Press Conference by the Press Secretary 17 September, 1999

1. Review of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) Leaders Meeting in Auckland
2. Overview of the current situation concerning East Timor
3. Review of the United States-Japan-Republic of Korea trilateral meeting concerning North Korea
4. Response to media criticism concerning comments made by Minister for Foreign Affairs Masahiko Koumura in regard to East Timor
5. Form of Japanese personnel and financial support to multinational peacekeeping operations in East Timor
6. Japan's position in regard to the possible lifting of sanctions imposed on North Korea

1. Review of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) Leaders Meeting in Auckland

   Press Secretary Sadaaki Numata: Good afternoon. Let me at the outset very quickly summarize three important events which have taken place. The first is the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) meeting in Auckland. Actually Prime Minister Keizo Obuchi gave a press conference at the end of the APEC meeting in Auckland so I will not repeat all the points. What we feel was significant about this APEC meeting, which took place in the tenth year since its inception in Canberra, the Commonwealth of Australia, is this. It was felt that solidarity among the Asia-Pacific has been growing stronger and this was demonstrated, for example, in the way that although APEC is a forum for discussing economic cooperation, this spirit of cooperation seems to be permeating APEC and expanding in a natural way to the issues of East Timor and other matters which are of immediate concern to all the leaders gathered in Auckland.

   About the main topics of the APEC meeting, three points are worth noting. Firstly, that it was felt that the Asia-Pacific economies were now showing signs of growing out of the serious economic crisis and in order to solidify this recovery, all APEC members collectively showed their resolve to resume their march toward regional prosperity. The APEC Declaration spells out how they propose to do this through regulatory reform, structural reform and so forth. In this context, we felt the strong expectations on the part of the Asia-Pacific economies for the Japanese economy, which has now gone over the hill and is moving toward recovery. There was also an expression of appreciation on the part of the Asia-Pacific economies for Japan's financial cooperation amounting to some US$80 billion.

   Secondly, the APEC leaders sent out a political message to successfully launch the new round of World Trade Organization (WTO) trade negotiations at the Seattle Ministerial Meeting of the WTO to be convened in November.

   Thirdly, there was this feeling shared that APEC does not belong solely to heads of state and government, or ministers or bureaucrats. There was this feeling that APEC can truly blossom only when industry, or more broadly, people of all strata, are able to avail themselves of the fruits of APEC. In this connection it was noted that further integration of women into society should be one important aspect of this. That is about the APEC meeting itself.

   Related Information (APEC 1999)
   
2. Overview of the current situation concerning East Timor

   Mr. Numata: East Timor was discussed extensively, if not within the framework of APEC of itself then among the leaders who were gathered there. As you know, East Timor was discussed by Prime Minister Obuchi, President William Jefferson Clinton of the United States of America and President Kim Dae Jung of the Republic of Korea when they met trilaterally on 12 September. East Timor was of course discussed bilaterally in various meetings among the leaders present. In these meetings, Prime Minister Obuchi took the position that the responsibility to rectify the unacceptable situation in East Timor and to restore order there lied with the Government of Indonesia, and that if the Government of Indonesia could not discharge that responsibility, it should immediately accept support by the international community to address the situation. We also took the position that Indonesia's political and economic stability is extremely important for the stability of Asia as a whole, especially at a time when there are signs of recovery at long last in this region.

   Active discussions took place on East Timor, and as you know, on the night of 12 September, President Bucharuddin Jusuf Habibie of the Republic of Indonesia made the announcement that Indonesia would accept international peacekeeping forces to restore order in East Timor. We welcomed this decision which the Government of Indonesia had reached on their own initiative.

   There have been subsequent developments. The United Nations Security Council Resolution 1264 was adopted on 15 September. We welcome this adoption of the Resolution and we expect that the situation in East Timor will stabilize as soon as possible with the early deployment of a multinational force to be established in accordance with the Resolution acting in cooperation with the Government of Indonesia and the Indonesian Armed Forces. We understand this multinational force is going to be led by an Australian general. We highly appreciate the positive contribution being made by Australia toward the peaceful resolution of the East Timor issue. We continue to place high expectations on Australia's efforts, and look forward to cooperating with Australia and other countries concerned as much as possible.

   It has always been our intention to extend as much contribution as possible for the stabilization of the situation in East Timor. With this in mind, Minister for Foreign Affairs Masahiko Koumura announced the following yesterday, September 16: "With regard to the multinational force, Japan will provide substantial financial contribution based upon the specific terms of reference to be coordinated with regard to the forces' activities and other matters." We are also concerned about the situation of refugees and other displaced persons both in and outside East Timor, and we intend to actively provide humanitarian assistance, given the tragic humanitarian situation and importance of the East Timor issue. As a first step of this humanitarian assistance, we have decided to contribute US$1 million to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) for UNCHR's start-up cost of its activities concerning East Timor. We have also earmarked $US1 million from the fund already contributed to the World Food Programme (WFP) to be used for its activities concerning East Timor. So Japan's initial humanitarian assistance amounts to US$2 million. Upon improvement of the security situation in East Timor, Japan will dispatch a government survey mission so that it can consider future assistance in a comprehensive way.

   We expect that there will be appeals made by United Nations humanitarian organizations and appeals to the international community for humanitarian assistance, and we intend to positively consider further humanitarian assistance, taking into consideration such appeals and other factors. From a somewhat medium- to longer-term perspective, we also intend to provide appropriate assistance for the reconstruction and development of East Timor.

   Related Information (Timor-Leste Situation (Archives))
   
3. Review of the United States-Japan-Republic of Korea trilateral meeting concerning North Korea

   Mr. Numata: Then, about North Korea. In the trilateral meeting that took place in Auckland among Prime Minister Obuchi, President Clinton and President Kim Dae Jung, they discussed how the three countries can work closely together in their approach to North Korea, and in fact this bilateral meeting symbolized the strong solidarity among the three. Shortly after the trilateral meeting, there was the announcement coming out of the US-North Korea consultations which had been taking place in Berlin. We also understand that the report by former Defense Secretary Dr. Perry has been sent to the United States Congress, although it is not in the public domain. Let me comment on these developments.

   Deterring the relaunch of the missile by North Korea is our highest priority in our policies toward North Korea for the time being. In this context, we appreciate and welcome the fact that the US-North Korea consultations have produced important, positive progress on a number of issues, including the missile issue, as a result of the very patient negotiating efforts undertaken by the United States, taking fully into account the positions of Japan and the Republic of Korea. With respect to the report by Dr. Perry, this report has been developed jointly by the United States, the Republic of Korea and Japan through very close consultation, and it addresses the concerns of the countries concerned, for example the question of the missiles, or the question, in the case of Japan, of the suspected abduction cases of Japanese nationals. It addresses these concerns in an appropriate manner, and we feel that it strikes a very good balance of all these factors. We fully support this report by Dr. Perry and we would like to express our deep respect and appreciation to Dr. Perry and all those concerned who have worked so hard to compile this report.

   We understand that there will be further consultations and dialogue taking place between the United States and North Korea. We strongly hope that in that process we will be able to have even firmer prospects of the freeze of North Korea's plan to relaunch its missile. If that proves to be the case, we on our part feel that it should become possible for Japan to lift the steps that we took last year in the wake of North Korea's missile launch in August. With this in mind, we would like to monitor North Korea's responses with very keen interest. We have been saying consistently that if North Korea acts in a positive manner in responding to the concerns of the international community, and Japan's own concerns, we on our part will be prepared to take steps to improve our relations with North Korea. We would like to avail ourselves of various opportunities which may present themselves to engage in dialogue with North Korea and to continue to convey this position of ours to the North Korean side.

   Related Information (North Korea's Missile Launch)
   
4. Response to media criticism concerning comments made by Minister for Foreign Affairs Masahiko Koumura in regard to East Timor

   Q: With regard to East Timor, I note your statement that you appreciate the position taken by Australia. When Foreign Minister Koumura came back from Auckland he made a comment along the lines that the international community should listen to Indonesia's concerns about the makeup of any peacekeeping force. Some sections of the Japanese media, for example the Mainichi Shimbun, interpreted that as a criticism of the US and other countries that have been putting pressure on Indonesia to accept an international force. Is that the case, and if not then why did Minister Koumura make that statement? What was he trying to say?

   Mr. Numata: When the APEC meeting ended in Auckland and immediately after President Habibie's announcement that Indonesia would accept an international security presence, Minister of Foreign Affairs Ali Alatas of the Republic of Indonesia was dispatched to New York -- in fact I understand that he flew with the Security Council team to New York -- to discuss the modalities of this international security presence. The question of how best the international security presence might be made up to restore stability in East Timor was being thrashed out in the United Nations, and Foreign Minister Alatas was providing some input into that process. It was a comment on that situation that existed at the time and it was certainly not a criticism of the efforts made by Australia and other countries.

   Related Information (Timor-Leste Situation (Archives))
   
5. Form of Japanese personnel and financial support to multinational peacekeeping operations in East Timor

   Q: How much of a discussion was there about the possibility of sending Japanese personnel to East Timor?

   Mr. Numata: When we talk loosely about sending Japanese personnel, the answer there depends on which phase we are looking at and what kind of personnel we may be thinking of. If it is a question of Japan participating in the multinational force itself in terms of sending our own Self Defense Forces personnel, that does not fit into the legal framework that we have under the International Peace Cooperation Law. If the situation stabilizes, and if there is to be a United Nations peacekeeping operation, then conceivably there may be ways in which we can send some personnel, for example to engage in humanitarian relief activities and so forth. So the answer really varies according to which part of the scenario you are addressing. I think what you have seen in the news reports -- since there has been so much focus on what may be happening in a few days' time -- the focus tended to be on the question of whether members of the Japanese Self Defense Force are going to take part in the multinational force. For that the short answer is no.

   Q: How far is the situation from changing the PKO Law to allow Japanese forces to participate?

   Mr. Numata: Well, the Law is there, and a certain portion of the Law is under freeze. To use a shorthand, that part of the United Nations peacekeeping operations which needs to be undertaken by infantries, is still under freeze and we would need another piece of legislation to defreeze it. If your question is whether it is possible for the Japanese Self Defense Forces to go out to take part in any United Nations peacekeeping operations, to take part in what you might call infantry operations in general, the answer is no. But this is a multinational force, for which, in terms of participation of our Self Defense Forces personnel, we have no legal basis. But at the same time, as I said at the outset, we are considering actively making a substantial financial contribution to the multinational force, especially in view of the fact that there are some countries, especially Asian countries, which are actively considering their participation in the multinational force, which do feel that their financial resources may be burdened too much. Perhaps we might be able to help in that regard. The precise size of the contribution is yet to be worked out, because we do not know what the total cost of this multinational force is going to be. It is still being actively discussed in the United Nations in the first instance and then we will be looking.

   Q: I have a follow-up technical question on that. You were saying that there is no legal basis for Japan to participate in a multinational peacekeeping force. So if Japan is to participate in East Timor, would that require a whole new piece of legislation?

   Mr. Numata: Yes.

   Q: So the unfreezing would have to be turned into a UN operation?

   Mr. Numata: With or without freeze, we would need another piece of legislation.

   Q: How was the original monetary figure arrived at?

   Mr. Numata: There were specific requests both from the UNHCR and the WFP. I mentioned earlier the likelihood of these two organizations, and perhaps other United Nations humanitarian organizations, making appeals to the international community. But even preceding these international appeals, the UNCHR and the WFP specifically came to us with requests for this help to facilitate their start-up operations. So it is response to these requests that we have made the decision of a US$1 million contribution to each.

   Related Information (Timor-Leste Situation (Archives))
   
6. Japan's position in regard to the possible lifting of sanctions imposed on North Korea

   Q: On North Korea, the United States has said that it is considering lifting sanctions. Would that act as a catalyst for Japan to lift the restrictions which were put in place last year? Could you also give us the list of what was done?

   Mr. Numata: What we decided on last year immediately after North Korea's launch of the Taepodong missile was to suspend for the time being the resumption of humanitarian assistance, such as food assistance, to suspend for the time being the resumption of normalization negotiations with North Korea, which had been suspended since the latter part of 1992, and not permitting charter flights between Japan and North Korea. When we say lifting these steps, it would basically mean going back to where we were just prior to the launch of the missile.

   In answer to your question about the relationship with the possible easing of sanctions by the United States, it is possible that the United States may be actively considering the easing of certain sanctions in order to promote further improvement in their relations with North Korea, but we are not aware of any firm decision having been made. We do understand that this idea of easing economic sanctions on the part of North Korea was one of the items of the Agreed Framework between the United States and North Korea, out of which, for example, the Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organization (KEDO) project proceeded. The relationship of these factors to what we may be doing on our part -- I said earlier that we hope that the prospect of North Korea's freeze of its plan to relaunch its missile will become firmer, that we are basically talking about North Korea's responses and actions, as things seem to be moving in a somewhat more positive direction than had been the case before. In the first instance we will be watching these developments very keenly -- after all we are talking about interactions -- to see signs of positive movements on the part of North Korea. In other words, I do not think I can precisely define here the exact circumstances under which we will be able to move to the next stage.

   Q: Some Japanese politicians seem to feel that the US actions are a bit hasty and they have expressed a high level of distrust of North Korea on its assurances that it is not going to relaunch missiles. Can you comment on that?

   Mr. Numata: What is significant is that as a result of the consultations that have gone on for quite some time between the United States and North Korea, they did agree to issue this press statement on 12 September in Berlin, in which they said that the two sides held productive discussions on pending issues, including the sanctions and missile issues. Each side came to a deeper understanding of the other's concerns and each acknowledged the need to continue taking steps that address these concerns. We feel that things are moving in a certain direction which can be encouraging. That is why we are saying that we consider this to be important progress. But at the same time, the process is ongoing, so we need to see how the process goes on. I think that is our response to the sort of concern which may exist in this country.

   Q: So there is something in addition to the statement in Berlin?

   Mr. Numata: The statement in Berlin indicates a direction in which things may be moving. The statement in Berlin also talks about the need to continue taking steps that address the concerns. I think we also need to see positive development which justifies positive steps and so forth. From our point of view, since the question of deterring the relaunch of the North Korean missile is of the highest priority for the moment, we do attach importance to the idea of North Korea freezing its plan to relaunch its missile.

   Q: Are you in any way communicating directly with the US side to represent you?

   Mr. Numata: We have been keeping in very close contact, and we have communicated very closely with the United States prior to the consultations in Berlin. As I said earlier, we have been communicating very closely with the United States and also the Republic of Korea to assist Dr. Perry's efforts to come out with this report. One result of that is that Dr. Perry's report -- although I have to keep saying that this is not in the public domain -- includes, among others, a reference to the need to address such issues as the suspected abduction cases of Japanese nationals, as well as such issues as reunifying separated families between the North and the South, the narcotics issue, the chemical and biological weapons issue, and of course the missile issue and the whole nuclear development issue. We do feel that our concerns have been taken into account and that a very good balance is struck in the report.

   Related Information (North Korea's Missile Launch)