Press Conference by the Deputy Press Secretary, 13 September 2012

Fourth Japan-Australia 2+2 Foreign and Defence Ministers’ Meeting
Situation in Somalia
Adoption of the Resolution by the United Nations General Assembly “Follow-up to paragraph 143 on human security of the 2005 World Summit Outcome”
Visit to Japan by Their Majesties The Yang di-Pertuan Agong and Raja Permaisuri Agong of Malaysia
Questions concerning the condition of the new Japanese Ambassador to China, Mr. Shinichi Nishimiya
Question concerning the visit to Washington D.C. by Mr. Seiji Maehara
Question concerning the bilateral relations between Japan and the People’s Republic of China
Questions concerning the Senkaku Islands
Follow up questions concerning the bilateral relations between Japan and the People’s Republic of China
Questions concerning the Takeshima Islands

1. Fourth Japan-Australia 2+2 Foreign and Defence Ministers’ Meeting

Deputy Press Secretary Ms. Naoko Saiki: Good afternoon. Let me begin by touching upon several issues before taking your questions.

Ms. Saiki: First, on the attendance at the Fourth Japan-Australia Foreign and Defense Ministerial Consultations by the Ministers for Foreign Affairs and of Defense of Japan. Foreign Minister Koichiro Gemba will attend the Fourth 2+2 Meeting between Japan and Australia from today to Saturday. In fact, the meeting will take place tomorrow on Friday, and he will be leaving Japan for Sydney, Australia this evening.

The Japan-Australia 2+2 Ministerial Consultations will be attended, as I said briefly, by Foreign Minister Gemba and Defense Minister Morimoto on the Japan side and by Minister for Foreign Affairs Carr and Minister for Defense Smith on the Australian side. They will hold this meeting for the first time in approximately two years. On this opportunity, Minister for Foreign Affairs Gemba plans to have a Foreign Ministers’ Meeting with Minister Carr.

2. Situation in Somalia

Ms. Saiki: Second, on the situation in Somalia. The Government of Japan welcomes the election of Hassan Sheikh Mohamud as the new president of Somalia on 10 September. Japan hopes that the newly elected president will work towards a new nation building to achieve peace and stability in Somalia as soon as possible. The Government of Japan will continue to provide necessary support for peace and stability in Somalia together with the international community.

3. Adoption of the Resolution by the United Nations General Assembly “Follow-up to paragraph 143 on human security of the 2005 World Summit Outcome”

Ms. Saiki: Third, on a resolution adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on human security. On 10 September, the resolution entitled “Follow-up to paragraph 143 on human security of the 2005 World Summit Outcome” was adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations at its 66th session. As you know, the notion of human security had been discussed at the United Nations.

The member states this time agreed upon a common understanding on human security by this resolution. It is expected that dissemination and application of human security will be promoted further in the international community through the resolution. The Government of Japan continues to promote human security actively by effectively utilizing the United Nations Trust Fund for Human Security and other Official Development Assistance projects.

4. Visit to Japan by Their Majesties The Yang di-Pertuan Agong and Raja Permaisuri Agong of Malaysia

Ms. Saiki: Fourth, on a visit to Japan by Their Majesties The Yang di-Pertuan Agong and Raja Permaisuri Agong of Malaysia. Their Majesties will pay a state visit to Japan from 1 October to 5 October. During Their Majesties’ stay in Japan, Their Majesties The Yang di-Pertuan Agong and Raja Permaisuri Agong will make a State Call on Their Majesties The Emperor and Empress of Japan. Their Majesties The Emperor and Empress will host a State Banquet in honor of Their Majesties The Yang di-Pertuan Agong and Raja Permaisuri Agong. The Government of Japan sincerely welcomes the visit of Their Majesties, which will further the friendly relations between Japan and Malaysia.

With these initial announcements, I would be happy to take your questions.

5. Questions concerning the condition of the new Japanese Ambassador to China, Mr. Shinichi Nishimiya

Q: I have two questions. First of them is about the condition of the Japanese Ambassador to China, Nishimiya-san. The report said that he was found unconscious on the street near his home, and brought to the hospital. Could you tell us what has happened and what is his condition, and if this has something to do with the current situation between China and Japan?

Ms. Saiki: On that point, what I can say today is that Mr. Nishimiya is in the hospital due to his poor health condition. I refrain from making further comments or explanations because this is a matter of his privacy.

Q: Just a follow-up question. Given the current relations between Japan and China, anybody in his position would assume very important responsibility. So, yes, his condition is a personal matter. But whether or not he is ready to assume that position, and go there and start working as an ambassador at this critical time, that is maybe a public matter as well. So, in that regard maybe, do you have some comments on how soon he will likely recover or how soon he will resume his official duty?

Ms. Saiki: Thank you for the question. First of all, let me remind you that the Japanese Ambassador to the People’s Republic of China right now is Ambassador Niwa, who is in Beijing, China. So, as far as the official function to be performed by the Japanese Ambassador to the PRC is concerned, Ambassador Niwa discharges his responsibility well.

Yes, please.

6. Question concerning the visit to Washington D.C. by Mr. Seiji Maehara

Q: Thank you. Regarding the visit of Mr. Maehara to Washington, I heard he gave an interview this morning and talked to the Energy Minister of the United States. I was just wondering if he explained to him the official nuclear energy policy of Japan. And why is Mr. Maehara doing that and not, for example, the Foreign Minister?

Ms. Saiki: Thank you for the question. We are aware that Mr. Maehara has been visiting the United States, and on his trip, he has had several opportunities to discuss a variety of things, including energy issues, with important figures in the United States. But we do not understand that he represents the Government of Japan. I think that he is visiting the United States on his behalf – “on his behalf” meaning in the capacity of the Chair of the Policy Research Committee of the DPJ.

Go ahead.

7. Question concerning the bilateral relations between Japan and the People’s Republic of China

Q: Again, the next question is about China, but a slightly different angle. Senior Chinese officials – namely, the Vice Minister of Commerce – earlier today said that the current bilateral relations will have a negative impact on Sino-Japanese economic and trade ties; so not only political or just about bad feelings between two people, but a negative impact on economic ties and relations. What is the Japanese Government’s view on that?

Ms. Saiki: Thank you for the question. I would like to state first of all that the relation between Japan and the People’s Republic of China is one of the most important relations. The relations between Japan and the PRC are of importance, not only to both countries, but also to the region and to the international community as a whole. That is exactly the reason why the two countries have agreed upon the importance of strengthening their bilateral relations, the “mutually beneficial relationship based on common strategic interests.”

Let me then reiterate the basic position of the Japanese Government with respect to the Senkaku Islands. The Senkaku Islands are a part of the inherent Japanese territory in light of international law as well as based on historical facts, and there is no doubt that the Senkaku Islands are Japan’s territory. In fact, Japan has maintained its valid control over the islands. Recently, the Government of Japan has decided to reacquire and possess the three islands belonging to the Senkaku Islands by the Government. This transfer of the ownership of these three islands from a private citizen to the Government of Japan does not and should not cause any issues vis-à-vis other countries or other regions since it is a purely domestic legal procedure. That being stated, again, the bilateral relationship between Japan and the PRC is such an important one that we would like to urge the Chinese side to act in a calm manner in broader perspective. For that purpose, the Government of Japan has been communicating very closely with the Government of the PRC at various levels. We will continue to do so.

8. Questions concerning the Senkaku Islands

Q: Japan had made a very good approach, in my opinion, regarding the Takeshima Islands and regarding South Korea by suggesting the ICJ should decide the fate of the islands, and, as you pointed out, there is a special thinking of the Japanese Government regarding the Senkaku Islands – its official position – which sounds quite similar to the position South Korea has regarding the Takeshima Islands. In that case, you proposed the ICJ. Why is Japan not proposing to let the ICJ to decide about the fate of the Senkaku Islands, too? That would probably be a good solution, and also would keep in mind the Japanese idea regarding Takeshima.

Ms. Saiki: Thank you for the question. Before responding to your question, let me clearly state that the Japanese Government has not suggested, but formally proposed to institute proceedings regarding Takeshima before the International Court of Justice. Very unfortunately, the Government of the Republic of Korea did not accept the proposal by the GOJ. But, we really would like to see the change of the position by the ROK so that the two countries will be able to be in a position to resolve the dispute in a fair and peaceful manner in accordance with the international law. This is the first basic point.

And, on your specific question, as I explained a few minutes ago, there are no disputes between Japan and other countries or other regions with respect to the Senkaku Islands. Historically and in light of international law, the Senkaku Islands are an inherent and integral part of Japanese territory. So, we do not see any point in proposing the case to be dealt with by a third party institution such as the International Court of Justice. What I am saying is that the nature of the issues – on the one side, Takeshima and on the other, the Senkaku Islands – is totally different. Furthermore, we are not aware that the Government of the PRC wishes to bring the case before the court, including the ICJ. So I do not make any speculative or hypothetical comments on that.

Q: What you described now is exactly the position the South Korean side has regarding the Takeshima Islands. So, in this case, in the case of Takeshima, you say although the South Korean Government is saying there is no territory issue because the Takeshima Islands belong to South Korea since ever and ever again, and you say the best way to solve the problem peacefully and in a good manner would be by going or proposing it to the ICJ. Now, you are on the side – like South Korea – saying it is your inherent territory for a long time, and the other side is saying, “No, that is not right.” Why is the Japanese Government not saying, in the same way as South Korea, this is the best idea to solve it peacefully by asking the international community about their stance? I mean, you will probably just repeat the answer you said. But, for me, it is important to point out that Japan should be aware that they are two points, or two problems, and the government is regarding each problem in a different position, but there could be a solution if Japan sticks with one position.

Ms. Saiki: Thank you very much for your question. We believe that the stance of the Government of Japan is consistent throughout all the cases. For instance, in July this year, Foreign Minister Gemba visited Cambodia to attend a number of ASEAN-related Foreign Ministers’ meetings where he clearly stated that all the issues, all the disputes, must be resolved in accordance with international law in a peaceful manner. So, I think, as I explained to you, the basic position of the Government of Japan is in this way very clear and consistent. We respect and abide by international law. We encourage and request other parties to do the same thing. Going back to the issue relating to the Senkaku Islands, the Senkaku Islands are a part of Japan’s territory in accordance with the historical facts and international law. So, there are no disputes to be resolved as far as the Senkaku Islands are concerned. But, if and when – in a hypothetical case, now I am rather speculating – any country or region should find a situation where a third party institution decision would be advisable, I think it is that particular party that should act. Japan has maintained the valid control over the islands. We are very confident in our position, and we are not afraid of any hypothetical situation which you are asking the question about. But, again, let me repeat that in terms of the nature, or the characteristics, or perhaps the basic structure of the two issues – one is the dispute relating to Takeshima, the other is the issue relating to the Senkaku Islands – these two are totally different.

9. Follow up questions concerning the bilateral relations between Japan and the People’s Republic of China

Q: The same topic, but a different angle. One month ago, there was a report that Chinese and Japanese bureaucrats – I think from the Foreign Ministries – struck out a deal that there will be emergency military lines between China and Japan. And this was before the tensions grew higher and higher. I never heard about this again, so just wondering: is there something like an emergency line between the Chinese and Japanese military? Or is this full of lies?

Ms. Saiki: Thank you for the question. Yes, the leaders of the two countries have agreed upon the establishment of lines of communications at various levels between the two countries in the context of a maritime crisis management mechanism. I do not believe that that agreement between the two leaders of Japan and the PRC has been invalidated. So, in that respect, I think there is the agreement, under which, at various levels, communication between the two countries is expected to grow and lines of communications to be instituted further.

10. Questions concerning the Takeshima Islands

Q: Last question. I saw a few ads in a South Korean paper regarding the Takeshima Islands which were brought up by the Japanese Government. Is this right? This is my first question.

Ms. Saiki: Excuse me. I did not follow your question. Can you repeat what you have said?

Q: Yes, I will try to make it more clear. In South Korean newspapers, they were asked about the Japanese stand regarding the Takeshima Islands. I read about that, and I was wondering if this is true, if the Japanese Foreign Ministry financed some ads – I know, for example, in the New York Times, but also in South Korean newspapers – to show the people what the Japanese stance is regarding the Takeshima Islands.

Ms. Saiki: On that particular point, I am not aware of what you have described – namely, there were some opinion advertisements in local papers in South Korea sponsored by the Government of Japan. I am not aware of that.

Are there any other questions? Okay, so this concludes today’s conference. Thank you for coming. I am going to Sydney, Australia with my Foreign Minister, Mr. Gemba, this evening. But I shall return by the beginning of next week. So, see you next week.

Back to Index