Press Conference by the Press Secretary 2 June, 1998

1. Introductory Training Program for the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty Organization International Monitoring System
2. Response of the Government of Japan to the second round of nuclear testing conducted by the Islamic Republic of Pakistan
3. Possible initiative by the Government of Japan to host a meeting regarding the situation in South Asia
4. Possible participation of the People's Republic of China in the G8 Foreign Ministers' Meeting
5. Response of the Government of Japan to the nuclear testing conducted by the Republic of India
6. Admission of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan to the Association of Southeast Asian Nations Regional Forum
7. Role of Japan in promoting peace and stability in South Asia
8. The Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty International Monitoring System

1. Introductory Training Program for the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty Organization International Monitoring System

   Press Secretary Sadaaki Numata: We have a quiet afternoon? I have two comments to make at the beginning. The first is about the Introductory Training Program (ITP) for the International Monitoring System (IMS) for the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty (CTBT). This program, a sort of seminar, will be held from 8 to 12 June in Tokyo under the auspices of the Provisional Technical Secretariat (PTS) Preparatory Commission (Prep Com) for the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty Organization (CTBTO). This is highly technical but basically the idea is that under the CTBT you do need a verification regime and the verification needs to take place all over the world. There are four different means of verification; one is the seismological verification or monitoring, the second is radio nuclei monitoring, the third is underwater sonar monitoring and the fourth is infra-sound monitoring. Under the CTBT regime there will be monitoring centers to be set up all over the world. With respect to seismological monitoring, there will be about 50 main monitoring posts and 120 supplementary posts. One of these monitoring stations will be placed in Matsushiro in Nagano prefecture. It is very well-known for seismological monitoring, not necessarily for nuclear testing but for earthquakes. It includes some 80 monitoring stations for radio nuclei monitoring, about a dozen underwater sonar monitoring posts and about 60 infra-sound monitoring posts or stations. The idea is that there will be this international data center to be established in Vienna which is where the CTBTO is headquartered. This international data center will be linked by satellite to all these monitoring sites as well as to the governments of the contracting parties. All these data will be assembled at the international data center for analysis. That is the general idea. Now, I think you will appreciate that these monitoring activities will have to take place all over the world which means that these monitoring posts will have to be manned by experts and that is what this training program is about. The program is designed for the technical experts and administrators of facilities for international monitoring and there will be 32 participants from the Southeast Asian, Pacific and Far Eastern regions. The Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA), the Meteorological Agency of Japan, the Japan Weather Association and the Japan Atomic Energy Research Institute are collaborating by offering their research facilities. There will be participation of Japanese experts, notably Dr. Shigeji Suehiro, who is the Special Assistant to the Minister for Foreign Affairs and he has been helping with the verification side of the CTBT negotiations which went on in Geneva. He used to be the Director-General of the Meteorological Agency. He is one of the foremost seismological experts in Japan. Toward the entry into force of the CTBT, the CTBTO Preparatory Committee is preparing to complete its verification system centering on the IMS. We hope that this program will contribute to the completion of this international monitoring system in our part of the world, that is in the Southeast Asian, the Pacific and the Far Eastern regions.

2. Response of the Government of Japan to the second round of nuclear testing conducted by the Islamic Republic of Pakistan

   Press Secretary Sadaaki Numata: My second announcement is really to catch up with the developments over the weekend on again, I am afraid, the nuclear testing front. The Islamic Republic of Pakistan conducted its second nuclear testing over the weekend on 30 May at about 17:00, Japan time. Japan deplores this in the sense that Pakistan went ahead with this testing despite the strong criticism by the international community and we are concerned that together with the Republic of India's nuclear testing, this could heighten the tensions in South Asia further, could provoke a dangerous escalation of a nuclear arms race and could undermine the foundation of the nuclear non-proliferation regime. For those reasons, we can in no way condone this testing. Minister for Foreign Affairs Keizo Obuchi called in the charges d'affaires of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan on the evening of 30 May to make his demarche to the charges d'affaires underlining these points and at the same time strongly urged Pakistan to heed the call of the international community for Pakistan to accede without condition to the NPT and the CTBT. As I have just said, these nuclear testings by India and Pakistan could threaten peace and stability in South Asia and could seriously undermine the nuclear non-proliferation regime which is supported by the majority of the international community. In view of this the United Nations Security Council issued the Presidential statement. In addition on Saturday 30 May, Ambassador Hisashi Owada of the Japanese Permanent Mission to the United Nations in New York asked for an emergency meeting of the Security Council and on that day Japan, in co-sponsorship with the Kingdom of Sweden and the Republic of Costa Rica, tabled a draft Security Council resolution on this. It is now being deliberated in the Security Council. Another development is that there is to be a meeting of the Group of Eight (G8) Foreign Ministers in London to address the question of this global non-proliferation regime as well as the peace and stability in South Asia and it is our intention to send Foreign Minister Obuchi to this meeting, with the permission of the Diet. It is our intention to take up in the G8 Foreign Ministers' meeting such matters as the need to strengthen global nuclear disarmament and the strengthening of the nuclear non-proliferation regime, the prevention of nuclear development on the part of India and Pakistan and the search for ways to relax the tensions between India and Pakistan.

3. Possible initiative by the Government of Japan to host a meeting regarding the situation in South Asia

   Q: The reports say that Foreign Minister Obuchi is calling for an international conference in Tokyo and that you expect India and Pakistan to attend that meeting and the object of the conference is to find ways to resolve the Kashmir problem --

   A: Yes. As I was saying earlier, one of the issues that this series of nuclear testings has brought into sharp relief is on the one hand, the question of the nuclear non-proliferation regime which may face a real danger of being undermined, and on the other hand it is this question of how you achieve peace and stability in South Asia and in the latter context, the question of Kashmir is a matter of very considerable tension in that part of the world. We feel that the tensions between India and Pakistan can be destabilizing, not only to South Asia but also to Asia as a whole and possibly to peace and stability in the world and for that reason we are seriously concerned about this. So it is in this context that we would like to see this question discussed in the Security Council as well as in the forthcoming G8 Foreign Ministers' meeting. What Foreign Minister Obuchi was saying was that we do feel it would be very strongly desirable for this question to be addressed seriously and if there is a part that can be played by Japan for example, if it is at all possible, by hosting a meeting in Tokyo, we might very well consider that possibility. However, exactly what can be done, and how it can be done we will have to give some further thought to because as I was explaining to you earlier, there are a number of meetings being envisaged and a number of discussions and deliberations taking place for example in the Security Council there is also talk about a possible meeting of the Permanent Members of the Security Council prior to the G8 Foreign Ministers meeting in London. The idea of a possible meeting in Tokyo will be something that we will be looking at, but in looking at that process we will also be taking into account whatever may emerge from these series of international meetings. At this stage it remains an idea.

   Q: Is this initiative or possible initiative, in response to Pakistan's request that Japan play a mediating role?

   A: It is based on our very serious concern about the stability of the region which could affect our part of the world. It is based on our desire to see tensions lessened in the region, but at the same time, there is this concern on the part of the international community as well and we expect to see discussions on the subject in the various fora. I think I will come back to my earlier statement that it is an idea that we are looking at. At this stage, before we go further into giving flesh to this idea, we will be looking at how this sort of question will be discussed in the sort of meetings that I have mentioned.

4. Possible participation of the People's Republic of China in the G8 Foreign Ministers' Meeting

   Q: Do you have any information whether China is going to attend the G8 Foreign Ministers' meeting?

   A: I do not at this point. The People's Republic of China will be attending the P5 meeting, that much I know.

   Q: Will that be in Geneva?

   A: I think Geneva is being talked about as a possible venue for 4 June.

   Q: You have quite often in your statements or in your responses referred to "the region." I presume the implication means South Asia.?

   A: Yes.

5. Response of the Government of Japan to the nuclear testing conducted by the Republic of India

   Q: There is the other context regarding China and the Sino-Pakistani nexus. Is the Ministry of Foreign Affairs satisfied that India has made sufficient efforts to explain to Japan, I am not talking about the nuclear issue alone, but generally speaking, what led to India doing these tests or at least the pretext of why India did these tests? Are you satisfied or is there some great gap between the two sides in communication at a higher level?

   A: I am not quite sure how best I can respond to your question except to say that had we been completely satisfied with the Indian reasoning for the nuclear testing, I do not think we would have found ourselves in the position of continuing to call on India to stop its nuclear testing and to join the NPT and the CTBT and, in order to convey this message to India, to take this certain set of measures. If you look at the result of the communication, I do not think we can say that we are satisfied. I think I had better leave it at that.

6. Admission of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan to the Association of Southeast Asian Nations Regional Forum

   Q: There is a report regarding Pakistan and the ASEAN Regional Forum.

   A: Yes. Yes.

   Q: Apparently, there was some discussion last month at the meeting of officials at the ARF that the Chinese suggested this and some of the other countries were reported to have said that they wanted to confine it to East Asia.

   A: Firstly, India is already in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations Regional Forum (ARF). Here we have a situation where developments between India and Pakistan in this particular instance can have serious repercussions for the region which is represented in the ARF. So, in view of this, there were some very tentative exploratory discussions among certain members of the ARF when the Senior Officials' Meeting took place in Manila from 20 to 22 May and we do feel that in view, partly of the fact that India is already in, that it would be desirable for Pakistan to be invited to the ARF meeting and that is why there were some exploratory discussions. It is true that this is not a matter on which consensus can be very easily obtained because there are different countries with different views, but we do feel that if possible it would be desirable for Pakistan to be invited in some form or other, for example to the Ministerial meeting which is scheduled to take place towards the end of July. So this is something that we are actively looking at and this is something on which we have initiated exploratory discussions within the ARF.

7. Role of Japan in promoting peace and stability in South Asia

   Q: Could you share your thoughts on one critical, practical matter. At the Security Council or at the G8, there is this particular allergy among this Indian government probably and the previous ones that Pakistan should not be allowed to achieve some type of parity with India in international standing and also the Indian's feeling that they should achieve the same kind of standing as China. These are real practical matters which have conditioned the responses of China, India and Pakistan on whatever situations that you have. How is Japan going to play these situations?

   A: If I could produce an answer to that out of my hat, I might qualify as the Secretary-General of the United Nations. But joking aside, our concern is that this series of nuclear tests by India and Pakistan brings to the surface some very serious fundamental problems facing the international community and the first is how we can preserve the global nuclear non-proliferation regime in light of the implications of these testings to the nuclear non-proliferation regime and what could possibly be done about it, does deserve very serious attention and debate by the international community. Secondly, as I have been saying repeatedly, this heightening tension is a destabilizing factor for the South Asian region which could have global implications. So that should also be addressed and this is something about which the international community cannot just sort of stand idly by. There may be the sort of difficulties that you have mentioned but we do feel that despite the difficulties these fundamental issues are issues which really ought to be addressed seriously and we on our part would like to engage ourselves actively in that process. I might also add that the question of nuclear weapons testing is a matter of very strong national sentiment for the Japanese people as well.

   Q: Even with all these meetings and conferences being called, there is no suggestion how long the sanctions might continue to be in place.

   A: When we try to convey a clear message in protest against a certain action, I think it would be very difficult for us to try to specify exactly how long those measures, and incidentally I am calling them measures, can last. I think we certainly hope that the appeal that we are making will be heeded in some tangible manner and I think it is on the basis of the consideration of a number of factors, including among others, the question of to what extent our calls are being heeded, that we will be thinking about how to put the situation back to normal.

8. The Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty International Monitoring System

   Q: The seismological monitoring centers, you said that --

   A: Yes. Incidentally, it is quite coincidental that I made these two announcements at the same time.

   Q: The seismological monitoring centers --

   Q: You said 80?

   Q: Eighty is for radio nuclei.

   A: Let me go over the numbers again. Fifty main seismological --

   Q: Fifteen?

   A: -- fifty main seismological monitoring sites, 120 supplementary seismological monitoring sites and 80 radio nuclei monitoring sites. Radio nuclei, please do not ask me about radio nuclei. It is something that flows in the air that you cannot see. Also, it includes about a dozen underwater sonar monitoring and 60 infra-sound monitoring sites.

   Q: Is Jesse Helms going to allow all of this on American soil?

   A: We are not proposing to have all of these on American soil. I used to deal with this sort of thing in Geneva as a disarmament negotiator. In those days I only knew about seismological monitoring. I feel a bit out of depth about radio nuclei and underwater sonar and so forth. Well, we concentrated on South Asia today.