Aff 1. Japan and the US have moved a permanent Patriot missile defense system in Okinawa to prevent attacks from China and the US. John Hofilena '13, "Japan to deploy missile defense system in Okinawa permanently," Japan Daily Press, 4-12-2013, DOA 2-22-2016. http://japandailypress.com/japan-to-deploy-missile-defense-system-in-okinawa-permanently-1226912/ (GS - J1)

Amid the increasingly bellicose rhetoric coming from North Korea and its threats of being able to strike Japan at any point it wishes to, the government will be deploying a missile defense system in Okinawa Prefecture permanently. Okinawa is the southern-most prefecture of Japan, and is home to majority of the US military presence in the country. According to a statement made by Defense Minister Itsunori Onodera, Japan’s Self-Defense Forces will be transporting and permanently placing a Patriot Advanced Capability-3 (PAC-3) defense system “as soon as possible” in two Japanese bases in the prefecture. The PAC-3 has interceptor missiles theoretically able to intercept any of North Korea’s short or medium range ballistic missiles should the hermit nation execute their threats. The missile defense system will be complete and operational within April, Onodera revealed. This decision moves forward the government’s earlier plan to deploy PAC-3 units in Okinawa by 2014, this given Pyongyang’s declarations of intending to strike U.S. military bases in Japan. Onodera stressed that what North Korea is doing is “unforgivable”, alluding to their repeated threats and statements. Onodera had met with Maj. Gen. Andrew O’Donnell, deputy commander of U.S. Forces Japan, where they shared all relevant information on North Korea’s capabilities and possible launch of missiles. As Pyongyang has given hints of a possible missile launch any day now, Japan’s military forces have remained on alert. Officials have speculated that North Korea could use the very significant date on Monday – the birth of Kim Il Sung, grandfather of the current leader Kim Jong Un – to finally go ahead with test firing its ballistic missiles around. North Korea has traditionally done demonstrations of its military power on the said date. Chief Cabinet Secretary Yoshihide Suga assured the press that the government “is taking all possible measures to protect people’s lives and safety and will not be deluded by North Korean provocations.” Japan had earlier this week deployed Aegis-equipped destroyers to the Sea of Japan with orders to shoot down anything that is fired towards Japan by North Korea.

2. Patriot missiles are permanently positioned in Okinawa for the specific purpose of protecting country from missiles from China and Korea. Itsunori Onodera '13, "Jsdf’S Patriot Missiles Arrive In Okinawa Today," Japan Update, 4-18-2013, DOA 2-22-2016. http://www.japanupdate.com/2013/04/jsdfs-patriot-missiles-arrive-in-okinawa-today/ (GS - J1)

A new security dimension for Okinawa’s protection goes into effect today with assignment of Patriot Advanced Capability-3 surface-to-air missiles here. Japan’s Defense Ministry says the surface-to-air missiles are being permanently deployed in Okinawa Prefecture. The move is

designed to shield the country from missiles that could be fired by North Korea. Vehicles carrying PAC-3 launch systems and other equipment were scheduled to arrive this afternoon, having left the

Air Self-Defense Force’s Hamamatsu base in Shizuoka Prefecture, central Japan, shortly before 9 a.m. Tuesday. The PAC-3 equipment was sent to a Tokyo Bay terminal and mounted onto a ferry operated by a private company. A total of four PAC-3 units are being permanently deployed at the ASDF’s Naha base and

Chinen sub-base in Nanjo. The permanent deployment of PAC-3 missiles in Okinawa was previously scheduled to take place by the end of March 2015. The ministry moved up the schedule

as North Korea looks ready to launch missiles, officials said. PAC-3 systems were temporarily sent to Okinawa when North Korea and China fired missiles last year.

Neg

http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2011/06/top-10-reasons-why-the-us-marines-on-okinawa-are-essential-to-peace-and-security-in-the-pacific

Quite simply, the United States and South Korea cannot deter and defend the Korean Peninsula from the North Korean threat without the critical support of Japan. The seven UN Command-designated bases in Japan are an irreplaceable component of any allied contingency, as are other Japanese bases. In a Korean crisis, Japan would be the transportation and logistical rear base for American reinforcements en route to the Korean Peninsula. Japan would also be expected to contribute to defending the air- and sea-lines of communication for the United States and to South Korea. Japan not exercising collective self-defense could unnecessarily put U.S. forces in harm’s way or prevent Tokyo from providing important logistics support to the allies during a Korean conflict. The new Guidelines for Defense Cooperation will expand Japan's global security role and provide greater flexibility, responsiveness and interoperability for alliance training, exercises, and planning on a broader spectrum of security issues. But questions remain as to whether Japan can fulfill these new or existing missions with current forces. Washington has long urged Japan to increase its defense expenditures. While Washington strongly supports Tokyo assuming a larger international security role, Japan’s neighbors remain wary. The United States and Japan have a responsibility to augment public diplomacy efforts to assuage regional concerns, particularly those of South Korea. One way to reassure Seoul of Japanese intentions would be to more closely coordinate or integrate bilateral and trilateral security operations. But recently Seoul has been reluctant to do so, even reducing previously agreed upon cooperative security activities. There are indeed growing security threats in Asia, but Japan exercising collective self-defense and assuming a larger security role is not one of them. Japan acting collectively in concert with partners for defensive purposes rather than unilaterally for offensive objectives are in Asia’s and the world’s best interests.

http://www.heritage.org/research/commentary/2015/4/heres-what-the-new-us-japan-defense-pact-looks-like

The U.S. Marines on Okinawa play a critical role in Operations Plan 5027, the joint U.S.–South Korean war plan for responding to a North Korean invasion. Marine forces are capable of conducting a full range of combat operations in Korea. Even the threat of an amphibious invasion would force North Korea to divert ground forces from the front line. General Burwell Bell, former commander of U.S. Forces Korea, affirmed that:

[The Marines on Okinawa] have a critical role in any Korean contingency. They were my deep operational ground maneuver unit. Without them, it would be WWI all over again. When the North Koreans consider the potential for the United States Marines to interdict

their logistics sites and fragile supply lines deep in their rear areas, the likelihood of the North seriously considering a sustained ground offensive drops drastically.[16]

Representative Park Jin, then chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee of the South Korean National Assembly, declared that:

[T]he U.S. military bases located in Okinawa play a significant role in keeping the Korean peninsula peaceful and safe. The U.S. Marines in Okinawa are obliged to defend Korea…. Thus, the relocation of U.S. military bases in Japan would affect not only the U.S.–Japan relations but also security on the Korean peninsula. [17]

In seeking to justify removing U.S. Marine forces from Okinawa, some analysts have asserted that a Korean War would be over quickly and that South Korean forces would be sufficient to handle the North Korean forces. Both premises are dangerously wrong. U.S. war simulations reveal that, even a week after a North Korean invasion, the situation would remain precarious. Moreover, an invasion would result in horrific casualties in the hundreds of thousands as well as trillions of dollars worth of damage.[18] A U.S. defense official commented:

[E]ven if South Korea could do it without U.S. Marines, it would be with far greater casualties and destruction. Why would you do that? Why would you send the military into a dangerous situation with fewer capabilities than necessary? Besides, you need those [South Korean] troops for the post-war collapse of North Korea.[19]

Indeed, the North Korean attack on Yeonpyeong Island in November 2010 illustrated the critical role Marines would play in rebuffing an attack by Pyongyang. As a result, Seoul augmented its own 27,000-member Marine Corps by 2,000, thereby bolstering its ability to defend the five islands in the West Sea.[20]

The US's presence in Okinawa assures allies, preventing an arms race.Keith Stalder [Commanding General, US Marine Corps Forces in the Pacific], “Marine General Stalder Speaks at

Tokyo American Center,” published by the Embassy of the United States in Tokyo, Japan, February 17, 2010. Available at:http://japan.usembassy.gov/e/p/tp-20100217-71.html 

“Potential enemies of Japan and the U.S. are watching to see if there are chinks in this Alliance, because if it can be weakened today, maybe it can be weakened further tomorrow. Our friends,those who share our values of liberty and our respect for human rights, are also watching. They want to remain firmly in our corner, but if they begin to suspect that our Alliance is not as strong as it once was, or that

the United States is not as able as it was to ensure security in East Asia, one of two things is going to happen. Either those countries are going to drastically increase their defense budgets to make

up for their lack of faith in the Alliance's ability to defend them, leading to a regional arms race, or those nations will look for another country, and another political philosophy, to partner with. Either of those developments would be very dangerous for Japan and a serious threat to the prosperity and stability of the region.”

The United States should remain in Okinawa to prevent Chinese expansion. China has claimed Okinawa. Gordon Chang [Columnist for Forbes.com], “Now China Wants Okinawa, Site of U.S. Bases in Japan,” The Daily Beast, December 31, 2015. Available at:http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/12/31/now-china-wants-okinawa-site-of-u-s-bases-in-japan.html

“On the day after Christmas, three Chinese boats, one modified to carry four cannons, entered Japan’s territorial waters surrounding the Senkaku Islands in the southern portion of the East China Sea. The move, a dangerous escalation, is the first time the People’s Republic of China sent an armed vessel into an area that Tokyo claims as its own. The sending of the three Chinese vessels on Dec. 26 appears to signal a new phase of incursions to grab not just the Senkaku Islands but the nearby—and far more

important—Ryukyu Islands. Those include Okinawa,   which hosts more than half of the 54,000 American military personnel in Japan, including those at Kadena Air Force Base, the Army’s Fort Buckner and Torii Station, eight Marine Corps camps, as well as Air Station Futenma and Yontan Airfield, and the Navy’s Fleet

Activities Okinawa. Geopolitically, Okinawa is key to the American-Japanese alliance and the heart of America’s military presence in Japan. But if Beijing gets its way, U.S. military bases will be off Okinawa soon. And Japan will be out of Okinawa, too. Chinese authorities in the spring of 2013 brazenly challenged Japan’s sovereignty of the islands with a concerted campaign that included an article in a magazine associated with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs; a widely publicized commentary in People’s Daily, the Communist Party’s flagship newspaper and therefore China’s most authoritative publication; two pieces in the Global Times, the tabloid controlled by People’s Daily; an interview of Maj. Gen. Luo Yuan in the state-run China News Service; and a seminar held at prestigious Renmin University in Beijing. At the same time, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs refused to affirm that China

recognized Okinawa and the Ryukyus as Japanese. The close timing of events indicated these efforts had been directed from the top of the Chinese political system.”

Internal Link: Presence in Okinawa is key to being able to rapidly move and respond to threats. John V. Roos, former US ambassador to Japan (was ambassador at time of writing), “The Enduring Importance of our Security Alliance”, January 29, 2010

The Marine Corps presence in Okinawa, which I am sure you have all been hearing about, is perhaps the least understood by the general public, but in reality is among the most critical of the forces we deploy in both peacetime and in the unlikely event of conflict. So let me be a little

more detailed here and a little technical, because I think it is important for all of us to understand. The III Marine Expeditionary Force in Okinawa brings together the core capabilities of all of our other services into a rapidly deployable self-contained fighting force known as the Marine Air-Ground

Task Force. The Marines combine air, ground, and logistical forces together, so that in any contingency or emergency there would be no need to wait for complicated logistical and airlift support from

other services. The short range helicopters assigned to the Marines in Okinawa would be able to rapidly move our ground combat and support units on Okinawa across the island chain that links Northeast and Southeast Asia to wherever they would be required. For heavier or longer-range

operations, the Marines would be supported by our naval fleet in Sasebo, just a few days sailing time away, which could project both Marine ground and air power anywhere in the region.

East Asian stability depends on a credible US-Japan relationship. Maintaining that depends on US presence in Okinawa. H. D. P. Envall and Kerri Ng, “Okinawa, the US-Japan Alliance, and Asia-Pacific Security”, Australian National University, May 2013 

What, then, needs to happen in order to put the US–Japan alliance on a more even keel and reduce the scope for Okinawan issues to act as a destabilizing force? The removal of US bases from Okinawa would threaten the overall credibility of the alliance and precipitate the likely failure of the strategies described earlier. Such a development, moreover, could lead to a rapid deterioration of security in Northeast Asia. Yet the events of 2012 also highlight how America’s successive attempts to persuade

Okinawans of the value of the US military contribution appear to have had only a limited impact.

Japan wont nuclearize as long as they trust US security guarantees.Emma Chanlett Avery and Mary Beth Nikitin [Specialist in Asian Affairs and Analyst in Non-Proliferation], "Japan's Nuclear Future: Policy Debate, Prospects, and US Interests," Congressional Research Service, February 19, 2009. Available at: https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/nuke/RL34487.pdf

Perhaps the single most important factor to date in dissuading Tokyo from developing a nuclear arsenal is the U.S. guarantee to protect Japan’s security.Since the threat of nuclear attack developed during the Cold War, Japan has been included under the U.S. “nuclear umbrella,” although some ambiguity exists about whether the United States is committed to respond with nuclear weapons in the event of a nuclear attack on Japan.25 U.S. officials have hinted that it would: following North Korea’s 2006 nuclear test, former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, in Tokyo, said, “ ... the United States has the will and the capability to meet the full range, and I underscore full range, of its deterrent and security commitments to Japan.”26 Most policymakers in Japan continue to emphasize that strengthening the alliance as well as shared conventional capabilities is more sound strategy than pursuing an independent nuclear capability.27 During the Cold War, the threat of mutually assured destruction to the United States and the Soviet Union created a sort of perverse stability in international politics; Japan, as the major Pacific front of the U.S. containment strategy, felt confident in U.S. extended deterrence. Although the United States has reiterated its commitment to defend Japan, the strategic stakes have changed, leading some in Japan to question the American pledge. Some in Japan are nervous that if the United States develops a closer relationship with China, the gap between Tokyo’s and Washington’s security perspectives will grow and further weaken the U.S. commitment.28 These critics also point to what they perceive as the soft negotiating position on North Korea’s denuclearization in the Six-Party Talks as further evidence that the United States does not share Japan’s strategic perspective.29 A weakening of the bilateral alliance may strengthen the hand of those that want to explore the possibility of Japan developing its own deterrence.

Japanese nuclearization could catalyze a global arms race.Emma Chanlett Avery '09, " Japan's Nuclear Future: Policy Debate, Prospects, and US Interests " Congressional Research Service February 19, 2009, DOA 2-23-2016. https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/nuke/RL34487.pdf (GS - J1)

Any reconsideration of Japan’s policy of nuclear weapons abstention would have significant implications for U.S. policy in East Asia. Globally, Japan’s withdrawal from the Nuclear

NonProliferation Treaty (NPT) could damage the most durable international non-proliferation regime. Regionally, Japan “going nuclear” could set off a nuclear arms race with China, South Korea, and Taiwan and, in turn, India, and Pakistan may feel compelled to further strengthen their own nuclear weapons

capability. Bilaterally, assuming that Japan made the decision without U.S. support, the move could indicate Tokyo’s lack of trust in the American commitment to defend Japan. An erosion in the U.S.-Japan alliance could upset the geopolitical balance in East Asia, a shift that could indicate a further strengthening of China’s position as an emerging hegemonic power. These ramifications would likely be deeply destabilizing for the security of the Asia Pacific region and beyond