The main thrust of President Piano's argument is that because the purpose of Japan-US security arrangements is the defense of Japan, the Japanese would be adverse to the relocation of FCLPs outside Japan. This argument is belied by Japan's active support of the relocation of the permanent basing of 8,000 U.S. Marines from Okinawa to Guam, a location about equally distant from Tokyo as Subic.
The relocation of the Okinawa Marines and the relocation of the FCLP practice field are part of the same overall Re-alignment of U.S. Forces in Japan. A practice field for FCLPs outside of Japan would logically in no way detract from the the commitment of the U.S. to defend Japan, and might increase the readiness of the U.S. to defend Japan.
Naturally the U.S. would like to have the FCLP site as close as possible to the permanent land base of the U.S. carrier based aircraft in Japan. However, as described in the Associated Press article cited by President Piano, the Japanese at the proposed sites have protested fiercely, forcing the Japanese to look further afield.
Go to http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D993M1A00&show_article=1. Subic is about twice as far from Tokyo as the U.S. Navy's current FCLP site at Iwo Jima. Refueling at Kadena AB in Okinawa, Japan based carrier aircraft could reach Subic in a few hours. Because Clark could serve as a divert field during FCLPs, Subic would be much safer than Iwo Jima for FCLPs. Perhaps most significant in favor of Subic being chosen as a FCLP site, the U.S. Navy knows everything there is to know about flying out of SBIA.
Conducting FCLPs at SBIA would not foreclose civilian use of the Airport during periods when FCLPs are not being conducted, which would be most of the time. Since civilian use of SBIA would not be foreclosed, how could conducting FCLPs at SBIA transform it into a "base" within the meaning of the RP-US Military Bases Treaty? Admittedly, during the conduct of FCLPs, any civilian flights would probably have to be diverted to Clark. However, at this point, with the number of civilian flights coming into SBIA exactly zero, we have a long way to go before the conduct of FCLPs at SBIA could interfere with civilian aviation at the Airport.
The argument whether FCLPs should be conducted at SBIA should be focused on the noise pollution generated, and whether Subic residents are willing to accept that level of noise pollution in exchange for continued maintenance of the Airport as an Airport. Landings and takeoffs at SBIA occur over water and jungle. FCLPs would be conducted at night, but Fedex flights took off in the early morning hours, and no one complained. As for Crown Peak residents, one earlier post writer notably said that they would not notice the noise of FCLPs over the noise of the motorcycles and the dogs barking.
I respectfully submit that the Japanese Government is in a better position than the President of the Subic Bay Chamber of Commerce to determine whether the Japanese would be adverse to the relocation of FCLPs outside Japan. If the Chamber is unwilling to promote the idea of FCLPs to the Japanese Government, I suggest that the moderators of this forum send copies of the posts on FCLPs to the press attache at the Japanese Embassy in Manila, and invite the press attache to respond.
[The Subic Bulletin] We will check with the Chamber for any further response, if none we will send the thread to the Japanese Embassy for comment.
No comments:
Post a Comment