’s also home to a loving and resilient native people who after surviving centuries of Western colonization have yet to receive their inherent right to self-determination.

We’ve been citizens since the 50’s, yet we still can’t vote for President, we aren’t represented in the senate, and our one Congressional Delegate can’t vote on the floor; but our voices are valid and our concerns are real.

This massive military buildup, which will realign troops from Okinawa to Guahan, puts our culture, environment, and our quality of life at risk while simultaneously violating our human rights. While Okinawa, Hawai’i, California, Philippines, and Korea have said no- we have not; and it is not because we say "yes"; it is because we were never ASKED. Our political status as a US Territory provides the United States a place wherein they may implement their plans with "no restrictions," meaning: they can do whatever is in their best interest. When our local leaders voiced concerns during realignment negotiations, they were told that this was a "nation-to-nation" conversation. This response reminds our people that we have never been equals within this country. We are Americans; but then we are not.

Why does the US go so far out of its way to subjugate a peaceful little island 30 miles long and 7 miles wide with a population of 171,000?

In a simple word: LOCATION.

Any military official will tell you as a US Territory, Guahan is the only location of its kind in the Pacific, from which long-range bombers can strike nearly any target in Northeast, East and Southeast Asia. They see us as the “Diego Garcia of the Pacific”.

But in the grand scheme of things, it doesn’t matter how important the Pentagon thinks we are, this costly, immoral and unsustainable practice of forcing bases on unwilling soil has a huge price tag ($4 billion) and it is breaking the backs of the American working class while destroying the lives of native peoples abroad.

Currently, the military is Guahan’s largest landowner, occupying roughly 1/3 of the land. Air force and naval bases restricted to the civilian public have not only displaced thousands of people, they have created a unique form of racial and socioeconomic segregation in which the service people behind the fence have their own hospitals, schools, homes, parks, churches, shopping centers, camping grounds, and beaches- all on land which was mostly stolen or forcibly bought for insultingly low prices from the indigenous Chamoru people. Besides the trauma of displacement, and being forced to use the English language in place of our own, our quality of life has seen other impacts. Before much of our rich and fertile ancestral farmlands were confiscated we had sustainable agriculture. Our farmers produced over 90% of our food. Today we must rely on expensive importing with our own local production reduced to 5%.

Last November the required draft environmental impact was released, outlining plans for the buildup. Those familiar with environmental impact statements and NEPA regulations will quickly tell you that the typical length of these types of documents run somewhere around 350 pages. However, the DEIS detailing US plans to realign Okinawan troops to Guam was over 11,000 pages and contained three separate projects (all three of which contained plans large enough to justify their own formal commenting period). This forced residents of Guam to digest, understand, and critique this massive document within a 90 day period. Residents were welcome to submit written comments but each were only given 3 minutes to testify at a series of only 3 hearings. You can see a few of these testimonies on the Voice of Guam Youtube Channel.

At first, attention and most discussion on the buildup was about how it was going to help our economy and create more jobs. But as the inadequacy of plans became apparent during the formal comment period, a shift in the island's attitude occurred as agencies, such as the Guam Water Authority, began to speak out in concern, worried that the expected population boom of 80,000 people would overwhelm our already outdated and stressed sewage system and threaten our freshwater source.

Other organizations such as the Boonie Stompers, a club of hiking enthusiasts, began doing outreach, revealing that the military intended to acquire more land to create live firing ranges in pristine jungles. One such site for a proposed firing range is on the Northeastern shore between Anderson Air Force Base and another base we call “Andy-South”. This site includes the ancient Chamoru village of Pagat, considered to not only hold archeological and historical significance- to us it is a truly spiritual place- one of the few left intact that we still have access to. A firing range in Pagat would be no less an outrage than when the Taliban blew up the treasured, ancient Buddhas carved into the cliffs of Afghanistan.

The Guam’s Fisherman Coop helped make the public aware that the military wants to dredge 73 acres of thriving coral reef at Apra Harbor to make another parking spot for a nuclear aircraft carrier. Against the wishes of our people, local leaders, and the urging of the EPA and Center for Biological Diversity, they want to slam the reef with giant weights where the spinner dolphin plays, scalloped hammer head sharks pup, sea turtles swim, and giant blue elephant ear sponge grow. Then they want to scoop the remains out with giant cranes and dispose the equivalent of 50,000 dump truck loads several miles off the coast of the island.

Now, thanks to the work and dedication of local agencies and organizations, and help from off-island folks, our local people have chosen to reject the sense that all of these sacrifices are worth the false promise of economic security from an increased military presence.

It has been truly inspiring to see this grassroots movement explode. And this is where you come in.

First, commit to further educating yourself on the what is happening in the Pacific. Peruse the newsletter, “Stop the military buildup” produced by Famoksaiyan, a group of Chamoru activist based out of California. On it you will find more background on the issue and links to awesome resources such as “No Rest for the Awake” and the “Drowning Mermaid Blog”. Both blogs are written by University of Guam instructors, bright minds who are very active in youth work and are driving forces behind this movement. There is also an amazing podcast you can subscribe to for free on Itunes called “Beyond the Fence”. This is a weekly radio show on the islands NPR station which discuses different aspects of the buildup on every episode.

Next I implore you to stand in solidarity with us and take action. Spread the word about what you’ve learned. Tell your leaders that you don’t support your tax money being used on any more excessive military expenditures. Join the movement to close the base on Okinawa and other sites abroad. Because whether we are talking about Guam, Okinawa or Hawai’i… it’s no different, our suffering and our commitment to oppose the militarization of our homelands is the same.

- Christina Illarmo

Text Fwd: Network for Okinawa’s Statement on Current Situation with U.S. Base Relocation 미군기지이전 현상에 대한 [오키나와를 위한 넷워크]의 성명

*Text thankfully informed by J.D. and Peace Philosophy Center. The translations were accompanied when it was originally informed.
이 텍스트는 J.D. 와 평화 철학 센터 (클릭)에 의해 감사히 알려졌읍니다. 번역은 이 글과 함께 자체 마련된 것입니다.
_____________________________________________________________________________

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
June 28, 2010

CONTACT: John Feffer, Institute for Policy Studies
johnf@ips-dc.org, 202-234-9382, cell: 510-282-8983

Network for Okinawa’s Statement on Current Situation with U.S. Base Relocation
미군기지이전 현상에 대한 [Network for Okinawa]의 성명

(Japanese, Chinese, and Korean versions come after the English version)
국문은 맨 밑을 내려 가시길.

We, the Network for Okinawa, firmly oppose the Joint Statement of the U.S.-Japan Consultative Committee issued on May 28, in which the two governments confirmed their intention to build a 1,800-meter long runway (or more than one runway portions) at Henoko on Okinawa as a “replacement facility” for Futenma Air Station, and the partial relocation of training to Tokunoshima Island.

The people of Okinawa, after losing 100,000 lives, one quarter of its civilian population in the Battle of Okinawa towards the end of World War II, sacrificed much of their sovereignty, human rights, and freedom during the U.S. military occupation, and still today—38 years after the island’s reversion to Japan. Although Okinawa accounts for only 0.6% of Japanese territory, it hosts 74% of Japan’s U.S. military bases on illegally expropriated land in the prefecture.

The proposed U.S. military base goes against democratic principles, threatens the environment, and does not improve the security of Japan or the United States.

In March, Washington reiterated a pledge requiring local consent before proceeding with construction. Okinawans have opposed and blocked U.S. military expansion on their island in the name of “Futenma relocation” for the past 13 years, and their resistance at present is stronger than ever. In the Mainichi Newspaper poll conducted from May 28 to 30 in Okinawa, 84% of the residents oppose construction of a new base in Henoko. According to this poll, 91% of Okinawans want US bases in Okinawa either reduced or removed and 71% don’t think Marines are needed in Okinawa. On April 25 at the all-Okinawa rally, 90,000 Okinawans; Governor Nakaima; mayors of all the municipalities; members of the prefectural assembly; and all but one members of Parliament representing Okinawa gathered to call for the unconditional closure of Futenma Air Station and to oppose construction of a new base within Okinawa.

On May 16, 17,000 people surrounded Futenma Air Station in a human chain. Villagers have engaged in an ongoing sit-in at Henoko Beach for more than 2,200 days. Even local business leaders, many of whom would profit from base expansion, refuse to sacrifice “Okinawa’s pride, dignity and autonomy” for the economic benefits that the central government would provide to base-hosting communities.

On June 5, Japan’s new Prime Minister Naoto Kan and President Obama held their first phone conference and acknowledged their commonality as former civic activists. In the same conversation, they confirmed their commitment to follow through on the bilateral agreement to build a new base in Henoko, a decision that ignore the overwhelming civic opposition of Okinawa.

We should halt base expansion in Okinawa not only for people’s sake, but for other species and the sea as well. Henoko, where the two countries are planning to build a massive state-of-art military complex to host accident-prone Osprey helicopters, is located on Oura Bay, a unique fan-shaped bay that holds complex and rich ecosystems – those of wetland, sea grass, coral reef, and mangrove that relate to each other and maintain a fragile balance. The combination of forests, rivers and oceans is important to conserving these biodiversity. It is the feeding area of diverse marine animals including the dugong, an endangered marine mammal. In January 2008, a U.S. District Court in San Francisco ruled that the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) had violated the National Historic Preservation Act by failing to “take account” the effects of the base construction on the dugong, as an Okinawan “natural monument” with significant cultural and historic heritage. On April 24, then Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama said, “Reclaiming land in Henoko’s ocean would be an act of sacrilege against nature.”

The U.S. Marine Corps presence in Okinawa has no strategic value. The Japan-US Security Treaty does not require Japan to provide bases to U.S. Marines. Rather than protecting Japan or Okinawa, the bulk of the U.S. Marines whose home base is Okinawa are fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan. Their training in Okinawa is for a mission that has nothing to do with “protecting Japan,” as many Japanese have been led to believe. Likewise, Marines won’t serve a role that justifies the plan for a massive, environmentally and socially destructive buildup in Guam.

The Network of Okinawa calls on the U.S. president and Japanese prime minister to change the bilateral agreement; return the Futenma land to its owners; and cancel plans to build new military facilities. We urge President Obama to “uphold and extend fundamental rights and dignity” to all Asian people, including Okinawans and beyond, as he declared in the National Security Strategy of May 2010.

The Network for Okinawa (http://closethebase.org/), a coalition of the US-based NGOs, draws together representatives from peace groups, environmental organizations, faith-based organizations, academia, and think tanks. Formed in early 2010, the Network is sponsored by the Institute for Policy Studies in Washington. Members include: American Conservative Defense Alliance, American Friends Service Committee, Center for Biological Diversity, Fellowship of Reconciliation, Greenpeace, Institute for Policy Studies, Just Foreign Policy,Pax Christi USA, the United Methodist Chuch, Veterans for Peace, and Women for Genuine Security.

==============================

=================

米軍基地移設の現状についての「ネットワーク·フォー·沖縄」の声明

我々「ネットワーク·フォー·沖縄」は、５月２８日に発表された日米安全保障協議委員会の合同声明に強く反対する。この声明によって 日米両政府は、普天間空軍基地の「代替施設」として沖縄の辺野古に１，８００メートルに及ぶ滑走路（滑走路は複数になる可能性有）を 建設し、訓練の一部を徳之島に移転する意図を再確認した。（訳者注：日本語版の声明には書かれていないが、英語版には滑走路が複数に なる可能性が明記されている。Ｖ字案等の可能性を残すためであろう。）

第二次大戦末期の沖縄戦により、市民の４分の１にあたる１０万人をも失った沖縄県民は、敗戦後の米軍占領時代を通じて主権も人権も自 由も奪われていたが、復帰後３８年経った今なお、この状態は変わっていない。沖縄は日本の国土の０．６％を占めるにすぎないのに、不 法に取り上げられた県内の土地に在日米軍基地の７４％が置かれている。

新基地の建設は民主主義の理念に反し、環境を脅かし、日本にとっても米国にとっても安全保障の向上とはならない。

米政府は３月に、基地建設には現地の人々の同意が必要であるとの意向を再表明した。実際は過去１３年に渡り、沖縄県民は「普天間移 設」の名目で進められようとしている米軍基地の拡大に反対し、かつこれを阻止してきており、現在沖縄の抵抗はかつてない強 いものとなっている。 ５月２８日から３０日の間に毎日新聞が沖縄で行った世論調査によると、実に県民の８４％が辺野古の新基地建設に反対して いる。さらに、９１％が沖縄の基地を減らして欲しい、またはなくして欲しいと考えており、 ７１％が沖縄に海兵隊は必要ないとしている。

４月２５日の県民大会には９万人の沖縄県民·仲井眞県知事·全ての自治体の市町村長·県議会議員·そして一人を除き全ての沖縄選出国 会議員が集まり、普天間基地の無条件閉鎖と県内の新基地建設反対を訴えた。５月１６日には１万７千人が普天間基地を人間の鎖で囲ん だ。辺野古では住民達が２，２００日以上も座り込みを続けている。基地受け入れにともなう「経済振興策」によって利益を得 るはずの地元経済界のリーダーでさえもが、受け入れにより「県民のプライド、自尊心、自立」を犠牲にすることを拒否しているのだ。

６月５日、日本の菅直人·新首相とオバマ大統領が初めて電話で会談し、元·市民活動家であるという両者の共通点を認め合った。 それにも拘わらず、同じ会話の中で、沖縄市民の圧倒的な反対を無視した二国間合意、すなわち辺野古新基地建設の実現に向けての努力を 表明している。

人間のためだけではなく、他の種や海のためにも基地拡大は阻止しなければいけない。日米両国が大規模な最新型軍事施設（事 故をおこしやすいオスプレー·ヘリコプターを配備予定）を建設しようとしている辺野古は、独特な扇形をした大浦湾岸に位置している。 この湾には湿地·海草·サンゴ·マングローブなどの複雑で豊かな生態系が互いに関わり合い、壊れやすいバランスを保ちなが ら生存している。これらの生物多様性を保持するには、森·川·海の組み合わせが大切なのだ。この一帯は絶滅の危機にある海 洋ほ乳動物ジュゴンを含む多種多様な海洋生物の生息地である。２００８年１月、米国サンフランシスコの地方裁判所は、沖縄 の貴重な文化や歴史的遺産であるジュゴンに基地建設がもたらす影響を国防総省が考慮しなかったとし、文化財保護法に違反しているとの 判決を下した。　４月２４日、鳩山由起夫首相は「辺野古の海を埋め立てるのは、自然に対する冒涜だ」と言った。

沖縄の海兵隊の存在に戦略的価値はない。日米安保条約は日本の米国海兵隊への基地提供を義務づけていない。沖縄の米海兵隊の多くは日 本や沖縄を守るのではなく、イラクやアフガニスタンで戦っているのだ。海兵隊の沖縄での訓練は、多くの日本人が信じ込まさ れているような「日本を守る」という建前とは全く関係ない目的で行われているのである。同様に、グアムでの基地拡大も環境的·社会的 破壊を伴うもので、海兵隊はこのような計画を正当化するような役割を果たし得ない。

「ネットワーク·フォー·沖縄」は米国大統領と日本の総理大臣に対し、二国間合意を変更し、普天間の土地を本来の持ち主に返還し、新 たな軍事施設の建設計画を撤回するよう求める。 我々は、オバマ大統領が今年５月「国家安全保障戦略」の中で述べた、「アジア諸国の人々の基本 的権利と尊厳を尊重し、維持する」という考えを沖縄県民にも確実に適用する事を強く要求する。

２０１０年６月１４日

ネットワーク·フォー·沖縄

===============================================

沖繩通信—關於沖繩軍事基地的聲明

我們（沖繩通信）在此鄭重聲明：我們堅決反對5月28日日美兩國政府聯合宣言中關於在沖繩邊野古新建一條1800米長的機場跑道，以 及將部分訓練活動轉移至德之島，以作為關閉沖繩普天間空軍基地的替代方案的計畫。

第二次世界大戰沖繩戰役奪去了十萬沖繩人，占沖繩人口四分之一的平民的生命。日本戰敗後的佔領時代，沖繩的主權，人權和自由皆未得到 保障。在沖繩返還日本之後的38年，這一不公正仍未得到糾正。僅占日本國土面積0.6%的沖繩，卻容納了74%的美軍駐日 基地。

新基地的建設違反了民主主義信條，破壞環境，而並未為日本和美國的安全提供更多保障。

今年3月，華府重申了新基地的建設須征得基地所在地人民的同意的原則。事實上，過去13年間沖繩人民從未停止過對借“搬遷普天間基 地”為名進行基地擴建的抗議和抵制，這一運動在今年達到了高潮。《每日新聞》於5月28日至30日的名義調查指出，84%的 沖繩居民反對在邊野古建立新基地；91%居民希望美軍削減或完全搬遷其在沖繩的軍事基地；71%居民希望美國海軍陸戰隊搬離沖繩。4 月25日舉行的沖繩全體市民大會上，9萬沖繩市民，沖繩縣長，所有下屬市、區主管，除一人外所有的縣議員聚集在一起，表達了他們對關 閉普天間基地和停止建設新基地的強烈希望。5月16日，一萬七千多沖繩市民組成了一條人鏈將普天間基地包圍。在邊野古市， 當地居民的靜坐示威已經持續了2200多天。即便是被認為會從基地擴建中獲益最多的本地商業界人士，也公開表示他們不會因為政府承諾 的擴建基地帶來的經濟利益就放棄“沖繩的驕傲，尊嚴和自由”。

6月5日，日本新任首相菅直人與美國奧巴馬總統進行了電話通話。都曾為市民活動家的二人，卻選擇了無視沖繩市民對新基地建設壓倒性的 反對意見，再度重申了兩國政府將在邊野古建設新基地的決定。

不僅僅是因為市民的原因，為保護沖繩的環境和生物多樣性，新基地的建設也應當被廢止。作為新基地建設地的邊野古市大浦灣因其獨特的扇 形結構，多種濕地，海草，珊瑚和灌木構成了獨特而又脆弱的複雜生態系統。森林，河流和大海的組合保證了當地的生物多樣性，為 包括儒艮在內的多種珍稀動植物提供者重要的棲息地。軍事設施的建立，特別是不安全的魚鷹直升機的進駐將成為這些瀕臨滅絕的動植物的嚴重 威脅。 2009年1月，美國三藩市地方法院裁決美國國防部在邊野古建設基地的決定沒有充分考慮到對自然環境何儒艮的危害，從 而違背了聯邦歷史文化財產保護法。 4月24日，鳩山由紀夫首相也公開表達了“在邊野古填海建立基地是對自然的破壞”。

在沖繩的美國海軍陸戰隊沒有戰略上的價值。日美安保條約也沒有要求日本向美國海軍陸戰隊提供軍事基地。與大部分日本人被告知的“駐沖 繩美國海軍陸戰隊是為了保護日本”不一致的是，以沖繩為基地的海軍陸戰隊正在阿富汗和伊拉克戰鬥。這和“保護日本”沒有任何關係。同 樣的，海軍陸戰隊在關島的存在同樣對當地社會和環境有破壞作用，是無法被正當化的。

我們（沖繩通信）呼籲美國總統和日本首相修改建立基地的雙邊協定；將普天間基地佔用地返還給原所有者；停止在沖繩建設新的 軍事設施。我們敦促奧巴馬總統能按照他在今年5月“國家安全保障戰略”中所述，“尊重和維持亞洲各國人民的基本權利和尊嚴”，響 應沖繩人民的呼聲。

沖繩通信
2010 年6月16日

===============================================

미군기지이전 현상에 대한 [Network for Okinawa]의 성명

[Network for Okinawa]는 5월 28일 발표된 미일안전보장협의위원회 합동성명에 결사반대를 표하는 바이다.

이 성명에 의하면 미일 양 정부는 후텐마 공군기지의 [대체시설]로 오키나와의 헤노코(辺野古)에 1,800미터에 이르는 활주로(활주로는 복수가 될 가능성도 있음)를 건설하여, 훈련의 일부를 토쿠노시마(徳之島)로 이전 의도를 재확인 했다. (역자주: 일본어판 성명에는 기록되어 있지 않지만, 영문판에는 활주로가 복수가 될 가능성도 있도록 기록되어 있음. V자안등의 가능성도 남겨두기 위해서라고 사료됨.)

세계 제2차대전 말기의 오키나와전투로 인해 오키나와 시민 전체 4분의 1에 해당하는 10만명을 잃은 오키나와 현민은 패전후의 미군점령시대를 통해 주권도, 인권도, 자유도 빼앗긴채 살아왔다. 복귀후 38년이 지난 아직까지도 현실은 변한것이 아무것도 없다. 오키나와는 일본 전 국토의 0.6%에 지나지 않지만, 불법으로 빼앗긴 오키나와 현 내의 토지 내에 일본 미군기지의 74%가 위치하고 있다.

새로운 미군기지의 건설은 민주주의의 이념에 반할뿐만 아니라, 환경에까지도 위협을 미치며 일본, 미국 양국 모두에게 있어 안전보장 향상으로는 이어지지 않는다.

미국 정부는 지난 3월, 기지건설에 있어서는 오키나와 현민들의 동의가 필요하다는 의향을 재표명 했다. 실제로는 과거 13년에 걸쳐 오키나와 현민은 [후텐마 미군기지 이전]의 명목하에 진행되고 있는 미군기지 확대에 반대하여 그것을 저지해 왔으며, 현재 오키나와의 저항은 이전 그 어느 때 보다도 거센 상태이다. 5월 28일부터 30일에 걸쳐 일본 마이니치 신문이 오키나와에서 실시한 여론조사에 의하면 84%에 이르는 현민이 새 미군기지를 헤노코로 이전하는것에 반대하고 있다. 뿐만 아니라, 91%가 오키나와의 미군기지 축소 또는 철폐를 원한다고 답했으며, 71%는 오키나와에 해병대는 필요없다고 답했다.

4월 25일에 치뤄진 현민대회에는 9만명의 오키나와 현민, 나카이마 오키나와현지사 (仲井眞県知事)를 비롯한 모든 자치단체장, 현(県)의원, 그리고 1명을 제외한 오키나와 당선 국회의원들이 모여 후텐마 기지의 무조건 폐쇄 및 현내의 새로운 기지 건설 반대를 호소했다. 5월 16일에는 1만 7천명이 후텐마 기지를 둘러싸는 이벤트를 벌였다. 헤노코에서는 주민들이 2,200일 이상 연좌시위를 이어가고 있다. 기지이전을 수용함에 따라 실행되는 [경제진흥책]에 의해 이익을 받을 수 있는 지역경제계의 리더들 조차도 기지 수용보다 [현민의 자존심 및 자립]을 희생시키는데 있어 강한 거부감을 표하고 있다.

6월 5일 칸 나오토 신임 일본 수상은 오바마 대통령과 첫 전화 회담을 했으며, 시민활동가로 활동했던 공통점을 서로 인정했다. 그럼에도 불구하고 전화 회담에서 오키나와 시민의 압도적인 반대를 무시하고 양국간의 합의, 즉 헤노코 새 미군기지 건설의 실현을 위한 노력을 표명했다.

인간뿐만이 아니라 다른 생물 및 바다를 위해서도 기지확대는 저지되어야 한다. 미일양국이 대규모 최신 군사시설(사고빈도가 높은 Osprey 헬리콥터를 배치 예정)을 건설하려고 하는 헤노코는 독특한 선형을 한 오오우라(大浦)만의 연안에 위치하고 있다. 이 만에는 습지, 해초, 산호초등의 다양하고 풍부한 생태계가 어우러져 무너지기 쉬운 생태계의 균형을 이루고 있다. 이러한 생물다양성을 보존하기 위해서는 숲, 하천, 바다의 조화가 중요하다. 이 일대는 멸종위기종인 해양포유류 듀공을 포함한 다양한 해양생물의 서식지이다. 2008년 1월 미국 샌프란시스코 지방재판소는 일본 국방성이 미군 기지건설에 의한 환경변화가 오키나와의 귀중한 문화재이며 역사적인 유산이기도 한 듀공에 미칠 영향을 충분히 고려하지 않은것으로 보고 문화재 보호법 위반 판결을 내렸다. 4월 24일 하토야마 유키오 수상은 [헤노코의 바다를 매립하는것은 자연에 대한 모독이다] 라고 발언했다.

오키나와 해병대의 존재에 전략적 가치는 없다. 미일 안보조약은 일본의 미해병대에 기지제공을 의무하지 않았다. 오키나와의 미국해병대의 대다수는 일본 및 오키나와를 지키는것이 아니라, 이라크 및 아프가니스탄에서 전투중이다. 오키나와에서의 해병대 훈련은 대다수의 일본인이 믿고 있는 것과 같은 [일본을 지키기 위해] 서가 아니라, 전혀 다른 목적을 위해 행해지고 있는것이다. 마찬가지로 괌 미군기지 확대 역시 환경적, 사회적 파괴를 수반하는 것으로, 해병대는 이런 계획을 정당화 하는 역할을 해서는 안된다.

[Network for Okinawa]는 미국대통령과 일본총리대신에게 양국간 합의를 변경하여, 후텐마의 토지를 원래의 주인에게 반환 및 새로운 군사시설 계획을 철회할 것을 요구한다. 오바마 대통령이 올해 5월 [국가안전 보장전략]중에 진술한 [아시아 각국 국민의 기본적인 권리와 존엄을 존중하여 유지한다]는 이념을 오키나와 현민에게도 확실히 적용 해 줄것을 강력히 요구하는 바이다.

2010년 6월 14일
Network for Okinawa