On April 5, 2013, the United States and Japan unveiled a plan to withdraw U.S. military forces from the island of Okinawa and to return 2,500 acres of land rightfully back to the Okinawan people—an effort the Okinawans have been pushing for since the U.S. first established their bases in Okinawa after World War II. According to the new plan, the U.S. Marine Corps Futenma Air Station will be fully evacuated by 2022. It also lays out a timetable of withdrawal for five other American bases in the southern half the island, which are to be returned in the late 2020s. While this is a moment of celebration for the Okinawans, there are still some serious concerns that worry the people of the island.

First, instead of permanently removing U.S. military presence, the U.S. and Japan intend to relocate a marine base elsewhere on the island, an idea vehemently opposed by the Okinawans. Okinawa currently hosts 74% of the U.S. forces in Japan, yet it’s citizens only account for 1% of the country’s population. Furthermore, the various military facilities on the island are situated in the central, most densely populated parts of its cities. The U.S. maintains that Okinawa is a perfect location for a military base because it lies in the center of four key geographical locations: mainland Japan, Guam, Taiwan, and the Korean Peninsula, making it a particularly vital bulwark for containing China and responding to attacks from North Korea. Additionally, the Obama administration sees this relocation-rather-than-removal strategy as a demonstration of the willpower the U.S. has to maintain its military posture in East Asia, despite its financial difficulties and exhaustion in the Middle East. U.S. Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel declared that the U.S. is committed “in our efforts to ensure a robust and operationally effective U.S. force presence in the region.” The administration regards U.S. troops in Okinawa to be a crucial and effective component of our security strategy in East Asia, which wasdemonstrated on Sunday when the U.S. flew two F-22 Stealth fight jets from an air base in Okinawa to South Korea in order to deter provocations by North Korean leaders.

Although occupying the island may be valuable for strategic purposes, there are tremendous costs to keeping a military base in Okinawa—costs that are not necessarily felt by Americans. According to the Department of Defense, the Japanese government contributes direct financial support of $3.23 billion to U.S. troops and indirect support (rent-free facilities, weapons, fuel, and equipment) of $1.18 billion annually, which offsets as much as 74.5% of the total costs for the U.S. to station its forces in Japan. Okinawans have long opposed U.S. military presence on their island. Over 90% of the population has demanded the complete removal of bases. In 2012, 1,200 citizens living near the Marine Corps’ Futenma Air Station, the most hazardous U.S. military base in the world, filed a law suit demanding compensation for years of harsh, unrelenting aircraft noise. The suit claimed that “explosive noise” pollution is damaging citizens’ way of life and health, as they are exposed to aircraft noise day and night, as well as a high risk of aircraft crashes. There have been 1,434 accidents listed related to military exercises, including 487 airplane-related incidents. Okinawans express that their daily lives are consumed with fear of accidents from U.S. fighter airplanes that create deafening noise as they fly into U.S. bases located in the middle of cities and other crowded areas. There have also been concerns over highly carcinogenic materials (fuels, oils, solvents, and heavy metals) that are regularly released during military operations and contaminate the surrounding land, air, and water. While the U.S. has proposed to mitigate these problems by relocating its bases to less populated areas of the island, Okinawans seek to remove American bases from the island altogether, arguing that they would still bear an unequal, overwhelming burden of U.S. forces in Japan. “It’s not fair,” one Okinawan claims, “it’s a prison for us.”

In addition to noise pollution, environmental degradation, and exposure to high risk of accidents, there have been multiple incidents of crimes involving military personnel that have pushed mild opposition against U.S. military bases into public outrage and widespread protests. Since 1972, there have been over 5,000 cases of crimes—including trespassing, burglary, violence, and rape—by U.S. military servicemen in Okinawa. However, the U.S.-Japan Status of Forces Agreement gives U.S. service members privileges of extraterritoriality (exemption of jurisdiction of local law) that have protected these servicemen under the law and allowed them to get off scot-free for their crimes. The issue of violent crimes by U.S. troops in Okinawa came to a peak in 1995, when three U.S. servicemen were caught gang raping a 12 year-old Okinawan girl. Tens of thousands of Okinawans flooded the streets, demanding that the American military leave the island immediately. The protests pressured government officials on both sides to reach an agreement to reduce military presence and withdraw U.S. troops by 2014.

This leads us to the second point the Okinawan people have made against the new withdrawal plan, specifically on the current timeframe of the withdrawal. Under an earlier version of the deal, bases would have been removed by next year. The new timeline established on Friday pushed the plan back by nine years. Furthermore, officials have warned that the speed by which the land is returned is largely dependent upon how fast the U.S. can relocate its equipment and personnel. The Futenma Air Station, for example, should be able to be evacuated by its 2022 deadline, “provided the replacement air base is operational.” However, it is unclear whether the Japanese government has the political will to force the island to allow construction of the replacement air base, especially if it spurs Okinawans to stage sit-ins and other acts of civil disobedience to stand by their demand for complete removal.

There are still deliberations and considerations that need to be made if the U.S. and Japan are serious about plans of relocation and/or withdrawal. Okinawans were historically excluded from the debate about the military bases on their homeland. The Japanese government has given preference to the U.S.-Japan security alliance over domestic politics, citing national security requirements. The U.S. affirms that it cannot afford to lose its presence in Okinawa, especially now with the rise of China and an escalating crisis on the Korean Peninsula. Whether the U.S. and Japan are right about the necessity and strategic importance of Okinawa, future plans for the island need to encompass a more inclusive view of the citizens’ perspectives and give weight to their concerns. Otherwise, they will continue to face growing resistance and antagonism, which will become counter-productive in their overall efforts. Without an agreement with the local people, the new plan for withdrawal is merely a political statement, rather than a sign of hope and change.