Listen to this article
Japan’s trial of a US marine for the sexual assault of an Okinawan woman has reignited long-standing frustrations over US military presence in Japan’s southernmost prefecture. This case is part of a persistent pattern of sexual violence, legal impunity and environmental degradation embedded in the US–Japan security alliance. Such incidents underscore deeper political and legal marginalisation of Okinawa, a region that has struggled for centuries to reclaim its autonomy.
Okinawa hosts over 70 per cent of US military forces in Japan despite comprising only 0.6 per cent of the country’s landmass. Since 1945, US personnel have committed a staggering number of crimes, including the 1995 gang-rape of a 12-year old girl by three servicemen. Yet extraterritorial protections granted under the US–Japan Status of Forces Agreement have long shielded US personnel from Japanese or local Okinawan legal accountability.
Understanding the structural roots of Okinawa’s predicament demands moving beyond state-centric analysis toward Original Nation Approaches to Inter-National Law. This approach draws a clear distinction between nations — cultural communities bound by shared ancestry, language and tradition — and states, which are juridical constructs rooted in the 1648 Westphalian order. Through imperial globalisation, indigenous nations were forcibly confined within imposed state boundaries and legal orders. The Original Nation Approaches to Inter-National Law recognises Okinawans not as ethnic minorities, but as an indigenous nation with precolonial sovereignty, empowering them to challenge their colonisation by the Japanese and US state systems.
Historically known as the Ryukyu (or Lew Chew) Kingdom, Okinawa enjoyed diplomatic and commercial ties with Java, China, Korea, Russia and other regional powers. It served as a critical maritime hub for centuries before Japan annexed it in 1879, initiating forced assimilation and political subjugation. Japan’s militarisation of the islands culminated in the devastating 1945 Battle of Okinawa, during which approximately 150,000 Okinawans perished. Following Japan’s defeat, the US assumed control of the islands until their reversion to Japan in 1972, a strategic arrangement between Washington and Tokyo that left Okinawan voices excluded and aspirations unfulfilled.
Okinawans remain trapped between these two powerful states that continue to subordinate their interests, but international law offers a framework for redress. The 2007 UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples affirms Indigenous peoples’ rights to self-determination and informed consent concerning activities, especially military installations, that affect their territories. Yet Japan failed to honour these principles in Okinawa, routinely ignoring local opposition to base expansion. The continued imposition of foreign military infrastructure without meaningful local consent represents not only a domestic injustice but also a violation of international norms.
Okinawan resistance has been persistent and principled. Political activists, civil society organisations and grassroots coalitions have consistently challenged the legitimacy of the US–Japan security arrangement and its colonial implications. While groups such as the Association of Comprehensive Studies for Independence of the Lew Chewans call for full sovereignty, Original Nation Approaches to Inter-National Law situates this within a broader indigenous and international legal context. The approach also affirms the pluralism of Ryukyuan voices across the archipelago, resisting efforts to homogenise their political aspirations.
One promising path toward restoring sovereignty and public trust lies in reviving indigenous forms of justice, such as community-based jury trials in civil and criminal cases, last practiced in Okinawa prior to its reversion in 1972. In civil trials, women plaintiffs, including an Okinawan widow, successfully won compensation against powerful international corporations headquartered in the United States.
All four civil jury cases during this period were brought by women — widows, single mothers or both — who prevailed against corporate defendants. Okinawan attorney Toshio Ikemiyagi has advocated for their reinstatement to empower Okinawans to directly confront issues such as noise pollution from US military exercises, particularly in response to the Japanese government’s invocation of the Status of Forces Agreement to evade jurisdiction over US military activities.
Another example of Okinawan legal resistance is the strategic use of the Prosecutorial Review Commission, which empowers randomly selected panels of 11 residents to review and potentially overturn prosecutors’ decisions not to indict. In 2011, citing Status of Forces Agreement protections, Japanese prosecutors declined to indict a US base employee who killed a local youth in a car accident after consuming alcohol on base. Yet following a petition from the victim’s mother, the Commission recommended indictment. The driver was subsequently indicted, tried and imprisoned after an exception was made for socially significant cases.
The Japanese government’s continued prioritisation of its alliance with the United States and neglection the rights of Okinawans undermines its domestic legitimacy and international legal credibility. Yet embracing Original Nation Approaches to Inter-National Law principles offers Japan a new path that respects Okinawan sovereignty, strengthens mechanisms of justice and accountability, and promotes regional stability through mutual respect and consent. A more equitable Asia Pacific demands that Okinawa be recognised as a sovereign original nation, fully entitled to chart its own political and social trajectory.
Hiroshi Fukurai is Professor of Sociology and Legal Studies, at the University of California, Santa Cruz.
EAF | Japan | Okinawan rights ignored as military crimes persist
AloJapan.com