Senior Senator Daniel Inouye of Hawaii (D) invoked the man himself yesterday, saying that the decision to “downsize” the Eielson Air Force Base in Hawaii—which contains 2,800 personnel and a number of fighter jets—was a mistake.
Inouye quoted Robert Kaplan, who said in a recent Atlantic Monthly article that military conflict with China—“a more formidable adversary than Russia ever was”—will define the 21st century. “The counterweight that the author describes rests on our bases in the Pacific,” Inouye said. “That is why the Eielson decision is so puzzling.”Eielson’s A-10s and F-16s are needed to “rapidly deploy to Korea in the event of a crisis, and the North Koreans know this,” Inouye said.
Military analysts at Washington think tanks contacted last week mostly supported the Defense Department’s pullback in Alaska. They said the few hours shorter flying time offered by Alaska’s bases was not of great strategic significance. Conflicts usually develop slowly and forces can be rearranged as the risk increases, they said.
Inouye said that approach sends the wrong message. “It is clear that the nations of the region, both allies and adversaries, keep an eye on the location of U.S. forces, our bases, to measure our resolve,” he said.

Comments to this entry
Alfred Russel Wallace
June 21, 2005
7:45 pm
IJ
June 21, 2005
9:03 pm
Diplomacy is back in vogue. But the Institute for International Economics may be overestimating the chances of 'soft' success in energy security.
"Oil-importing and oil-exporting countries must come together to work out a global energy regime that will support rather than constantly jeopardise the world economy. . . At best, it will take several years to . . . install new domestic and global energy regimes. "The United States and the World Economy: Foreign Economic Policy for the Next Decade":http://bookstore.iie.com/merchant.mvc?Screen=PROD&Product_Code=3802