Press Conference by the Deputy Press Secretary, 3 September 2009

Announcement on the earthquake in Indonesia
Announcement on the agreement on the improvement of relations between Turkey and Armenia
Questions concerning the recent earthquake in Indonesia
Questions concerning personnel issues in relation to the upcoming change of government
Questions concerning the upcoming government's stance on the Indian Ocean refueling mission
Questions concerning the US-Japan relationship under the upcoming government
Questions concerning Japan's ODA budget
Further questions concerning personnel issues in relation to the upcoming change of government
Questions concerning the Japan-China Joint History Research Committee

I. Announcement on the earthquake in Indonesia

Deputy Press Secretary Yasuhisa Kawamura: Good afternoon. Welcome back to the press conference. Let me start by making two brief announcements.

First, we have learned there was a strong earthquake in western Java of Indonesia with a report of a number of casualties. I would like to extend my sympathy to the people of Indonesia and condolences to the bereaved families who have lost their loved ones. We will follow additional information from Indonesia with keen attention.

II. Announcement on the agreement on the improvement of relations between Turkey and Armenia

Second, Japan welcomes the agreement reached on August 31st between Turkey and Armenia under the mediation of Switzerland. Turkey and Armenia this week agreed to start their initial political consultations by provisionally signing two Protocols: one on the establishment of diplomatic relations and the other on the development of bilateral relations.

Japan welcomes this development for the normalization of their bilateral relations. We think this will contribute to the peace and stability of the region. We also expect further efforts to be made by both countries towards normalizing their relations.

This is all from me. Now, I will invite your questions.

Related Information (Press Release)

III. Questions concerning the recent earthquake in Indonesia

Q: Just on the earthquake, as a matter of interest, was there a tsunami at all following the earthquake?

Mr. Kawamura: We have not officially confirmed if there was a case of a tsunami, but I have read a press report about tsunami casualties.

Q: There was a tsunami?

Mr. Kawamura: There is a press report.

Q: I am sorry, I did not quite catch that.

Mr. Kawamura: I cannot officially confirm the information because there is no official confirmation from the Indonesian government at this right moment.

IV. Questions concerning personnel issues in relation to the upcoming change of government

Q: My chief question is with the change of government, what will that mean on the transition side for foreign embassy staff and so on? This is the first time there has been an actual change of party. Does that imply that Japan's ambassadors will be replaced en masse? What does it mean in terms of the foreign diplomatic establishment?

Mr. Kawamura: I am very sorry I have no answer to reply to your questions.

As you may know, in the general context of the transition from the current administration to the upcoming one, there was an instruction of the Prime Minister to secure a smooth transition. So we are now under this instruction. We will employ our efforts so that the transition will be a very smooth one.

So, when coming down to your very particular issue of assignment of ambassadors, I have no comments.

Q: Not even off the record? I mean, normally with a change of administration, there is a change in ambassadors, for instance. Does that not follow in Japan's case too?

Mr. Kawamura: Well, I am sorry. It is beyond my mandate.

Q: What about the handover of foreign policy documents? We discussed this yesterday at the Kantei (Prime Minister's Office) briefing. Is there any legal requirement that the Foreign Ministry hands over to the new administration all documents available on various situations in foreign policy?

Mr. Kawamura: You asked about the legal basis which would require Foreign Ministry officials to hand over all the diplomatic documents to the new administration?

Q: There is such a thing?

Mr. Kawamura: Let me get back to you because this is quite a technical inquiry. My sense is that all the necessary information should be shared with the representatives of the government in the area of foreign policy as well. This is a very general requirement. Coming down to your specific question about "the legal requirements," I need to make some extra research.

V. Questions concerning the upcoming government's stance on the Indian Ocean refueling mission

Q: What do you think about refueling of ships in the Indian Ocean given the expected change in the new government's policy? Is there any indication?

Mr. Kawamura: There are various press reports about this point, how this issue will be handled in the coming months. But at this right moment, from my side, I should refrain from making any comments. I would like to follow the instructions and directions of the new administration, which will be formed in the coming days.

VI. Questions concerning the US-Japan relationship under the upcoming government

Q: I would like to ask for your personal impression after reading Mr. Hatoyama's vision in the New York Times and Washington Post. Have you read it? The United States side, especially the media, has reacted strongly to what he wrote. Did you think it was that provocative when you read it?

Mr. Kawamura: Well, I read the article and there was a series of international press coverage on the view of Mr. Hatoyama. But I think this is a kind of reflection of a keen and high attention of every part of the world on the recent Japanese election results and the consequent establishment of the new Cabinet.

What I would say is that with these high expectations, the foreign ministry will follow directions of the new administration, especially in the area of bilateral relations with the United States. Within the guidelines of the new administration, we will manage the very important Japan-US relationship.

Q: I think it is already starting to undermine the current Japan-US relations, but is the Foreign Ministry not going to take actions or try to allay concerns within the United States? It seems that Mr. Obama and Mr. Hatoyama are directly making exchanges, but the Foreign Ministry is outside those exchanges. Should it not become more involved?

Mr. Kawamura: For the management of US-Japan relations themselves, of course we will look forward to working closely together with the new administration under the upcoming new guidelines and new directions. That is a matter of course. So, I have nothing further to say on this point, but I should just mention that we learned that yesterday, last night, Mr. Hatoyama and President Obama had a telephone conversation, and according to the White House homepage's announcement and the DPJ's announcement, the two leaders referred to the importance of the Japan-US relationship and we recognize that.

Q: Was the Foreign Ministry involved in arranging the talks?

Mr. Kawamura: I do not believe so. If I am wrong, I will let you know.

Q: So as long as Mr. Hatoyama is not voted as Prime Minister, the Foreign Ministry will not be involved in...

Mr. Kawamura: As far as I know, there was no official involvement in the preparation of the talks on the side of the Foreign Ministry.

VII. Questions concerning Japan's ODA budget

Q: One more question, the compilation of the budget is going forward at the moment. How much involvement does the Foreign Ministry have in the allocation of ODA foreign aid, and is there any concern that the agreements that might have been made on the ODA front could be modified in light of what the new government wants to do in terms of cutting certain expenditures?

Mr. Kawamura: I am sorry. No comment again.

ODA forms an important part of Japanese foreign policy making; that is for sure. But, when you ask about the feasibility of the budget plan regarding ODA under the new Cabinet, this is an issue on which I should make no comments.

Q: On a purely technical note, how far in advance are ODA commitments made to recipient countries on the level of foreign aid that they can accept?

Mr. Kawamura: A very general principle is that we refrain from making commitments (without the Cabinet's approval) to the recipient countries about particular projects or financing and so forth, which would involve some part of the Japanese budget. Because we have a single fiscal year budgetary system, ODA officials also cannot make a commitment beyond the budget authority which was given for that particular fiscal year with the approval of the Diet. There may be some variations in very exceptional and particular cases, but I am just talking about a principle, in general.

Related Information (Japan's ODA)

VIII. Further questions concerning personnel issues in relation to the upcoming change of government

Mr. Kawamura: Yes, please.

Q: This was in today's newspapers, about secretaries of members of parliament. There are three secretaries that every member of the parliament had. Mr. Ozawa said that because there are 100 new members of parliament who are coming to the parliament, Mr. Ozawa suggested that parliament members of the DPJ not appoint those secretaries which were used by the LDP. One of the classes of secretaries needs 10 years experience, so how do you think, in your opinion, about this government issue?

Mr. Kawamura: In order to understand your questions correctly, you refer to the secretaries, the supporting staffs of parliamentarians?

Q: Yes, because every member of the parliament is allowed three secretaries. Two are normal secretaries, one is an administrative something. I do not remember what it says. Mr. Ozawa said that it needs 10 years of experience, minimum, to work with a member of parliament.

Now, this new at least 100 to 200 members of parliament might have already ? but these new 100 parliamentarians from the DPJ side will need that secretary. Mr. Ozawa said "I advise the members of parliament belonging to the DPJ not to appoint the secretaries which worked under LDP members."

Mr. Kawamura: I have read the news report about this issue, but I cannot make a comment on it.

Q: Point of fact; the present structure is that the Foreign Minister is a political appointee, and then has right below that the two junior ministers? What are they named? What is the structure?

Mr. Kawamura: There are two State Secretaries for Foreign Affairs and three Parliamentary Vice-Ministers for Foreign Affairs.

Q: What are they? Those two state secretaries, are they currently political appointees or are they members of the parliament?

Mr. Kawamura: They are Diet members. All of the five are Diet members.

Q: So, there is not that much change in that respect. There is not much scope for making change in the Foreign Ministry.

Mr. Kawamura: I am sorry, I am not the appropriate person to answer the question.

Q: All five are Diet members? The State Secretaries and the three Parliamentary Vice-Ministers are all...?

Mr. Kawamura: You are talking about the current regime?

Q: Yes, current.

Mr. Kawamura: All of them are currently Diet members

Q: The highest ranking permanent civil servant in the Foreign Ministry occupies what position?

Mr. Kawamura: The highest you mean?

Q: Yes.

Mr. Kawamura: Aside from the "altitude" sense, we have a Vice-Foreign Minister.

Q: And he is a permanent civil servant?

Mr. Kawamura: The English translation is the Vice-Foreign Minister.

Q: Sorry, really my last point. Does he rank above the two state secretaries? You have a minister, two state secretaries and a vice-minister; who is senior in authority?

Mr. Kawamura: As a matter of course the Vice-Foreign Minister works closely with the Foreign Minister, the State Secretaries for Foreign Affairs, and the Parliamentary Secretaries for Foreign Affairs with their instructions. So, it is so to speak a relationship of instruction and support. Anyway, we have established an orderly, supportive relationship.

Q: There is only one senior vice-minister?

Mr. Kawamura: You mean the Vice-Foreign Minister? Yes, one. We do not say senior, it is Vice-Minister.

Q: But I have some misgivings. There are senior vice-ministers. One senior vice-minister out of another ministry and then two vice-ministers.

Mr. Kawamura: You are talking about another ministry?

Q: Yes, another ministry.

Mr. Kawamura: I am not so sure about the other ministries.

Q: What do you think in your opinion is the new system of administration because Mr. Hatoyama is saying that they are going to have a new kind of set up for another ministry to be directly controlled by the Prime Minister.

Mr. Kawamura: There are various press reports about the idea of having some regime change, but it would not be appropriate for me to make comments on that.

Q: Because it looks to me like in some Communist countries, they have some normal army and they have a part of the army which is directly controlled by the Communist Party, or something like this. I was thinking that it is not the part of the army, but if there is some coup or something, that army is directly controlled by the Communist Party or something like this.

Mr. Kawamura: What I should point out about that new government is that new administrative preparations will be formed later and we will see them.

Q: Going back to my original question for a moment, in the past, when there has been a change of administration in Japan, has it been usual practice then to replace ambassadors?

Mr. Kawamura: I am sorry, I could not catch the question.

Q: Whenever there has been a change of administration, obviously LDP-led in each case, but has it been practice to change ambassadors in most cases when there is a change of government?

Mr. Kawamura: We have long years of experience in appointing ambassadors, but it is not so easy to say in clear cut words about a rule of appointment of ambassadors, but in general, the principle has been that the right person goes in the right place. They appoint the right ambassadors in the right countries.

IX. Questions concerning the Japan-China Joint History Research Committee

Q: Regarding the Japanese press report about the postponement of the planned Japan-China Joint History Research Committee, which was originally scheduled to take place in Tokyo tomorrow, the 4th, according to the press, due to some political considerations, the Chinese opted to postpone it. Can you please give us your thoughts?

Mr. Kawamura: Currently, we are confirming with the Chinese government whether it will be the case. We have not yet gotten a confirmed reply from them.

The fact behind this is that on the 2nd, yesterday, the Chinese liaison office, which is the Institute of Modern History, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, sent a message to the Japanese liaison office, which is the Japan Institute of International Affairs. The message was "It has become impossible to hold the fourth plenary session of the Japan-China Joint History Research Committee." In reaction to this, the Japanese Foreign Ministry has been contacting the Chinese government over whether this will be the case. There is no confirmed reply yet.

(The latest information: With the confirmation of the Chinese government, the fourth meeting of the Japan-China Joint History Research Committee, which was scheduled to be held on September 4th in Tokyo, has been postponed. Japan hopes that the meeting will be reconvened in the near future.)

Any other questions? Thank you for your presence.

Back to Index