(* 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 Katsuya Okada

Date: Friday, November 20, 2009, 4:27 p.m.
Place: Briefing Room, Ministry of Foreign Affairs

Main topics:

Opening Statements
- (1) Election of the President of the European Council
- (2) The APEC Japan 2010
The Issue of the Realignment of the US Forces in Japan
The North Korean Abduction Issue
Visit to North Korea by a Senior US Official

1. Opening Statements

(1) Election of the President of the European Council

Minister:
I have two announcements today. First, the President of the European Council of the European Union (EU) has been elected. Prime Minister Herman Van Rompuy of Belgium will assume the office of President. Ms. Catherine Ashton of the United Kingdom, currently in charge of trade in the European Commission, has been elected as High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. Japan-EU relations are very important. I intend to further deepen Japan-EU relations, in full cooperation with the two people elected this time.

(2) The APEC Japan 2010

Minister:
Second, at the Cabinet Meeting this morning, I called for the cooperation of each ministry and agency for the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) Ministerial Meeting, Economic Leaders’ Meeting, and other related meetings, as Japan will host these meetings next year. The Minister of Economy, Trade and Industry made a similar request. The Chief Cabinet Secretary announced that, in accordance with a decision by the Prime Minister, a Japan preparatory council for the APEC meetings, to be chaired by the Chief Cabinet Secretary, was established today under the Cabinet. Various work will start to prepare Japan to host the APEC meetings a year from now. On a related note, at today’s Ministerial Conference, I expressed my wish to conduct, in parallel with the preparatory work, a wide range of discussion on new goals for APEC, and initiatives to make APEC even more significant, in light of the 20th anniversary of the forum. I also stated that, in consideration of the fact that Japan will host APEC next year and the United States will be the host country the year after that, I would like to hold Japan-US consultations over the next two years in order to make APEC, an organization which stretches across the Pacific Ocean, even more meaningful.

2. The Issue of the Realignment of the US Forces in Japan

Question (Nakaima, Ryukyu Shimpo):
I have a question regarding the issue of the relocation of Futenma Air Station. You have been saying from before that you aim for a solution “expeditiously” because it is difficult to find a new location outside of Okinawa due to time limitations and because spending too much time on the issue would lead to the dangers of Futenma being left unattended. However, the mayor of Ginowan City, which hosts the air station, has been saying for some time that he would like you to consider the issue of eliminating the dangers of Futenma Air Station and the issue of finding a new location separately. Do you have any intention of considering these two issues separately? Please also give us your reasons for your opinion.

Minister:
I believe what the mayor of Ginowan City is talking about is the abolishment and removal of Futenma Air Station. I do not think he is talking about relocation. I think there may be some discrepancy there to begin with.

Question (Kaminishigawara, Kyodo News):
My question also concerns the relocation of Futenma Air Station. During a press conference this morning, in reference to the working group, Minister of Defense Kitazawa stated that he “submitted the Ministry of Defense’s proposal to the Prime Minister’s Office, the Chief Cabinet Secretary, and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.” Does the Ministry of Foreign Affairs plan to create an alternative plan? Additionally, regarding its content, there are various opinions stating that the plan should include a relocation and a scale-down of training at Kadena base or that environmental information should be inserted into the Status of Forces Agreement. What is your opinion on this?

Minister:
First of all, what did Minister of Defense Kitazawa state at the press conference?

Question (Kaminishigawara, Kyodo News):
In response to a question from the press, he said “we presented the best possible plan that we could think of at the moment to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Chief Cabinet Secretary.”

Minister:
At the Cabinet Meeting, I asked Minister of Defense Kitazawa whether he had said the things the media has been reporting as I was a little concerned about recent reports. He responded that he had not. Therefore I cannot make any comments about what you just said without directly confirming it with him. Yesterday, the Prime Minister also said many things. In today’s media reports, some of my statements from a meeting of the Committee of Foreign Affairs and Defense at the House of Councillors were misreported. As those who had been there and listening would actually know, I first stated, “I must be careful about how I say things otherwise the press will make it seem as though I am indicating a certain position.” In reply to repeated questioning asking if there was no logical possibility that the current plan would go through, I responded that “I cannot say that there is no logical possibility” and then I reiterated that “I must be careful not to let the press write things in a way that makes it seem like I have a position. That is not how I want people to understand this.” However, some media outlets reported that I had touched on the possibility that the current plan may go through. Some articles report things that are clearly not what I meant or said. Therefore even if I am asked for my opinion on somebody’s statement, I cannot easily comment on these matters unless I have confirmed that it was really what that person said. To Prime Minister Hatoyama as well ? it seems that he was asked, “Minister for Foreign Affairs Okada said at a meeting of the Committee on Foreign Affairs and Defense at the House of Councillors that there was a possibility that the current plan would go through. What is your opinion on this?” He might state in response. I think it rather irresponsible for the press to ask questions without accurately conveying who said what.

Question (Kaminishigawara, Kyodo News):
I believe what I said was accurate, so I would like to have your comment on this once you have confirmed it.

Minister:
I will confirm it.

Question (Uchida, Asahi Shimbun):
In relation to Futenma Air Station, does the Ministry of Foreign Affairs currently have any plans to submit a proposal to the working group on measures to reduce the burden on Okinawa which is associated with the relocation of Futenma Air Station?

Minister:
Regarding what will be discussed by the working group, I myself went to Okinawa recently and heard from the mayor of Kadena and from the governor of Okinawa. I heard their opinions on the current situation regarding the burden being placed on Okinawa. I confirmed anew that we must do something about this. Now that the Japanese side and US side have gathered together, I think it is necessary that we use this opportunity to convey these opinions.

Question (Beppu, NHK):
Is the Ministry of Foreign Affairs going to submit a proposal on lessening the burden on Okinawa to the working group or not? Or rather, will you submit this to the Prime Minister?

Minister:
We have not decided on this yet. Naturally, I believe there will be a debate on whether we will submit a proposal. We have not decided whether we will submit something in a proper form yet.

Question (Iwakami, Freelance):
I previously asked a question regarding the Kadena consolidation plan. In relation to this issue, I met with Chairman of the Policy Research Council of the People’s New Party Mikio Shimoji, who has been strongly arguing for the Kadena consolidation plan, and interviewed him in detail. He said that he has directly conveyed his opinions to you. Based on this I would like to ask you three things. First of all, does a precondition of the Kadena consolidation plan have to be the lessening of the burden on Okinawa? By burden I mean the noise created when airplanes arrive and depart. I believe Okinawa would not be satisfied unless the burden on Kadena is reduced by having airports such as Kansai International Airport, Saga Airport, Shizuoka Airport, or some other airport ? I do not know which specifically ? handle the burden of the arrival and departures of training airplanes.

Minister:
I have heard Mr. Shimoji’s opinions. However, I do not share them. What I have been saying is that considering the current noise pollution level, if Futenma Air Station were to be consolidated with Kadena, unless the burden is lighter than it is now, it would not be a viable plan. That is all I have been saying.

Question (Iwakami, Freelance):
Does this mean you are not currently considering moving training airplanes to an airport on mainland Japan in order to lower the noise pollution level?

Minister:
What I just said is all I have to say.

Question (Iwakami, Freelance):
Does this include moving the departures and arrivals of the training airplanes?

Minister:
I have nothing more to say.

Question (Iwakami, Freelance):
I have another related question. I also heard this from Mr. Shimoji. Governor of Osaka Toru Hashimoto stated, in private, that if the Japanese Government were to officially request that Kansai International Airport take over Okinawa’s burden, he would examine and consider the matter. Is there anything you have heard on this and do you have any plans to think about or discuss this?

Minister:
I am not aware of this statement.

Question (Nezu, NHK):
In relation to the Kadena consolidation plan, at the meeting of the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives this afternoon, you stated that “as a precondition of including the Kadena consolidation plan in our examination, the current noise pollution level must not rise, therefore, part of the current Kadena Airbase’s functions should be moved elsewhere. Our examination will include an inquiry into whether such a thing is possible.” Does this mean that you are currently examining moving some of Kadena Airbase’s functions?

Minister:
We are examining whether such a thing is possible.

Question (Nezu, NHK):
When you say that you may move part of the base’s functions, do you mean that you are examining whether it is possible to move training to mainland Japan or another location?

Minister:
I did not say anything more than what I have already said.

Question (Nishino, Kyodo News):
While I think that what you have been saying regarding the Kadena consolidation plan has remained consistent, I believe there must have been many negative opinions regarding the development, environmental issues, and noise issues surrounding the Kadena consolidation plan ? even from those not having negative positions ? at the Japan-US working group, during your visit to Okinawa, and even in today’s Diet deliberations. I think that you have heard many opinions on this issue from the time you first brought this plan up based on the position that something needs to be done about the dangers of Futenma Air Station as soon as possible. As you conduct an examination into whether it will be possible or not, do you have the feeling that the adoption of the Kadena consolidation plan is going to be harder than you first thought, or is your perception unchanged?

Minister:
We have been discussing this on the premise that it would not be easy to begin with. Other than that, we are in the middle of the examination, and I am not going to give my opinion on something that is still in progress.

Question (Tanaka, Nihon Internet Shimbun):
The Nihon Internet Shimbun provides video footage of your statements so you will be conveyed in a straightforward manner, without losing any of the details. So please feel secure in answering questions. Regarding the base in Henoko, if a considerable number of Marines relocate to Guam, I believe that there would be no need to forcibly make a base at Henoko, and thus the issue would be resolved to an extent. In your personal opinion, especially since this was a election campaign promise, would you rather not build a base in Henoko if possible?

Minister:
I do not think we are at a stage where I can state my own preferences. Regarding relocation to Guam, this would depend on what functions would be transferred there. A landing pad for helicopters would be necessary somewhere. I do not think it is as easy as saying “Move everything to Guam.” As you know, the relocation of 8,000 Marines to Guam is something that was agreed upon between Japan and the United States and it will be mainly headquarters functions that will be transferred. I think that more than this, moving everything completely to Guam, for example, is something that has been thoroughly discussed between Japan and the United States previously and I think that it would not be an easy thing to do.

Question (Kawasaki, Yomiuri Shimbun):
Returning to the subject of Futenma, today Governor Nakaima of Okinawa held a press conference and mentioned Futenma, stating his opinion that if a candidate who is against the relocation wins the Nago mayoral election next January, it would be extremely difficult to implement the current plan. I also heard that you said something to the effect that this decision should not be left up to the citizens of Nago City to decide before the central Government can come to a decision. Please tell us again your opinion on whether the Government should come to a conclusion before the Nago mayoral election.

Minister:
Regarding the first part of what you said, I am not aware of how the Governor stated his opinion and I do not think it is appropriate for me to comment on whether the plan will be difficult to implement based on the outcome of the election. There is always more than one candidate in an election and if I were to say something to the effect that if a certain candidate should win, the relocation of Futenma Air Station would go well or not, this would, in a sense, influence the election. Therefore I believe I should not say anything. However, what I said in Okinawa was, “It is not appropriate to force a decision that should be made at the national level onto the people of Nago City. Therefore I think it would be best if the country reaches a decision before the mayoral election.”

Question (Kamematsu, J-CAST News):
On the Futenma issue, I believe that at the meeting of the budget committee on November 2, Mr. Shimoji asked a question and presented his own proposal. At that time you said that the Kadena consolidation plan was proposed several times from both the Japanese and US sides, so you believed there was a possibility of it being adopted. Since it was proposed not only from the Japanese side, but from the US side as well ? in 2005 to be exact ? is this a factor which you believe is favorable for the adoption of the Kadena consolidation plan? Additionally, please give us your opinion on why the Japanese side did not accept the plan at that time.

Minister:
I do not really know the developments of the time. However, one major issue with the Kadena consolidation plan was the opposition from the local community that it would further increase their burden. Another reason was that again, it would be operationally difficult. Regarding operational difficulties, I do understand the argument that it would be difficult. However, examination is necessary to verify whether it would be unacceptably difficult. If it truly is unacceptable, this would have been something that could be calculated subjectively, and I question whether the US side would have proposed the plan if this were the case. The issue of the local community remains as well. This is something we must overcome, regardless of which side brought up the plan.

Question (Kamematsu, J-CAST News):
The proposal from the US side was submitted before 2006. Would this be a plus factor or a factor that would strengthen your argument for the Kadena consolidation plan?

Minister:
It is one of the points that needs to be verified.

3. The North Korean Abduction Issue

Question (Uesugi, Freelance):
Today, instead of an issue concerning the correspondents club, I would like to ask about the abduction issue. Yesterday ? today, technically speaking ? the Resolution on the Situation of Human Rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) was adopted at the Third Committee of the United Nations (UN) General Assembly. Could you please tell us again your policy on the abduction issue in response to the adoption of this resolution?

Minister:
The policy on the abduction issue has basically remained the same as the previous administration. It is needless to repeat here that the abduction issue is a humanitarian issue as well as one of human rights. In light of this, my basic understanding is that the abduction issue should be resolved together with the nuclear and missile issues, and based on the resolution of these issues, Japan and North Korea should aim to normalize diplomatic relations.

Question (Uesugi, Freelance):
Could you please comment on the resolution adopted at the Third Committee of the UN General Assembly?

Minister:
Although I do not have a copy of the said UN resolution with me, I take it as a renewed expression of concern towards the human rights situation in North Korea. This, of course, encompasses the issue of abduction. Serious violations of human rights are taking place in North Korea right now, by which I do not just mean abductions but also the plight of the people living in North Korea. I think it is highly important for Japan as well to seek substantial improvement of the situation.

4. Visit to North Korea by a Senior US Official

Question (Saito, Kyodo News):
My question is about US-North Korea relations. The schedule of US special envoy Stephen Bosworth’s visit to North Korea has been decided and announced by President Obama. Could you please tell us your take on this bilateral dialogue, as well as your current expectation of whether or not this will speed up consideration toward a Japan-North Korea dialogue?

Minister:
I am looking forward to seeing some progress from US-North Korea dialogue when US special envoy Bosworth visits North Korea on December 8. Looking back at North Korea’s previous negotiations, I do not feel that a breakthrough will be achieved that easily. While I look forward to seeing some progress, I am cautioning myself against having excessive expectations.

Back to Index