On April 14, DPJ Policy Research Committee Chair Masayuki Naoshima issued the following statement.

Today, the Agreement regarding the relocation of US Marines based in Okinawa to Guam was passed by the House of Representatives.

The Democratic Party of Japan considers the Japan-US Alliance to be the lynchpin of Japan’s national security, and the keystone for the peace and stability of the Asian-Pacific region. However, we believe that it is necessary to consider the role of the US military bases in Japan, and to review the State of Forces Agreement and the financial burden which should be borne by Japan, keeping an eye on the US military’s global strategy, in the light of changes in the security environment in East Asia such as the issue of North Korea’s development of nuclear weapons and missiles.

In particular, since it involves an injection of precious tax money under difficult fiscal conditions, the reasoning and accounting grounds for Japan bearing approximately 60% of the 10.27 billion US dollars in total for the relocation to Guam should be made public. Furthermore, although the relocation cannot progress without funding from the United States, the US government has not called on the US Congress to approve the agreement. Due to the economic crisis and reduction in military spending by the US, it is not certain that the relocation will proceed in accordance with the roadmap as planned, and there is a risk that only Japan will end up making a financial commitment.

It is also a significant problem that, in spite of the fact that reducing the burden on Okinawa is a large part of the aim of the relocation, the relocation and the completion of an alternative facility at Futenma Air Station have been made a package deal. Also, considering the fact that there is a great deal of variation in the target figures and the actual figures with regard to the approximately 8 000 marines and 9 000 dependents who are to be relocated from Okinawa to Guam, it is not clear exactly how much the burden on Okinawa will be reduced.

The government has not fulfilled its accountability obligations at all with regard to the above issues, and we feel that we have no alternative but to oppose this Agreement. We will continue to call for an explanation from the government in the House of Councillors, as well as once more engaging in thorough debate as to how the realignment of US forces for which this Agreement forms the basis should proceed.