(* This is a provisional translation by an external company for reference purpose only. The original text is in Japanese.)

Press Conference by Minister for Foreign Affairs Masahiko Koumura

Date: Tuesday, June 24, 2008, 10:50 a.m.
Place: Briefing Room, Ministry of Foreign Affairs

Main topics:

North Korean issues
Incident involving shooting and capture of the Kisshin Maru 31
Climate change issue

1. North Korean issues

Question:
The United States White House Spokesperson Perino stated with expectation that on June 26, North Korea will make a declaration regarding its nuclear facilities. Please state Japan's position on that statement and how Japan views the removal of North Korea from the list of nations sponsoring terrorism.

Minister:
Based on the principle of "action for action," which dominates the overall actions in the Six-Party Talks, the United States is saying that if North Korea makes its declaration then the US Government will notify Congress of its plan to remove North Korea from the list of nations sponsoring terrorism. In concrete terms, I do not have solid information on whether or not North Korea will truly make a declaration on June 26. The United States has clearly stated that in the event that North Korea makes a proper declaration it intends to remove North Korea from the list and observe carefully the situation for 45 days after that declaration since this depends on whether or not Congress will approve the government plan. Naturally, meanwhile, consideration will also be given to what kind of progress is made in Japan-North Korea relations and of course, whether the declaration on the nuclear facilities can be truly valued as a declaration, which is of the utmost importance to the United States, as well as the situation afterwards. The United States has stated to ascertain these facts.

Question:
Will Japan oppose North Korea's removal from the list of nations sponsoring terrorism by the United States if no concrete progress is made in 45 days, for example, for the reopening of the investigation that has been agreed upon between Japan and North Korea in the consultations or for the handover of the Yodogo hijackers?

Minister:
Our ultimate stance is that we will continue close discussions with the United States, seek to gain its cooperation as much as possible and advance progress on the abduction issue. With that background in mind, I will meet Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice in the near future and I intend to speak with her about this.

Question:
The United States has publicly announced its view, through a spokesperson, that North Korea is expected to make a declaration on 26 June. Has the Government of the United States already used diplomatic routes to explain to the Government of Japan, that if North Korea makes a declaration, then the Government of the United States will begin the process of removing North Korea from the list of nations sponsoring terrorism under the principle of "action for action" as you have just described?

Minister:
That has been conveyed to us at various levels.

Question:
Until now, the Government of Japan has consistently maintained the position of calling on the United States not to remove North Korea from the list of nations sponsoring terrorism unless there is some progress on the abductions issue. In the event that the United States promptly moved forward at this point and removed North Korea from the list, wouldn't that contradict what the Government of Japan has been saying?

Minister:
This is a card that the United States has. This is a card that the United States has based on its domestic law. From our point of view we have been calling on the United States to let us share the card in order to achieve progress in the abductions issue. On that point, the United States has been cooperative until now and if we were asked whether or not that has been sufficient, the Government of Japan would certainly say that we would like the United States to be even more cooperative. Those are the views of the Government of Japan. That is why from my perspective I want to have a talk with Secretary of State Rice. That is why regarding the matter of whether or not to remove North Korea from the list, I think it is not simply a matter of yes or no but rather a question of just how far that can be used as a card. From the perspective of Japan we intend to make efforts so that card is used as fully as it can be used.

Question:
This weekend a Japan-United States Foreign Minister Talk is scheduled to take place in Kyoto. Is it your view that you do not want North Korea to be removed from the list before the talks?

Minister:
The view of the Government of Japan that we want the United States to let us use the card more has already been sufficiently conveyed to the United States. In that process, the United States explains that it is only a notification of its intention, therefore, it is not necessarily the case to remove North Korea from the list as soon as a declaration is submitted. The position of the United States is that it will closely watch the situation and enthusiastically cooperate during the ensuing 45 days from now on. In the event that there is any problem with the declaration of nuclear facilities after that point it is certainly possible for the procedures to be stopped, which is the United States' way of thinking.

Question:
There is a 45 day period but whether or not the United States would undertake a revision of its decision to remove North Korea from the list depends on primarily a matter of issues related to nuclear programs and not to the abductions issue, is that understanding right?

Minister:
It is primarily so. At the same time, the United States says not to forget the abductions issue and to cooperate as much as possible. Japan will do its best to pursue what the United States describes as "as much as possible."

Question:
Hypothetically, in the event that measures have been taken to remove North Korea from the list, during your talks with Secretary of State Rice, is there anything concrete that the Japan side will make a request to the United States?

Minister:
Our request is to ask the United States for its cooperation as much as possible. In this we are not talking only about the abductions issue, but also about the issue of nuclear declaration. If there is not sufficient progress made on both of those areas then this decision should be reversed. In the event that sufficient progress is not made then we certainly intend to call on the United States to reverse the decision. In the event that sufficient progress is made then Japan and the United States will hold close consultations. This is natural because we are allies.

Question:
Regarding the declaration, you stated it would be possible that even in the event that there is not sufficient declaration, progress should be advanced on a priority basis. In the event that the declaration that North Korea actually makes is not a complete and accurate one that Japan has consistently called for, will Japan continue to demand a complete and accurate declaration?

Minister:
As I always have said, the ultimate goal is denuclearization. That is why we are looking for complete abandonment. All of the nuclear programs must be abandoned. The question is whether or not the declaration contributes to that ultimate goal. In order for the declaration to fulfill this criterion, as Japan has been saying, it must be a complete and accurate one. That is the fundamental position that has been maintained by Japan. Naturally, there are various views not only between Japan and the United States, but rather amongst the five parties. Therefore, the minimum level that should be ensured is the point that can ultimately lead to the abandonment of the nuclear programs. And besides that, whether or not North Korea's declaration falls within the definition of a complete and accurate declaration is something that will be decided through close consultations with other countries. I believe that the United States understands Japan's views in this regard pretty well. For example, when I met with Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Hill, he said that the videogame that his children enjoyed playing was a Japanese one and that unless the player thoroughly achieved all of the objectives in level two then the player cannot advance to level three, and given that, he considerably understands the views of Japan. It is not the case that anything is decided simply by the views of one country. Amongst the six countries involved, in particular through the close coordination amongst Japan, the United States and the Republic of Korea, as well as in coordination with China, and with Russia, finally efforts are made to call on North Korea. Japan hopes that we can get the point as close as possible to our goal.

Question:
Even if the Government of the United States notifies Congress of intending to remove North Korea from the list of nations sponsoring terrorism based on the principle on "action for action" in response to a declaration made by North Korea, do you think that Japan should not immediately be concerned about this?

Minister:
I think this is really something like half a glass of water. We are constantly making efforts and taking actions in order to move the situation in a direction that will be even a little bit better than the current worrisome situations.

Question:
In the event that the United States does remove North Korea from the list, will this have an influence on Japan-US relations?

Minister:
For the time being, what the United States is talking about is making a notification to Congress of an intent to remove North Korea from the list. Therefore, actually removing it from the list would take place after that. I think that the Minister of Foreign Affairs should refrain from commenting on whether or not it will have an influence without actually seeing the situation in the event that such removal materialized and what talks would take place between Japan and the United States. Naturally, you could say that all issues between Japan and the United States have an influence on bilateral relations. I do not think that the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Japan should state exactly to what extent that will have an influence on the relations. If there is a negative influence, then we should try to keep the influence to the lowest level possible and we are going to call on the United States to do what we should ask it to keep the influence to the smallest level possible.

2. Incident involving shooting and capture of the Kisshin Maru 31

Question:
In the summer of 2006, a fishing vessel from Nemuro was fired upon by a Russian patrol boat and was taken into custody. After that, the vessel itself was reportedly transferred to a Russian state corporation. Can you confirm the facts in this case and explain your views regarding the negotiations related to the handover of the vessel?

Minister:
I am fully aware of the media reports. The Government of Japan thoroughly understands the facts in this case but due to the sources of our information I am not in a position to discuss that. When I recently visited Russia I asked the vessel to be returned. Naturally, considering our basic position on the Northern Territories, this is absolutely not something that we can accept. Furthermore, even though we are talking about a vessel, from the humanitarian perspective we cannot accept it, and therefore I demanded the vessel to be returned. Considering that the decision to confiscate the vessel came from an official court in Russia, their position is that they do not intend to return the boat. We do not accept that and therefore we will continue to steadfastly call on them strongly.

3. Climate change issue

Question:
At the Major Economies Meeting that took place in the Republic of Korea, agreement could not be reached on numerical targets for long-term goals. There are some people who are of the view that it will be difficult to achieve agreement on long-term goals at the G8 Summit. In particular, the United States is taking an extremely rigid stance on this issue. Going forward, how does Japan intend to convince the United States in this regard?

Minister:
It is not only the United States that is rigid. Other countries such as China and Russia are also taking rigid stances. However, given that this is an extremely difficult issue, we must steadily make advances and move forward slowly. The Major Economies Meeting recently was not a step backwards. It is not true that there was no progress at that meeting. In fact, a little bit of progress was achieved. Naturally, we will work to further this along at the G8 Summit. We will continue to focus on the importance of advancing this at all meetings that take place further on, including the leaders meeting of MEM directly following the G8 Summit. What the United States is saying, that it is the newly emerging economies whose CO2 emissions are increasing and unless they are brought into the fold then there would be absolutely no meaning is in fact true. At the same time, what the newly emerging economies are saying, that it is the advanced economies who are primarily responsible for creating the bad situation that currently exists and therefore, the first steps must be taken on the part of the advanced countries is true. If both parties present correct arguments and are squared off against each other face to face, then there will be no progress. Therefore, efforts must be made to appeal to both sides and we must persuade both sides, noting that the other side has stated that they will take action and therefore, they must also take action. Japan is quite proud that it has a lot of ability and technology in such balancing efforts and we intend to bring that to bear.

Question:
Are you confident that you will be able to achieve more to advance this process than was achieved last year at the Heiligendamm Summit?

Minister:
Naturally, we are.

Related Information (Climate Change)

Back to Index