Press Conference by the Press Secretary 20 September 1996

Introduction to the press conference
Foreign Ministry Spokesman Ken Shimanouchi: Good afternoon ladies and gentlemen. Welcome to the regular Ministry of Foreign Affairs press conference. Before I take your questions, I have two announcements. The first is that after this press conference, there will be a background briefing on the current session of the United Nations being held in New York, given by two officials directly in charge of the United Nations at this ministry.
The Security Consultative Committee (2+2) Meeting held in Washington, D.C.
Foreign Ministry Spokesman Ken Shimanouchi: I would also like to give you a brief readout of the 2+2 Meeting held in Washington, D.C. on 19 September, local time. The Meeting began at 9:30 a.m. and lasted for about three and one-half hours. It was actually a session of the Security Consultative Committee (SSC), better known as the 2+2, and a working lunch following the Meeting. After the Meeting, three documents were announced: The Joint Announcement; the Status Report on the Special Action Committee on Facilities and Areas in Okinawa; and the Progress Report on the Guidelines Review for Japan-U.S. Defense Cooperation. The documents have been made available to you. Since these documents describe in detail the subjects discussed in the 2+2 Meeting, let me give you in a nutshell what was discussed. At the outset of the Meeting, the two sides took stock of the developments since the 2+2 Meeting last year, which was also held in the United States in September. The two sides gave high marks to the results achieved through the efforts of the two governments to better adapt the Japan-U.S. Security Arrangements to the new situation, and to strengthen the arrangements on a more stable foundation. In this context, they referred to the April Summit Meeting between Prime Minister Ryutaro Hashimoto and President William Clinton of the United States of America, together with the Joint Security Declaration announced at that time. They also referred to the Special Measures Agreement, the new Host Nation Support Agreement (HNS), the efforts of the Special Action Committee on Facilities and Areas in Okinawa (SACO) to address the issue of United States bases in Okinawa. They also referred to the Acquisition and Cross- Servicing Agreement (ACSA), and also the initiation of consultations on the review of the guidelines for Japan-U.S. defense cooperation. They also talked about the agreement on the support fighter, the F-2, among other things. They also discussed, more specifically, the issue of United States bases in Okinawa and the efforts of the SACO. A status report was given concerning the work being done in the SACO. The 2+2 reaffirmed its firm commitment to bring to fruition the work being done in the SACO by the end of November of this year. On this subject, the Japanese side explained the efforts that the Japanese side was making to reduce the burden on the people in Okinawa resulting from the concentration of U.S. facilities and areas in Okinawa. The United States expressed appreciation for such efforts by the Japanese side and for the statement made by Prime Minister Hashimoto on 10 September. With regard to the return of Futenma Air Station, they referred to the three options now being considered, namely the incorporation of facilities into Kadena Air Base, the construction of a heliport at Camp Schwab, and also the newest proposal, which is the development and construction of an offshore floating facility. The 2+2 agreed to set up a special working group to conduct joint studies which will take into account safety, noise, operational and technical aspects, as well as environmental and financial factors. They agreed that the SACO would be coming up with a final report, taking into account these studies by the special working group. On the review of the Defense Cooperation Guidelines, the two sides expressed satisfaction for the smooth progress being made in the consultations regarding the review of the Guidelines being conducted in the Subcommittee on Defense Cooperation created for this purpose. They approved the progress report that the Subcommittee submitted to the 2+2. The 2+2 instructed the Subcommittee to move ahead with its work with the intention of completing its work by autumn of 1997. They also agreed on the importance of providing a clear explanation on these efforts to the countries of the Asia- Pacific. They also noted the importance of the internal studies of the Government of Japan on contingency responses in the context of the review. I am referring to the studies now being conducted internally within the Government of Japan at the instruction of Prime Minister Hashimoto. Another subject that was discussed was the mutual exchange in the areas of technology and equipment. Both sides expressed their appreciation for the substantial progress being made in the areas of exchanges of technology and equipment. They also expressed satisfaction at the fact that an exchange of notes was effected regarding the production of the F-2 support fighter and at the fact that the notification procedures for the United States Congress had been completed regarding this matter. They also confirmed that they would continue joint studies regarding ballistic missile defense (BMD). They discussed a number of other issues, but I will stop here and give you an opportunity to ask questions about this meeting or any other subject. Those are the announcements that I wanted to make, and I will be delighted to respond to any questions that you might have.
Meeting between Prime Minister Ryutaro Hashimoto and President William Clinton of the United States of America
Q: Since Prime Minister Hashimoto is going to meet with President Clinton next week, and the Government is changing now because of the election, right? So, will this have any effect on what they will really achieve, because there is an election coming, and the members of the Government will be changing anyway? At this time, even though they are having a talk, what can they actually talk about?

A: The Meeting will be held on 24 September. It is going to be a very short meeting -- maybe 15 or 20 minutes. The agenda has not been fixed. I assume that the two leaders will discuss whatever is on their minds at the time. We consider it very important that the Prime Minister of Japan and the United States President meet as frequently as possible, whenever they have an opportunity, to discuss issues and subjects of common interest to them.

Q: So, the election has no affect on it whatsoever?

A: No, because President Clinton will be in New York for the United Nations General Assembly, and our Prime Minister will be in New York for the United Nations Meeting. As I said, it is very important that the two leaders meet whenever they have an opportunity.
Japan-U.S. exchange of notes regarding production of the F-2 support fighter
Q: You had mentioned this involvement in the exchange of notes concerning the production of the F-2. Can you elaborate on this move?

A: I did not bring the press release with me. May I give you a copy of the press release later on, because this was some months ago. This is not new. They took stock of the progress made since last year's meeting of the 2+2. In this context, they referred to the exchange of notes regarding the F-2 as one of the achievements reached by the two sides in the past year.
Possible expansion of United Nations Security Council membership
Q: This issue of Japan joining an expanded Security Council doesn't seem to have as high a profile today as it did a year or two ago. Why is this the case?

A: I think that is your personal impression. First of all, in order for Japan to become a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council, there has to be agreement on United Nations reform, in this case the restructuring of the Security council. This is still under discussion among the members of the working group set up for that purpose. Although there is a consensus that the Security Council needs to be expanded, there is no consensus regarding other matters, such as the number of permanent members which should be added to the Security Council. Presently, the most important thing is to continue discussions on the restructuring of the Security Council and achieve consensus on this.

Q: The Security Council issue is part of a larger effort by the Government of Japan to increase its leadership profile in global affairs. With that as a premise, I am wondering, with the Prime Minister heading to New York, does the present anger in China, Taiwan, Hong Kong, and Macao over the Senkaku lighthouse in any way diminish Japan's ability to raise its global leadership profile and its profile in East Asia?

A: We are seeking non-permanent membership in the Security Council right now. Maybe, since the elections for the non- permanent members will be held during the current session, we have been focusing on this aspect more than on the permanent seat aspect. I do not necessarily agree with you that this is an attempt by Japan to raise its profile in international affairs. Although, we think that in the Security council, countries that are both willing to and capable of playing a role in maintaining peace and stability in the world should be added to the Security Council as permanent members. That is our position. Japan, in its own way, has been making contributions to the peace and prosperity of the world. We have been participating actively in the efforts to reform the United Nations. Also, we have been playing a very active role in the area of nuclear disarmament. Also, we have been trying to play a greater role in such areas as humanitarian assistance and refugee issues. As a permanent member of the Security Council, we believe that we can better play that role. So, it is not an attempt to raise Japan's profile in the world. We want to play a useful role in the world.
The fundamental position of the Government of Japan on the Senkaku Islands
Q: I do not want to suggest that in a negative context at all, as something that Japan should not aspire to. Isn't this something that the United States has encouraged -- for Japan to play a role commensurate with its economic strength? And, something that the last five prime ministers have endeavored to do. My only question is whether having China, Taiwan and Hong Kong so angry over this Senkaku incident, that it might create a type of static that could get in the way of everybody's best long-term interests?

A: You have not been to any of our recent press conferences, have you?

Q: No, it has been awhile.

A: Press Secretary Hiroshi Hashimoto and I have repeatedly explained Japan's position on the Senkaku issue, and I will give it to you in a nutshell if you like.

Q: Sure. Go ahead.

A: The position of the Government of Japan is as follows. Japan has repeatedly made it clear that the Senkaku Islands are an integral part of Japanese territory. The Government of Japan is not involved in the activities of the private group which constructed a lighthouse on the Island -- nor do we support the activities of this group. Japan attaches a great importance to its friendly ties with the People's Republic of China, and we believe that it is necessary for both sides to approach this matter calmly, so as not to affect the bilateral relationship. The same goes for non- governmental relations with Taiwan. We do not want these stable ties affected by this issue.

Q: Going back to the Senkaku Islands issue -- I have asked this same question many times, but still I have to ask once more, I guess, because yesterday, the Yomiuri Shimbun reported that the Government of Japan already decided not to give approval to this lighthouse built by Seinensha. Since it is one of the most popular newspapers in Japan, can you confirm that really is the Japanese Government's position?

A: I agree with you that the Yomiuri Shimbun is one of the most popular newspapers in Japan, and I have great respect for it. The current status of this issue remains the same. What I am about to say is the same as what I said last week, and as what Press Secretary Hashimoto said this Tuesday. The Government of Japan is carefully considering how to approach this issue of the lighthouse on the basis of Japan's position on the Senkaku Islands -- which you are well aware of -- that it is an integral part of Japanese territory.

Q: So, they have not decided yet?

A: No decision has been reached. We are still considering this matter carefully.

Q: But, one issue I would like to raise -- because we have talked to the secretary of the owner of the Island. We have talked to him, and we also talked to another reporter from Reuters. He claimed that he did not give permission to the Seinensha to build a lighthouse there. He said he didn't know the group -- he didn't know why they did this. That contrasts with what the Foreign Ministry has told us before, which says that the Seinensha got his permission -- from the landowner of the Senkaku Islands. Apparently, according to this land owner, Seinensha's illegal entry is trespassing -- because it was without permission of the owner. So, that's an illegal building. That's totally different from what we heard from the foreign Ministry, though.

A: We are not aware of what was discussed between the owner of the Island and the media, and also the discussions between the owner and this private group. We are not aware of this.

Q: The Foreign Ministry did tell us that because the Seinensha got permission they're not against any law.

A: We are not in a position to be abreast of what is being discussed by the parties to this. We have said that it is private property.

Q: Apparently, the owner didn't give the approval -- they didn't know what Seinensha would do. They just went there on their own, without any permission. That is hard for us to understand, because anybody who tries to go in there -- tries to go to the Senkaku Islands -- will be expelled by the Maritime Safety Agency. Only Seinensha's boat got in, and they didn't get permission. Actually, they don't have the permission from the owner. It is hard for us to believe that's without --.

A: I cannot make any comments on that, because I am not aware of what was discussed between the owner of the Island and the private group. There is no way I can comment on this.

Q: How would the Maritime Safety Agency -- they have a patrol there -- how would they only let Seinensha's boat get in?

A: As I said, I do not know what was discussed, so there is no way I can comment on this.

Q: I am asking about the Maritime Safety Agency. How could they only let Seinensha's boat go in without other boats which try to go in? And then, apparently, whatever is between the owner and a private person is another thing -- but, they don't have the permission, right? So how come? What we don't understand is that a few journalists tried to go there by boat, and always were kept out, even though we were from Japan. However, the only boat that could get in was Seinensha's boat? If the Government says it's private land, how come it only lets Seinensha's boat get in? Doesn't that show that there's some kind of support?

A: This issue has to do with the domestic legal system, and we in this building are not experts on that subject. I therefore cannot answer your question intelligently.

Q: Are you saying that the domestic legal system would be different for journalists?

A: I am not suggesting that at all. For domestic legislation, agencies other than the Ministry of Foreign Affairs are responsible. We are only responsible for the foreign policy aspect of the Government of Japan's activities. That is why I am not in a position to give a detailed response to a detailed question regarding Japan's domestic legal system.

Q: Assuming that the Government has not given permission to the Seinensha, quite apart of whether the Maritime Safety Agency stops boats or not, if the group is guilty of trespassing, is there anything in Japanese law that says they should not be prosecuted for trespassing?

A: I believe that I have already explained to you why I cannot answer that question. I am not an expert on Japan's criminal code, or the civil code, or any other domestic law. I just do not know.
The speech to the United Nations by Prime Minister Ryutaro Hashimoto
Q: Will the Prime Minister in New York take steps to reassure Japan's Asian neighbors that Japan will not become an aggressive military nation again?

A: With regard to the Prime Minister's speech in New York, I cannot discuss that. Perhaps in the following background briefing, my colleagues can give you some hints. I am not in a position to tell you what the Prime Minister is going to say, but since it is going to be a United Nations speech, the speech will deal with United Nations matters. As you know, Minister for Foreign Affairs Yukihiko Ikeda will be having a bilateral meeting with his Chinese counterpart, Minister of Foreign Affairs Qian Qichen. Again, I am not in a position to give you the agenda of the meeting, because what to discuss is entirely up to the two Foreign Ministers. But, I do expect that the Foreign Minister will reaffirm to the Chinese Foreign Minister that Japan's basic policy vis-?-vis China remains unchanged -- that Japan attaches importance to its ties with China, that Japan intends to develop cooperative ties with China in accordance with the principles stated in the Japan-China Joint Communique, and that Japan will continue to give support to the efforts being made by China to move forward its reform and openness policies. This is the message that we will be sending to the Chinese side. Also, we expect in this meeting of Foreign Ministers to discuss the overall relationship between Japan and China. We would like to make this an opportunity to reaffirm the continued development of cooperative ties between Japan and China.
Matters of domestic law outside the purview of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Q: Going back to the Senkaku Islands, let me put it this way. The Seinensha submitted an application to the Maritime Safety Agency for the Government to recognize this lighthouse as a formal one. But, if this lighthouse is illegally built -- I mean, they go there, they build it, without asking the permission of the owner. So then, this application shouldn't be considered anyway, right? It shouldn't be accepted as an application since this building is --.

A: This is another question about Japan's domestic laws. We in this ministry do not have jurisdiction over these laws, so I cannot give you an authoritative interpretation of our laws.

Q: Since it is becoming a diplomatic problem, then you would think that at least the Japanese Government would check if the Seinensha built this lighthouse, and if they got approval from the owners, as what we were told by the Foreign Ministry, right? That is what we have been told.

A: I assure you that Japan is a country governed by law. So, this whole issue will be dealt with in accordance with the relevant laws and regulations of Japan. I can tell you that.
Meeting in New York between Minister for Foreign Affairs Yukihiko Ikeda and Minister of Foreign Affairs Qian Qichen of the People's Republic of China
Q: Will the two Foreign Ministers be discussing the Senkakus in their meeting?

A: It is up to the two Foreign Ministers to decide. The spokesman for the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs said yesterday, I believe, that the Chinese side would be raising this issue. I can give you a personal guess -- yes, I do expect this issue to be discussed in New York by the two foreign ministers.

Q: If it is discussed, would you say it is a formal statement, or do you think they will actually go into some detail?

A: That is something that is entirely up to the two foreign ministers. We will not know until after the Meeting is over -- we never do. I am not in the business of doing guesswork in front of a camera.
Fishing talks between Japanese private-sector interests and Taiwan
Q: Japan and Taiwan have reached agreement in a report on fishing measures. If this report is correct, can you tell me about their meeting in Tokyo?

A: As you know, a preliminary consultation at the private- sector level was held in early August between the Japanese and Taiwanese sides. At that time, the two sides agreed that they would be discussing this matter fully. Right now, the timing and other specifics of the second round of consultations are being discussed through the normal private-sector channels between the two sides. So, my answer to that question is that that is still under discussion between the two sides.

Q: And, the date can now be fixed?

A: It is still being discussed. Thank you very much.

Back to Index