Top > Announcement > Press Conference by Foreign Minister > April 9, 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, April 9, 2010, 3:04 p.m.
Place: MOFA Press Conference Room

Main topics:

  1. Opening Statements
    • (1) Signing of the Successor Treaty to the 1st Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START I)
    • (2) Situation in Kyrgyzstan
    • (3) How the Crisis Management System Ought To Be in Response to Large-Scale Natural Disasters in the Wake of the Haiti Earthquake and the Chile Earthquake
    • (4) Visit to the City of Yokosuka
    • (5) Lawsuit to Overturn Ruling against Disclosure of Information Relating to Reversion of Okinawa to Japan
    • (6) Screening Test for JPO Candidates 2010
  2. Investigation of So-called Secret Agreements (Lawsuit to Overturn Ruling against Disclosure of Information Relating to Reversion of Okinawa to Japan)
  3. How Crisis Management System Ought To Be in Response to Great Natural Disasters in the Wake of the Haiti Earthquake and the Chile Earthquake
  4. Japan-China Summit Meeting
  5. US Military Realignment Issue
  6. Visit to Yokosuka
  7. Extension of Measures against North Korea
  8. Nuclear Security Summit
  9. Death Penalty for Japanese Drug Traffickers in China

1. Opening Statements

(1) Signing of the Successor Treaty to the 1st Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START I)

Foreign Minister Okada: First of all, (US) President Obama and (Russian) President Medvedev signed the subsequent treaty to the 1st Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty yesterday, April 8, in Prague.
   Japan appreciates the fact that as a result of negotiations that the two countries had been conducting, important progress was made, including an agreement on the level of reduction of nuclear warheads and their delivery means.
   The fact that this treaty, which complies with the disarmament obligations under Article 6 of the NPT, the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, has been signed before the conference to review the operation of the NPT to be held in May is an important contribution to that conference, and Japan highly regards it.
   We hold expectations that the two countries will swiftly ratify the treaty and exercise leadership within the international community toward promoting nuclear disarmament on a global scale with the participation of other nuclear powers, as well as the goal of a nuclear-free world.

(2) Situation in Kyrgyzstan

Minister: The second topic is about the situation in Kyrgyzstan. As I already spoke about at the Diet today, there was a clash between anti-government demonstrators, including members of opposition parties, and security forces on April 7 in Bishkek, the capital city of the Kyrgyz Republic. So far, more than 70 persons have been killed and more than 1,000 persons injured. We are deeply concerned over this matter and are closely monitoring the situation.
   There are approximately 130 Japanese nationals residing in Kyrgyzstan for extended periods, but so far, there are no reports that any of them has suffered harm. We have so far provided Japanese nationals living in Kyrgyzstan and others with information on the security situation and safety measures, as well as given them a heads-up in preparation for a potential deterioration in the security situation. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) continues to take swift and thorough action by setting up an emergency headquarters and a MOFA liaison office in Kyrgyzstan so that we could carry out protection of Japanese nationals and information gathering appropriately.
   We are aware that the leaders of the opposition parties established a provisional government on April 8. However, President (Kurmanbek) Bakiyev has issued a statement rejecting his resignation, and it is unpredictable how the situation will develop. We hope that all concerned parties will try to resolve the issue peacefully through dialogue and that the situation will be settled as soon as possible.

(3) How the Crisis Management System Ought To Be in Response to Large-Scale Natural Disasters in the Wake of the Haiti Earthquake and the Chile Earthquake

Minister: You have been given hand-outs with regard to the third topic, which is about how the crisis management system ought to be in response to large-scale natural disasters in the wake of the Haiti earthquake and the Chile earthquake. In the wake of the two earthquakes, we had been conducting debates on improvements in the crisis management system, and now that the results of the debates have been compiled, I would like to inform you of that.
   First of all, let me talk about the improvements. So far, as concerns the crisis management system at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, initial responses, in particular, have so far been handled under the initiative of the bureau chiefs of the sections in charge. In the case of Haiti or Chile, that refers to the director-general of the Latin American and Caribbean Affairs Bureau. We improved the system so that in the future, the Councilor for Crisis Management will play the central role and the initial response can be made more quickly.
  With the relevant bureau or section handling crisis management, the same bureau handled crisis management during the latest earthquakes in Haiti and Chile, and the bureau clearly responded more quickly during the second time around – the Chile earthquake – than the first time around – the Haiti earthquake. Naturally, during the first time around, the bureau did not have sufficient experience. We have no way of knowing where – for example, Asia of Africa – such a large-scale disaster will strike in the future. It is in that sense that we have decided that the councilor for crisis management should first take the lead in making the initial response, with various experience being accumulated under the councilor. I believe that you can go ahead and think that it is the same idea as (the role of) the Deputy Chief Cabinet Secretary for Crisis Management at the Cabinet Secretariat.
   In addition, we adopted a crisis-response meeting that will be joined by the occupants of the so-called three politically appointed positions in the Foreign Ministry – the minister, state secretaries, and Parliamentary Vice-Ministers and where discussions will be held on countermeasures, upon receiving the first report immediately after a crisis has occurred. Furthermore, we will set up an emergency headquarters, depending on whether a crisis meets the criteria for setting up such a headquarters. In addition to widening our channels for obtaining security information by clarifying our crisis management system and establishing close contact with the United Nations Department of Safety and Security, we also decided to improve our communications systems at our diplomatic missions abroad. What this means is that because a number of specific problems emerged in Haiti, such as cell phone batteries running out, we decided to make further improvements to our communications systems, although that involves funding.
   Next, in order to ensure the prompt deployment of emergency rescue teams, etc., we will deploy preparatory teams within 24 hours after a disaster has occurred, in principle. We will strengthen cooperation with relevant ministries and agencies from the deployment preparation stage. The means of transportation will be diversified. This will include chartering, for example. Additionally, medical functions will be expanded. We are already holding discussions with JICA and relevant ministries and agencies with regard to strengthening cooperation with NGOs. We are also thinking about holding discussions with regard to matters that require further working out of arrangements.
   Further utilization of Self-Defense Force units is an agenda for future examination. Basically, there is a common global rule that says that in situations that cannot be handled otherwise, the military comes into action, and that is a matter of fact. However, I feel that there may be cases in which SDF medical units should be deployed from the beginning, depending on the location (where a disaster has struck).
   In addition, when deploying SDF personnel to hazardous areas, assuring the safety of the personnel, as written in relevant attached resolution in the Diet, becomes top priority. Of course, while safety assurance is a top priority, it does not mean that we will be hesitant about deploying SDF personnel by being excessively tied down by that.
   Next, we will expand cooperation with relief teams and NGOs from other countries in disaster areas, as well as sort out control and command authority regarding emergency rescue operations. With various ministries and agencies or local governments maintaining control and command authority over the personnel they send out, emergency rescue teams are deployed in a manner in which such personnel are bundled together. Perhaps some discussions may be required in determining whether any kind of problem may arise as a result of that. So far, no problems have arisen, but I feel that control and command authority should be sorted out a little further, especially because this is a scene of havoc (that emergency rescue teams will be facing).
   Next, we have Haiti and Chile here, but with regard to Chile, we had difficulties because the Chilean Government did not readily clarify its intentions concerning international assistance. Amid this situation however, I believe we were able to respond appropriately based on the past experiences. With regard to the medical team within the emergency rescue team, we first sent out an advance team, giving priority to promptness of deployment. Since then, however, we shelved deploying the backup team due to the policy of the Chilean Government, as you all are aware.
   As a matter of fact, I will say this, judging that such information should be disclosed. We had to pay a cancellation fee for a chartered flight that had been on standby, since we were planning to send out our emergency rescue team until the last moment. The fee was about 18 million yen for a same-day cancellation. I realize there may be criticism as to whether we could have made a wiser decision, but we believe we should deploy emergency rescue teams as soon as possible, while taking such risks into consideration. I feel that it was just that the outcome was regrettable this time. If this is unacceptable, we need to discern the situation more closely when we plan to deploy emergency rescue teams, and I would like for you to understand, by all means, that things like this can happen in the future. We made a decision on the deployment, with an awareness that there may be cancellations to a certain extent.

(4) Visit to the City of Yokosuka

Minister: I will visit the city of Yokosuka tomorrow. In Yokosuka city, I plan to exchange opinions with Mayor Yoshida and observe the US naval facility there.

(5) Lawsuit to Overturn Ruling against Disclosure of Information Relating to Reversion of Okinawa to Japan

Minister: With regard to the judgment that just came out on the lawsuit to overturn the ruling against disclosure of information relating to the reversion of Okinawa to Japan, I felt that the judgment was a little surprising, but the state lost in the lawsuit. While I think I have to examine the judgment, etc. a little more closely, I do not necessarily have a clear grasp as to what extent the state made its assertions in the lawsuit, but after I assumed this post following the change in power last year, I issued to the administrative vice-minister on the very day of my inauguration an order that was based on legal backing, and a thorough investigation was subsequently conducted. I feel that the judgment fails to reflect this fact. Although I will have to examine the judgment a little more closely, it is being said that such an allegation was not made by our side. I am not quite sure about this point. In any case, it is clear from the results of the investigations that such things (documents) do not exist at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Therefore, I would like to say that there is no more to it than that. I would like to study the purport of the judgment very well.

(6) Screening Test for JPO Candidates 2010

Minister: Lastly, I would like to make an announcement on the screening test for JPO candidates in 2010. As a part of efforts to increase the number of Japanese staff at international organizations, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs has implemented a JPO dispatch program. Under this program, a young Japanese national, who aspires to become a permanent employee in an international organization in the future, will be dispatched as a JPO (Junior Professional Officer) to an international organization for two years, as a rule, and thus provide him or her the opportunity to gain necessary knowledge and experience to become a permanent employee in an international organization. From today until June 9, we will be accepting applications for the FY2010 JPO Dispatch Screening Test. Candidates who possess the necessary expertise and background will be selected through a screening process based on application documents and interviews. Successful candidates will be dispatched as JPOs to various international organizations including the UNDP, UNICEF, and UNHCR. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs intends to provide support through this program so that as many Japanese nationals as possible will be able to perform brilliantly at international organizations.
   Incidentally, there were 510 applicants in FY2009, and 34 of them passed the test. To be qualified, you must be 35 years old or younger and possess Japanese citizenship, so if any of you out there are interested, I encourage you to take the test.

2. Investigation of So-called Secret Agreements (Lawsuit to Overturn Ruling against Disclosure of Information Relating to Reversion of Okinawa to Japan)

Noguchi, Mainichi Newspapers: This is in relation to the lawsuit to make information about the secret agreements public. The court ruling has ordered the government to disclose the information, but it has been concluded that the documents between Director-General Yoshino and minister Sneider, which had been an issue in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs' investigation, were not found. I would like to ask in relation to this again, if they are claimed to not exist, then I believe that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs will have to explain why they do not exist; how do you plan to respond in this regard?

Minister: I have still not examined the judgment carefully, and at this stage I would like to be cautious with my comments. Although I would like to make a determination after I have had a detailed look, I just now heard something that is somewhat difficult to believe, namely that our party did not allege in the court case that a thorough reinvestigation had been performed. I therefore would like to examine this decision carefully, including how we go forward regarding the details of the judgment. However, there are no (documents). Since the results of our investigation showed that (the documents) do not exist, I think that it is quite difficult to explain what does not exist.

Jinbo, Video News: Following up on the matter of the secret agreements, I only have a summary of the judgment here with me, but according to the summary, the judgment orders the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to investigate properly why they do not exist and were not found, so therefore the burden of proof is on the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and it must explain that they do not exist for this and that reason. Specifically, the decision demands hearings into point-by-point handling and the like of those who could have been given the documents since the time when it is possible that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs had come into possession of each document: vice-ministers, American Affairs Bureau directors-general, Treaties Bureau directors-general, directors and other members of the First American Affairs Division going back through time. Although you stated that you would (comment) after careful examination, is it possible that you will conduct more such investigations moving forward?

Minister: I have not yet examined the text of the judgment in detail, so whether it is saying something realistic, something realistically possible. This is something that happened a long time ago, so I think that we must consider this very well, including this fact.

Jinbo, Video News: So the possibility of investigations has not been eliminated?

Minister: I will not say anything at this time.

Takimoto, Ryukyu Shimpo: This is in relation to the present matter, but in your statement, why did you not make allegations in the conduct of the proceedings? You said that you cannot believe why it was not alleged in the trial that a thorough investigation had been performed; does this mean that you took no part in how the proceedings were conducted?

Minister: To be sure, the actual proceedings for this court case were finished for practical purposes, when, in January or February? It may have been earlier. Then the judgment was delayed. I do not recall very well how many times the court was convened after I was appointed (Minister), but most of it was conducted under the preceding government. I personally never comment about individual cases, and, there are also responsible attorneys, so I think that each, shall we say, official, went forward in consultation. In any case, this is the decision of a district court, so as for what we will do from here, I do not think that we will accept it as-is, so I would like to consider carefully what we will do moving forward.

Iwakami, freelance: In relation to the current issue, listening to your explanation, given that, the court proceedings themselves were nearly completed during the time of the previous government.

Minister: I am not asserting that far at this time.

Iwakami, freelance: There is a possibility of that, and then when the current government came into power, it ordered the disclosure of the issue of the secret agreements, thoroughly pursued and investigated this issue, and then reported it. There was a, shall we say, time lag in the disclosure; there was a time lag between the trial, the actual investigation by the current government, and its announcement, and this time lag caused the trial to be out of sync, and you then stated that you also felt uncomfortable, because this may be somewhat counter to the facts, but could this be the reason?

Minister: I have not had a good look at the judgment, so frankly speaking, I do not know. I would like to examine this carefully. But if an order was given based on the law, based on the National Government Organization Act, and that does not include the fact that an investigation was performed, then I think I have no option but to say that there was also a problem with the party that did not allege this. I would like to verify this carefully, including this background.

Nishino, Kyodo News: You say that you will examine the judgment carefully, but listening to what you are saying, there is also a mention that it will not be accepted as-is. Of course, this is after you have examined it carefully, but may we understand that there is a possibility of an appeal?

Minister: I would like to examine it carefully, but I cannot eliminate that possibility. What I am saying is that we are not necessarily satisfied by this judgment.

Nishino, Kyodo News: Meanwhile, I believe you have expressed regret that nobody in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs made these allegations, or made these allegations properly, before the judgment. When we were covering these secret agreements, we were also extremely interested in why this kind of thing happened, and how this trial and the secret agreements would turn out moving forward.
Meanwhile, when you say that you do not have a grasp of how the proceedings were conducted within the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, I conversely question why this is so. In this regard it is a little, even with this judgment, the order actually states "the Minister of Foreign Affairs," and it is a little hard to understand if you do not speak having organized this responsibility and the details of the judgment. When you say that you regret something, you are speaking for the entire Ministry of Foreign Affairs, so I think that some of this also goes back to you. Please pull these matters together for us.

Minister: In any case, I released Mr. Yoshino from his obligation of confidentiality, but I have no intention to contribute to, or interfere with, how individual court cases are fought, so in a sense I was delegating this.

Tsuruoka, Asahi Shimbun: I have a question in relation to the current topic. The results of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs' investigation were probably out as of 20 November, and subsequently, in the trial around the new year, they were probably not made public until the verification by the Expert Committee was finished, so the brief was probably put on hold and not released, but if the Ministry of Foreign Affairs had announced the results in November, and made allegations adding the facts, I have the feeling that this sort of thing would not have happened. In other words, as far as the way that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs should be making information public, I have the feeling that it is problematic that the results were out in November, but not made public until March; what are your thoughts on this?

Minister: This is because we had decided to make it public including the results of the Expert Committee, so I do not think that there was anything wrong with that way of doing it.

Noguchi, Mainichi Newspapers: Was it that the results were out internally at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in November, and there was no collaboration in relation to the secret agreements between the Ministry of Foreign Affairs' internal team and the parties in charge of the trial? Although of course, you had nothing to do with that, so I do not think that you created an interrelation and ordered allegations to be made properly in the trial as well.

Minister: So, shall we say verification of the secret agreements, the team inside the Ministry was independent, so it does not release these results externally. It is a fact that it was operating in that form, including within the Ministry. I cannot respond beyond that now.

Jinbo, Video News: Until you became the Minister of Foreign Affairs, each government over time has said that there were no secret agreements, and after you became Minister, in any case you conducted an investigation to show whether secret agreements existed, and now you have done this investigation.
   Meanwhile, it is my understanding that in this lawsuit as well, you disclosed the secret agreement documents because you wanted to reveal the existence of the secret agreements. Therefore, if one thinks that both parties have taken the same course in grappling with the issue of the secret agreements, there is an impression from your statements today that you are, shall we say, extremely dissatisfied with this judgment, or that the interests of the two parties are in conflict, which is somewhat unexpected, but isn't this the same general course that you have in mind? I honestly did not understand what about the judgment dissatisfied you so much.

Minister: The judgment states that despite our thorough investigation, it was still insufficient, so I want to say that I am confident there is no such a document. Based on the fundamental approach that as a government official, a Minister should not say too much about the details of a trial, regarding the obligation of confidentiality, I released Mr. Yoshino from his obligation of confidentiality in order to enable him to speak openly and freely, but I had the fundamental approach that it was better not to be involved in the details.

Takimoto, Ryukyu Shimpo: For confirmation, did you personally think that the internal investigation in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs that you ordered, or the results of the investigation by the Expert Committee, would be reflected in this lawsuit?

Minister: I am somewhat unaware, so I will not know that they really were not reflected until I can verify it again properly, so I do not what to make any decisive statements, but I think that naturally, it is common sense that the latest information or allegations at that time would be made in the name of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

Yoshinaga, Mainichi Newspapers: This is not about the court case per se, but I would like to ask about the results of the investigation by the internal investigative team of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, rather than the results of the Expert Committee made public by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. With regard to the secret agreement regarding the subrogation of the restoration assurance costs upon reversion of Okinawa to Japan, the investigative team's report revealed the background of the deal between Japan and the US: namely that the costs of 4 million dollars for restoration assurance and 16 million dollars for relocation of Voice of America were added in to make a total of 320 million dollars. The previous government did not admit to any increase, and then-Foreign Affairs Minister Fukuda denied an increase in his response to the Diet. Can we understand that you were aware that a total of 20 million dollars had been added to the 300 million dollars, including the breakdown, as reported by the investigative team?

Minister: I had a little trouble understanding. This is because when so much is said to me, I have trouble understanding.

Yoshinaga, Mainichi Newspapers: To summarize, the results of the investigation by the investigative team showed that in addition to the 4 million dollars for land restoration that at the time was said to be subrogation, there were 16 million dollars in relocation costs for Voice of America, and the Government of Japan was subrogating these costs. Were you aware that 20 million dollars had been added to the 300 million dollars, and that the Government of Japan was subrogating this?

Minister: I cannot respond regarding my impressions. The results of the investigation are the awareness of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

Takimoto, Ryukyu Shimpo: Further in relation to this addition, on the question of whether there was a secret agreement, be it for a restoration cost of 4 million dollars, or a further 16 million dollars that originally should not have been paid, and with regard to how that money was spent, the response to the Diet had always been that 320 million dollars were paid to the United States as-is, and it was up to the United states how to break it down and use it, and that Japan had nothing to do with that, and this bound had not been exceeded. Certainly, at the press conference for the results of the investigation, I believe that you stated that in the view of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, it was not a secret agreement because it was within the bounds of the responses made to date.

Minister: This is the definition of "secret agreement," right? The conclusion of the experts was that this was a "secret agreement in the broad sense."

Takimoto, Ryukyu Shimpo: My question builds on this, but I am not speaking about the total this time, but I would rather like to confirm that there is an awareness that payment had been made with the awareness that an extra portion had been added to the payment.

Minister: So this is as stated in the report. There is not my own thinking. The results of the investigation of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs are my thinking on the topic.

Nishino, Kyodo News: In the sense of summing up, what you are saying, that things that should have been alleged as a matter of course were not alleged is extremely odd.

Minister: No, I am saying that there is a possibility of that.

Nishino, Kyodo News: There being a possibility of that, you are saying that you cannot accept it as-is, but thinking from the standpoint of the Minister of Foreign Affairs, the fact that you lost the trial means that you lost because the Ministry of Foreign Affairs did not say what needed to be said, so I am not sure what reason you will have for appealing. This topic is confined to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs side, and in relation to the lawsuit, the other party said to disclose it, and you were saying there was nothing, and you lost. Regarding there being many things happening internally in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, saying that you cannot discard the possibility of an appeal for this reason, I somehow find this hard to agree with.

Minister: If what you just said was the case, I would not agree either. This is because the possibility of an appeal is not linked one-to-one with investigations to find new secret agreements. This is what you said, but I have not said this. What I have said is that there are parts of the trial results that I am not satisfied with. So then, I am not necessarily satisfied with the way that the evidence was presented, including whether it was in line with common sense, and I have therefore said that I am considering the possibility of an appeal. Of course, if I do not examine the contents in a little more detail, the judgment has just come out, so I am not saying that I have seen the contents in much detail. But apart from this, asking whether the Ministry of Foreign Affairs made sufficient allegations, that may not have been the case. This is speaking internally. What I am saying is that this is regrettable.

Takimoto, Ryukyu Shimpo: If I can summarize again, the questions is whether the Ministry of Foreign Affairs sufficiently presented the evidence in the lawsuit proceedings, and also whether this should be examined carefully, and with regard to whether it was done sufficiently, I had wanted to confirm whether that was regrettable, but putting that aside, are you saying that the judgment was unfortunate?

Minister: I said that there is a possibility of an appeal.

Takimoto, Ryukyu Shimpo: Rather than that, my question was about your reaction to the judgment itself.

Minister: What I said was that there is a possibility of an appeal.

Tsuruoka, Asahi Shimbun: I would like to confirm that since the finding of facts in the first instance is finished, this is the foundation of a trial, but if you appeal and pursue some new facts, in other words doesn't this mean adding allegations?

Minister: I will not know until I have examined the judgment a little more closely, but more than problems with the facts, I am not necessarily satisfied with the way of proving that it is not here, or who should prove what.

3. How Crisis Management System Ought To Be in Response to Great Natural Disasters in the Wake of the Haiti Earthquake and the Chile Earthquake

Okawa, freelance: My question concerns how the crisis management system ought to be with regard to large-scale disasters, etc. and how countermeasures ought to be with regard to conflict-torn regions. I visited Iraq before the war against the Hussein regime. At the time, children were suffering from depleted uranium shells, but I was told that the children would not be allowed to leave the country. Therefore, I asked whether it would be all right to have hospital ships, etc. come near the coastal area. They told me that it would be okay, since it would be inside the country. What I want to say is whether the Ministry of Foreign Affairs has thought about hospital ships. I believe that what will emerge after the Doctors Without Borders will be Hospitals Without Borders. Please tell us about your thoughts on this.

Minister: I think that is an idea. However, it will cost a lot of money. If you think about overall disaster assistance, ships travel slowly and have various limitations. There is also the question of for what purpose they would normally be used -- how they would be used during peacetime. In that sense, I feel that it is a matter of how we prioritize this in terms of using taxpayers’ money.

Okawa, freelance: You say that ships are slow, but these ships do not have to be in Japan. For example, the idea is to place hospital ships in various locations by having Japan gain cooperation from other countries – and this includes the issue of funding – and presenting this idea to the United Nations. It would suffice to have hospital ships moored at locations where earthquakes occur very frequently. What do you think of having Japan, as a seafaring country, propose such an idea?

Minister: I think it is good to have various ideas, but it is quite difficult to predict where an earthquake will occur. Therefore, I have some doubts as to what extent we can gain the understanding of taxpayers concerning the idea of placing many ships in places where earthquakes are likely to occur. However, I welcome various ideas.

Saida, Nishinippon Shimbun: As you mentioned earlier, there was an 18-million-yen cancellation fee at the time the government planned to dispatch an emergency rescue team to Chile. This is precisely about the use of taxpayers’ money. I think that the government should investigate the matter very thoroughly to determine whether it made a reasonable judgment. In other words, I would like for you to explain a little more carefully by saying that the government tried to do it for such and such a purpose, but in the end, it turned out this way, and these are the agendas that lie ahead, and so forth.

Minister: In the case of Chile, immediately after the earthquake occurred, there was an announcement from Chilean President (Michelle) Bachelet that Chile, at the moment, needed no emergency aid from foreign countries. Despite that, we held discussions on whether we should do something considering the terrible situation at hand. In due course, while the earthquake occurred at 3:00 AM on February 27 local time, President Bachelet requested aid from foreign countries on the afternoon of February 28 local time (morning of March 1 Japan time). The request included setting up temporary hospitals and constructing (permanent) hospitals on a medium- to long-term basis. In addition, we received a list of requested aid items, including field hospitals, from the Chilean Embassy in Tokyo. In response to this, the Japanese Government determined that there was a need for assistance in the medical field, and on March 1 Japan time, the government decided to send a medical team. Before the end of the day, we sent an advance party consisting of three members – an official from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs as the team leader, a doctor, and a JICA employee. In the case of Haiti, we tried to send our emergency rescue mission to a location as close (to the disaster site) as possible, but since Chile is far away, we decided that we should move our personnel to a closer location while sending the advance party at the same time. Therefore, we were making preparations to send the main party. Since then, however, we received notification from the Chilean Government that it was not accepting foreign medical teams that were to offer ordinary initial treatment. The Chilean Health Ministry also told the Japanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs that Chile needs assistance basically in the form of materials, not personnel. In response, we decided to call off the planned dispatch of the backup party on April 2 Japan time.

Kawasaki, Yomiuri Shimbun: My question is about the topic of how the crisis management system ought to be, which you explained earlier. You have a numbered list from 1 to 4 with regard to the crisis management system and the agendas for future examination. When do you plan to implement each of the listed items under this system, and with regard to the agendas for future examination, when do you plan to make final decisions? Please explain.

Minister: Things within the crisis management system that require funding and must be done in sequence must be done sequentially. However, we have changed the manual for this ministry’s system, etc., and we are already operating within that system. The agendas for future examination will require holding consultations with relevant ministries and agencies. Therefore, we are in the process of holding such talks sequentially. Since we may have to revise laws in some cases, we would like to conduct thorough discussions, although I am not saying that we will do so by a certain date.

Kawasaki, Yomiuri Shimbun: In the part on the agendas for future examination, there is a passage that says that the agendas will be examined, including reviewing the existing supplementary Diet resolution and cabinet decisions. Is this connected with reviewing the current PKO rules?

Minister: It is just the way it is written here. Therefore, when we deliberated on this existing law on emergency rescue teams, it is written in the supplementary Diet resolution that due consideration will be given to the safety of personnel.

Saida, Nishinippon Shimbun: You made a comment earlier to the effect that you have to be prepared for cancellations to a certain extent. Realistically speaking, however, repeated cancellations would result in the loss of valuable taxpayers’ money. Therefore, what do you perceive as the agendas or issues for future examination and which portions do you plan to correct in the future? Please tell us your thoughts on this.

Minister: That would be about how to gather the information available at a certain time and examine the accuracy of the information, but if we try to be more careful than that, we will be late (in dispatching emergency rescue teams). Therefore, I believe that the top leader has to make a decision at that point. I am responsible for the cost of 18 million yen for the cancellation this time.

Nishino, Kyodo News: Let me ask you once again about the agendas for future examination. In order to review the existing supplementary Diet resolution, it is necessary to consult with the Diet, and in order to review cabinet decisions, it is necessary to consult with the Cabinet. You say that these are being done sequentially. Are they actually being done, or have you just decided that these will be done in the future?

Minister: I would like for you to make judgments based a little bit more on common sense. We first intend to hold discussions on whether we want to change the supplementary Diet resolution. If we reach a decision that a review is necessary, then we will consult with the Diet. At the moment, we are holding such discussions within the government.

Nishino, Kyodo News: You are saying that discussions are being held within the government. Does that mean that the discussions are being held within the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, or beyond the Ministry of Foreign Affairs?

Minister: The discussions are still at the level of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, but I have explained to the Chief Cabinet Secretary and other officials that such agendas exist.

4. Japan-China Summit Meeting

Kajiwara, NHK: I believe that Prime Minister Hatoyama will go to Washington next week, and I believe that a Japan-China Summit meeting there is being arranged. Today, death sentences were carried out on three more people; do you think that this will be the theme there, or the gas fields, or what do you think will be the theme?

Minister: To be sure, I think that a Japan-China Summit has not yet been officially decided, and they are still at the stage of moving in that direction. Therefore, moving forward I would like to consider what should be discussed in the limited time available. I think that there are some issues that are suitable for discussions between leaders, and others that are not.

Kajiwara, NHK: Is there a possibility that the death sentences carried out today will be taken up?

Minister: It has still not been considered concretely.

5. US Military Realignment Issue

Nanao, Niconico Video: This is a question on behalf of our viewers. It is a question regarding a statement yesterday by Defense Minister Kitazawa. With relation to the issue of relocating US Air Station Futenma, Minister Kitazawa stated that generally speaking, US military bases are nuisances. Although he prefaced this remark by saying "generally speaking," considering his position as the head of national defense, and the timing of his remarks, will this statement have impact on foreign relations or the like?

Minister: I do not recall this statement, but if it was made in the Diet then I must have been next to him.

Nanao, Niconico Video: According to media reports, it was at a meeting of the Committee on Foreign Affairs and Defense of the Upper House.

Minister: If that is the case, then I must have been next to him, but I do not really recall this. I would therefore like to refrain from making comments.

Iwakami, freelance: The front page of this morning's Sankei Shimbun newspaper had a big story stating that the government had abandoned the White Beach proposal. Regarding this matter, I would like to ask if this is true, and if so, it has been assumed that the government's plan includes the White Beach proposal, but please tell us if this has changed, and if so, it will be difficult to (relocate Futenma) inside Okinawa prefecture, so please tell us if the status quo will be maintained, or if it has become necessary to pursue locations outside the prefecture or outside the country.

Minister: I have nothing to say about matters for which the five cabinet ministers have a common awareness. Additionally, as I also said in the Diet, I was at that meeting, and let me be clear that the statement to the effect that such a decision was made is anything but true.

6. Visit to Yokosuka

Hatakeyama, freelance: Regarding your visit to Yokosuka tomorrow, could you tell us the aim of this visit?

Minister: One thing is that I would like to gain a good grasp of the situation at Yokosuka, which is one of the main US military facilities in Japan, particularly for the Navy. Another is that a great deal of discussion came out of the recent investigations into secret agreements, and there have been several exchanges between the Mayor of Yokosuka and Ministry of Foreign Affairs personnel, and I do not recall clearly if it was vice-mayor or mayor of Yokosuka city – but he will also come to see State Secretary Takemasa for discussions. Base on these reasons, I would like to visit the mayor, and properly communicate the approach of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

7. Extension of Measures against North Korea

Ishikawa, Yomiuri Shimbun: This is regarding sanctions against North Korea. Today, it was decided to extend the sanctions for one year, but please tell us your views on how effective these sanctions will be for the progress of the relationship between Japan and North Korea.

Minister: I think that there are two sides to it, but the situation has not changed at all, so it stands to reason that they would be extended, and I do not think that there is any other course of action.

8. Nuclear Security Summit

Noguchi, Mainichi Newspapers: The Nuclear Security Summit will be held in Washington next week. I think that there are many areas in which the Government of Japan can make contributions to the world, such as in the peaceful use of nuclear energy, but what role would you like the Government of Japan to play, and in particular, Japan and the US have aligned their views on a world without nuclear weapons, and I think that there are many possibilities there, but what are your thoughts?

Minister: The Nuclear Security Summit will be held based on appeals, especially President Obama’s appeal in the field of nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation, the latter of which is directly related to the theme of the Summit. Naturally, I think that Japan can also make a wide range of contributions. Matters of importance and extreme urgency for the international community will be discussed: nuclear security and measures against nuclear terrorism.

9. Death Penalty for Japanese Drug Traffickers in China

Nishino, Kyodo News: With regard to today's executions, please tell us again your reaction and comments.

Minister: I think it was extremely unfortunate that the death penalties were carried out. As a fellow Japanese, I think that it was extremely unfortunate that they were executed, regardless of their crimes, and especially that four people were executed in such a short period of time. But these matters are decided in accordance with the legal procedures of each country, so while I think it was unfortunate, I think that we have got to respond to it rationally.

Back to Index