After reading Yoshio Shimoji's July 31 letter, I can't help but get the impression that he may be among those Japanese in general who are frustrated with the U.S. military presence on their island. If so, may I offer a few points to ponder whenever the "unfairness" of the U.S.-Japan Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) gets on their nerves?

• Many of the GIs in Japan are not here because they chose to be or want to be, but because they were ordered to be here by the U.S. government to do a job that benefits BOTH countries.

• Since they were ordered to be here, the U.S. government has the obligation to afford them a bit of protection against prosecution in countries -- such as Japan -- where the justice systems drastically differ from that in the U.S.

• SOFA was drafted, agreed upon and signed by BOTH countries. It was not forced on one by the other.

• If there are parts of the agreement that Japan would like to change, then Japan has the right to start a dialogue with the U.S. to negotiate a change. This is how Article 17(3c), or the "sympathetic consideration" clause, came to be.

• If, at any time, Japan wants U.S. forces out, all it has to do is say "leave." The Philippines did that and the U.S. left.

One last thing to think about: If, say, some 30,000 Japanese were living within walled-in "bases" in California, how do you think they would feel if the U.S. media routinely referred to them as "a burden" and made them out as evil and dangerous? How would they feel if the U.S. government asked them to minimize the number of their kind who lived off base? Do you think they might think someone was being racist?

michael logan