To Our Readers
By John Flanagan
Saturday, April 8, 1996
In Okinawa, the issue isn't constructive criticism, but constructive engagement, our current policy in the Pacific. Coined by a former CINCPAC, Adm. Charles Larson, the term means staying actively involved with other nations through joint training exercises, visits, conferences and forward deployment. It means we don't leave our forces at home. They go to where the action is - such as in the Formosa Strait - or stay close by in bases in South Korea, mainland Japan and Okinawa.
Like constructive criticism, constructive engagement can be good and bad. Our presence in Okinawa and elsewhere provided decades of stability for Asian economies to flourish. Still, the American bases have deprived landowners of the use of their property and led to tragedies such as the recent notorious rape case.
Okinawans view constructive engagement as intolerable irritation. They want their land back and they want the American troops out.
This policy, however, sustains an era of peace and stability that has benefited the entire world. Until Japan finds another suitable place to relocate our forces from Okinawa, we can only sympathize with Okinawans, urge them to endure and clean up our act where we can.
