The second quarter of 2006 went about as well for U.S.-Japan relations as could be imagined. The two governments agreed on a plan to restructure their military alliance; the ban on U.S. beef exports to Japan was lifted (again); the two countries’ diplomacy appears to be well coordinated as they deal with vexing issues (Iran and North Korea); and the “Sayonara Summit” was a PR success (as anticipated). From all appearances, the foundation has been laid for a successful U.S.-Japan partnership that outlives the George Bush-Koizumi Junichiro “special relationship.”

A roadmap emerges

The quarter began with the two governments still arguing over the particulars of the realignment of U.S. forces in Japan. As noted in last quarter’s analysis, Washington and Tokyo failed to meet their self-imposed March deadline for finalizing the redeployments of U.S. (and some Japanese) forces. While applauding the draw down of U.S. Marines on Okinawa (despite some howls over the cost), communities elsewhere on the Japanese archipelago were reluctant to accept relocated forces. On April 23, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and Japan Defense Agency Director General Nukaga Fukushiro agreed that Japan would pay $6.09 billion, or 59 percent, of the estimated $10.27 billion total costs to move 8,000 marines from Okinawa.

Celebration over the deal was short-lived. Three days later, Deputy Defense Undersecretary for Asia and Pacific Affairs Richard Lawless announced that Japan would be expected to pay at least $26 billion (about ¥3 trillion) as its share of the cost of realigning all U.S. forces in Japan (a bill that would be paid over 6-7 years). His “rough estimate” stunned the Japanese public and many politicians; a public opinion poll a few days later showed 81 percent of respondents saying Japan should not pay the full amount. Even if the final bill isn’t exactly that size, it is unclear how Japan will foot a bill of that magnitude.

Lawless’ speculation about a price tag signaled that a deal on the overall package was imminent. And, sure enough, on May 1 the Security Consultative Committee (the SCC, sometimes referred to as the “2+2 meeting” because it is composed of the two countries’ highest-ranking diplomatic and defense officials), released the “United States-Japan Roadmap for Realignment Implementation.” The four-page document (available at www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2006/65517.html) contains details of the realignment.

Let’s start with several guiding principles. First, “the individual realignment initiatives form a coherent package.” In other words, there will be no à la carte itemizing of moves. This was a problem throughout the negotiations as the U.S insisted that bases could be closed only when alternative facilities/locations were identified and made available. There could be no putting off tough decisions – where to relocate forces – until later. Second, Japan will pay construction and other costs of facilities development, while the U.S. will pay operational costs arising from implementation of the deal.

Key features of the roadmap regarding Okinawa include:

• The Futenma Replacement Facility (FRF) will consist of two 1,600 meter runways aligned in a V-shape, in the Camp Schwab area. The project’s scheduled completion date is 2014.
• Some 8,000 III Marine Expeditionary Force (MEF) personnel and their approximately 9,000 dependents will relocate from Okinawa to Guam by 2014.
• A detailed plan for consolidation of remaining U.S. facilities will be completed by March 2007.
• All relocations will occur before facilities are returned, and all Okinawa-related realignment initiatives are interconnected.
• Consolidation and land returns south of Kadena depend on completing the relocation of III MEF personnel and dependents from Okinawa to Guam. That, in turn, is dependent on: (1) tangible progress toward completion of the FRF, and (2) Japan’s financial contributions to fund development of required facilities and infrastructure on Guam.

Other key provisions include:

• The U.S. Army command and control structure at Camp Zama will be transformed by 2008. Headquarters of the Ground SDF Central Readiness Force will arrive at Camp Zama by 2012. A battle command training center and other support facilities will be constructed within Sagami General Depot using U.S. funding.
• Air Self-Defense Forces (ASDF) Air Defense Command and relevant units will relocate to Yokota Air Base in 2010. Both countries will develop a master plan for base use to accommodate facility and infrastructure requirements. A bilateral, joint operations coordination center will be established at Yokota, and will include a collocated air and missile defense coordination function. The two governments will study civilian-military dual use of the base.
• Carrier Air Wing Five squadrons from Atsugi Air Facility, consisting of F/A-18, EA-6B, E-2C, and C-2 aircraft, will be relocated to Marine Corps Air Station Iwakuni by 2014.
• Both governments will step up ballistic missile defense capabilities. PAC-3 capabilities will be deployed within existing U.S. facilities and areas within Japan as soon as possible.

The roadmap was approved by the Japanese Cabinet at the end of May. A month later, the two governments established a U.S. Force Realignment Council, a consultative panel that will map out plans for specific features of the roadmap and confirm progress as it is implemented.

U.S. beef back on the menu

The other big issue hanging over the bilateral relationship this quarter was the continuing ban on Japanese imports of U.S. beef. Rhetoric had been escalating as Tokyo refused to bow to U.S. pressure and readmit U.S. beef. On April 13, U.S. Agriculture Secretary Mike Johanns warned of rising impatience among U.S. legislators and the very real possibility of retaliation. Yet, at a series of Japanese-government sponsored panels to explain progress in the bilateral beef talks to Japanese consumers and hear their views on the matter, members of the public had expressed concern about the safety of U.S. beef. Opposition politicians called for maintenance of the ban, charging that the government was acting for political reasons and playing with the safety of Japanese consumers as a result.

The protests were for naught as Tokyo announced June 20 that it was lifting the ban. Japan pledged to send inspectors to 35 meatpacking plants in 16 states to ensure that no diseased beef would be imported. Those inspectors would prepare a report upon their return and that would be used to guide thinking on how the ban would be lifted. President Bush played up the decision in his June 29 summit with Koizumi, explaining that his guest had eaten beef the night before and predicted that “the Japanese people are going to like the taste of U.S. beef.” Public opinion polls show that it will be an uphill battle for U.S. producers to regain the confidence of Japanese consumers.

Kudos in Iraq and goodbye

Conspiracy-minded types noted that the announcement of the resumption of beef imports was virtually simultaneous with Koizumi’s announcement that Ground Self-Defense Forces (GSDF) would be withdrawing from Iraq after a two and a half year deployment. The move had been debated in the press for months, with the general tenor suggesting that it was only a matter of time.

During their stay, a grand total of 5,500 GSDF members participated in three-month rotations, making it the largest overseas deployment of the GSDF in history. None have been killed, nor a single bullet fired. The withdrawal, which should be completed later in the summer, will be coordinated with the redeployment of Australian and British forces, which have been providing protection for the SDF. Koizumi also announced that while ground forces will be removed, ASDF units will increase activities in support of multinational forces and the United Nations. Currently, three ASDF C-130 air transports are based in Kuwait, mainly transporting goods to an airport near Samawah; new airlift support will be provided to Baghdad and the north of Iraq.

U.S. National Security Advisor Stephen Hadley put a positive spin on the withdrawal. After applauding Japanese support for the reconstruction of Iraq, he noted that Tokyo was continuing to aid Iraq and was actually expanding its role. At his June 29 summit with Koizumi, President Bush noted that “Japanese defense forces did a really good job when they were in Iraq. And they’re able to leave because they did such a good job.”

One voice on Iran

Iraq wasn’t the only Middle East country that figured in the U.S.-Japan relationship. The continuing failure to resolve the uncertainties surrounding Iran’s nuclear program absorbed time and attention from the two countries’ leaders. In June, Foreign Minister Aso Taro had a 25-minute phone conversation with his Iranian counterpart Manouchehr Mottaki during which Aso urged him to take up the offers by the U.S. and the EU to deal with the situation. Meanwhile, U.S. officials pressed Japan to consider financial sanctions on Iran in the event of a failure of diplomacy. By the end of the quarter, the Financial Times was reporting that Japan was prepared to sign on to financial sanctions. The topic was on the agenda at the June summit between Bush and Koizumi. Meeting the press after their session, Koizumi reported that “Japan certainly supports that U.S. stance of seeking resolution through a dialogue regarding the nuclear proliferation issue. The Iranian issue remains a grave issue for the entire world economy, and Japan wishes to cooperate with the United States and other countries concerned on this matter, as well.”

One voice on North Korea

If dealing with Tehran proved frustrating, then relations with Pyongyang are best described as maddening. The Six-Party Talks to resolve that nuclear crisis remained in suspension while North Korea ratcheted up tension at quarter’s end with signals that it was prepared to test-fire missiles, including a long-range Taepodong 2. (The launch occurred early in July; the two countries’ response will be taken up in the next issue of Comparative Connections.) Throughout the quarter, Washington and Tokyo remained in close contact, coordinating policy and presenting a united front to Pyongyang. Tokyo’s position is closest to that of Washington among the six parties in the multilateral talks.

The U.S., alone among the other parties to the Six-Party Talks, has backed Japan’s demand that Pyongyang resolve the cases of the abductees – Japanese citizens that North Korea has admitted to kidnapping. This quarter, President Bush met Mrs. Yokota Sakie, mother of Yokota Megumi, abducted in 1977 when she was 13. (This meeting followed a March visit by U.S. Ambassador to Japan Thomas Schieffer to the beach where Yokota was kidnapped; he pledged to raise the issue with Bush.) Bush called his April 28 meeting with Yokota “one of the most moving meetings” he has had since being president and promised to push North Korea to return abductees and respect human rights. In addition to meeting the president, Yokota and other members of a Japanese delegation testified in a House of Representatives subcommittee hearing about the abduction issue, met high-ranking government officials and lawmakers, and held a press conference.

As the quarter drew to a close, the world focused on signs the North was preparing to test launch a long-range missile. Following a mid-June meeting with Foreign Minister Aso, Schieffer said the two countries were considering economic sanctions in the event of a launch. The UN ambassadors of both countries were also coordinating a response in the event of a test. Both governments issued public warnings; the topic was one of the highest on the June 29 summit agenda.

One voice on missile defense

The prospect of a North Korean test vindicated those on both sides of the Pacific who had been calling for closer cooperation on ballistic missile defense (BMD). The U.S. and Japan are working together on various aspects of missile defense. They are jointly developing a new version of the interceptor that a BMD would use to shoot down long-range missiles. Early in the quarter, Kyodo reported that the two governments had agreed on the initiation of a two-year joint research project to develop advanced technologies for a sea-based radar system and a combat command system. Subsequent reports that the Pentagon had approved the sale to Japan of new interceptors (the deal still requires Congressional approval) triggered a typically belligerent response from Pyongyang, which cautioned that “overseas aggression is the invariable ambition.”

On June 22, the Japanese Aegis-equipped destroyer Kirishima took part in a U.S. missile defense test, the first time that a U.S. ally joined such an exercise. The Kirishima contributed long-range surveillance and tracking with the USS Shiloh, another Aegis-equipped vessel that will be stationed in Japan from August. They succeeded in intercepting a mock warhead with a standard interceptor fired from an Aegis-equipped ship.

A day after the test, Ambassador Schieffer and Foreign Minister Aso signed documents agreeing to strengthen BMD cooperation. The Japan Defense Agency announced the same day that a high-resolution radar to detect missiles had been deployed within Japan and the two governments confirmed that they would deploy Patriot missiles on U.S. bases. The prospect of a North Korean test firing prompted the Kirishima to return home ahead of schedule and has prodded Washington and Tokyo to speed up deployment of the various elements of a BMD system in Japan.

A sensational ‘Sayonara Summit’

On June 29, President Bush and Prime Minister Koizumi met in Washington for their 13^th summit. The visit was a fitting cap to the extraordinary personal relationship the two men have forged during their five years in office together. The “summit-cum-road trip,” with a 19-gun salute, a White House dinner, and visit to Graceland, set a new standard for intimacy on the diplomatic circuit.

The speeches hit all the right notes, with the two men celebrating a bilateral alliance that sets the foundation for cooperation on global issues. They applauded their two countries’ shared values – “democracy, free enterprise, and a deep and abiding respect for human rights” – and their cooperative efforts to deal with such problems as Iraq, North Korea, and the war on terror. The comments highlighted the personal nature of the relationship: Bush explained that the visit was to “honor the leadership of Japan’s Prime Minister Koizumi, a man of vision, a man of integrity, and I’m proud to call him my friend.” The prime minister responded by noting that, “over the past five years, there has been no world leader, alongside Mr. Bush . . . with whom I have felt so much heart-to-heart, felt so deep a friendship.”

The official agenda of their meeting covered all the topics identified in this assessment. In their comments after the meeting, both men called on North Korea to abandon plans to conduct a missile test, and said it vindicated their strategy to pursue missile defense.  Another item that received considerable attention in their comments after the summit was energy. President Bush noted that the two countries “can help provide technologies that will improve the climate, as well as reduce our dependence on hydrocarbons.” He identified nuclear energy as one option. In his comments, Prime Minister Koizumi highlighted Japan’s interest in UN reform, especially the Security Council.

During the press availability, Koizumi was asked about his foreign policy priorities. The prime minister used the question to respond to charges that he has given too much attention to relations with the U.S. and should pay more attention to Asia. He explained    some in the mass media “misinterpreted my position. … that I was saying to the extent Japan-U.S. relations remain good, I couldn’t care less what Japan’s relations would be with other countries. That is not at all what I said.” Rather, he believes that Japan-U.S. relations are the most important for Japan. But that does not mean that better relations with the United States are at the expense of relations with other countries.

More than just friendship

Much of the press coverage of the meeting focused on the personal: the road trip to Graceland, where Koizumi got a guided tour of his idol Elvis Presley’s mansion and where he crooned “Love me tender” to Priscilla and Lisa Marie Presley and President and Mrs. Bush.  But as Chief Cabinet Secretary Abe Shinzo was quick to note after the summit, “The importance of the Japan-U.S. alliance is not just between the top leaders of the two countries but is a shared understanding of the two countries.” Anticipating the concern over the scheduled departure of Koizumi in September, he continued “It is important to firmly recognize that the two countries’ maintenance of their strong bond will contribute to the national interests of the two countries as well as to world peace and stability, and we believe there will be no change in this basic understanding even when there are changes in government.”

Charting a future

To keep the relationship on its current course, Bush and Koizumi released after their summit a document heralding a new U.S.-Japan Alliance of Global Cooperation for the 21^st Century. The alliance identifies the “universal values and common interests” that provide the foundation of the alliance. The values include freedom, human dignity and human rights, democracy, market economy, and rule of law. The two countries share interests in: “winning the war on terrorism; maintaining regional stability and prosperity; promoting free market ideals and institutions; upholding human rights; securing freedom of navigation and commerce, including sea lanes; and enhancing global energy security.”

Their statement applauded the remarkable progress in bilateral security cooperation achieved since the two men took office. These changes “constitute historic steps forward that make the U.S. military presence more enduring and effective, and ensure the capabilities necessary for the alliance to cope with diverse challenges in the evolving security environments. … full and prompt implementation of these agreements is necessary, not only for Japan and the United States, but also for peace and stability of the Asia-Pacific region.”

The declaration mentions all the usual topics, including those examined above. It also highlights capacity building for natural disaster response and prevention and response to pandemic diseases, pushing for a successful conclusion to the Doha Round of world trade talks, and strengthening the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) forum.

The declaration also notes “the two leaders agreed to explore ways to further deepen the mutually-beneficial bilateral economic relationship. … Such an expanded partnership would include: promoting growth and economic reform; promoting and maintaining open markets; ensuring efficient movement of legitimate goods, services, people, and investments, while tackling threats from terrorism; strengthening intellectual property rights protection and enforcement; enhancing global energy security; and fostering transparent and favorable business climates in both countries.”

The call for strengthening the economic relationship is worthy of note. There is some unease (or perhaps more accurately, jealousy) in Japan about the decision of the U.S. and South Korea to move forward with a free trade agreement. Off the record, U.S. officials admit they are not unhappy with that response. While Japan continues to reform its economy, there is frustration in the U.S. (and in the U.S. business community in Japan) about its pace and about Japanese contributions to global trade talks. The noisy public debate about growing inequality in Japanese society and the readiness of financial police to go after fund manager Murakami Yoshiaki and Horie Takafumi, president of Livedoor Co., suggest that the reform process will continue to be contested and unsteady. The nail that sticks up will continue to be hammered down – especially if it resembles the fin of a U.S.-style corporate shark. The language of the declaration suggests, at least, that alliance managers have recognized an imbalance in the U.S.-Japan relationship: after devoting considerable attention to the security dimension, it is time to spend more time on economic issues.

A relationship on hold?

While there is clearly a need for the two countries to look at their economic relationship, it is unclear how that re-examination will finish. There won’t be an answer next quarter; in fact, it is unlikely that there will be progress on any issue in the bilateral relationship, perhaps for the rest of the year. Japan’s focus is turning inward as the country prepares for the post-Koizumi era. Important political decisions regarding the alliance – security and economic – are not likely to be made. That is unfortunate: the June 29 summit demonstrated that Prime Minister Koizumi has put the pieces in place as the two countries contemplate taking their alliance to the next level. No one knows how long they will remain there.