[Wikileaks]Japan: PART 1 OF 2 — U.S., JAPAN REACH AD REF GUAM

Viewing cable 08TOKYO3457, PART 1 OF 2 — U.S., JAPAN REACH AD REF GUAM

If you are new to these pages, please read an introduction on the structure of a cable as well as how to discuss them with others. See also the FAQs
Reference ID Created Released Classification Origin
08TOKYO3457 2008-12-19 05:39 2011-05-04 00:00 CONFIDENTIAL Embassy Tokyo

VZCZCXRO0336
OO RUEHFK RUEHKSO RUEHNH
DE RUEHKO #3457/01 3540539
ZNY CCCCC ZZH
O 190539Z DEC 08
FM AMEMBASSY TOKYO
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE 9590
RUEKJCS/SECDEF WASHDC IMMEDIATE
INFO RUEHUL/AMEMBASSY SEOUL 2922
RUEHGP/AMEMBASSY SINGAPORE 7293
RUEHNH/AMCONSUL NAHA 3889
RUEHOK/AMCONSUL OSAKA KOBE 5323
RUEHFK/AMCONSUL FUKUOKA 1532
RUEHKSO/AMCONSUL SAPPORO 2098
RUEHIN/AIT TAIPEI 7219
RUHBABA/CG III MEF CAMP COURTNEY JA
RUHBANB/CG MCB CAMP BUTLER JA
RUEKJCS/CJCS WASHINGTON DC
RHMFISS/CMC WASHINGTON DC
RUENAAA/CNO WASHINGTON DC
RHMFISS/COMMARCORBASESJAPAN CAMP BUTLER JA
RUHEHMS/COMMARCORBASESPAC CAMP H M SMITH HI
RUHPSAA/COMMARFORPAC
RUYNAAC/COMNAVFORJAPAN YOKOSUKA JA
RHHMHBA/COMPACFLT PEARL HARBOR HI
RHOVVKG/COMSEVENTHFLT
RUEAHQA/CSAF WASHINGTON DC
RUEHC/DEPT OF INTERIOR WASHINGTON DC
RHEFDIA/DIA WASHINGTON DC
RHHMUNA/HQ USPACOM HONOLULU HI
RUEKJCS/JOINT STAFF WASHINGTON DC
RHEHAAA/NSC WASHDC
RUHBANB/OKINAWA AREA FLD OFC US FORCES JAPAN CP BUTLER JA
RUENAAA/SECNAV WASHINGTON DC
RUEATRS/TREASURY DEPT WASHDC
RHMFISS/USFJ

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 12 TOKYO 003457

SIPDIS

DOD FOR OSD/APSA SHIVERS/SEDNEY/HILL; DEPT OF NAVY FOR
SECNAV WINTER, ASN PENN, DASN BIDDICK; DON PASS TO JGPO FOR
BICE/HICKS; NSC FOR WILDER; PACOM FOR J00/J01/J4/J5; USFJ
FOR J00/J01/J4/J5

E.O. 12958: DECL: 12/15/2018
TAGS: MARR PREL PGOV JA
SUBJECT: PART 1 OF 2 — U.S., JAPAN REACH AD REF GUAM
INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENT

REF: STATE 128612

Classified By: Ambassador J. Thomas Schieffer; Reasons: 1.4 (b/d)

¶1. (C) Summary: U.S. and Japanese negotiators reached an ad
ref agreement on December 15 for a bilateral International
Agreement (IA) committing the Japanese government to provide
USD 2.8 billion to construct facilities and infrastructure on
Guam to support the relocation of III Marine Expeditionary
Forces (MEF) units from Okinawa. The ad ref agreement meets
all of the negotiating objectives contained in Reftel. The
text includes linkages, approved at the Prime Ministerial
level, between construction of facilities on Guam and
Japanese actions to complete the Futenma Replacement Facility
(FRF). The Japanese government agreed to measure its cash
contributions for Guam projects in USFY2008 constant dollars
and provide the U.S. government flexibility in funds
management. On December 13, the Ministry of Finance approved
USD 336 million for Guam projects in the JFY2009 budget. The
Japanese government has also indicated plans to accelerate
Diet approval of the IA in order to mitigate against the risk
of an early election. The decision to conclude a
Treaty-level (on the Japanese side) agreement committing
Tokyo to provide multi-year funding for Guam and compelling
completion of the FRF as a precondition to relocating III MEF
elements to Okinawa significantly reduces the risk that local
politics in Okinawa or a change in government in Tokyo will
result in the unraveling of the May 1, 2006 realignment
package. End Summary.

———-
Background
———-

¶2. (C) U.S. and Japanese negotiators concluded an ad ref
International Agreement (IA) regarding the implementation of
the relocation of III MEF personnel from Okinawa to Guam on
December 15. The Japanese government requested a bilateral
IA in order to secure multi-year funding from the Diet for
the Guam relocation, part of the package of U.S. Forces
realignment measures agreed upon at the May 1, 2006 Security
Consultative Committee (SCC) meeting. In addition to legally
binding the current and future Japanese Cabinets to implement
the political-level SCC agreement, the Japanese government
sought clarity from the U.S. government on how Japanese funds
would be managed. Tokyo specifically requested assurances
from the U.S. government on equal treatment for Japanese
companies bidding on Japanese-funded projects, tax
exemptions, and a mechanism for Japan to incrementally fund
multi-year projects. The Japanese side also sought to
measure Japan’s USD 2.8 billion (the cash portion of Japan’s
6.09 billion overall commitment) contribution in nominal 2008
dollars (i.e. not to be adjusted for inflation). The
Japanese government also sought confirmation from the U.S.
side that it remained committed to relocating to Guam, and
that the U.S. would reach mutual agreement with Japan over

TOKYO 00003457 002 OF 012

any major actions that would affect the use of the facilities
(such as a future Base Realignment and Closure decision to
draw down forces in Guam).

¶3. (C) In agreeing to enter into IA negotiations, the U.S.
government insisted that the IA be part of an overall package
to include: 1) an explicit linkage in the IA that the
Relocation of III MEF elements to Guam be made contingent on
completion of the Futenma Replacement Facility (FRF); 2) full
funding for JFY2009 projects on Guam identified by the Joint
Guam Program Office (JGPO); 3) agreement on the flexible use
of funds, including interest, deposited in the U.S. Treasury
for Guam construction projects; 4) calculation of Japan’s USD
2.8 billion in constant dollars or agreement to off-set lost
purchasing power through use of a nominal calculation; and 5)
adequate funding for the FRF. The U.S. side also made clear
that the IA and the Implementing Guidance (IG) are linked and
must be read together to constitute a whole agreement.
Furthermore, the U.S. side made clear that the IA would be
treated as an executive agreement by the United States
Government and not made subject to Senate approval.

—————-
Ad Ref Agreement
—————-

¶4. (C) After a series of negotiating sessions in Washington
and Tokyo from November 4 to December 15, the two sides
reached substantive agreement on the IA and a set of side
arrangements. These side arrangements include detailed
Department of Defense (DOD)-Ministry of Defense (MOD)
Implementing Guidance (IG), an Exchange of Diplomatic Notes,
and an oral commitment to be made by the Japanese Foreign
Minister at the time of the signing of the IA. The contents
of all three separate arrangements were agreed upon at the
same time as the ad ref agreement for the IA, and were
confirmed only after the Japanese side reported that it had
secured sufficient budget for Guam projects in the JFY2009
budget request. This set of arrangements meets the
negotiating instructions contained in Reftel and addresses
all the U.S. objectives stated in para 3 above. Specifically:

— Objective 1: Explicit linkage in the IA that the
Relocation of III MEF elements to Guam be made contingent on
completion of the Futenma Replacement Facility (FRF):
Preamble paragraph 9 and Articles 2, 3, and 9 incorporate
this explicit linkage.

— Objective 2: Secure adequate funding for JFY2009:
Immediately upon conclusion of a substantive agreement on the
IA/IG texts, the Ministry of Finance (MOF) agreed to budget
USD 336 million for Guam relocation projects in the JFY2009
budget. This budget will be approved by the Cabinet and made
public on or about December 20.

— Objective 3: Agreement on the flexible use of funds,

TOKYO 00003457 003 OF 012

including interest, deposited in the U.S. Treasury for Guam
construction projects: Through both the IA, especially
Article 7, and the IG, the Japanese government agreed to the
flexible use of Japanese funds to cover potential cost
overruns and other contingencies (details contained in
paragraph 3 (f) of the IG). The Japanese side also agreed to
seek additional funding if necessary to meet project-funding
obligations (also para 3 (f) of the IG). Moreover, Japan
committed to transfer funds in a timely way each year. The
IG (paragraph 3 (a)) stipulates that Japan will transfer its
annual contributions within 30 days of the annual Exchange of
Notes (EON) confirming the proposed Guam-related budget for
each fiscal year. Japan’s fiscal year begins on April 1 and
the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) has committed to
completing the EON “”as soon as possible”” after the Diet
enacts the annual budget in late March. This commitment will
be reaffirmed by the Foreign Minister at the time the IA is
formally signed.

— Objective 4: Preserve Purchasing Power of the Japanese
Contribution: The Japanese government agreed to calculate its
USD 2.8 billion contributions in 2008 constant (i.e.,
adjusted for inflation) dollars. The Japanese side further
agreed (IG paragraph 3 (b)) to discount their contribution
using the specific index proposed by the USG (i.e., the
Engineering News Record-Building Cost Index “”ENR BCI””).

— Objective 5: Adequate funding for the FRF: MOD informed
the Embassy that MOF approved nearly USD 300 million (total)
for FRF projects in JFYs 2009 and 2010.

— Preserving the status as an Executive Agreement for the
United States: U.S. commitments are caveated as being subject
to the availability of funds, tangible progress on the FRF,
and Japanese funding for Guam Relocation. The U.S. entirely
rebuffed Japanese pressure to grant new tax exemptions or
allow incremental funding mechanisms for Japanese projects.
The U.S. side made clear that all actions under the IA will
be undertaken in accordance with relevant U.S. laws and
regulations.

——————
Way Ahead/Timeline
——————

¶5. (C) Given the potential for a general election after the
start of the Japanese fiscal year on April 1, 2009, the
Japanese side has decided to accelerate Diet review of the
IA. The IA need only be approved by the Diet’s Lower House,
which is now dominated by the ruling coalition. Even if the
opposition-controlled Upper House were to vote it down or
take no action, the IA would be ratified 30 days after Lower
House approval. In order to meet this timetable, MOFA has
asked the U.S. to be prepared to sign the IA the weeks of
February 9 or 16, either in Washington or Tokyo. If this
schedule holds, the timeline will be as follows:

TOKYO 00003457 004 OF 012

December 15: Ad Ref Agreement Reached
December 19: Japan’s Cabinet approves JFY2009 budget,
including USD 336 million for Guam
January 5: Diet regular session convenes
Mid-January: JFY2009 budget submitted to the Diet
Mid-February: IA signed by Japanese Foreign Minister and a
U.S. counterpart
Early March: JFY2009 budget enacted/IA submitted to Diet
Mid/Late March: IA approved by Diet Lower House
Mid/Late April: IA ratified
Late April/Early May: Exchange of Notes, IG signed
Early/Mid May: Japan transfers USD 336 million to a
designated U.S. Treasury Account

———-
Text of IA
———-

¶6. (SBU) The following is the ad ref IA text as confirmed
on December 15. The text of the Exchange of Notes follows in
paras 7 and 8. More details on the negotiating history
behind this package of agreements is further clarified in
Paras 9-29 below.

Begin draft text of the IA

AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF
AMERICA AND THE GOVERNMENT OF JAPAN CONCERNING THE
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE RELOCATION OF III MARINE EXPEDITIONARY
FORCE PERSONNEL AND THEIR DEPENDENTS FROM OKINAWA TO GUAM

The Government of the United States of America and the
Government of Japan,

Affirming that the United States-Japan security arrangements,
based on the Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security
between the United States of America and Japan signed at
Washington on January 19, 1960, is the cornerstone for
achieving common security objectives,

Recalling that, at the meeting of the United States-Japan
Security Consultative Committee on May 1, 2006, the Ministers
recognized that the implementation of the realignment
initiatives described in the Security Consultative Committee
document, “”United States-Japan Roadmap for Realignment
Implementation”” (hereinafter referred to as “”the Roadmap””)
will lead to a new phase in alliance cooperation, and reduce
the burden on local communities, including those on Okinawa,
thereby providing the basis for enhanced public support for
the security alliance,

Emphasizing their recognition of the importance of Guam for
forward presence of United States Marine Corps forces, which
provides assurance of the United States’ commitment to
security and strengthens deterrent capabilities in the

TOKYO 00003457 005 OF 012

Asia-Pacific region,

Reaffirming that the Roadmap emphasizes the importance of
force reductions and relocation to Guam in relation to the
realignment on Okinawa and stipulates that approximately
8,000 III Marine Expeditionary Force (hereinafter referred to
as “”the III MEF””) personnel and their approximately 9,000
dependents will relocate from Okinawa to Guam by 2014, in a
manner that maintains unit integrity, and recognizing that
such relocation will realize consolidation and land returns
south of Kadena,

Recalling that the Roadmap stipulates that United States
Marine Corps CH-53D helicopters will be relocated from Marine
Corps Air Station Iwakuni to Guam when the III MEF personnel
relocate from Okinawa to Guam, the KC-130 squadron will be
based at Marine Corps Air Station Iwakuni with its
headquarters, maintenance support facilities, and family
support facilities, and the aircraft will regularly deploy on
a rotational basis for training and operations to Maritime
Self-Defense Forces Kanoya Base and Guam,

Reaffirming that the Roadmap stipulates that, of the
estimated ten billion, two hundred seventy million United
States dollar ($10,270,000,000) cost of the facilities and
infrastructure development costs for the III MEF relocation
to Guam, Japan will provide six billion, ninety million
United States dollars ($6,090,000,000) (in U.S. Fiscal Year
2008 dollars), including two billion, eight hundred million
United States dollars ($2,800,000,000) in direct cash
contributions, to develop facilities and infrastructure on
Guam to enable the III MEF relocation, recognizing the strong
desire of Okinawa residents that such force relocation be
realized rapidly,

Reaffirming further that the Roadmap stipulates that the
United States will fund the remainder of the facilities and
infrastructure development costs for the relocation to
Guam-estimated in U.S. Fiscal Year 2008 dollars at three
billion, one hundred eighteen million United States dollars
($3,180,000,000) in fiscal spending plus approximately one
billion ($1,000,000,000) for a road,

Recalling that the Roadmap stipulates that, within the
overall package, the Okinawa-related realignment initiatives
are interconnected, specifically, consolidation and land
returns south of Kadena depend on completing the relocation
of III MEF personnel and dependents from Okinawa to Guam, and
the III MEF relocation from Okinawa to Guam is dependent on:
(1) tangible progress toward completion of the Futenma
Replacement Facility, and (2) Japan’s financial contributions
to fund development of required facilities and infrastructure
on Guam,

Have agreed as follows:

TOKYO 00003457 006 OF 012

Article 1

¶1. The Government of Japan shall make cash contributions up
to the amount of two billion, eight hundred million United
States dollars ($2,800,000,000)(in U.S. Fiscal Year 2008
dollars) to the Government of the United States of America as
a part of expenditures for the relocation of approximately
8,000 III Marine Expeditionary Force personnel and their
approximately 9,000 dependents from Okinawa to Guam
(hereinafter referred to as “”the Relocation””) subject to
paragraph 1 of Article 9 of this Agreement.

¶2. The amount of Japanese cash contributions to be budgeted
in each Japanese fiscal year shall be determined by the
Government of Japan through consultation between the two
Governments and reflected in further arrangements that the
two Governments shall conclude in each Japanese fiscal year
(hereinafter referred to as “”the further arrangements””).

Article 2

The Government of the United States of America shall take
necessary measures for the Relocation, including funding for
projects of the Government of the United States of America to
develop facilities and infrastructure on Guam subject to
paragraph 2 of Article 9 of this Agreement.

Article 3

The Relocation shall be dependent upon tangible progress made
by the Government of Japan towards the completion of the
Futenma Replacement Facility as stipulated in the Roadmap.
The Government of Japan intends to complete the Futenma
Replacement Facility as stipulated in the Roadmap in close
cooperation with the Government of the United States of
America.

Article 4

The Government of the United States of America shall use
Japanese cash contributions and their accrued interest only
for projects to develop facilities and infrastructure on Guam
for the Relocation.

Article 5

The Government of the United States of America shall ensure
that all participants in the process of acquisition for
projects to be funded by Japanese cash contributions for the
Relocation shall be treated fairly, impartially, and
equitably.

Article 6

The two Governments shall designate the Ministry of Defense
of Japan and the Department of Defense of the United States

TOKYO 00003457 007 OF 012

of America respectively as the implementing authorities. The
two Governments shall hold consultations at the technical
level on implementation guidance to be followed by the
implementing authorities, and on the specific projects
referred to in paragraph 1.(a) of Article 7 of this
Agreement. Through such consultations, the Government of the
United States of America shall ensure that the Government of
Japan shall be involved, in an appropriate manner, in the
implementation of the said projects.

Article 7

1.(a) Specific projects to be funded in each Japanese fiscal
year shall be agreed upon between the two Governments and
reflected in the further arrangements.

(b) The Government of the United States of America shall
maintain a United States Treasury account to which the
Government of Japan shall provide cash contributions. The
Government of the United States of America shall open and
maintain, under the said account, a sub-account for Japanese
cash contributions in each Japanese fiscal year.

¶2. Japanese cash contributions and their accrued interest
that is contractually committed to pay for specific projects
shall be credited, based on the method of calculation using
an index to be agreed upon between the implementing
authorities referred to in Article 6 of this Agreement, to
the total amount of Japanese cash contributions, which is up
to the amount of two billion eight hundred million United
States dollars ($2,800,000,000) (in U.S. Fiscal Year 2008
dollars).

3.(a) In case there remains an unused balance of Japanese
cash contributions after the completion of all contracts, as
evidenced by receipt of documents releasing the Government of
the United States of America of any further financial and
contractual liability, for all specific projects funded in
the same Japanese fiscal year, the Government of the United
States of America shall return the said unused balance to the
Government of Japan, except as provided in paragraph 3.(b) of
this Article.

(b) The Government of the United States of America may use,
with the consent of the implementing authority of the
Government of Japan, the unused balance for other specific
projects funded in the same Japanese fiscal year.

¶4. (a) The Government of the United States of America shall
return interest accrued from Japanese cash contributions to
the Government of Japan, except as provided in paragraph
4.(b) of this Article, after the completion of all contracts,
as evidenced by receipt of documents releasing the Government
of the United States of America of any further financial and
contractual liability, for the last specific projects funded
by Japanese cash contributions.

TOKYO 00003457 008 OF 012

(b) The Government of the United States of America may use,
with the consent of the implementing authority of the
Government of Japan, interest accrued from Japanese cash
contributions for projects funded by Japanese cash
contributions.

¶5. The Government of the United States of America shall
provide the Government of Japan with a report every month on
transactions in the United States Treasury account, including
all the sub-accounts related to Japanese cash contributions.

Article 8

The Government of the United States of America shall consult
with the Government of Japan in the event that the Government
of the United States of America considers changes that may
significantly affect facilities and infrastructure funded by
Japanese cash contributions, and shall take appropriate
actions, taking Japanese concerns into full consideration.

Article 9

¶1. Japanese cash contributions referred to in paragraph 1 of
Article 1 of this Agreement shall be subject to funding by
the Government of the United States of America of measures
referred to in Article 2 of this Agreement.

¶2. United States’ measures referred to in Article 2 of this
Agreement shall be subject to: (1) the availability of funds
for the Relocation, (2) tangible progress made by the
Government of Japan towards the completion of the Futenma
Replacement Facility as stipulated in the Roadmap, and (3)
Japan’s financial contribution as stipulated in the Roadmap.

Article 10

The two Governments shall consult with each other regarding
the implementation of this Agreement.

Article 11

This Agreement shall be approved by the United States of
America and Japan in accordance with their respective
internal legal procedures. This Agreement shall enter into
force on the date when diplomatic notes indicating such
approval are exchanged.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF the undersigned, duly authorized for the
purpose, have signed the present Agreement.

DONE in duplicate, at ( ) in the English and Japanese
languages, both equally authentic, this ( ) day of (
), 2009.

TOKYO 00003457 009 OF 012

End IA Text

¶7. (SBU) The following is the draft text of the Japanese
Diplomatic Note and Annex:

Begin Japanese Note and Annex

Excellency,

I have the honor to refer to the Agreement between the
Government of the United States of America and the Government
of Japan concerning the Implementation of the Relocation of
III Marine Expeditionary Force personnel and their dependents
signed at on , 2009 (hereinafter referred to as
“”the Agreement””), which provides, inter alia, that the amount
of Japanese cash contributions to be budgeted in each
Japanese fiscal year shall be determined by the Government of
Japan through consultation between the two Governments and
reflected in further arrangements that the two Governments
shall conclude in each Japanese fiscal year.

I have further the honor to refer to the discussions that
have taken place between the Government of the United States
of America and the Government of Japan concerning the
implementation of the relocation of approximately 8,000 III
Marine Expeditionary Force personnel and their approximately
9,000 dependents from Okinawa to Guam and to propose on
behalf of the Government of Japan the following arrangements
as a result of those discussions:

¶1. The amount of Japanese cash contributions budgeted in the
Japanese fiscal year 2009 is three hundred thirty six million
United States dollars ($336). The Government of Japan shall
provide to the Government of the United States of America, in
accordance with the applicable laws and regulations, the said
Japanese cash contributions in the Japanese fiscal year 2009.

¶2. The amount of the Japanese cash contributions for each
specific project is stipulated in the Annex.

¶3. The Annex may be modified by agreement between the
Government of the United States of America and the Government
of Japan.

I have further the honor to propose that, if the proposals
set out above are acceptable to the Government of the United
States of America, this Note and Your Excellency’s reply to
that effect on behalf of the Government of the United States
of America shall be regarded as constituting an agreement
between the two Governments in this matter, which shall enter
into force on the date of your Excellency’s reply.

I avail myself of this opportunity to (extend/renew) to Your
Excellency the assurance of my highest consideration.

Annex

TOKYO 00003457 010 OF 012

Design project (Apra Harbor Medical Clinic, Bachelor Enlisted
Quarters, Fire Station, Waterfront Headquarters Building)
$15 M
On-base infrastructure project in Andersen Air Force Base
North Ramp $27 M
On-base infrastructure project in Apra Harbor $169 M
On-base infrastructure project in Finegayan (Phase 1) $124 M
Total: $336 M

End Japanese Note and Annex

¶8. (SBU) The following is the draft text of the U.S.
Diplomatic Note:

Begin U.S. Note

Excellency,

I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of Your
Excellency’s Note of today’s date, which reads as follows:

“”(Japanese Note)””

I have further the honor to confirm on behalf of the
Government of the United States of America that the proposals
set out in Your Excellency’s Note are acceptable to the
Government of the United States of America and that Your
Excellency’s Note and this reply shall be regarded as
constituting an agreement between the two Governments, which
shall enter into force on the date of this reply.

I avail myself of this opportunity to (extend/renew) to Your
Excellency the assurance of my highest consideration.

End Draft Text of U.S. Diplomatic Note

—————————-
Negotiating Background on IA
(Keyed to IA Text in Para 7)
—————————-

Preamble
——–

¶9. (C) Most of the language in the Preamble came directly
from existing public documents, especially the United
States-Japan Roadmap for Realignment Implementation (“”the
Roadmap””), released by the Security Consultative Committee
(SCC) on May 1, 2006. The U.S. requested two specific areas
of the public documents be clarified in the Preamble. First,
the U.S. requested that the Preamble introduce the idea that
the “”approximately 9,000 dependents”” that will transfer with
the 8,000 Marines from Okinawa to Guam be described as
“”associated dependents”” to capture the idea that there may be
more dependents joining the Marines on Guam than currently

TOKYO 00003457 011 OF 012

reside with those same Marines on Okinawa due to differing
stationing policies. The second was a U.S. request that the
Preamble delete reference to the approximately one billion
dollar military road on Guam. This road was included during
the April 2006 negotiations on cost-sharing as a way to
increase the overall cost estimate (i.e., the denominator)
and thereby reduce the share of total costs borne by Japan.
During the negotiations over the IA Preamble language, the
U.S. clarified that the United States would not consider the
road an absolute prerequisite for the completion of the
Relocation. The Japanese side acknowledged both points, but
strongly resisted any language that differed from existing
public formulations out of concern that changes would draw
Diet scrutiny that would distract from focus on the key
issues in the IA. Having registered these clarifications,
and obtained satisfactory corresponding Japanese
acknowledgment, the U.S. side acceded to the Japanese request
to adhere to existing Roadmap language.

¶10. (C) Separately, the U.S. introduced two issues into the
Preamble that had not previously been in public documents.
The first is paragraph four of the Preamble (“”Emphasizing
their recognition of the importance of Guam for forward
presence””) The U.S. had requested even stronger language to
stress the unique capabilities of Guam in the context of
overall U.S. Pacific Strategy. However, MOD, reportedly at
the level of Administrative Vice Minister Kohei Masuda, was
not willing to use the words “”unique,”” “”strategic,”” or
“”location”” in a bilateral document due to “”political
sensitivities”” (implying Japan’s war-time history with Guam).
The U.S. noted its disappointment that the Japanese side was
not willing to provide requested language.

¶11. (C) Additionally, the U.S. proposed references to the
opportunities provided by Guam relocation for increased
Self-Defense Force (SDF) training. Although explicit
language exists in Agreed Implementation Plans (AIP) that
points to specific commitment by Japan to maintain a
near-continuous rotational presence on Guam for training, and
although earlier SCC documents speak more generically about
training opportunities offered by Guam, the MOD refused to
mention training, again invoking AVM Masuda’s personal veto
of such a reference. The MOD argued that reference to SDF
training was outside the scope of the IA, would attract a
number of distracting questions, and would leave MOD unable
to address those questions given the undeveloped plans for
SDF training on Guam. The U.S. side registered its strong
disappointment and pledged to work with the Japanese side to
find other ways to promote the positive effect of U.S.-Japan
training cooperation on Guam.

———
Article 1
———

¶12. (C) The purpose of Article 1 is to highlight Japan’s

TOKYO 00003457 012 OF 012

obligations. Paragraph 1 captures the Japanese government’s
overall commitment for multi-year funding, and paragraph 2
notes that Tokyo’s actual contributions will be decided
annually based on the program implementation. The “”further
arrangements”” referenced in paragraph 2 are the annual
Exchanges of Notes and Annexes (see para 7 above). Japanese
commitments are subject to conditions outlined in Article 9,
displaced from Article 1 in order to keep the tone of Article
1 “”more positive,”” at the direction of MOFA Administrative
Vice Minister Mitoji Yabunaka.

¶13. (C) Definitions: Article 1 includes the definition of
“”the Relocation”” as “”the relocation of approximately 8,000
III Marine Expeditionary Force personnel and their
approximately 9,000 dependents from Okinawa to Guam.”” The
Japanese side specifically highlighted that this definition
deliberately excludes a reference to “”by 2014″” as part of the
IA obligation, thereby allowing Japanese funding to continue
beyond 2014, if necessary. The two sides had a frank
discussion about the origins of the numbers 8,000/9,000 in
relation to actual personnel and dependents on Okinawa who
will move to Guam. The number 8,000 refers to authorized
positions in the units identified in the AIPs as relocating
to Guam. The number 9,000 dependents is based on a
calculation of the number of dependents associated with such
units if manned in full. In the context of drafting the 2006
Roadmap, both the 8,000 and the 9,000 numbers were
deliberately maximized to optimize political value in Japan,
but the two sides knew that these numbers differed
significantly from actual Marines and dependents assigned to
units in Okinawa. To clarify the balance, the AIP also
identifies that 10,000 Marines will remain on Okinawa, and
lists the units associated with those 10,000 Marines. In
2004-2006, when the Roadmap was negotiated, the number of
Marines assigned to the units in Okinawa was on the order of
13,000, significantly less than the 18,000 authorized.
Likewise, the total number of dependents on Okinawa was less
than 9,000. These numbers are regularly briefed by U.S.
Forces Japan to various Japanese counterparts. Japanese Diet
members from Okinawa have also highlighted that the number of
authorized Marine/dependents moving to Guam described in the
public report does not match actual numbers on Okinawa today.
ZUMWALT

広告
  1. まだコメントはありません。
  1. No trackbacks yet.

コメントを残す

以下に詳細を記入するか、アイコンをクリックしてログインしてください。

WordPress.com ロゴ

WordPress.com アカウントを使ってコメントしています。 ログアウト / 変更 )

Twitter 画像

Twitter アカウントを使ってコメントしています。 ログアウト / 変更 )

Facebook の写真

Facebook アカウントを使ってコメントしています。 ログアウト / 変更 )

Google+ フォト

Google+ アカウントを使ってコメントしています。 ログアウト / 変更 )

%s と連携中

%d人のブロガーが「いいね」をつけました。