Skip to main content
Support
Event

Still Too Large? Local Reaction to the U.S. Military Presence in Japan, Korea, and the Philippines

Sheila A. Smith, Shifting Terrain Project Director, East-West Center; Patricio Abinales, University of Kyoto; Masaaki Gabe, University of the Ryukyus; Katharine H.S. Moon, Wellesley College

Date & Time

Wednesday
Mar. 15, 2006
1:30pm – 3:30pm ET

Overview

Sheila A. Smith, at a jointly co-sponsored Asia Program and East-West Center event March 15, presented an overview of the East-West Center's Shifting Terrain cross-national research project. This two-year study examines the changing domestic political reaction to the presence of U.S. military forces in the Philippines, Japan and Korea. Noting that the United States has maintained troops in the Asia Pacific region since the end of World War II, and that its alliances with key countries in the region continue today to be seen as critical to regional peace and stability, Smith asserted nonetheless that there is a story that has gone largely untold. Democratic transitions in the Philippines, Japan and Korea, she asserted, have produced calls for greater national government discretion over the use of U.S. forces stationed in these countries. Outside of government, and often in localities far from the center of national power, the goals and impact of U.S. military forces deployed in the Asia Pacific region are viewed more in terms of their social costs than their strategic value. The national government's policy agenda is increasingly questioned and challenged by local governments and citizen activists. Crimes and accidents reverberate nationally, revealing significant changes in the complexion of anti-base sentiments. As the U.S. government seeks to transform its global military presence, and as the process of realigning America's overseas military forces proceeds, Washington must consider these new domestic influences on governments that host U.S. forces. Washington, Manila, Tokyo and Seoul must give greater attention to the local impacts of U.S. forces and develop policies that mitigate the pressures on local residents. To be successful, new initiatives for managing the presence of American forces in each of these societies will need to conform to domestic law and meet public expectations for government accountability.

Patricio Abinales noted that when U.S. troops returned to the Philippines in the 1990s, mostly to the southern area of Mindanao, 60 percent of the Muslims in the area approved. This is because there has been a "state of war" with Manila for several decades, so U.S. troops were perceived as bringing a certain amount of stability to the region. Local leaders, increasingly marginalized by the center, also welcomed the Americans and the money they would be bringing with them. Abinales stated that the main dilemma of the U.S. troops is that they are temporary and transient, so their ability to bring peace to the region is limited. In terms of local politics, not all the leaders are "good guys." The entrenched political families, after all, have done little to address basic poverty, and they are now fighting amongst themselves. He also claimed that, at the national level, Philippine institutions are weak, the military is divided, and the political leadership is unstable and illegitimate. On the other hand, noted Abinales, the problematic situation in the southern Philippines is nothing new. President McKinley sent General Leonard Wood there 100 years ago to pacify the region. For the U.S. military to succeed this time, it will have to get involved in local politics.

Massaki Gabe pointed out that most U.S. forces in Japan are concentrated on Okinawa. There are 25,000 U.S. troops on the island, and of them, 15,000 are marines. The most important point, he stated, is that Japanese society is changing. The outlook is more global, yet at the same time, political power is devolving to the localities. There is more institutional involvement, both at the local level and the central government, in dealing with U.S. base issues. However, now that there is a plan for realignment of U.S. forces, formulated last October, frictions have arisen. For example, Futenma Marine Air Station, which basically occupies the downtown area of Ginowan City, is closing, and U.S. forces are being moved from the southern to the northern part of Okinawa. This involves a host of issues between localities and Tokyo, especially regarding economic support, both for areas losing troops and those areas gaining them. While no Okinawans were involved in last October's realignment talks, local leaders have not been shy about advancing their own plans and proposals.

Katharine H. S. Moon began her presentation by describing a riot between U.S. soldiers and Koreans. It occurred in 1971. So, friction between locals and U.S. soldiers is nothing new. What is new, said Moon, is that since the late 1980s, real democracy has come to South Korea. Local people can no longer be controlled top down from Seoul. Since the 1990s, decentralization and democratization have created a radically different operating environment. Opinions regarding the U.S. troop presence are now formed from the bottom up. Korean citizens have new legal rights, such as the right to petition, the right to conduct audits, and the right to demand transparency. However, average Koreans feel that their new legal rights stop at the U.S. military gate. This adds to their frustration. As in Japan, the closing and relocation of bases is creating much dislocation, both for those communities losing troops and for those gaining them. Local governments are demanding economic assistance from Seoul to cope with these dislocations, and they have more power behind their demands. In addition, such issues have now gone multinational. Moon pointed out that because of recent technology, such as the internet and cell phones, local activists in Korea, Japan and the Philippines, and even Puerto Rico, have been in contact with each other over the past five years. They trade advice and experiences, and learn from each other. Moon concluded that governments have not been learning as fast as local authorities. In the ROK, for example, it was only in 2004 that an office was set up to deal with the issue of U.S. force relocation. In addition, this office will be disbanded when the relocation is completed. If there are no local institutions to handle complaints, warned Moon, they will spill over to become national issues.

Tagged

Hosted By

Indo-Pacific Program

The Indo-Pacific Program promotes policy debate and intellectual discussions on US interests in the Asia-Pacific as well as political, economic, security, and social issues relating to the world’s most populous and economically dynamic region.   Read more

Thank you for your interest in this event. Please send any feedback or questions to our Events staff.