Press Conference by the Deputy Press Secretary, 1 July 2010

G8 and G20 Summit Meetings
Resolutions passed in the US Congress recognizing the importance of the US-Japan alliance
Negotiations on a Japan-India Agreement for Cooperation in the Peaceful Uses of Nuclear Energy
Fifth Meeting of the International Commission on Nuclear Non-Proliferation and Disarmament (ICNND)
Official Development Assistance (ODA) Review
Question concerning Japan's position on international non-proliferation of nuclear weapons
Question concerning Official Development Assistance
Questions concerning the G8 and G20 Summit Meetings

G8 and G20 Summit Meetings

Deputy Press Secretary Hidenobu Sobashima: Good afternoon ladies and gentlemen. Today I have several topics to share before inviting your questions.

We have distributed the declarations of the G8 and G20 Summit Meetings, among others. So first, I would like to explain a little bit about the G8 and G20, although those took place on the last weekend, and these documents are several days old already.

As for the G8 Summit Meeting, if you have a look at the second page, from paragraph 8, it deals with the issue of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), particularly MDG 4 and MDG 5, for child health and maternal health. On paragraph 10 on the next page it says that the G8 undertake as of today 5 billion US dollars of additional dollars for disbursement over the next five years in connection with MDGs 4 and 5, and in this connection I would like to explain that Japan, on the occasion of the G8 Summit Meeting, pledged around 500 million US dollars as an additional contribution for this purpose.

Secondly, from paragraph 19, there is a section called Africa. Prime Minister Kan reiterated Japan's commitment to double the amount of ODA to Africa, and he expressed Japan's determination to continue to support Africa. In this connection appreciation from the leaders of Malawi, Senegal, and Ethiopia was conveyed to Prime Minister Kan before the G8 Meeting itself.

In paragraph 28 there is a reference to the nuclear non-proliferation, where it says, "We therefore welcome the outcome of the Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty Review Conference, and will pursue the follow on actions it recommended by consensus. We call upon all states to do the same. We are committed to seeking a safer world for all and to creating conditions for a world without nuclear weapons, in accordance with the goals of the Treaty." We welcome this reference.

In paragraph 34, this is on the incident of the sinking of the Republic of Korea's naval vessel, the Cheonan. For your information, Prime Minister Kan led the discussion. He condemned the sinking, and emphasized the importance for the international community to support the Republic of Korea. As a result, there is paragraph 34, which says "We deplore the attack on March 26 that caused the sinking of the Republic of Korea's naval vessel, the Cheonan, resulting in tragic loss of 46 lives." They called for "appropriate measures to be taken against those responsible for the attack in accordance with the UN Charter and all other relevant provisions of the international law. The Joint Civilian-Military Investigation Group, led by the Republic of Korea with the participation of foreign experts, concluded that the Democratic Peoples' Republic of Korea was responsible for the sinking of the Cheonan. We condemn, in this context, the attack which led to the sinking of the Cheonan. We demand that the Democratic Peoples' Republic of Korea refrain from committing any attacks or threatening hostilities against the Republic of Korea. We support the Republic of Korea in its efforts to seek accountability for the Cheonan incident, and we remain committed to cooperating closely with all international parties in the pursuit of regional peace and security." So we attach a particular importance to this paragraph agreed by the G8 leaders, because Prime Minister Kan started the discussion.

On the next page, in paragraph 36, there is a reference to Afghanistan, and again, Prime Minister Kan explained the recent visit of President Karzai of Afghanistan to Japan, and Japan's cooperation to Afghanistan. In this connection Prime Minister Kan also explained the importance of the stability of Pakistan.

For the G20, I would like to just refer to paragraph 10, which starts from page 2. Again, Prime Minister Kan explained in the G20 meeting that upholding the strong economy, robust public finances, and strong social security system, Japan has decided on the new growth strategy, and the fiscal management strategy. If you look at the fourth line on page 3, it says, "advanced economies have committed to fiscal plans that will at least halve deficits by 2013 and stabilize or reduce government debt-to-GDP ratios by 2016. Recognizing the circumstances of Japan, we welcome the Japanese government's fiscal consolidation plan announced recently with their growth strategy." I just want to refer to this particular sentence in connection with Prime Minister Kan's participation in the G20 Summit.

On the occasion of the G8 and G20 Summits, Prime Minister Kan had bilateral summit meetings with the leaders of Canada, Germany, the United Kingdom, the Russian Federation, the Republic of Korea, China, Vietnam, India, Indonesia, and the United States of America. I am not going to explain the contents, but if you have questions I am ready to answer on the bilateral meetings as well.

Resolutions passed in the US Congress recognizing the importance of the US-Japan alliance

Mr. Sobashima: The next topic is the resolutions passed in the US Congress. On the 29 June, the Senate of the United States unanimously approved Resolution no. 564, and earlier on 24 June the House of Representatives adopted House Resolution 1464, of similar contents. In this fiftieth anniversary year of the US-Japan Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security, the Senate and the House adopted resolutions recognizing the importance of the US-Japan alliance for the security of the region, and thanking the Japanese people, particularly the residents in Okinawa, for hosting the US bases and the US personnel, and expecting the alliance of the United States and Japan to continue to contribute to the peace and democracy globally. We welcome the adoption of these resolutions and we intend to cooperate with the United States to develop further the alliance relationship built on the past achievements.

Negotiations on a Japan-India Agreement for Cooperation in the Peaceful Uses of Nuclear Energy

Mr. Sobashima: The next is negotiations on a Japan-India agreement for cooperation in the peaceful uses of nuclear energy. Last Monday and Tuesday we had the first round of negotiations on a Japan-India agreement for cooperation in the peaceful uses of nuclear energy, and Foreign Minister Okada, I think it was last Friday, explained the reasons why we have decided to start the negotiations. The Foreign Minister explained that the Japanese Government has conducted very cautious consideration on this issue, because India is not a party to the NPT, but India has committed to non-proliferation. In 2008, the nuclear suppliers group (NSG) has decided to approve the cooperation with India on an exceptional basis, because India is honoring its commitment for non-proliferation. Ever since, Japan has been considering what to do vis-à-vis India, and we have concluded that it is useful to engage India and to make India continue to honor its commitment for non-proliferation. We have also considered the impacts of our possible cooperation on the climate change and global warming issues, the bilateral relationship between Japan and India, and also the impacts in Japan's energy and industrial policy aspects. Then finally we have decided to start negotiations with India on an agreement for cooperation in the peaceful uses of nuclear energy. So we had the first round of negotiations last Monday and Tuesday.

Related Information (Press Release)

Fifth Meeting of the International Commission on Nuclear Non-Proliferation and Disarmament (ICNND)

Mr. Sobashima: The next, I think we have distributed the press release, is the fifth meeting of the International Commission on Nuclear Non-Proliferation and Disarmament (ICNND). I will read paragraph one and paragraph two. The fifth and final meeting of the International Commission on Nuclear Non-proliferation and Disarmament, co-chaired by the Hon. Yoriko Kawaguchi, former Minister for Foreign Affairs of Japan, and the Hon. Gareth Evans AO, former Minister for Foreign Affairs of Australia, will be held in Vienna, Austria from Saturday 3 July to Sunday 4 July.

In December last year, the Commission completed its report which includes specific recommendations, and presented it to the Prime Ministers of Japan and Australia. Some recommendations were submitted as a working paper to the 2010 NPT Review Conference held in May this year. At the forthcoming meeting this weekend, the Commission will, among other things, conduct a review of the results of the NPT Review Conference, evaluate and analyze responses to their report, and discuss methods for actual implementation of the recommendations given in the report.

Related Information (Press Release)

Official Development Assistance (ODA) Review

Mr. Sobashima: And finally, there is no paper distributed, just an oral explanation, that we have concluded a review on ODA. The three major areas for our ODA should be first, poverty alleviation, which includes the MDGs, and the second priority area is investment in the peace or the contribution to peace, and thirdly, a contribution to sustainable growth. We have identified these three areas as priority areas for our ODA.

Then we have decided to consider various issues to improve the quality of our assistance. For example, we will consider the possibility of extending loans in foreign currency. Our ODA loans are provided in yen, so we have repayment in yen, but we would consider the possibility of extending our ODA loans in foreign currency. This is just one example of the things that we are going to consider. And also we will make further efforts for improved visibility of our ODA. These are just some of the many points that we have concluded for our ODA at this point.

Today I do not have any announcements about VIP visits, so I would now like to invite you to ask me questions.

Related Information (Japan's ODA)

Question concerning Japan's position on international non-proliferation of nuclear weapons

Q: First, let me apologize in advance for the tough questions here. In regard to the Indian nuclear agreement, Japan's position on international non-proliferation of nuclear weapons, I am trying to get a grasp on what is Japan's non-nuclear weapon proliferation policy, because there seems to be a very different track that Japan is pursuing depending on which country we are talking about. There are two that I would like to highlight. The position that Japan has on Iran versus the position that it has on India. Iran is a signatory to the NPT, India is not. Iran allows IAEA inspectors into its country, India is not a member of that framework. India has nuclear weapons, it has tested nuclear weapons in May 1998; Iran may not even have a nuclear weapons program, there is no definitive evidence on whether or not they have one or not. And yet, with regard to India, Japan is willing to actually get involved in the civilian nuclear energy program, and in the case of Iran, Japan strongly supports UN sanctions on a country that may not even have an illicit nuclear weapons program. So I am trying to figure out why is the standard of Japan's policy apparently so different in these cases?

Mr. Sobashima: First of all, I already said that we had very cautious consideration, the Foreign Minister himself explained this, and it took about two years after the decision of the NSG to allow cooperation with India, a consensus decision including Japan. And the premise, the understanding for our decision this time, is that India will honor its commitment for non-proliferation. We have checked, and we are satisfied, that India is honoring its commitment for non-proliferation. But yes, India is outside the NPT treaty, so we had very serious consideration.

For Iran, as you pointed out, Iran is a party to the NPT, and they are subject to IAEA safeguards. However, the international community is not satisfied with the current status, particularly the enrichment activities that they are conducting by themselves, which could imply developing a nuclear weapons program, and therefore, yes, there is a difference of status between India and Iran. We feel that there is a kind of international agreement that India is honoring its commitment for non-proliferation while as for Iran the international community has a doubt that Iran may be going a wrong way, and therefore our positions are different on India and Iran.

Again, I would like to emphasize that because India is outside the NPT Treaty we had very cautious consideration, and I already explained that in addition to the fact that we are satisfied that India is honoring its commitment, we had consideration from those three aspects I pointed out, that is the impacts for climate change and global warming issues, the bilateral relationship between Japan and India, and also the impact on Japan's energy and industrial situation. So as a result of cautious consideration, the Government of Japan decided to negotiate an agreement, but of course it is up to the continued commitment of India for non-proliferation, among other elements which should be satisfactory, that we will in the end conclude an agreement successfully. It is up to what will happen in the future. I don't know whether I satisfied your question.

Q: Actually I am about to get called for a live interview so I have to stop my questioning there, but thank you for your answer.

Question concerning Official Development Assistance

Q: Just one question on the ODA. You said that there was a decision to improve the visibility of that. Do you mean the transparency of that in light of the allegations that Japan distorts its aid program according to who votes for it in the IWC? Is that what that is about? When you use the word visibility are you talking about promotion of the ODA aid, or transparency of how it is allocated?

Mr. Sobashima: Well, of course the visibility should apply for the international audience, but we particularly have in mind the Japanese taxpayers, and for the Japanese taxpayer to agree to the spending of their money for ODA to help developing countries we need to explain what are the situation of the ODA projects. So in order for Japanese people to better understand the situation, we have decided to provide information which is more understandable than before. So this is what I meant by increasing visibility. It is not related to unwarranted international criticism.

Related Information (Japan's ODA)

Questions concerning the G8 and G20 Summit Meetings

Q: Regarding the G20, just to really make it clear, you read out one passage which was recognizing the circumstances of Japan, and welcoming the Japanese Government's fiscal consolidation plan. That means that there is the exemption for Japan not to fulfill the pledge to halve the deficit? So it is actually an exemption?

Mr. Sobashima: That is the meaning, that we are not sort of required to halve the deficit. That is the meaning.

Q: And if I may, regarding the G8 Summit, you stressed that Prime Minister Kan led the discussion regarding the Cheonan sinking. Did he also bring the topic up? Was he the one who said that this should be put on the agenda of the G8 Summit?

Mr. Sobashima: He actually led the discussion, however, I think you understand the process of the G8, that this is a long process of preparation for the agenda, and the preparations started even before Mr. Kan became the Prime Minister. But anyway, what I wanted to say is that there was expectation that Prime Minister Kan should lead the discussion on this issue, and he did that.

Q: I am just wondering, or just curious, because the United States and Japan were both affirmative towards South Korea to say "we are on your side", so when was the decision that the Prime Minister of Japan should lead the discussion, and not, for example, President Obama?

Mr. Sobashima: I may not be able to satisfy your question, but I think it is not unnatural for Japan to lead the discussion because Japan is very close to the Republic of Korea, and Japan is very attentive to the security situation of the region, and then of course not only the United States Government but also the Japanese Government expressed the support for the Republic of Korea immediately after the report was issued, and also when there was an announcement from the President of the Republic of Korea. The Japanese Government immediately supported the Republic of Korea. So I think it is natural that Japan led the discussion on this issue.

Q: If I may ask, off the record, I am just wondering, is there a regulation that leaders also agree that on this topic you will lead the discussion, and on this topic you can lead the discussion?

Mr. Sobashima: The one thing that I would like to say is that it is up to the host government to structure and prepare the meeting, so the Canadian Prime Minister should be responsible for organizing the meetings of all parts of the G8 and the G20 this time. I will stop here.

If there are no further questions, thank you very much for coming.

Back to Index