Top > Announcement > Press Conference by Foreign Minister > March 5, 2010

(* 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, March 5, 2010, 3:00 p.m.
Place: Briefing Room, Ministry of Foreign Affairs

Main topics:

  1. Opening Statement
    • (1) The Meeting between Chief Cabinet Secretary Hirano and Ambassador to Japan John Roos of the United States, and other items
  2. The Issue of the Realignment of the US Forces in Japan
  3. Cyber Attack on 2 Channel
  4. Iranian Nuclear Development Issue
  5. The International Bluefin Tuna Trade
  6. Cooperation for Development of Nuclear Power Plants
  7. Visit to Japan by Former Death Row Prisoner Kim Hyon-Hui
  8. The Six-Party Talks
  9. The Takeshima Issue
  10. Establishment of the Travel Promotion Act in the United States
  11. The Examination of the So-called Secret Agreements

1. Opening Statement

(1) The Meeting between Chief Cabinet Secretary Hirano and Ambassador to Japan John Roos of the United States, and other items

Minister:
I have no statements to make in particular. I will go to Hokkaido tomorrow as I have already stated. Additionally, regarding the meeting between Chief Cabinet Secretary Hirofumi Hirano and US Ambassador to Japan John Roos on the Futenma issue, all the media outlets are reporting various things, but I am in close contact with the Chief Cabinet Secretary and he did not discuss any tangible plan with the US side. There had been a plan for a meeting in the past, but no opportunities to actually have one has arisen up until now. Now that the budget has been passed at the House of Representatives, Chief Cabinet Secretary Hirano was able to take a breath and meet Ambassador Roos as the Chief Cabinet Secretary for the first time. Many things have been reported on what was said during the meeting. However, there were absolutely no discussions on tangible plans. Some newspapers wrote articles saying “what is the Ministry of Foreign Affairs doing?” based on such a misunderstanding, but I am not concerned about them at all. If a tangible proposal is formed or is about to be formed, then the Ministry of Foreign Affairs will have to thoroughly negotiate with the US side.

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

Question (Nezu, NHK):
I have a question about the Futenma issue which you just mentioned. You stated that if a tangible proposal was formed or about to be formed you would negotiate with the US side. Prime Minister Hatoyama stated that the Japanese government would form its proposal by the end of March. Can you tell us about what you think the schedule will be like and about what future negotiations and contact with the US will be like?

Minister:
Contact will be carried out as I just stated. Regarding the schedule, I have stated many times to the Prime Minister and Chief Cabinet Secretary that it must be done as soon as possible. Therefore I think it is extremely positive that they have finally made the time limit clear.

Question (Nezu, NHK):
In relation to this, I believe you met with Deputy Secretary of State James Steinberg of the United States this morning. Can you tell us what you discussed with him about the schedule – for example how the Prime Minister stated that the government wants to come up with a proposal by the end of March – and what kind of opinions were exchanged regarding the Futenma issue?

Minister:
It is not as if the Futenma issue did not come up. However, I will not talk about specific details of our meeting. Additionally, the Prime Minister’s statement about how the government wants to come up with a proposal by the end of March did not come up during our discussions.

Question (Ida, Shukan Kinyobi):
During Tuesday’s press conference, you stated that you must respect the fact that the Okinawa prefectural assembly unanimously adopted a resolution against relocation within the prefecture. Against this backdrop, the meeting between Chief Cabinet Secretary Hirano and Ambassador Roos took place before the Okinawa prefectural assembly submitted a request. Seeing reports about how Mr. Hirano and Ambassador Roos met and Mr. Hirano gave an explanation, the people of Okinawa may think that they should have received an explanation before the US side did. If this happens, then proposals will be harder to form. As an matter of procedure, I believe that democracy is the most important factor. What are your opinions on this?

Minister:
There was no explanation of a proposal. I would be grateful if you would report this accurately.

Question (Takimoto, Ryukyu Shimpo):
In relation the relocation of the Futenma Air Station, whether a proposal came up during the meeting between the Ambassador and the Chief Cabinet Secretary or not, recently the media has been reporting that you are considering a plan to relocate onshore at Camp Schwab. What is your opinion of this plan? Additionally – this was reported on a little yesterday – another plan to relocate the air station to a filled-in sea area at White Beach has come up. What are your opinions on these two plans?

Minister:
I am sure you already know the answer, but the Verification Committee is currently in deliberations and I will not comment on its process, progress, or tangible plans.

Question (Ida, Shukan Kinyobi):
I have a related question. I am sure that the Verification Committee is conducting its discussions, but various speculations or proposals keep coming from each political party before the Verification Committee forms a conclusion. While you say that the Verification Committee is conducting discussions, at the same time, proposals pop up from other places, and Chief Cabinet Secretary Hirano is making statements which could be taken to mean the Verification Committee will be dissolved. What is your opinion on this?

Minister:
I think that it is inevitable that as each party prepares to propose a plan to the Verification Committee, that the party will discuss it internally and the proposal will leak out. As for how the Verification Committee will operate, that is something that will be decided with Chief Cabinet Secretary Hirano taking a central role, and I do not think anything has been decided right now. I do not have any comment at this time.

Question (Reynold, Reuters):
Do you think that the current Futenma relocation plan is still a possibility at this point?

Minister:
My position on this has not changed. I will not comment on individual plans, but I believe that there are all sorts of possibilities.

Question (Ida, Shukan Kinyobi):
Reading Mr. Muneo Suzuki’s blog, it says that last night he attended a dinner that you hosted and that he met and talked with you there. Did the topic of Futenma come up then?

Minister:
I do not recall much. I do not think I brought up the topic. The members were the three committee chairs and they all have their own opinions, so I was careful about what I said.

3. Cyber Attack on 2 Channel

Question (Nanao, Nico Nico Douga):
I am reading this question on behalf of our users. From 1 to 2 March, the servers of major Internet bulletin board site 2 Channel went down, making it difficult for users to access the site for a continued period. It is being reported that IT companies in the United States that received server damage from a large number of serious attacks from computers in countries such as the Republic of Korea (ROK) are holding discussions with organizations such as the FBI and eying legal measures. This was even conveyed in JoongAng Ilbo, an influential newspaper in the ROK, and I believe that the facts will become clearer in the future. Please tell us your opinion on the current hostility between certain Internet users in Japan and the ROK as well as on this trend.

Minister:
The facts are not clear about individual cases as of yet, so I feel that it is best not to comment at the current stage. However, I can say that attacks using the Internet take place on the private sector level as well as the national level. On the national level, we have to be ready to handle these situations with a firm response. This is an important issue at present, and will continue to be in the future as well.

4. Iranian Nuclear Development Issue

Question (Inoue, Kyodo News):
I have a question about the meeting you had today with Deputy Secretary of State of the United States James B. Steinberg. After the meeting, the Deputy Secretary of State stated that he and you had discussed the Iranian nuclear development issue as well, saying that he believed that Japan and the United States, as important partners in the United Nations Security Council, would continue addressing the issue with the same stance and a common approach. The United States is calling for additional sanctions against Iran. Does Japan, too, consider that the current situation requires additional sanctions? If so, what kind of sanctions do you think are necessary?

Minister:
I shared with the Deputy Secretary of State the views that I exchanged with the Iranian Parliamentary Speaker at the meeting which lasted for approximately one hour during his recent visit to Japan. I explained Deputy Secretary of State Steinberg what I had conveyed to the Speaker: that Japan placed an importance on the relationship Japan and Iran had developed thus far, that Iran had not fulfilled its responsibility despite the report by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the United Nations Security Council resolutions, and that Japan sincerely hoped Iran would fulfill its responsibility because there was not much time left. Discussions on the issue will take place from here on in the United Nations Security Council. Naturally, Japan, as a member of the Security Council and the country that will chair the Council in April, must play an important role. I will not elaborate on the specifics of sanctions or matters to be discussed going forward. Once the direction in which the international community will advance is determined, Japan will certainly and sincerely follow the decision made.

Question (Beppu, NHK):
On a related note, what if a decision is made, not in the Security Council but by a coalition of the willing, to impose sanctions on Iran? How will Japan respond to the decision?

Minister:
I would rather not to answer what-if questions. We are discussing the thorough response that the Security Council will take.

Question (Beppu, NHK):
Does Japan support the banning of crude oil imports?

Minister:
As I said earlier, the Security Council is currently discussing the specifics of sanctions. As such, it is not appropriate for me to speak on individual matters and things we agree on or disagree on. Once a decision is made, Japan will follow the decision thoroughly.

5. The International Bluefin Tuna Trade

Question (Yoshida, NHK):
My question is about the issue of fishing for bluefin tuna in the Atlantic. With the United States expressing its support for Monaco’s proposal yesterday, it is now widely considered that Japan, which opposes the Monaco’s proposal, is in an extremely disadvantageous position. We only have about two weeks left until the vote. What is your current understanding of the situation? How will Japan seek to secure at least a one-third support for its position of opposing the measure to ban the international trade of bluefin tuna?

Minister:
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs, in collaboration with the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, will make efforts to ensure that Japan’s position will be understood.

Question (Yoshida, NHK):
Japan is in an extremely disadvantageous position. What kind of efforts are you going to make specifically?

Minister:
I will not elaborate on Japan’s diplomatic or international efforts. The Japanese government as a whole will make its utmost efforts.

6. Cooperation for Development of Nuclear Power Plants

Question (Sakamaki, Bloomberg):
This question is in regard to the selling of Japan’s nuclear power generation technologies to nuclear power plants overseas. There is news that the prime minister has sent a personal letter to Viet Nam and that a new company is to be constructed. Please explain what activities the government is taking part in, including these developments.

Minister:
I do not think that I should provide specific details on these activities; however, the prime minister himself has admitted to sending the letter and Japan has undertaken various activities to date in Viet Nam as well as in the UAE. In consideration of this, it has become normal for the government to proactively involve itself in a wide range of large-scale projects specifically in the private sector for such areas as nuclear power, bullet trains, and water processing. The government holds discussions so that it can carry out its role in these activities, and in reality the government is aiming to work to deepen its involvement in the issues at hand. We have made various efforts for a range of projects up until now, and these efforts have not been confined to the simple sending of personal letters.

7. Visit to Japan by Former Death Row Prisoner Kim Hyon-Hui

Question (Oguri, Nippon Television):
Regarding former death row prisoner Kim Hyon-Hui’s visit to Japan, Minister of National Public Safety Commission Nakai stated at a press conference after the Cabinet Meeting that he had already talked to you about this matter. Please tell us about the current situation and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs’ position on this.

Minister:
Minister Nakai has indeed talked to me about this. I cannot recall exactly on what occasion it was, but it came up while we were chatting. Primarily, I think the decision will fall on the minister in charge. I am sure there will be various problems and hurdles, but the Ministry of Foreign Affairs will make efforts to remove these obstacles when necessary. I believe that details, including how exactly she will be summoned to Japan, have not been decided yet.

8. The Six-Party Talks

Question (Saito, Kyodo News):
This is about the Six-Party Talks. If I remember correctly, you described the stance to be taken toward the resumption of the Six-Party Talks, saying that “We should not misunderstand and think that resumption itself is the goal.” I would like you to give us further explanation of what you meant by that. I am asking you this because the statement you made can be interpreted in various ways. North Korea demands various conditions for the resumption of the Six-Party Talks and is reportedly playing many tactics. Accordingly, your statement can be interpreted to mean that Japan will by no means compromise its position of demanding North Korea to return, unconditionally, to the Six-Party Talks, and that Japan sees no point in resuming the Six-Party Talks in exchange for making compromise. Or, it can be interpreted differently, that you were implying to say that it was only natural – and as such Japan would accept – for various tactics to have taken place and that Japan is ready to make compromises if that is what is necessary for the resumption of the Six-Party Talks because Japan believes that what is important is to hold discussions under resumed Six-Party Talks. I would appreciate it if you could clarify your views and elaborate your intention.

Minister:
Both interpretations went too far. What I meant to say was that while the resumption of the Six-Party Talks was important, we should always remember the primary reason for convening the Six-Party Talks. Resumption itself should not be the goal. That is all I meant.

Question (Saito, Kyodo News):
Let me confirm. The Japanese government’s position of calling for North Korea’s unconditional return to the Six-Party Talks remains totally unchanged. Is that correct?

Minister:
Yes – basically.

9. The Takeshima Issue

Question (Azumi, Freelance):
I would like to ask about the Takeshima issue. A ceremony to commemorate Takeshima Day took place in Shimane Prefecture last month, but apparently no government officials or members of the Democratic Party of Japan attended the event. Neither was a statement released on that occasion. On the other hand, the government made it clear in its statement in response to a question from Legislator Akiko Kamei that the government had conveyed to the Republic of Korea (ROK) a number of times by documents and through other means Japan’s position on the Takeshima issue. How will Japan address the Takeshima issue going forward?

Minister:
It was my decision not to attend the event in Shimane Prefecture. In any case, I think it is rare for the Minister for Foreign Affairs to attend events organized by prefectural governments. As for the Takeshima issue, there are many occasions in which I meet with ROK officials and we exchange views on our respective positions. From our side, we rightly assert that Takeshima is Japan’s territory.

Question (Azumi, Freelance):
With the Diet being in session, you must have been too busy to attend the event, but Legislator Muneo Suzuki, Chairman of the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives, did attend the ceremony, and was the first Chairman of the Committee to ever do so. Both the Takeshima issue and the issue of the Northern Territories are border issues. Yet, the degree of emphasis that the government places on each issue differs significantly. For example, Takeshima Day has not been enacted by law. Likewise, more than one billion yen is earmarked, in the national budget, for the Northern Territory issue whereas only about 120 million yen is earmarked for the Takeshima issue. What is your understanding of border issues?

Minister:
Both the Takeshima and Northern Territory issues are extremely important territory issues for Japan. That is why Japan is making claims.

10. Establishment of the Travel Promotion Act in the United States

Question (Kawasaki, Yomiuri):
A bill that imposes a uniform US$10 surcharge when travelers without visas who wish to go to the United States apply to enter the country was signed into law by the president yesterday United States time (today, Japan time). This means that Japanese nationals that visit the United States without first acquiring a visa must pay US$10 when they apply to enter the country via the Internet – although they will have to do so only once every two years. At the same time, citizens of the United States that visit Japan do not have to pay a separate surcharge even when traveling without a visa, and this creates a sort of gap or imbalance. This is to impact a great number of people, such as those who travel to Hawaii. Please give us your thoughts on this matter.

Minister:
This problem carries the concern of negatively impacting human exchanges between Japan and the United States, and accordingly the development of economic relations. Therefore, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs has continued to convey its concerns about this issue. The president has now signed this bill into law, so now we plan to carefully watch over the resulting impact.

11. The Examination of the So-called Secret Agreements

Question (Takahashi, Jiji Press):
We expect the report on the secret agreement regarding the transport of nuclear weapons into Japan to be released in the near future. Yesterday, the prime minister expressed that he would not revise, but firmly maintain, the Three Non-Nuclear Principles. However, the prime minister himself has also pointed out that the Three Non-Nuclear Principles, and in particular the portion on not introducing nuclear weapons into Japan, lost their substance during the Cold War era. Please give us your opinion on how the principle of “not introducing nuclear weapons into Japan” was evaluated to date and what can be expected of this clause in the future.

Minister:
Basically, there has been no change. As I have even commented further on this issue here before, verifications are underway and I plan to answer various questions on the issue once the results from the verification become clear. I would like to maintain the same answer for today.

Question (Ida, Shukan Kinyobi):
I would like to ask about the aforementioned secret agreement. The results are going to be released soon. Is the report going to remain classified until the date of announcement? The Asahi and Yomiuri Newspapers reported on the content of the report as of yesterday, and of course it is natural that news organizations should acquire such content by covering news throughout the nation, but if the report is supposed to remain classified, I have the feeling that a leak by Foreign Ministry officials to certain news media has the danger of shifting the focus of the issue at hand into a new direction, such as whether there was actually a secret agreement. I believe that the focus of this problem is whether the previous administration and Foreign Ministry officials have deceived Japanese citizens in the past. What are your views on this? While I said that I had one question, there ended up being two. Is the report classified? Also, what is the focus of the secret agreement problem? I will not touch on the detailed content, but please provide your understanding of these questions.

Minister:
Of course, the text that has been considered to date is classified. Confidentiality applies to staff of the Foreign Ministry, as well as the temporary staff that make up the membership of the verification committee. There are many stories in the newspapers. Some stories are correct, some are not, and they are wide in range. I do not know who is leaking such information or who imagined up such information, but I do not see it as a good thing.

Question (Ida, Shukan Kinyobi):
So, the report itself is classified.

Minister:
The report itself is still an internal document and it is thus labeled classified. So, in that sense, yes, it is safe to say that it is a classified document.

Back to Index