(* 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 Seiji Maehara

Date: Thursday, February 10, 2011, 10:20 a.m.
Place: MOFA Press Conference Room

Main topics:

Realignment of US Military Force (Freeze on Futenma-Related Budget)
Japan-North Korea Relations
Japan-Russia Relations
Domestic Politics (Coalition with Social Democratic Party of Japan)
Japan-US Security Sub-committee
Japan-Australia EPA Negotiations
Situation in Myanmar

1. Realignment of US Military Force (Freeze on Futenma-Related Budget)

Nagai, Nihon Keizai Shimbun: Today, some news media reported that the government is studying the possibility of freezing Futenma-related budgetary expenditures. I would like to ask you two questions in connection with this.
The first question is whether, with regard to the facts, you heard within the government circles anything about a plan to freeze Futenma-related budgetary expenditures. The second question is whether, regardless of the facts, it is possible to freeze Futenma-related budgetary expenditures while implementing the Japan-US agreement of May 28, although I believe that the government does not plan to change its policy regarding implementing the agreement. Please comment on that possibility in general terms.

Minister: Although I am aware that some news media have carried such a report, I have never discussed this matter with other government officials or party officials.

Moreover, even though it may not be necessary for me to comment on this, as the report has been carried by only some news media, I would like to say that we are presenting the current budget bill because we believe that it is the best. As this budget is the best budget, we seek its approval upon conducting thorough debate, and the position of the Government of Japan to firmly adhere to the Japan-US agreement of May 28 has not changed at all.

Nagai, Nihon Keizai Shimbun: During the policy consultations with the Democratic Party of Japan (DPJ) that began on the 8th, the Social Democratic Party (SDP) demanded removing Futenma-related budgetary expenditures from the budget bill. From the comments that you just made, it appears that the government cannot comply with the SDP's demand of removing the Futenma-related budgetary expenditures. Is my understanding correct?

Minister: Again, since we are presenting the budget bill because we think that it is the best, we seek approval for the best budget bill, and we would like to call for this not only on the SDP but also on all Diet members. What is being taken up in the report are the expenses required for continuously conducting surveys of the existing environmental conditions in order to effectively carry out follow-up investigations on environmental impact assessments, as well as the expenses required for incidental work for a building currently under construction that is related to the work on land inside Camp Schwab. This is the same as the work being done during the current fiscal year, and you all should remember which parties voted in favor of the budget for the current fiscal year.

2. Japan-North Korea Relations

Hashimoto, Kyodo News: I have a question concerning Japan-North Korea relations. Some weekly magazines have reported that you were a member of the "Japan-North Korea Friendship League of Kyoto Prefectural Assembly Members" during the time when you were a member of the Kyoto Prefectural Assembly. The articles indicate that this is linked to your comments about seeking Japan-North Korea talks without regard to the Six-Party Talks or your flexible approach with regard to policy toward North Korea. Please tell us the facts, as I believe that this would significantly damage Japan's national interests if the articles were true.

Minister: With those press reports, I came to think once again that perhaps that is the way that weekly magazines take things up. There existed four assembly members' leagues for friendship with other countries at the time I served as a member of the Kyoto Prefectural Assembly. These were friendship leagues for the friendship between Japan and North Korea, South Korea, China, and Taiwan, respectively. Since I was one of the only two independents in the 65-member Kyoto Prefectural Assembly, I did not have any relations with the members of other floor groups. For this reason, I joined all the friendship leagues. Therefore, I find it difficult to comprehend why only my affiliation with the Japan-North Korea Friendship League has been taken up and reported. I was affiliated with all the assembly members' leagues. I believe that allegations that I am easygoing on North Korea are completely off the mark if you would recall that with regard to the issue of Chogin credit unions (North Korea-affiliated credit unions), etc.; I pursued the case of the relationship between these unions and the General Association of Korean Residents in Japan, as well as cases with regard to fictitious accounts, accounts with fictitious names, and remittances to North Korea, at the time of the Koizumi administration. During my second visit to North Korea, in addition, I stayed at the Koryo Hotel and happened to meet the perpetrator of the Yodo-go hijacking incident. Since this happened by chance, we talked for about two or three minutes while standing. I recall asking questions about the person's health condition and intention to return to Japan, among other things, and I told the Public Security Intelligence Agency everything with regard to this matter after I returned to Japan. In that sense, allegations that my past experiences of having been affiliated with the assembly members' league or having visited North Korea would result in my taking a conciliatory attitude toward North Korea as foreign minister are completely off the mark. My intention is to carry out all actions in accordance with national interests.

3. Japan-Russia Relations

Inada, NHK: While I believe that you will be departing for Russia tonight, President Medvedev convened a meeting and gave instructions to his Cabinet ministers, saying that "the Northern Territories are Russian territory under the absolute sovereignty of our country, and they should be further developed in terms of not only infrastructure but also the military aspect." Although Japan naturally has been asserting its sovereignty, please tell us how you intend to respond to the fact that the President, who is the head of state, has said that "Russia's sovereignty (over the Northern Territories) is very important" and how his latest comments would affect your visit to Russia and the second round of territorial negotiations.

Minister: This issue has yet to be resolved even though 65 years have passed since the end of World War II. There were various periods in the past with regard to this matter. I believe that in particular, during the time that the Cold War between the United States and the Soviet Union was in a very severe state, this issue was hardly discussed, and there were various ups and downs in the territorial negotiations between the two countries. What is important is that from the viewpoint of international law, the Northern Territories are inherent Japanese territory and that Russia's occupation of the islands has no foundation under international law. Therefore, regardless of how many very important persons go there or who goes there, or regardless of whether Russia strengthens or weakens its military presence there, the legal assessment of Japan under international law remains completely unchanged, so our intentions will stand firm as a rock. On the other hand, as these are negotiations, we believe that Japan-Russia relations are very important, and although the territorial issue is an important issue and a major theme of Japan-Russia relations, I believe that if it were put off to the side, the basis for cooperation between Japan and Russia would expand infinitely. I believe that this would contribute to the national interests of both countries. I believe that cooperative relations expand infinitely in various areas such as the economy, technology, and the environment, as well as various international relations, issues related to North Korea, and the issue of the fight against terrorism. Therefore, from such a broad perspective, while I intend to firmly assert developing Japan-Russia relations on the occasion of my meeting with the Russian side, I would also like to call on Russia this time to mutually make efforts to further bring out the infinitely spreading potentials of the two countries by resolving the territorial issue and concluding a peace treaty.

Inada, NHK: I have two questions concerning the comments you just made. You are saying that Russia's assertion has no foundation under international law, that it does not matter who goes there or how many times someone goes there, and that this assessment remains firm as a rock. However, I believe that Russia naturally does not acknowledge Japan's assertion that Russia's occupation has no foundation under international law. Amid this situation, despite Japan's arguing that its assertion does have a foundation under international law, Russia continues to strengthen its effective control [sic] over the Northern Territories in this way. What is your response to this, and as I feel that there naturally are views that as a result of that, the return of the Northern Territories would be delayed or become difficult, how do you feel about that?

Minister: The important thing is that the question of what kind of assessment might be given under international law lies at the very heart of this matter. If we examine various treaties concluded so far, Japan's assertion that the Northern Territories are inherent Japanese territory stands completely firm as a rock, and I believe that we have evidence under international law to sufficiently refute the assertions of the Russian side. Therefore, with regard to such negotiations, by clarifying our legal grounds, the legal assessment that the Northern Territories are our inherent territory will not change, regardless of how many very important persons go there or whether Russia strengthens or weakens its military presence there. I believe that this is the most important point. However, it is also true that we have no control over the Northern Territories at the moment and that this is an issue that has not been resolved for 65 years, so we should try to quickly conclude a peace treaty in order to build a mutual win-win relationship. To this end, I believe that it is important to enhance mutual trust with Russia, by persistently promoting cooperative relations in various aspects in a concrete manner.

4. Domestic Politics (Coalition with Social Democratic Party of Japan)

Mukai, Yomiuri Shimbun: I have a question about the coalition with the Social Democratic Party of Japan. Leaving aside the earlier question of whether the budget for Futenma will be frozen, the Democratic Party of Japan has begun working-level talks with the Social Democratic Party of Japan. As we have seen under the Hatoyama administration, I think it is a fact that there are some irreconcilable differences with the Social Democratic Party of Japan regarding security policy. As the person responsible for foreign affairs, do you think that such a coalition of the Democratic Party of Japan could have future impact on foreign affairs?

Minister: The coalition government between the Democratic Party of Japan and the People's New Party was formed with an agreement on policy. I think the important thing is to avoid creating coalitions of convenience. I think a "coalition of convenience" is a state where different groups, with different policies, get together just to form a majority.
Meanwhile, however, it is a fact that we are facing a number of challenges, including the current twisted Diet, and budgetary bills. Considering that it is the responsibility of government to create results, then if that principle can be maintained, or in other words if the principle of solid agreement on policy while avoiding a coalition of convenience can be maintained, then it is inevitable that we must seek coalitions with various political parties or lawmakers. Therefore, considering the current situation faced by the Democratic Party of Japan, I think that it is important to pursue a wide range of policies, while maintaining this principle.

Mukai, Yomiuri Shimbun: I have a question about the "coalition of convenience" you just mentioned. The Social Democratic Party of Japan is demanding that Futenma be relocated outside the prefecture or outside the country. Do you think that it would be a coalition of convenience if the DPJ government were to make some sort of compromise, and take a policy of taking two thirds?

Minister: What the current government can say is that the agreement between Japan and the United States on May 28th of last year is an official agreement with the United States, so strictly adhering to and executing this agreement is a key point of the Kan administration, and we will not bend on this.

5. Japan-US Security Sub-committee

Inafuku, Ryukyu Shimpo: I have a question about the Japan-US Security Sub-committee. It is going to start today; what specific topics will be discussed? I also believe that there was an issue of whether a V-shaped or I-shaped layout would be used at Henoko; will that also be discussed?

Minister: Essentially, this Japan-US Security Sub-committee functions to create a mutual awareness of current strategic environment surrounding this region as well as Japan; also, we now have the relationship of the Japan-US alliance, and I believe that the sub-committee will discuss how to make this alliance effective and dynamic in order to respond to changes in that strategic environment.
I have not received any reports on whether these plans regarding a V-shaped/I-shaped layout will be discussed. I am not aware at this time whether such matters will be discussed.

Inafuku, Ryukyu Shimpo: You and others have been going to Okinawa continually since the end of last year, and striving to gain understanding (of the people of Okinawa), but the situation in Okinawa has still not changed. Although you said that it is important to adhere strictly to the Japan-US agreement, how will you convey the issue of the relocation of Futenma to the United States?

Minister: With regard to obtaining some sort of conclusion by a visit to the United States by the Prime Minister, the US side has also agreed not to link them, and understands that the Government of Japan will continue persistent dialog in order to gain the understanding of Okinawa. In this sense, although of course we have absolutely no intention to spend endless and unlimited time, we believe that it is important to strive persistently to gain the understanding of the people of Okinawa, while apologizing sincerely that the results are different from what we said in the last general elections.

6. Japan-Australia EPA Negotiations

Watanabe, NHK: My question concerns EPA negotiations between Japan and Australia. As of today, negotiations have been conducted for four days. Have there been any reports as to the progress of the negotiations? Also, you said that an agreement would be reached by mid-year; although I think that agricultural issues are a major challenge, please tell us your policy for grappling with this.

Minister: Negotiations for a Japan-Australia EPA have been conducted up to today, and I have not yet been informed of what specific discussions are currently being made.
However, my instructions have been the basic approach approved by the Cabinet last year regarding a comprehensive economic partnership. This includes reaching agreements on EPAs and FTAs currently being negotiated as soon as possible. At the same time, it also calls for efforts to reach agreements on liberalization (of trade) at a high level. These two things are written there, and considering the two of them together, I think that mutual liberalization between Japan and Australia at a high level should be agreed as soon as possible, and negotiating a Japan-Australia EPA should be the touchstone of Japan's positive intentions regarding FTAs and EPAs, and I think that this should be shown externally, so although the substance is also important, I have instructed them to act swiftly, and reach an agreement quickly.

7. Situation in Myanmar

Kamide, Freelance: I have questions relating to Myanmar.
With the elections over, I believe that on Friday of last week you indicated an awareness that the situation had improved somewhat In my investigative reporting, although I do not know if it is in reaction to these actions, large corporations and others have also voiced expectations. So I would like to ask two questions.
Firstly, ODA is currently limited to humanitarian aid only; under what conditions or standards would this change? Please tell us your personal awareness on this point. This is my first question.
My other question is as follows. In the past, there was the famous phrase, "constructive engagement." I think that this policy, which differs from that of the West, provides support while criticizing, rather than isolating or cornering the ruling junta. However, people with an interest in democratization have said that in the end, this has enabled the junta to lengthen its rule, and the result has not been good. Will the same thing happen this time as well? What is your current view of constructive engagement? Please tell us your appraisal of these two points.

Minister: Firstly, turning to your first question, I think that we must cautiously determine whether the situation now has improved. What I found praiseworthy to a certain degree was that general elections were held for the first time in 20 years, although they turned incomplete and imperfect. Aung San Suu Kyi was also released from house arrest, and was given a certain degree of freedom. I consider this a step forward. What is important is to continue to move in the direction of that step forward, and this point should not be judged too hastily. A new president has just been selected for the current regime, so I think that we must make decisions, including one regarding ODA, after thoroughly ascertaining the direction a bit more. At the present time, it is not possible to make decisions on what new active steps to take.
Next, with regard to constructive engagement, these types of issues always draw criticism. I think, however, that there are many examples of where constructive engagement has gone well. In this sense, there might be cases where all criticism and no engagement result in strengthening a military junta, for instance. If I may mention an example that has occurred to me, countries including Japan gave support to Islamic countries in the Middle East who improved their relations with Israel, as a peace dividend, and this has moved forward peace in the Middle East, in a certain fashion.
In other words, this is not a question of black or white, or of one or zero. I think that it is important to contribute to democratization, respect for fundamental human rights, and development, while thoroughly maintaining a certain level of engagement. Although I think that in that sense there may be many differing views, we are even now still conducting humanitarian ODA, so we intend to continue our dialog with Myanmar, ensuring that there are no steps backward, while maintaining engagement.

Back to Index