(* This is a provisional translation by "WIP ジャパン" for reference purpose only. The original text is in Japanese.)

Press Conference by Foreign Minister Taro Aso

Date: Tuesday, January 23, 2007, 10:50a.m.
Place: Briefing Room, Ministry of Foreign Affairs

Main topics:

Cabinet Meeting/Informal Cabinet Meeting
Six-Party Talks
Domestic Politics

1. Cabinet Meeting/Informal Cabinet Meeting

2. Six-Party Talks

Question:
The parties involved are in the process of preparing themselves for resumption of the Six-Party Talks. Please let us know how at this stage you think things will turn out.

Minister:
The other party being the other party, nothing can be said regarding the prospects that is going to be reliable. All the articles that expressed hope for results from the last round of Six-Party Talks were off the mark. Even if a reliable offer comes, it can not be reliable, so, you'll have to understand, that, involving the other party as it does, I don't think even what I reply now reliable. There is not really much I can say at this stage.

US Assistant Secretary of State for East Asia-Pacific, Christopher R. Hill came to Japan on January 20 and held talks with Kenichiro Sasae, Director-General of the Asia and Oceania Bureau. He then went to Beijing to be engaged in talks with Vice Minister of Foreign Affairs, Wu Dawei. However, I do not think that the timetable for the Six-Party Talks has been officially decided upon.
Unless the issue of denuclearization is not addressed in a concrete form, there is no point in holding these Six-Party Talks. In that respect, I think that the chair nation, China, is going to have to work hard in a number of areas.

Question:
Last time, the conditions for the Six-Party Talks were, I believe, that they could not be held unless apologies were offered for the nuclear test and the state of things was returned to how it was before the nuclear testing took place. Following that, the Talks opened. That having been the case, does the Japanese government intend not to continue to insist on the conditions and demands that it laid down at the opening of the last Talks?

Minister:
The Six-Party Talks were initiated fundamentally in order to ensure that that North Korea did not possess nuclear weapons. Since a nuclear test took place, the whole premise of the Six-Party Talks is lost. In such a case, everything changes, and not only for Japan. All the other five parties to the Talks are in accord when it comes to refusing to have dealings with North Korea as a nuclear nation. A common element in the Six-Party Talks is that no dealings will be had with a nuclear North Korea.

Question:
Apparently Director-General Sasae is to go to Beijing on the 24th to meet with Vice Minister of Foreign Affairs, Wu Dawei. This could be taken as being for final arrangements to the Six-Party Talks timetable. How should it be seen?

Minister:
Vice Minister for Foreign Affairs Yachi went to Russia for Japan-Russia Strategic Dialogue, and to Beijing for Japan-China Comprehensive Policy Dialogue, during which time originally it was decided that Director-General Sasae should go to Beijing. The priorities were just as I have stated. It just so happened that the dates coincided and that therefore, if they could find time, there would be a meeting between two. However, Japan and China may not make any decisions between just themselves, many decisions must be made concerning various issues. If Six-Party Talks are to be held, five working groups must also be held. Japan-North Korea negotiations are also a part of this. These must be also discussed.

Question:
When on his visit on the 20th US Assistant Secretary of State for East Asia-Pacific Hill was asked whether there was a possibility of the Six-Party Talks being held from February 5th in the second week in February, he said that that couldn't be "ruled out". Are you, Minister, at this point in time, of the same opinion?

Minister:
Yes, I am. To borrow his words, I think that such a possibility could not be "ruled out". However, the content has to be worked out. Whether talking about Yongbyon or the IAEA, of inspections and monitoring, monitoring is more tiresome. So the details regarding issues like these have to be worked out, and I believe that they have yet to be fully worked out.

Question:
Are you aiming roughly for that timeframe?

Minister:
Yes.

3. Domestic Politics

(See Japanese version)

Back to Index