Press Conference 24 January 2003

1. Change in the visit to Japan by President Ricardo Lagos Escobar of the Republic of Chile
2. Meeting between Minister for Foreign Affairs Yoriko Kawaguchi and Undersecretary of State John Bolton of the United States of America
3. Questions concerning meeting between Minister for Foreign Affairs Kawaguchi and Undersecretary of State Bolton
4. Question concerning Minister for Foreign Affairs Kawaguchi's statement at the Diet
5. Question concerning Japan's security alertness

1. Change in the visit to Japan by President Ricardo Lagos Escobar of the Republic of Chile

   Press Secretary Hatsuhisa Takashima: Good afternoon, thank you very much for coming to this briefing. Today, I have two announcements I would like to make.

   The first announcement is with regard to the visit to Japan by President Ricardo Lagos Escobar of the Republic of Chile, and Mrs. Lagos, which was announced on 10 January. The Government of the Republic of Chile informed the Government of Japan that Mrs. Lagos will not be visiting Japan due to unavoidable reasons. So this is a slight change of plans for the visit.

   Related Information (Visit to Japan of His Excellency Mr. Ricardo Lagos Escobar, President of the Republic of Chile (Announcement by the Press Secretary/Director-General for Press and Public Relations, Ministry of Foreign Affairs))
   
2. Meeting between Minister for Foreign Affairs Yoriko Kawaguchi and Undersecretary of State John Bolton of the United States of America

   Mr. Takashima: The second announcement is that Minister for Foreign Affairs Yoriko Kawaguchi met with Undersecretary of State John Bolton of the United States of America at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs today, and discussed issues of mutual concern between the two countries, including the situation in North Korea and the Republic of Iraq.

   With regard to North Korea, they both agreed that it was essential to find a peaceful and diplomatic solution to this nuclear issue concerning North Korea. They also agreed that Japan, the United States and the Republic of Korea would have close ties and coordination of their positions vis-à-vis the North Korean situation. In particular, they agreed that bilateral close consultation between Japan and the United States is most important.

   On the situation in Iraq, Foreign Minister Kawaguchi emphasized that weapons of mass destruction in Iraq is a mutual concern of the international community, and it also has a strong connection to the peace and stability of the Middle Eastern region. She expressed Japan's deep concern about the development of the situation in the region.

   In return, Undersecretary Bolton said that the United States is seeking a peaceful solution to this problem. However, the international community has spent more than ten years waiting for Iraq to resolve this issue and dismantle all its weapons of mass destruction. He stated that the United States cannot wait forever. He also said that the United States would seek concerted efforts by the international community to resolve this question.

   Prior to the meeting, earlier this morning, Undersecretary Bolton held a regular consultation on arms control, disarmament and non-proliferation with officials of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. At this meeting, the Japanese and American sides agreed that it was very important and essential to maintain and implement the framework of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) in order to secure world peace and stability.

   The Japanese side was headed by Director-General for Arms Control and Scientific Affairs Yukiya Amano, who is in charge of arms control and disarmament at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

   Related Information (Japan-North Korea Relations)
   Related Information (Japan's Diplomatic Efforts on the Issue of Iraq)
   Related Information (Arms Control, Disarmament and Non-Proliferation)
   
3. Questions concerning meeting between Minister for Foreign Affairs Kawaguchi and Undersecretary of State Bolton

   Q: Could you tell us in detail the agenda presented from Japan to Mr. Bolton? For example, I have been reading that Japan has been suggesting a United Nations Security Council plus Japan and Republic of Korea meeting. Has this been discussed?

   Mr. Takashima: That was taken up by both of them, Foreign Minister Kawaguchi and also by Undersecretary Bolton. They agreed that Japan and the United States, with the Republic of Korea, would act jointly when this issue is picked up at such international fora as the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and also the United Nations (UN).

   At that time, Foreign Minister Kawaguchi said that the issue of sanctions should be dealt with very carefully. Undersecretary Bolton said that even if this matter were taken up by the United Nations, it would not necessarily mean sanctions at the same time. Sanctions and the discussions are different matters, that was the statement of Undersecretary Bolton at the meeting.

   Q: So Foreign Minister Kawaguchi said that Japan, the United States and the Republic of Korea would jointly act?

   Mr. Takashima: We will keep our solidarity through close coordination and consultation whenever the issue is picked up at international fora.

   Q: Was there any specific proposal for the place of dialogue among the five permanent members of the UN Security Council plus Japan and the Republic of Korea?

   Mr. Takashima: There was no discussion on the actual framework or the mechanism of the dialogue among the members of the UN Security Council, and Japan and the Republic of Korea. Rather, it was discussed in general terms.

   Q: When you say Japan, the Republic of Korea and the US are working jointly, what would that actually mean in practical terms? How would that work?

   Mr. Takashima: These three countries have been working jointly, coordinating with each other very well in terms of our attitude toward North Korea, sharing information and views, and consolidating our actions and deeds.

   Of course, Japan, the United States and the Republic of Korea are individual countries with their respective relations with North Korea. For example, Japan has the Japan-Democratic People's Republic of Korea Pyongyang Declaration; whereas the Republic of Korea has just finished its ministerial talks with North Korea. So those relations are individual ones, but in conducting individual action with North Korea, all countries first inform each other what sort of issues are being discussed or what sort of decision is to be taken. Coordination and close consultation are the key words for those relations.

   Q: So, if they went to the Security Council, is the US not the only member country?

   Mr. Takashima: As you have rightly mentioned, Foreign Minister Kawaguchi and Undersecretary Bolton agreed that even though Japan and the Republic of Korea are not members of the UN Security Council, with the close consultations with the United States, and also other members of the Security Council, especially the permanent members, the views of Japan and the Republic of Korea would hopefully be reflected in the discussion to be held at the Security Council when this issue would be taken up by the UN Security Council.

   Q: In effect, the US would represent those three countries?

   Mr. Takashima: Not necessarily, because, for example, when Foreign Minister Kawaguchi visited the French Republic, President Jacques Chirac and also Minister of Foreign Affairs Dominique de Villepin of France mentioned the possibility of having some sort of attachment between the P5, and Japan and the Republic of Korea.

   Therefore, it is not necessarily the case that the views of Japan and the Republic of Korea are solely represented by the United States. However, there will certainly be an occasion where Japan and the Republic of Korea can consult with other members of the UN Security Council although we still do not know what sort of framework or mechanism will emerge.

   Q: Did Mrs. Kawaguchi and Mr. Bolton discuss documentation to draw out the security issue concerning North Korea?

   Mr. Takashima: They have not discussed this. However, Undersecretary Bolton referred to the statement made by Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage to the Japanese press corps in Washington as a kind of general summary of US policy vis-à-vis North Korea.

   Q: Does Japan want the US to include some kind of mention of asking North Korea not to try out their missiles?

   Mr. Takashima: Of course, the moratorium on missile testing is part of the Pyongyang Declaration, which was signed by the leaders of Japan and North Korea, so Japan believes that North Korea will abide by its commitment to the terms and articles laid out in the Pyongyang Declaration. Therefore, it would hopefully be reflected if there is any agreement signed between North Korea and the United States. After all, we regard that North Korean missiles are also part of its overall arsenal of weapons of mass destruction.

   Q: So Japan is asking the US to include this?

   Mr. Takashima: We are not asking but we expect it will be included.

   Q: You mentioned that Undersecretary Bolton said that the issue going to the Security Council does not necessarily mean sanctions. What is Japan's position on the use of sanctions? Would you encourage sanctions if it does go to the Security Council? Would you be happy to see the Security Council impose sanctions on North Korea or do you think it should be avoided?

   Mr. Takashima: As I have said, Foreign Minister Kawaguchi expressed her wish to see the question of sanctions dealt with very carefully. That means that sanctions should not be too promptly or urgently implemented or declared.

   Q: Does Japan want the issue of North Korea to be dealt with at the Security Council?

   Mr. Takashima: It is our understanding that the IAEA will make a report to the UN Security Council on this issue. So it is not a question of whether Japan would like it, it will be referred when the time comes. Japan expects that this issue would be taken up by the Security Council because this is also a matter of international concern.

   Q: Mr. Bolton gave a press conference in Korea this week and he said that the IAEA would reach a new resolution by the end of this week. Yesterday, the IAEA said that there would be no decision until the end of next week. One of the main reasons was to give North Korea more time to consider the proposals offered by the Russian authorities. This week, there has been a one-week delay. Do you expect this issue to be referred to the Security Council by the end of next week? Should North Korea be given two weeks rather than one week?

   Mr. Takashima: The IAEA decided not to hold a board meeting today to discuss the issue of North Korea. We have to wait and see what the attitudes of the other members of the board are.

   Q: So you expect this to go to the Security Council but you do not know when that might be?

   Mr. Takashima: We do not know when it will be brought to the Security Council because it is up to the IAEA. At the board meeting, we have our own Permanent Representative of Japan, Ambassador Yukio Takasu, and he is just discussing this issue with his fellow members of the board.

   Q: As the North Korea nuclear crisis continues, does Japan feel that the threat of missile attack from North Korea is rising?

   Mr. Takashima: We are very much concerned about the increasingly harsh statements by North Korea, and we hope that the North Koreans will not fire missiles or restart their activities at the reprocessing or even at their nuclear plants, because we regard that these actions clearly violate the international commitment they have made. We urge North Korea not to engage in those activities.

   Related Information (Japan-North Korea Relations)
   Related Information (Japan-DPRK Pyongyang Declaration)
   
4. Question concerning Minister for Foreign Affairs Kawaguchi's statement at the Diet

   Q: Foreign Minister Kawaguchi was at the Diet this morning. She was answering questions about Japan's risks if missiles were fired in the direction of Japan by North Korea. What I was not clear about is that obviously, if there is an attack, then if a missile is launched, then it is only a matter of minutes for it to reach Japan. To what extent Japan can judge where the missile is, as in the case of the 1998 firing, where it just flew over Japan, would be very difficult to ascertain.

   However, if there were a situation where Japan had advance warning that a missile would be fired, or detected that some missile was being fueled and readied for launch, in that kind of situation, in view of the constitutional constraints of Japan, what could the Government do? Does self-defense include an attack on missile sites in North Korea to halt their launch? What are the boundaries of Japan's responses to a possible North Korean missile launch?

   Mr. Takashima: Japan has the right to defend itself from any sort of aggression by outside forces. On what sort of action would be taken in such a case, it would depend upon each case. Since it is a very hypothetical situation, I would rather not discuss it here.

   Q: Can you repeat Mrs. Kawaguchi's response to the Diet during the question and answer session at the budget committee this morning? Do you have the transcript?

   Mr. Takashima: I do not have the transcript, but I can refer you to the press office.

5. Question concerning Japan's security alertness

   Q: Is Japan raising its alertness against possible attacks? Japan is always trying to defend itself, that is why it has a Self-Defense Force, but given the recent escalation of North Korean hostility, has Japan heightened its security alertness?

   Mr. Takashima: My understanding is that the Japanese Self-Defense Force has not changed its alertness status.