PROBLEMS IN JAPAN OVER U.S. TROOPS

Press, Volume XCI, Issue 27657, 13 May 1955, Page 13

PROBLEMS IN JAPAN OVER U.S. TROOPS

(Rec. 10 p.m.) TOKYO, May 12. American guns firing on the slopes of Japan’s sacred mountain, Fujiyama, today brought bitter protests from Japanese and again raised the question of how long the United States would consider it worthwhile to station security forces in Japan.

The expected friction as American troops rub together with the Japanese people and complications at government level are bringing many influential Americans to the idea that the best thing would be to get out and leave Japan to devise her own defence arrangements. It is authoritatively stated that this suggestion already is being discussed in ' the United States Embassy at several levels. A diplomatic source said that Washington had been advised it was time now to take a completely new look at the policy towards Japan. The American use of Japanese land for training troops, artillery and tank exercises, bombing ranges, coastal landing exercises, and naval and air bases has been one immediate source of friction. The latest cause of friction has been a six-day artillery firing exercise, which began on Tuesday under the shadow of Fujiyama. The exercise, the first to be held in an enlarged range, was agreed on between the Japanese Government and American forces two years ago. Three thousand local villagers, plus some trade union representatives, yesterday demonstrated against the exercise under large banners proclaiming “Protect our sacred Mount Fuji.” Local officials described the exercise as illegal, but the central government did not commit itself beyond a statement by Mr Shintaro Fukushftna, director of the Special Procurement Board, which looks after these problems, that the American claim that Japan had agreed to firing in the area “is perhaps going too far.” Negotiations are continuing. When Japan became independent in April, 1952, United States forces stayed on under the terms of the AmericanJapan Security Treaty. Since then the daily and magazine press has regularly featured complaints from Japanese residents about barrack and troop training areas. They say they do not like the noise, the entertainment services which Japanese enterprise provides for the troops, and the troops. The Leftist press and politicians regularly attack the government for “subservience” to the United States. Last of Defence The security agreement requires Japan to make an annual contribution to the cost of the joint defence arrangements. This year, the new government of Mr Ichiro Hatoyama Sromised certain Budget limitations, ependent on American agreement, to reduce the Japanese share of joint defence costs. Some American concessions finally were won, but only after weeks of negotiation, which the press publicised variously as deadlock, disagreement or—according to the publisher’s point of view—American coercion. The officially-stated American view

is that the security agreement provides for the gradual depletion of American strength in Japan and the gradual accretion of Japan’s own defence forces. United States military and diplomatic authorities have complained that Japan, in this matter, is dragging her heels. The military statement of the American problem is that United States forces stayed in Japan to prevent the creation of a dangerous power vacuum until Japan herself could take over. With negligible sea and air forces and a lightly-armed land force of only 130,000 men, Japan raises serious doubts about her present readiness to take over.