Press Conference by the Press Secretary 6 February 1996

Economic cooperation mission to be dispatched to Bosnia-Herzegovina
Foreign Ministry Spokesman Hiroshi Hashimoto: Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. Welcome to the regular Ministry of Foreign Affairs press conference. First of all, I would like to explain a little bit about the dispatching of an economic cooperation mission for Bosnia and Herzegovina. This mission will be headed by Deputy Director-General of the Economic Cooperation Bureau Norio Hattori. The delegation consists of representatives from various agencies. Altogether, 20 people will go to Bosnia-Herzegovina from 8-18 February. They will not only go to Bosnia-Herzegovina, but also to Brussels and Washington, D.C. to exchange views and information on the future aid to Bosnia and Herzegovina. Bosnia-Herzegovina is in arrears to Japan to the amount of 2.1 billion yen, out of which 500 million yen is related to Japan's Official Development Assistance (ODA) loans -- 1.6 billion yen is related to Japan's trade insurance. If Japan is required to extend ODA loans in the future, Bosnia-Herzegovina and Japan must solve this debt issue. The mission members will talk with Bosnia-Herzegovina on this issue first. Secondly, the mission members will exchange views with the Bosnia-Herzegovina Government on possible bilateral aid in the future. They would like to specify the priority areas for future Japanese ODA. In Washington, D.C., they will meet not only the representatives of the United States Government, but also the World Bank. The World Bank now estimates that US$5.1 billion is necessary for the reconstruction of Bosnia-Herzegovina for the coming four years. On the basis of the mission's findings, the Japanese Government will study what it can do, and we intend to announce that, if possible, at the second Bosnia-Herzegovina aid conference scheduled to take place in either March or April this year. I am ready to answer any questions you may wish to ask.
APEC participation issues
Q: There have been some reports that some countries are applying to join the working groups of APEC. Would it be appropriate to ask Japan, which is the Chair of APEC, which countries are applying, and what working groups are they applying to?

A: First of all, the first Senior Officials Meeting (SOM) of APEC will take place in Manila between 7-9 February. They will talk on various matters, but as you rightly pointed out, the participant matter is one of the issues. As far as the new membership of the APEC itself is concerned, at this year's APEC Meeting this issue will be decided on and the senior officials are required to prepare the criteria for membership. They will just start this, so it is too premature for us to say now what criteria they will produce. Secondly, if you talk about participants of the working groups, I do not have the relevant data here, but at the last Osaka APEC meeting, they announced some kind of criteria for participation in the working groups. According to such criteria, if there is any, I think the new participants will be selected.

Q: You wouldn't have the list of who has applied so far would you?

A: We will check on this and answer you later.
KEDO crude oil provisions and aid for North Korea
Q: Would you give us the Ministry of Foreign Affairs' understanding of what happened yesterday between Ambassador Mondale and Mr. Yamazaki?

A: First of all, we are not in a position to make a comment about the meeting between Ambassador Walter Mondale of the United States and Liberal Democratic Party Policy Affairs Research Council Chairman Taku Yamazaki. Would you tell me what particular subject you would like to know about?

Q: The morning paper said the American Government has asked the Japanese Government for US$22 million in funding for KEDO.

A: To repeat, the Japanese Government is not in a position to make a comment on the content of the talks between the two gentlemen; however, what I can tell you is that neither the KEDO, nor the United States Government, has formally asked the Japanese Government to bear the cost of the crude oil supply, citing a specific figure. So, we do not know on what basis Ambassador Mondale talked about the figure of US$12 million. The Japanese Government, the United States, and the Government of the Republic of Korea are now cooperating and exchanging views with us, trying to find out what we can do on this issue -- the supply of crude oil to North Korea. We are also coordinating with KEDO, but still, we have not reached any conclusion on this.

Q: Has American-supplied crude oil already been delivered?

A: According to the agreement between the United States and North Korea, up until the construction of the light water reactor, every year, the United States is obliged to supply North Korea with 500,000 tons of crude oil. We understand that the United States is principally responsible for the delivery. However, because of budget restraints in the United States, there is the fact that the money does not exist for the delivery. Very recently the United States Congress has approved a specific amount of money for this, but it will take two more months to implement the delivery. So, Japan, the United States, and the Republic of Korea, together with KEDO are now trying to find a solution to this. However, as I told you, neither the KEDO, nor the United States Government has formally asked us to bear some cost for this.

Q: You said formally -- have they informally?

A: We have been exchanging views, but in any case, through the tripartite meeting, together with KEDO, we are now in the process of finding a solution.

Q: You say there has been no formal or official request from the United States. Have there been any informal request?

A: The Japanese Government has not been asked by the United States Government to bear the cost for delivery of crude oil, citing a certain amount.

Q: The three parties have been exchanging views on the American contribution of oil. Is it your impression that the Americans need a loan in order to get their financial house in order, so they can then fulfil the agreement as signed? Or do they want a re-cast in terms of the agreement, so that the Governments of Japan and/or the Republic of Korea will also link specific contributions to funding the oil program?

A: KEDO itself is a new organization with certain financial issues arising. As I explained to you, the United States Government is expected to play a central role in the delivery of crude oil to North Korea. Once there is a shortage of finance for this, we must find the resources to fill in. Up until now, Japan, the United States, and the Republic of Korea have been trying to persuade other countries in the world to donate more. I am talking about the European Union, ASEAN, and so on. We understand that because of the budgetary procedures of the United States Congress, there will be a shortage of money for the immediate delivery of the crude oil to North Korea, so how to bridge the gap between now and the actual implementation of the responsibilities of the United States is, of course, important, but whether it will be done by borrowing money and so on, the three countries have not decided. They are exchanging views and cooperating with each other, and they have not produced any measure for this yet.

Q: I am a little unclear on this. Maybe there is a call for, simply, a loan to the Americans. Maybe there is a call for other countries to pay money that initially the Americans said they would pay.

A: I cannot tell you anything specific on this. When Japan, the United States, and the Republic of Korea tried to persuade other countries to donate to KEDO, it was principally related to the medium- and long-term perspective. As for the immediate shortage of money, the three countries, together with KEDO, have to find a formula.

Q: The European Union and ASEAN said no, right?

A: Some ASEAN countries have already decided to donate money to KEDO. The European Union still has not decided what amount of money it would donate.

Q: The Americans said over the weekend that they have sent US$2 million in what has been called peanuts for humanitarian assistance. What will Japan do in response to the various reports of famine and humanitarian distress in North Korea, and what is the status on any moves toward normalization? The coalition was sending a delegation -- is that going to happen?

A: As for our aid to North Korea, we have already extended rice aid. We have already extended emergency aid through the international organizations. Now, we do not intend to extend new aid to North Korea. This is one point. The other point is that the United States very recently announced its emergency aid package for North Korea. We understand that the United States announced this in close consultation with the Government of the Republic of Korea. And, the Japanese Government understands and welcomes the decisions of the Clinton Administration on this. But, as far as Japan is concerned, we do not have a plan to extend new aid to North Korea. As for normalization, the Japanese Government has already announced that it is ready to resume the talks without setting preconditions; however, there has not been a move on this. I understand that the coalition parties will send their delegation to the Republic of Korea this week, but the Government is not in a position to make a comment on that visit.

Q: When and how much aid was sent?

A: Last year, first of all, we extended 150,000 tons of rice as grant aid. In addition to this, we gave 150,000 tons of rice on a loan basis -- altogether 300,000 tons. Later, we extended 200,000 tons of rice aid on a loan basis. But, as far as that one is concerned, not all the rice has been shipped to North Korea yet. Last September, in response to the United Nations Department of Human Affairs (DHA) appeal, we extended US$500,000 in emergency aid to North Korea. That is what we did last year.

Q: One of the irritants in this issue, between the North Koreans and the Republic of Korea is that the Republic of Korea extended rice aid and was not thanked for it -- they felt offended, and it is a strong contributing reason for their current posture. What sort of response did the Government of Japan receive from the Government of North Korea for its previous offers or commitments of aid?

A: Very often, the North Korean side expressed some kind of assessment through their media, so it is very difficult for us to evaluate this. But, at the same time, I think we received a note of gratitude from North Korea. Once we extended the aid to North Korea, we sincerely hoped that the Government of North Korea highly appreciated it, and that the rice itself was delivered. But, it needs to be distributed, and it has been distributed to the right people. As far as the North-South dialogue is concerned, it is unfortunate that the delivery of rice from Japan and the Republic of Korea has not contributed to the continuation of dialogue. We just hope that North Korea will show a more flexible attitude on this. Q: I am not sure I understand. Did you say you did receive a note of gratitude from North Korea?

A: I think we received a note of gratitude from North Korea. But, I do not remember its contents exactly.

Q: Are you referring to President Kim Jong Il's congratulations to former Prime Minister Murayama?

A: No. When Japanese officials contacted North Korean officials on the rice issue, we received a note or some expression from the North Korean side. At the same time, they provided us with the names of provinces where the Japanese rice was distributed.
Japan-Russian Federation bilateral relations
Q: Two-and-a-half years ago President Yeltsin visited here, and with former Prime Minister Morihiro Hosokawa, reached an agreed history of the Northern Territory dispute and a framework for negotiating future progress and resolution. Since tomorrow is Northern Territories Day, I wonder if you can bring me up-to-date on what has transpired since the time of the Yeltsin-Hosokawa efforts?

A: After the visit to Japan by President Boris Yeltsin of the Russian Federation, the Japanese Government has changed. Now the Hashimoto Government has been established, so I would like to explain to you the policy of the present government toward the Russian Federation. In order to do so, I had better cite what Prime Minister Ryutaro Hashimoto actually said to President Yeltsin. On 16 January, President Yeltsin sent a congratulatory message to Prime Minister Hashimoto for his appointment to Prime Minister of Japan. On 26 January, Prime Minister Hashimoto returned a message to President Yeltsin, wherein he said the following. First of all, he stated his government will succeed the previous Murayama Government's policy toward the Russian Federation, and that his government is determined to establish a constructive cooperative relationship with President Yeltsin, on the basis of the Tokyo Declarations. Secondly, Prime Minister Hashimoto stated that since the visit of President Yeltsin to Japan, the two governments have been endeavoring to make steady progress, especially in the practical field of the bilateral relationship. However, in order to upgrade the partnership to a truly higher level, it is extremely important to fully normalize the relationship between the two countries by signing the Peace Treaty -- through solving the territorial issues. This year, we will celebrate the 40th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic relations between the two countries. Prime Minister Hashimoto sincerely wants to make progress in the bilateral relationship with the Russian Federation. At the same time, he reiterated the fundamental positions of the Japanese Government. He said that he sincerely hoped that the Russian Federation would continuously pursue democratic reform, economic reform and a cooperative external policy on the basis of law and justice. The Japanese Government intends to support the Russian Federation, in cooperation with other countries, if the Russian Federation continues to pursue the reform policy. Lastly, Prime Minister Hashimoto stated that if the parliamentary debates or other situations allow him to do so, he would like to attend the summit on nuclear safety.

Q: Two questions: He said he succeeded the policies of the Murayama Government. Was there any change at all and did the Murayama Government embrace fully the framework set up by the Hosokawa Government? That is one question. Have there been, in the intervening two-and-a-half years, actual working meetings to produce any movement on this issue, or have there actually not been substantive negotiations?

A: There has not been any change at all about the fundamental policy of Japan toward the Russian Federation since President Yeltsin visited Japan in 1993. However, unfortunately, there has not been progress on the territorial issues. At the same time, I would like to tell you that the so-called framework talks on the fishing surrounding the Northern Territories have started since that time, and the fifth talks are going to take place soon. Today, I am not in a position to tell you when the fifth meeting will take place. Although, this is also a very difficult negotiation, the Japanese Government is determined to sincerely deal with the negotiations with the Russian Federation. Although we have not decided anything, if you talk about the ministerial meeting between the two countries, Minister for Foreign Affairs Yukihiko Ikeda will go to Moscow for the next meeting in order to proceed with the Peace Negotiations, and at the same time, to talk about the economic relationship; a format has been set up to talk about this. Because of the Diet Session and other reasons, Minister Ikeda has not decided anything about his possible visit to Moscow.

Q: Could you put your finger on the aid figure which you have given to the Russian Federation so far?

A: I do not have the data in front of me. I will ask my colleague to give you the data later.

Q: Including the aid given after the earthquake in Sakhalin.

A: Ok.

Q: Continuing on this subject, the stated policy does not change. We understand this. Prime Minister Hashimoto really has a different spirit in foreign relations, particularly where issues relate to the legacy of the war -- certainly different from what former Prime Minister Tomiichi Murayama had. I think we can agree on this. Should we expect that this will have any affect on the style and manner in which Prime Minister Hashimoto will pursue this issue?

A: First of all, on the perceptions of the past war, Minister Ikeda clearly stated to his counterparts in Phuket several days ago, that the present Hashimoto Government has succeeded the position of the Murayama Government on the history. In addition to this, it seems that the Russian Federation has certain expectations for the present government. For example, as I told you, President Yeltsin sent a congratulatory message to Prime Minister Hashimoto on 16 January, and the content of the message was unprecedentedly warm. We do not know what President Yeltsin is up to now. In any case, Prime Minister Hashimoto has reiterated the fundamental positions of the Japanese Government. So, eventually -- I do not know if it will be in Moscow or not -- sometime, both leaders will have a chance to meet. Although, President Yeltsin has a lot of tasks to solve domestically, the Japanese side sincerely hopes President Yeltsin will show once again the same eagerness as when he visited Japan in 1993 for the full normalization of the bilateral relationship between the two countries. But, as I told you, so far, there has not been progress on the peace negotiations and so on.

Q: Do you think we will see a different style from Prime Minister Hashimoto and Minister Ikeda in pushing this issue? I think there can be no argument that it achieved some prominence at the time of the Hosokawa-Yeltsin meetings, and really, pretty much disappeared with the Hosokawa Government. It has been a very low-profile issue for the last two years.

A: As far has the Russian Federation is concerned, now they have a new Minister of Foreign Affairs. In order to solve such issues like the territorial ones, it is very important, first of all, for the leaders and the present ministers to meet each other and talk. In this sense, I cannot tell you when Minister Ikeda and Minister of Foreign Affairs E.M. Primakov of the Russian Federation can meet. I do not know when President Yeltsin and Prime Minister Hashimoto can meet. But, up until that time, I cannot tell you anything specifically related to your question.

Q: In the past it has been the Russian Federation's concern that the idea of giving the islands back to Japan would limit their access to blue waters for their navy. Are you taking the initiative to sponsor this, or promoting the northeast Asia security dialogue to address these concerns?

A: If you talk about security relationships in northeast Asia, basically they exchanged information about the mutual defense policy, and so on. That forum is not directly linked to the northern territorial issues. As far as the northern territorial issues are concerned, Japan and the Russian Federation have to solve this bilaterally.

Q: The Director-General of the Defense Agency was expected to go to Moscow. Has anything been decided on this?

A: I do not have that information here. In any case, we would like to strengthen dialogue with the Russian Federation in many fields. As for the visit by Director-General of the Defense Agency to Moscow is concerned, I have not obtained any information.

Q: There have also been reports from Moscow by Japanese agencies in the past that the Americans might condition the resolution of this issue -- or link this with the support for the United Nations Security Council application for permanent membership. Would you say that your policy of so-called expanded equilibrium is linked to the same question?

A: We are determined to expand our relationship with the Russian Federation. Through these efforts, we would like to solve the territory issues, too.
Upcoming APEC Finance Ministers' Meeting
Q: About the stated preparation for the APEC Ministerial Meeting -- is there any concrete progress on the issues -- anything on capital flows?

A: Last week, your Indonesian colleague asked this question, and I could not answer well at that time. My colleague has distributed a copy of the 1995 APEC Finance Ministers' Meeting Report today. What I understand is that the next Kyoto meeting, which will take place on 16-17 March, will be basically a continuation of the 1995 Finance Ministers' Meeting. They will talk and review, first of all, the macroeconomic development and the market situation in the region. In comparison to last year, this year many participants in the region are still enjoying very rapid economic growth. However, some members have already started to take some restrictive measures to prevent the inflation rate from going higher. This year, they will also talk about capital flows. There is not a specific problem about capital flows this year. It is wisely said that the General Agreement to Borrow (GAB), which supplements the IMF facilities, will be discussed by some members; especially the East Asian members may be interested in the GAB facilities. Under the agenda, and the Capital Flows, they will continue to talk on the voluntary and timely public disclosures on the regular basis of economic and financial information of interest to financial markets. The IMF is now preparing the criteria on this issue -- how and to what extent the members of APEC should disclose the economic information. Under the agenda, they will talk about the Exchange Rate Movements -- that exchange rate policies must form an integral part of an overall macroeconomic policy framework for each of the member economies. I remember very well that at the last APEC informal leadership meeting, some members stated the need to talk and exchange views on this subject. I am sure that at the Kyoto Meeting, they will continue to talk on this subject, but we do not know whether they will produce something tangible or not. The most important thing is that in order to promote trade and investment in the APEC region, it is very important to keep the exchange rate movements stable. In this sense, it is more and more important for the participants of APEC to talk about this issue. As for the agenda and Funding for Infrastructure Development, mobilization of capital flows for infrastructural development continues to be very important in the region. Last January, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs published its idea for a new aid scheme to promote private financing for infrastructure development. The Japanese Government is going to take concrete measures to assist the efforts of the private sector to finance infrastructure development. You may remember that very recently, one of the councils of the Ministry of International Trade and Industry also announced measures in line with this. This is what I can tell you.

Q: Are there any new issues or suggestions from the Japanese side for this meeting?

A: Japan is going to chair the Meeting, and it is probably too premature to tell you anything more than what I already told you; the continuation of the 1995 APEC Finance Ministers' Meeting. Basically, they will talk about the issues I have explained to you. I do not know whether there will be anything new to this.
Asia-Europe (ASEM) Meeting preparations
Q: Can you tell us what came out of the Foreign Ministers' Meeting in Phuket last week, and will you be sending any high officials to the meeting in Bangkok this month?

A: As far as the Asia-Europe Meeting (ASEM) is concerned, now the Ministers' Meeting on the Asian side is over, and this week the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Kingdom of Thailand is going to meet his European counterpart, and they will presumably finalize the so-called ASEM agenda in April. I understand they basically do not want to specifically set up an agenda, but under a broad range of topics, allow all the summit members to freely exchange views. The key to ASEM will be to create a new comprehensive Asia-Europe partnership for greater growth, which aims at strengthening links between Asia and Europe. But, at the same time, the Meeting is to underscore the importance of Asia and Europe, maintaining dialogue with other regions. The ASEM is to strengthen political dialogue, and they will talk about the existing dialogue fora, such as the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF), Post-Ministerial Conference (PMC), and how to strengthen political dialogue. They will talk about the importance of United Nations reform and the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT). Also, the ASEM is to reinforce economic cooperation, and they will stress the importance of generating greater two-way trade and investment flows. Presumably, they will commit themselves to market economy principles, an open multilateral trading system, non-discriminatory liberalization, and open regionalism. And, they will talk about the need for WTO consistency. They will talk about APEC, the WTO and so on. Also, they aim to encourage the business and private sectors, and it is expected that the Meeting will establish, in due course, an Asia-Europe Business Forum. The Meeting is expected to promote cooperation in other areas through talk about cross-flows between Asia and Europe, such as agriculture, science and technology, information and communication technology, energy and transport, human resources development, environment, and so on. At the same time, the Meeting is expected to emphasize that the new links between Asia and Europe should help overcome misperceptions that exist between the two regions. That is what I can tell you.

Q: Is there anyone who will attend from the Ministry of International Trade and Industry?

A: From the Japanese side, we have not decided who will go, apart from the Prime Minister.
Asia-Pacific regional security issues
Q: It has been reported that the People's Republic of China is going to put on extra war games close to that time. What is the Japanese Government's position on this? If the People's Republic of China is going to attack Taiwan for some reason, what is the Japanese position on this?

A: First of all, the situation over there is closely related to the peace and stability of Japan and the peace and stability in the Asia-Pacific region. So, we are closely monitoring the situation over the straits. This is one point. Secondly, whatever problem both the People's Republic of China and Taiwan might have, we sincerely hope that those problems are solved through talks, not through military means. This is the most important point. We do not want to see a military conflict occur in the region.
Comfort Women report to be published
Q: Apparently, the United Nations commission that looked into the comfort women issue is about to issue a report. Do you have any more specific information about when this report is going to be issued and where it is going to be issued?

A: I think some time very soon, the report prepared by Ms. Radhika Coomaraswamy will be announced. Already, some Japanese newspaper carried an article on this. What I can tell you is the report itself has been prepared by Ms. Coomaraswamy herself. We do not know how the Human Rights Committee will deal with the report itself. There has been some misunderstanding on her report. We know that Ms. Coomaraswamy said that on the establishment of the Asia Peace Foundation for the women -- the special foundation set-up by the Japanese Government -- that she welcomed this, and that the Japanese Government continuously does its best to accomplish the objectives of the foundation. But, at the same time, Ms. Coomaraswamy talked about the responsibilities of the Japanese Government to take concrete measures on the reparation and claims. The Japanese Government cannot accept her position. First of all, we have to await the formal announcement, and we will study the report fully. We will discuss this matter at the forthcoming United Nations Human Rights Committee. Thank you very much.

Back to Index