Press Conference by Press Sec. 9 May 1995

1. Election of Monsieur Jacques Chirac to the Presidency of the French Republic
2. Situation on the Korean Peninsula and tripartite consultations between Japan, the United States of America and the Republic of Korea
3. Request by the Government of the United States of America for Japan's cooperation regarding United States' economic sanctions against the Islamic Republic of Iran
4. Japan's policy regarding sanctions in general
5. Various issues related to economic sanctions by the United States of America against the Islamic Republic of Iran
6. Breakdown of recent Japan-United States of America negotiations on automobiles and auto parts
7. Recent visit by Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Foreign Affairs Yohei Kono to the Republic of Croatia and the situation in the former Yugoslavia

1. Election of Monsieur Jacques Chirac to the Presidency of the French Republic

   Foreign Ministry Spokesman Terusuke Terada: Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. I wish to express, on behalf of the Government of Japan, hearty congratulations to Monsieur Jacques Chirac on his election to the Presidency of the French Republic. I hope that the inauguration of President- elect Chirac, who is known to have a keen interest in Japan, will contribute to the further development of Franco- Japanese relations, and ultimately, to Japanese-European relations. Although the French Administration is changing from socialist to conservative hands, we believe that the new Administration will maintain, basically, the present diplomatic policy, including that towards Japan.

2. Situation on the Korean Peninsula and tripartite consultations between Japan, the United States of America and the Republic of Korea

   Q: About the situation on the Korean Peninsula -- the United States' forces are modernizing their weapons in the Republic of Korea. It was announced yesterday. I wonder whether Minister for Foreign Affairs Yohei Kono or Director- General of the Defense Agency Tokuichiro Tamazawa were consulted about this, or advised about this, during their visits during last week's Golden Week holiday?

   A: At this stage, I think it is rather difficult for me to make any official comments, unless we have full information on this matter. Based on the exact information, we should like to study the matter carefully. Without having done that, I am afraid to say that I can't offer you any official comments at this stage.

   Q: Also, Ambassador Robert Gallucci of the United States and Ambassador Tetsuya Endo are in the Republic of Korea in tripartite consultations.

   A: That's right.

   Q: Could you elaborate on the mission and objectives of this meeting?

   A: I can simply confirm the fact that the tripartite meeting is going to take place in Seoul on 10 May. It is a meeting between Assistant Secretary of State for Political- Military Affairs Robert Gallucci of the United States of America, Ambassador Tetsuya Endo and their counterpart from the Republic of Korea. The purpose of this meeting is very much related to the preparation for the resumed United States-North Korea talks. However, I must say that we are not really quite sure of the timing and venue of these United States-North Korea talks.

   Q: Ambassador Gallucci is visiting Japan after Seoul. Is this correct?

   A: Although the schedule for Ambassador Gallucci's trip to Japan is yet to be determined, I can simply say that he is passing through Japan.

   Q: Can you give us the date he will be in Tokyo?

   A: We are not yet in a position to make an official announcement about his trip to Tokyo. Eventually, I suppose we shall be able to do so, but not at this time.

   A: do you have any update on possible resumption of Tokyo's talks with North Korea on normalization?

   Q: We do not have anything specific to offer at this stage. In other words, nothing has been decided on it.

   A: But you are continuing contact. Is this correct?

   Q: Of course, we do maintain the contacts, but we have not yet decided on the exact timing and venue for Japan-North Korea normalization talks.

3. Request by the Government of the United States of America for Japan's cooperation regarding United States' economic sanctions against the Islamic Republic of Iran

   Q: This question is concerned with your relations with Iran and also in the context of the threatened United States' sanctions on autos and auto parts. There have been reports that, at the G-7 Summit in Halifax, President Clinton of the United States might make an effort to get Japan to continue deferring the second phase of the yen loan to Iran. They also cited Japan as an example when President Clinton announced the sanctions against Iran. How do you reconcile this in your own mind in the Ministry or in the Government, that on the one hand they are threatening you with sanctions, and on the other hand, they want you to take measures which really are not exactly in your national interest, but in theirs?

   A: I am always impressed by your very sophisticated questions. But let me update the information regarding this matter. This morning, a demarche was made by Ambassador to Japan Walter Mondale of the United States to Vice-Minister for Foreign Affairs Kunihiko Saito. Ambassador Mondale gave to Vice-Minister Saito a detailed explanation of the economic sanction measures against the Islamic Republic of Iran and asked for the Government of Japan's cooperation in this regard. To this request made by Ambassador Mondale, Vice-Minister Saito replied that he would make a detailed and careful study. In this connection, perhaps I should add that our detailed and careful study will be based on two salient considerations: firstly, our policy towards Iran; secondly, our policy to secure the stabilized supply of petroleum. This is all that I can tell you at this stage. Sorry to have evaded your question, but I just wanted to let you know what happened this morning.

   Q: Just as a follow-up on the Iran issue -- is the Foreign Ministry thinking of reassessing its policy on Iran? Perhaps it is --

   A: Whenever I say "study," you should not take it as "reassessment." It might be included, but --

   Q: There has been some criticism that this initiative and new type of foreign policy, as exemplified by that, may have been a mistake on the Foreign Ministry's part. Is there any such reflection within the Foreign Ministry?

   A: Under the present circumstances, now, officially, a United States request was made. As I said, we are now going to make a detailed and careful study. Through a thorough examination, of course, we have to study the matter on the basis of our policy towards Iran, then on the basis of our policy to secure a stabilized oil supply. It will take some time to complete the study. In advance of the study being completed, if you want to say whether it will result in a new policy, a reassessment, or a continued policy, at this stage, I can't offer you any idea whatsoever. We have vowed to study the matter very, very carefully.

4. Japan's policy regarding sanctions in general

   Q: As a principle, on Japan's policy regarding sanctions -- are you in favor of unilateral sanctions being taken by nations, or do you feel that authorized multilateral organizations like the United Nations Security Council or the World Trade Organization (WTO) should really give the go-ahead on the imposition of sanctions?

   A: If your question is not related to the recent measures adopted by the Government of the United States -- whenever you talk about a sanction, we take it as a sort of internationally agreed-upon sanction; such a sanction always comes from the international fora. But, I certainly wish that my remarks should not be confused with any particular diplomatic event. I tried to answer your question in general terms.

5. Various issues related to economic sanctions by the United States of America against the Islamic Republic of Iran

   Q: What did Ambassador Mondale present as reasons to justify American sanctions? What specific behaviors of Iran?

   A: In order to answer your question, I feel obliged to give you the details of the conversation which transpired between Vice-Minister Saito and Ambassador Mondale. I was instructed not to dwell on the details of the conversation, to my great regret.

   Q: OK. Let me ask you a very short question. Did Ambassador Mondale refer to counterfeit U.S. dollars that the U.S. Treasury Department suspects of being printed in Iran?

   A: I do not have any knowledge of that.

   Q: On a related question -- from a very practical point of view, can, for example, Nippon Oil, which has a refining arm that is a 50/50 joint venture with the U.S. firm CalTex, continue to buy Iranian crude oil after this ban in the United States?

   A: We just received a copy of the executive order signed by President William Clinton of the United States. It was just yesterday, and we just started to study it. Without undergoing a study, I think it is technically difficult for us to answer your question.

   Q: So, until you come to some sort of conclusion, it is all right for Nippon Oil to continue buying Iranian crude oil.

   A: You should not jump to a conclusion at this present stage; as far as our Government is concerned, we have just started to study the matter very carefully.

   Q: When do you expect to reach some sort of conclusion?

   A: I won't mention any particular time frame for that.

   Q: It seems to me that this is the sort of question that you cannot kind of continue to study --

   A: May I remind you that the measures taken by the Government of the United States are fully intended for United States' companies and citizens.

   Q: So, practically speaking, can a 50/50 joint venture continue to have trade relations with Iran?

   A: I do not try to offer you any answer to this question because it requires study by our specialists. Sorry to disappoint you so much.

   Q: Another point -- Secretary of Defense William Perry of the United States talked about Iran being "awash with oil" and therefore not needing nuclear reactors from Russia. Now, it seems to me to be a contradiction. You are not giving them nuclear reactors; you are giving them a loan for an alternate energy project -- the Karun Hydroelectric Project. They seem to be objecting to that, too. So, is it their contention that Iran does not need energy?

   A: I cannot answer your question on behalf of the interested Governments, but if I try to answer the specifics relating to this Government, the question of the next phase of the yen credit is still in the process of study. No conclusion has been drawn on it.

   Q: Is it possible that Japan will eventually reach a different conclusion from the United States' request? You say that you are studying it, and you gave two salient considerations, I think.

   A: The best answer to your very difficult question at this stage is: I should not make any comments.

6. Breakdown of recent Japan-United States of America negotiations on automobiles and auto parts

   Q: How seriously does Japan regard the breakdown in the auto sector talks between the United States and Japan?

   A: In fact, we find it very much regrettable that the negotiations broke down. Our delegation has been very serious in trying to reach an agreement, and Minister of International Trade and Industry Ryutaro Hashimoto did all he could in order to try to reach an agreement on this matter. But of course, from the start, our position is that we can negotiate whatever is within Government reach, but when one tries to negotiate certain matters, such as voluntary plans, which are beyond the reach of the Government, quite naturally, we can't reach an agreement. It so happened that the United States' side insisted on the question of voluntary plans up through the very end of the negotiations. Therefore, we could not accept such a request, which would be tantamount to the imposition of the Government's action upon the private sector.

   Q: If the issue reaches the WTO, as there is a good possibility that it might, do you think Japan has a good chance of winning its case?

   A: I think it is quite early to say anything about this, because, if the United States' side withdraws voluntary plans, our side is ready to resume the talks. But at the same time, I understand that the United States' side is preparing a set of measures, and until we see what the Government of the United States is going to do, we can't say anything definite in a premature manner.

   Q: Could this all climax on the eve of the G-7 Summit in Halifax? Politically, it would be fairly grim.

   A: Not really, because at the end of the negotiations, United States Trade Representative Mickey Kantor stated, "We don't want to jeopardize the overall U.S.-Japanese relation." This statement is equally shared by Minister of International Trade and Industry Hashimoto. Of course, if we fail to produce tangible results out of bilateral talks, we simply have to continue our consultations at the newly created World Trade Organization (WTO); in other words, the consultation moves on from bilateral to multilateral.

   Q: Would you like to avoid taking it to the multilateral level?

   A: Without seeing the final position taken by the Government of the United States, it is very difficult to answer your question, but supposing that there were any sanction imposed, we would have to start our consultations at the WTO.

   Q: The United States and Japan have come to this point many times in the past, so much so that it seems like a deja vu situation. Is it different this time? What's different?

   A: I note one difference. The past negotiations, I recall, included certain areas which could be solved through government intervention. In other words, these matters remained within the reach of the Government. But this time, we are now seeing a specific request which requires us to go beyond the powers of the Government. I would say this is certainly quite a difference between the measures resolved in the past and this particular request.

   Q: That being the European Commission and Canada, also.

   A: Yes.

   Q: Thank you.

7. Recent visit by Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Foreign Affairs Yohei Kono to the Republic of Croatia and the situation in the former Yugoslavia

   Q: Foreign Minister Kono was on an official visit to Croatia from 28-29 April. According to Kyodo News Agency reports, he was assured in Zagreb by Croatian Prime Minister Valentic of Croatian cooperation with the United Nations and Special Representative Yasushi Akashi. Also, according to the same report, Foreign Minister Kono told Prime Minister Valentic that all disputes must be solved through talks. But only two days after the promise, the Croatian army, backed by artillery, tanks and airplanes, attacked Serb-held territories all across United Nations' ceasefire lines, and killed countless soldiers -- the total wasn't exact -- and civilians. Special Representative Akashi and the United Nations will not permit a plan to resume seeking how to help. So, my question is: what was the Japanese reaction to the Croatian action, after all those promises made just two days before the action?

   A: Our diplomatic efforts have been very sincerely genuine. We believe in the peaceful solution of the conflict. But of course, what is happening in the former Yugoslavia is deeply rooted in the ethnic questions complicated by other social factors. But in order for the international community to find a solution for this very much unfortunate situation, we still have to make the best use of the United Nations. We do believe that without the help of the United Nations organizations, we would find it extremely difficult to solve the problem, but we must understand that it is certainly a process which requires so much time and patience. However, we do hope that all the nations involved should never lose hope.

   Q: I have another question. Some reports said that the United States' and German Ambassadors in Zagreb were informed in advance of the Croatian attack. Is there a possibility that some information was also passed on to Foreign Minister Kono? If yes, what was his reaction? If not, how do you judge such underestimation of the importance of the Japanese foreign minister?

   A: Let me check on that, because I do not have any such specific information in my briefing book. I am sure that my colleague will be quite happy to help you. Without having more detailed information, I can't answer your question. I am really sorry for that.

   Q: My last question -- the visit of Foreign Minister Kono to Croatia was announced as a peace mission; as a peace mission, how would you evaluate it? Was it a success or not?

   A: I think the visit itself was quite successful. For the first time, a Japanese foreign minister made an official visit to that country. Of course, we made a considerable contribution to the Government of the Republic of Croatia in that we have announced our humanitarian plan to open a refugee center in close cooperation with United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). This is certainly a good humanitarian project, which will be able to accommodate some 700 to 800 refugees. You may perhaps remember that when the Ministry of Foreign Affairs sent its survey mission in January 1994, we identified Croatia as a country --

   Q: The visit of Director-General Yanai?

   A: Precisely. We identified Croatia as a country which requires this sort of humanitarian assistance. Precisely our diplomatic objective has been attained, in this particular sense, by the visit of Foreign Minister Kono.