Press Conference by Press Sec. 23 May 1995

1. Third Meeting of the Ministers for Foreign Affairs of the Rio Group Troika Countries and Japan
2. Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organization (KEDO)
3. Japan's diplomatic action following an underground nuclear test by the People's Republic of China
4. Japan-United States of America relations and consultations at the World Trade Organization (WTO)

1. Third Meeting of the Ministers for Foreign Affairs of the Rio Group Troika Countries and Japan

   Foreign Ministry Spokesman Terusuke Terada: Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. The Third Meeting of the Ministers for Foreign Affairs of the Rio Group Troika Countries and Japan will be held from 30-31 May in Tokyo. The Meeting will be attended by Minister of Foreign Affairs Dr. Galo Leoro Franco of the Republic of Ecuador, present Chair of the Rio Group; Minister of Foreign Relations Luiz Felipe Palmeira Lampreia of the Federative Republic of Brazil, former Chair; Minister of Foreign Affairs and Worship Antonio Aranibar Quiroga of the Republic of Bolivia, Chair for the next term; and Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Foreign Affairs Yohei Kono. At the forthcoming Meeting, there will be wide-ranging exchange of views on the international situation, not only on the relations between Japan and Latin America but also on the issues of the reform of the United Nations Security Council, the international economy, Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC), etc. Since 1989, the Ministers for Foreign Affairs of Japan have been holding a meeting annually with the Ministers for Foreign Affairs of the Rio Group at the time of the United Nations General Assembly. In addition, meetings with the Rio Group Troika countries have been taking place every year since 1993; the previous Meeting was held in Brazil, in Brasilia in August 1994.

2. Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organization (KEDO)

   Q: I have three questions about the North Korea-United States negotiations on the Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organization (KEDO). How do you evaluate the latest development, in which North Korea is refusing again to accept the South Korean reactor? Second, is this development impacting the Japanese resumption of normalization talks? Third, when will those talks resume?

   A: Let me state that the technical negotiations between the United States' and North Korean delegations are still continuing in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Therefore, at this stage, I rather hate to make any comments on the progress being made through the negotiations being undertaken in Kuala Lumpur. We are very much aware of the position taken by the delegation of North Korea, that it still opposes the provision of light-water reactors of South Korean design. But in this connection, let me emphasize the important point that the Government of the Republic of Korea does play a central role in providing the light-water reactors to North Korea. Therefore, the Governments of Japan, the United States of America and the Republic of Korea do have the common position that there is no alternative other than the provision of the South Korean-type light-water reactors. Now, you asked me a question with respect to the normalization talks between Japan and North Korea. I stated already at a previous briefing session that we have been in touch with North Korea, but up until now, the venue and timing are yet to be determined. In this connection, we do maintain the position that normalization talks between Japan and North Korea are not directly relevant to the current technical negotiations in Kuala Lumpur between the United States' and North Korean delegations.

   Q: Has North Korea at any time during these rounds of negotiations with the Americans, either with them or with you, broached the topic of Japan taking over the central role of providing the light-water reactors, or increasing its contribution? In other words, have they indicated that they would be willing to have Japan play the central role, and not South Korea?

   A: I regret very much indeed being unable to give you any detailed account of what is taking place in these technical negotiations. I am not allowed to touch upon the detail of the conversation. But we have the common position that it is indeed the Government of the Republic of Korea which is willing to play the central role. As far as the Government of Japan is concerned, we have never thought of substituting for the Government of the Republic of Korea in this regard. So, whatever is stated by North Korea, the three Governments stick to the common position that it is indeed the Government of the Republic of Korea which plays the central role. The three Governments do agree that there will be no alternative other than that of the central role being played by the Government of the Republic of Korea.

3. Japan's diplomatic action following an underground nuclear test by the People's Republic of China

   Q: Could you update us on exchanges between the Government of Japan and the Government of the People's Republic of China after the underground nuclear test?

   A: I am quite sure that you are very much aware of the demarche made yesterday. Acting Director-General of the Economic Cooperation Bureau Hideaki Ueda summoned Counsellor Zheng Xianglin of the Embassy of the People's Republic of China in Tokyo, and our position was clearly conveyed to him. The Chinese side stated that the point made by the Government of Japan would certainly be transmitted to the very attention of the home Government. This is what happened. After that, I simply note the statement made by the spokesman of the Chinese Government. This is all that I know so far. We are sincerely hoping that the Chinese Government will understand the great sensitivity of the Japanese people toward the question of nuclear testing.

   Q: In other words, there has been no formal reaction from the Chinese side to the Japanese protest.

   A: I think what was stated by the Chinese spokesman should be interpreted as an official statement by the Chinese Government.

   Q: Now that you have taken this decision to consider cutting grants-in-aid to China, I suppose that it would be difficult not to take similar action, or stiffer action, in the future, when they are expected to carry out more tests.

   A: We certainly hope that they would be attentive to the clear cut manifestation of the feelings held by the Japanese people with respect to the nuclear testing, and of course, the series of demarches which we have made were intended to convey the feelings of Japan to the Government of China.

   Q: Has Japan decided on how much aid is to be cut?

   A: In order for me to answer your question, let me take just a little time to explain the economic cooperation mechanism in the case of grants-in-aid. We do not determine a priori a certain amount of money which is earmarked for the offering of grants-in-aid to a particular country. In other words, our grants are made up of individual projects, and by the end of the fiscal year, you see a certain number of projects examined and approved which constitute the totality of the grants-in-aid during that fiscal year. So, you can't say we are going to cut a certain amount of money from the start. We do not know exactly how much money is going to be involved. We have to examine project-by- project, and then through examination, we have to take into account the latest nuclear test as part of our overall policy considerations toward China.

   Q: This means that, generally speaking, there may not be any punitive measures in so far as grants-in-aid, because you could, in any case, refuse grant-in-aid requests for particular projects. So, it seems to me this symbolism is more for domestic consumption rather than to serve some notice on China.

   A: I hate to characterize this sort of diplomatic action using the term which you referred to. What is of significance is that we are trying to convey our very strong feelings with respect to the nuclear test through this diplomatic action. We are not imposing any sanctions at all. We are sincerely hoping that our feeling should be well understood by the Chinese Government. Anyhow, let me emphasize that we attach great importance to the maintenance of the good and friendly relationship between Japan and China. The stable scene of the Japan-China relationship is quite an important aspect of relations in the Asia-Pacific region, in terms of the maintenance of peace and security.

4. Japan-United States of America relations and consultations at the World Trade Organization (WTO)

   Q: Can I switch subjects to the issue of relations with the United States in the aftermath of the sanctions on automobile and auto parts trade talks? It seems apparent that both the Foreign Ministry here and the U.S. State Department seem to have retained the traditional role of trying to quiet down matters, but considering that no visits have taken place at the ministerial-level, can you update us on any damage control measures that are being taken? Day to day there are hard-line statements coming out of Washington, D.C., and it is rebounding from here.

   A: I think there is a commonality of interest between the two Governments in that both Governments do think that the question of the automobile and auto parts sector should not damage the overall bilateral relationship. Both countries are developing a well-balanced relationship in the fields of, for example, the Common Agenda, security dialogue, the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) forum, North Korea, and others. Therefore, we are hoping to settle the matter at the newly created World Trade Organization (WTO). In other words, we are hoping to see the start of consultations at the WTO. This action does mean that we should like to work for a quiet resolution without politicizing the issue. So, this matter is going to be taken up at the WTO. Of course, we have a number of other consultations which are going on as always.

   Q: I think Minister of International Trade and Industry Ryutaro Hashimoto and other Government officials have hinted that Japan may impose sanctions of its own on U.S. products. I would like to know if you can tell us what types of sanctions are being considered, including the possible increase of tariffs from effective rates to bound rates.

   A: It seems to me that this is a favorite subject, often taken up by the reporters here and also there. I am not really quite sure of the thrust of the statement made by Minister of International Trade and Industry Ryutaro Hashimoto. What I can say at the moment is that now we have decided to take up this matter at the WTO. So, we have to initiate consultations in accordance with the rules and procedures of the WTO. Consultations should take precedence. This is our position.

   Q: So, you are not thinking of any other measures besides consultations through the WTO?

   A: We are now concentrating our efforts in order to expedite consultations. Because we could not produce any tangible results by direct bilateral consultation, now, the consultations are going to take place at the WTO. I understand that the United States Government has also agreed to conduct consultations with us. So, we have to hold consultations in accordance with WTO rules and procedures.

   Q: Is Japan thinking of any other measures which are within the framework of the GATT or WTO, but which would target U.S. products?

   A: Before proceeding with consultations, we do not like to speculate on other measures. We are focusing our attention on the conduct of consultations.