(* This is a provisional translation by "WIP ジャパン" for reference purpose only. The original text is in Japanese.)

Press Conference by Foreign Minister Taro Aso

Date: Tuesday, July 11, 2006, 10:56 a.m.
Place: Briefing Room, Ministry of Foreign Affairs

Main topics:

Cabinet Meeting
The North Korean Missile Launch

1. Cabinet Meeting

2. The North Korean Missile Launch

Minister:
Those of you who were with me until late last night already know that I engaged in a long and wide-ranging telephone conversation with United States Secretary of State, Dr. Rice, about a Security Council resolution regarding the North Korean missile launch. I reaffirmed our basic position of seeking a resolution from the Security Council. On top of that we both agreed that time should be allowed for China to conduct its diplomacy with North Korea. For that reason, we have decided for a short time not to put the draft resolution to the vote. We wish to continue in close consultation with the United States on this issue.

Question:
Condemning this missile launch is one thing, but the visit of the Chinese Vice-Minister of Foreign Affairs, Wu Dawei, to North Korea to work to facilitate six party talks is quite another. How did Japan arrive at the position that you are voicing?

Minister:
If you read the transcript of the Six Party Talks, you will find that the missile issue is mentioned at the very end. The contravention of the Pyongyang Declaration and the launching of these missiles are directly related, meaning that we are not negotiating over a completely different matter. The Six Party Talks, deal not only the missile issue, but the missile issue is included in the aims of the Six Party Talks. They are not such different issues.

Question:
China has proposed a chairman's statement, minus the sanctions included in Japan's draft resolution. On the other hand, it has stated that it will not raise any objection if a condemnatory resolution is decided upon. What attitude is Japan going to take in response to China's position on this?

Minister:
With Vice-Minister Wu Dawei having gone to North Korea only yesterday, and without knowing what kind of negotiations are taking place, I can't say anything. I can only guess what kind of response he is getting. Basically, we give China time. We are for issuing a resolution. The United States and Great Britain are for issuing a resolution. It may depend on the content, but we are for issuing a resolution, not for a chairman's statement. If we hold back from the proposed draft resolution, China will come up with a proper result. Otherwise, we will issue the resolution. Since we have given China some time, until we see the results of China's exercise of diplomacy and North Korea's response to it, it is very difficult to reply to assumptions.

Question:
You talk about waiting for the results of negotiations, but is there not the chance of them becoming so drawn out that the opportunity to get a UN resolution is lost? You said yesterday that, given the possibility of counter-maneuvers, moves should be made as quickly as possible. Approximately how many days before you think time is up?

Minister:
The G8 Summit is on the 15th, and it goes without saying that it will be very awkward for the host country if things are not settled by then. The EU3+3 meeting (the United States, Russia, and China) will take place before that in Paris on the 12th. With the United States and China meeting there, I imagine there will be a lot going on. I think it is certain that there is a goal, but with every passing day the sense of urgency slackens. Furthermore, there is a possibility that there will be all sorts of maneuvering and behind-the-scenes negotiation to avoid issuing a resolution. That's something we will have to deal with. What weighs on us the heaviest is the possibility of our waking up to find that we can't be certain of a majority. For that reason, Japan's basic position is that we want things carried out promptly.

Question:
Were you saying in the context of China trying to persuade North Korea that you might not propose a resolution - that you might hold back from doing so?

Minister:
A draft resolution will be forthcoming. Whatever happens, we will propose a resolution.

Question:
Are you saying that whatever the outcome of China's attempts at persuading North Korea, your intention to propose a resolution will remain unchanged?

Minister:
We will propose a resolution. That is for certain. There may be differences over what it will contain, but a draft resolution will definitely be made. We will propose a resolution. The only question about it is the content.

Question:
Does that mean that the content may be modified depending on the outcome of China's efforts?

Minister:
The possibility certainly exists of change in the content of the resolution. It is written in extremely difficult English, so translating it into Japanese can only make some of the wording even more difficult to understand. But, to put it simply, the kernel of what it says is that missile-related technology may not be bought or sold. The longest section in it expresses that.

Question:
Will there be any change to your position that the resolution should refer to sanctions?

Minister:
No. We have no intention of changing the basics of the resolution.

Question:
What are the parts that may be changed?

Minister:
I can't say anything about that until we see how North Korea responds.

Back to Index