Press Conference by the Press Secretary 18 May, 1999

1. General Elections in the State of Israel
2. Possible international political and security roles for Japan
3. Position of the Government of Japan on sanctions placed after nuclear testing by the Republic of India and the Islamic Republic of Pakistan
4. Role of the international community in relieving debts of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan
5. Position of the Government of Japan on the outcome of elections in the State of Israel
6. Position of the Government of Japan on the future political situation in the Middle East
7. The effect of benchmarks on Japanese companies in the Republic of India

1. General Elections in the State of Israel

   Press Secretary Sadaaki Numata: Good afternoon. I have a comment to make on the outcome of the general election in the State of Israel, although the formal result has not been announced yet. We understand that there is every likelihood that Mr. Ehud Barak, the Labor Party candidate, will be elected as the next Prime Minister of Israel. Pending the announcement of the formal outcome, we would like to take this opportunity to express our strong hope that upon the establishment of the new Government in Israel, the peace process will be resumed promptly with the efforts of the parties concerned, that the Wye River Agreement will be implemented with respect to the Palestine issue and that the negotiation of the final status of the Palestinians will be promoted in an accelerated manner on the basis of the Oslo Agreement. We also hope that the talks among the parties concerned will start with respect to the other tracks, that is the Syria track and the Lebanon track which are now being stalled. We do hope that there will be progress in these other tracks as well to achieve a just, lasting and comprehensive peace. Japan, for its part, has been actively extending its cooperation in the sense of talking to the parties concerned, and also in the sense of actively participating in aid to the Palestinians. Aid to the Palestinians to date totals more than US$400 million. It is our intention to continue to cooperate positively with the parties concerned in their efforts to achieve peace.

   Related Information (Japan-Israel Relations)
   
2. Possible international political and security roles for Japan

   Q: There has been a debate recently about Japan taking a more active part in international politics in connection with Article 9 of the Constitution. What is the Government planning to do regarding this? Do you want to take a more active part in international politics? Whatever, what is the line of thinking?

   Mr. Numata: You also mentioned Article 9 of the Constitution so your question contains not just the political element, but also the security element. That is a very large question. Let me see if I can break it down into digestible parts. Firstly, it is certainly our intention to play an active part on the international scene -- or let's say, on the global scene -- because our interests are, indeed, global. Given the place which Japan occupies in the world, we certainly feel that we cannot remain indifferent to things that happen in other parts of the world -- in distant parts of the world, if you will. That is why we feel that we should be working actively together, not only with the countries in our region, but also with countries in other parts of the world to bring peace, stability and prosperity to all the peoples of the world. That is why we have been concerned and also interested in, for example, the Middle Eastern peace process which I just mentioned. We have also been concerned, for example, about the recent crisis in Kosovo. That is something which is happening in Europe, but the implications of that crisis go far beyond Europe and that is why we recently made the decision to extend US$200 million of assistance to help alleviate the humanitarian tragedies there. In such actions, we would like to continue to act together with many other countries of the world, with like-minded countries, in pursuit of the ideals and objectives which are widely shared by the international community. We would like to exercise whatever leadership we can. When I say "leadership," I don't mean the kind where we try to dictate what others should be doing, but the kind of leadership which would be conducive to the promotion of efforts by many members of the international community in pursuit of shared objectives and shared ideas. That is my general comment on our political roles.

   With respect to the question of Japan's possible international security role, firstly, I will draw a distinction between Japan's international security role and what might be called Japan's military role. In essence, it is not our intention to try to throw our military weight around. We have done that in the past and that did not bring about happy consequences for our own people and for our neighbors either. So, we are committed to the pursuit of peace. You mentioned Article 9 of the Constitution in which we have forsaken the option of using military force to settle international disputes. That still holds. It is within that framework that we are trying to search for a role that we can play which would contribute to peace and security in the international community. There has been an ongoing debate about what sort of roles Japan can play in that regard. And, there has been an evolution of thinking in that regard. Where we are is that we have, for example, decided that we will be sending our personnel include our Self-Defense Forces personnel to participate in international peacekeeping operations under the aegis of the United Nations. We have done that with respect to Cambodia and in several other instances. Most recently, we have our Self-Defense Forces personnel in the Golan Heights, but they are not there to engage in combat; they are there to provide logistic support. So, there is a certain limit to what we envisage with respect to our roles in that regard. That is Japan playing an international security role which is in the wider interest of the international community as opposed to Japan either throwing its military weight around or embarking on a path to reemerging as a military power. Given the commitment on the part of the Japanese people to our constitution and to the spirit embodied therein, and given our own experiences in the earlier part of this century, I do not foresee any basic change in our approach to security or military affairs from what I have just described now.

   Q: In a way, the Hiroshima and Nagasaki syndrome is going to preclude any possible amendment of Article 9 of the Constitution. What is the emerging consensus regarding an amendment?

   Mr. Numata: If you ask me what the emerging consensus at this point in time is, I do not think there is any emerging consensus which is in favor of revising Article 9 of the Constitution. Then again, you might ask what if we look into the crystal ball and look ahead to the year 3000. Well, for one thing, I shall not be there, you will not be there either in the year 3000.

   Q: Japan is very much concerned with the nuclear arms race in the region. The two new nuclear powers of the region, that is India and Pakistan, have some heated conflicts that need international attention. What role can Japan play to make these countries settle their issues so that the region is safe from a third world war?

   Mr. Numata: You mentioned the conflicts between the Republic of India and the Islamic Republic of Pakistan which are a source of international concern, you are quite right. At the same time, there are also other concerns which you mentioned right at the outset of your question, which is the nuclear testing by Indian and Pakistan which is a matter of concern. The first gentleman mentioned the Hiroshima and Nagasaki syndrome. We have had our own experience with respect to nuclear weapons and that has given rise to a very deeply ingrained sentiment on the part of our people. Regarding the first part of your question about the Kashmir question, of course, we are concerned about it. We do hope that the issue can be settled peacefully and amicably through dialogue between the parties directly concerned, that is India and Pakistan. There have been questions raised as to what the international community might be able to do to help the parties resolve this conflict. That has not been an easy issue. You might recall that shortly after the nuclear testing by India and Pakistan last year, there was a resolution in the United Nations regarding the subject in which there was a call for the peaceful settlement of the issue. I cannot remember the exact language, but the resolution also urged India and Pakistan to engage in dialogue to settle a number of issues including Kashimir. We were very much behind that resolution in joining the call on the part of the international community. We will continue to urge the two parties to settle the conflict peacefully. If in that process there does emerge any kind of a role for Japan, we will be happy to play it, but I do not think it is the kind of role which we try to impose on the parties concerned.

3. Position of the Government of Japan on sanctions placed after nuclear testing by the Republic of India and the Islamic Republic of Pakistan

   Mr. Numata: Having said that, I also do need to refer to the ramifications of the nuclear testing by India and Pakistan. We did find the nuclear testing by these two countries very regrettable. Because of the fundamental principles involved in extending our assistance -- we, in fact, have this Official Development Assistance (ODA) Charter which does state that in providing our ODA, we do need to take into account situations in the recipient countries on several factors including the question of the development of weapons of mass destruction and so forth. It is in the light of this philosophy that we have had to take certain measures with respect to new commitments of yen loans and grant assistance. Those measures are limited to the area of economic assistance or economic cooperation. We have maintained the position that it is certainly our intention to maintain traditional friendships and broad relations with both India and Pakistan, and we have been engaged in dialogue with both India and Pakistan. For example, the Minister of Foreign Affairs Gohar Ayub Khan of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan visited Japan in November last year. We did have meaningful bilateral dialogue. Foreign Secretary K. Raguhunath of the Republic of India came to Japan in January to meet his counterpart. We do have bilateral dialogues taking place. Having said all of this, of course we would like to find ourselves in a position where we will be able to lift these measures with respect to ODA. In order for us to reach that stage, there are certain benchmarks that we need to see being achieved. These benchmarks include the adherence to the comprehensive test ban treaty; secondly, the rigorous export control regime with respect to nuclear and missile related materials, and legislation to that end; thirdly, a commitment to the conclusion of the cut-off treaty on fissile materials, and prior to the treaty, a production moratorium on fissile materials; and fourthly -- this is a long one -- self-restraint on missiles, that is refraining from weaponization or deployment of nuclear weapons and from the testing of deployment of missiles and nuclear weapons. There were some incidents of concern to us in April when the missile testing was conducted by both India and Pakistan.

   We would like to find ourselves in a position of being able to first relax and then lift these measures with respect to new commitments of aid. It is for that reason that we are anxiously awaiting positive responses by India and Pakistan. It turned out to be a very long answer, but I wanted to give to you the full picture.

   Q: So, to go back to the earlier questions, since we are talking about ODA and benchmarks. So, the fourth one is regarding the missiles and the fact that both countries tested ballistic missiles. Where does the ODA stand now?

   Mr. Numata: It stands where it stood shortly after the nuclear testing last year.

   Q: Last year, the United States also imposed sanctions on India and World Bank loans and monetary assistance were also cut off. There has been a considerable softening on the part of the United States and we have engaged in parties with the United States also. We have made considerable progress. But, Japan has been quite tough with us in terms of ODA assistance also being squeezed out. Earlier, you said that Japan set up some benchmarks in order for assistance to start again. How realistic are these benchmarks?

   Mr. Numata: Well, we feel that the benchmarks are quite realistic and there is a very good reason speaking from our side for these benchmarks. For one thing, we are the only one nation which actually suffered from the devastating, annihilating effects of nuclear weapons, and you cannot accused the Japanese people for having a very strong sentiment on that.

   Q: I am talking about the Indian reaction to sanctions from Japan and Australia. They are under the United States nuclear umbrella. We do not have a nuclear umbrella. We need to have nuclear weapons.

   Mr. Numata: At the same time, that also raises the danger of the proliferation of nuclear weapons which could be very destabilizing to the world. We could start a two-hour debate on the subject.

   Related Information (Response of the Government of Japan to the Nuclear Tests Conducted by India and Pakistan)
   
4. Role of the international community in relieving debts of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan

   Q: I have two questions. Regarding the AP reports to cancel the debts of Jordan, how can the international community best help to relieve the debts? The second is with Netanyahu's removal, what is the view of the Government of Japan of the situation as we move toward achieving peace?

   Mr. Numata: Let me take the second question first because I did refer to it right at the beginning. To the extent that this is an election which took place in a country other than Japan, I do not think I should put myself in the position of making any sort of strong value judgment on the outcome of the election. I will say that we strongly hope that upon the birth of the new Israeli Government, the peace processes would be accelerated. When I say that we strongly hope that the peace processes will be accelerated, I base it on the judgment that perhaps the outcome of the election gives us a good reason for expressing that strong hope. That is the answer to your second question.

   Related Information (Japan-Jordan Relations)
   
5. Position of the Government of Japan on the outcome of elections in the State of Israel

   Mr. Numata: With respect to your first question, the question of how best we, that is the international community -- the United States, Japan, and other countries -- can best help the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan has been on our minds for quite some time. In fact, when Prime Minister Keizo Obuchi went to Amman to attend the funeral of the late King Hussein and met the new King Abdullah of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, we did express our intention to extend as much assistance as possible to Jordan. When you talk about assistance to Jordan, the question of the possible cancellation or rescheduling of debts is one of the items on the table. When Prime Minister Obuchi visited the United States at the beginning of this month and met President William Jefferson Clinton, the subject did come up between the two leaders. As I understand it, this question of Jordan's debt has been under discussion in various multilateral fora and according to the recent International Monetary Fund (IMF) report, for example, there seems to be this general understanding emerging on the part of the countries concerned that it should be possible to deal with this problem through debt rescheduling in the framework of the Paris Club. It is our intention to respond positively to this call for debt rescheduling to take place in the framework of the Paris Club. I would also like to point out that we do attach importance to assistance to Jordan and in that respect, we do consider it important to foster those industries in Jordan which can earn foreign exchange. It is from that viewpoint that in January, this year, we made a commitment to extend US$63 million worth of yen loans for the development of their tourism sector. It is our intention to provide further assistance to Jordan, for example, in the areas of providing our own business and our expertise to Jordan and also financial assistance with a view to helping their export industries. This we would like to do in cooperation with the programs that the United States and the European Union have with respect to supporting the private businesses in Jordan.

   Related Information (Japan-Israel Relations)
   
6. Position of the Government of Japan on the future political situation in the Middle East

   Q: How do you see the future political situation in the Middle East, and what is Japan's view on Iraq and the Palestinian case?

   Mr. Numata: That again is a very large question. Let me see if I can tackle it. I will come back to what I said at the beginning which is that the Wye River Agreement and the Oslo Agreement do provide very important frameworks for the achievement of peace in the Middle East, not just with respect to the Palestinian issue, but also with respect to the Syrian tract and the Lebanon tract, and so forth. We do hope that these very valid frameworks can be fully utilized so that peace can be achieved in the Middle East. It may not be an easy process, but we do feel that peace should be achievable with the efforts of all the parties concerned. We would like to continue to encourage such efforts. For our own part, especially since the beginning of the 1990s, we have been engaged much more actively in dialogues with all the parties concerned -- not just with one side, but with all the parties -- through the visit of our Foreign Minister, through the visits of our Prime Minister, and also through our welcoming a number of Middle Eastern leaders. This year, for example, in April, we had President Hosni Mubarak of the Arab Republic of Egypt visit Japan, and President Yasser Arafat of the Palestian Authority also came in April. We had very intensive discussions on the subject. We would like to continue such dialogue. Perhaps we may have a slight advantage in the sense that we are in a position to have channels open to all these people.

   I mentioned earlier the question of our Palestinian assistance which now exceeds US$400 million. The next meeting of the donors for Palestine will take place in Japan sometime this autumn. We will be hosting that meeting. That would be another opportunity for us to be involved. We have also been taking part actively in the multilateral negotiations or consultations which may be somewhat stalled now, but which were initiated parallel to the peace processes that I have described. We have been actively participating in that process, for example, through chairing the Working Group on the Environment. We do feel that it is important to pave the way for the economic development and stability of the countries concerned when peace is achieved. We would like to continue to play a role in that regard. That is my answer with respect to the Middle Eastern peace process.

   You mentioned the Republic of Iraq. We are very seriously concerned about the development of production of weapons of mass destruction by Iraq. We do feel that it is essential for international peace and security that Iraq destroys all its weapons of mass destruction. It is very important to prevent the proliferation of these weapons. We do feel that there is a consensus in the international community on this. We also feel that it is important for the international community, including the United Nations Security Council, to continue to approach this firmly with a view to eliciting cooperation from Iraq in this regard. At the same time, we have been quite concerned about the fact that the people of Iraq apparently have been placed in a very difficult predicament or plight. We do feel that their plight should be alleviated as soon as possible. When I talk about their plight, I am talking about what seems to be the worsening situations with respect to education, health and welfare, basic social infrastructure and so forth. We have been extending humanitarian assistance to alleviate the plight of these people through international organizations. The most recent commitment in this regard was US$1.55 million in March. With the objectives that I stated at the outset in mind, we are closely following the deliberations in the Security Council and we do strongly hope that Iraq will fully abide by the related Security Council Resolutions.

   Related Information (Japan-Middle East Relations)
   
7. The effect of benchmarks on Japanese companies in the Republic of India

   Q: You already explained about the benchmarks, yet some Japanese business leaders are saying that Japanese companies are badly affected by the infrastructure problem, for example, the power and the drinking water. Do you see any value added?

   Mr. Numata: It takes two to tango. I think that is my response to your question which is that in the absence of progress with respect to the benchmarks that I have mentioned, it continues to be difficult for us to take the initiatives to satisfy the demands of our businessmen.

   Related Information (Japan-India Relations)