I agree with everything that you said.

It is true that Japan and Korea benefited from USA presence in the region and I believe that we need the USA soldiers in our country for obvious reason (strategic and politic).

Under the strategic point of view I have nothing to add to what you said but I was more focused on the legal aspect of said “Japanese autonomy” toward USA, since they are bound to American interference by their constitution.

My main concern is “will Japan ignore or revoke their constitution if it is necessary to assure their dreamed autonomy from the USA?” or even more will the USA exercise the power it granted himself to intervene in Japanese constitution if needed?

Obviously I’m talking about a very extreme situation, that could lead both countries on the verge of a war if something like that happens, but I’m just trying to understand how far would Japan go to achieve the its autonomy claim.

Such as what? refeuling ships? Big deal.

U is just looking to troll some Japanese person. Sorry, U but Japanese don't care.

Japan has to live within the reality of that bad blood created and in the fact that two of its neighbors are communist – at least in political orientation for China. They also have to face the fact China is a huge nation in terms of population and a rapidly growing economy that gives it more and more ability to project power not just in East Asia but globally.

So, given the enviornment Japan lives in, it needs a strong military and/or strong military strategy, but the bigger of an ability it has by itself, the more it stokes the pent-up anger in Korea and China and elsewhere in Asia. So — like England facing the Soviet Union in Europe after WWII, Japan decided to tie its military strategic position to that of the US, and it will continue to do so regardless of whatever this new administration and voters have in mind.

I think that is far from saying Japan has no "autonomy." It certainly does. If it wanted, it could sever its relationship with the United States. It doesn't not because the US "controls" it or has "undue influence" on it —- It does it because it sees it as the best means to achieve its security needs.

In short, you can just as easily say that Japan has been "using" the United States the last few decades when it – just like South Korea – could have fielded an adequate military of their own without need of help from the US military.

The reality is, the US-SK and US-Japan relationship has been based on some sense of reciprical advantage (bilaterialism) for a few decades now. For myself, I disagree with the US policy of keeping troops in South Korea but support keeping them in Japan as the natual Pacific line of defense to draw.

Could someone explain something: If the USA has political power over Japan since the USA granted to the Japanese their constitution and has the legitimacy to change it and Japan has also a war debt with the USA, how can Japan act independently from the USA? It`s because of this issues that I believe that any Japanese "autonomy" claim is impracticable.

I`m not saying Japan is a colony of USA (because it is not in fact), but it`s obvious that they are bound to the USA control in political matters.

It appears that in response now the US is threatening to downsize even further if these agreements are not kept by withdrawing a huge chunk of the US Air Force in Japan:
http://rokdrop.com/2009/09/17/us-threatens-to-rem…

Yes we can!