The United States and Japanese
governments have agreed to remove 9,000 U.S. Marines from the
garrison in Okinawa. Many of the units, around 5,000 soldiers, will
be reassigned to Guam with others being transferred to other bases
around the Pacific Theater. Japan has promised to provide $3.1billion
in funds to aid in the transfer and relocation of the Marines. Along
with this, there is talk of creating a joint training center in Guam
for the continued connection of Japanese and American forces.
Officials from both countries fully
support this plan and talk about how it will strengthen relations and
military capabilities in the region. The politicians allude to the
fact that this move will not only strengthen the Marines' ability to
react to threats in the area, but it will also cause an increase in
the capabilities and military power of the Japanese military. Leaders
argue that these movements will aid in the strategic rebalancing of
the Asia-Pacific region. Specifically, there is the belief that this
action will cause a greater ability for flexibility in the region;
something that is greatly pushed by the American military community.
Of course, not everyone is pleased
with this relocation of troops. A number of American politicians have
questioned this strategy on the part of Panetta, and debate whether
or not this move will truly create a more strategic environment.
There is also controversy in Okinawa, where the agreement calls for
the relocation of troops only after a Marine Air Base is moved, a
heated issue in the area. Also, many Japanese are unhappy with this
move due to the threat of China. They like American military support
on the island, since it shows support and military protection against
aggressors.
While Panetta states that this
movement is truly strategically optimal, there are still questions
and problems that arise when considering the defensive aspects.
Firstly, this act causes to greatly split the forces located in the
Pacific. The base in Okinawa would be reduced from nearly 20,000
combat Marines to barely 10,000. This fact, combined with the
relocation of Marines to various posts, leaves the American Marine
Corps with less cohesive capabilities in the region. Yes, if
something happens the Marines are able to mobilize multiple bases,
including the forces moved to Guam, but it reduces the cohesiveness
and the training the units have in working together.
Also, this reduction in troops can be
seen as a show of weakness on the world stage. With America reducing
forces in the region, specifically the base so close to China and
Taiwan, it could be construed by many as America losing its' resolve
to defend the region. This could make other nations, such as China
who is currently taking more interest in patrolling the seas, to push
into American controlled areas and threaten American hegemony. While
it is true that Guam is still close to the area, and can launch
military strikes nearly as quickly, the loss of appearance and face
creates major threats in the political realm. There is a possibility
of another nation being more willing to test American resolve, or
other countries pushing for the reduction of American troops on
their soil, in response to the actions of Japan.
Sources:
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment