(Unofficial Transcript)

Press Briefing by the Government of Japan
at the Third Session of the Conference of the Parties to the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change

Ambassador Toshiaki Tanabe: Today was the first day of the high-level ministerial conferences at COP3. During this high-level segment, we heard an opening speech by Prime Minister Hashimoto. I'm sure you have a copy of his speech, so it is not necessary for me to go over it in detail. I would, however, like to touch very briefly on the gist of his statement.

Basically, he said that global warming is a very serious issue, on which the survival of humankind depends. He said that we will be needing a long-term effort, perhaps requiring as long as 100 years, in order to address this issue fully. We had the Rio de Janerio Conference, and now, five years later, we are trying to make some major adjustments in order to make this effort more efficient. It is necessary for us to have a very solid and clear first step started here at the Kyoto Conference, with the aim of addressing global warming issues.

The second point Prime Minister Hashimoto mentioned has to due with the fact that the prevention of global warming will have to be addressed by each and every country, as its own problem. He said that rather than window-dressing the problem or finding loop-holes, each country must address the problems seriously as their own issues, as issues that can not be postponed. In order to do that, countries have to increase their energy efficiency. The Prime Minister sited some examples of how to go about increasing energy efficiency. For example, for cars and electrical appliances, a top-standard product must be established, and standards that must be fulfilled must also be established. In addition, some very vigorous rules are needed, in order to reduce the emission of carbon dioxide. All of these efforts, although at first they will seem hard, will result in real fruit for the effort.

Prime Minister Hashimoto sited the Green Initiative that he launched in June of this year. Enormous technological development are much needed. Unless we have a breakthrough in terms of relevant technological innovation, it will be very difficult to solve these problems. As a long-term approach, it is very important for us to be engaged in aiming for technological innovations in break-through technologies.

Particularly, the CTI plays a very important role in this matter. In relation to the developing countries, Japan will be training the personnel needed and will also be giving concessional loans to developing countries. This is part of the Kyoto Initiative. Japan will further enhance its measures in this direction, for assistance to developing countries. In more concrete terms, we will be expanding the coverage of our policies involving the fight against global warming. Until now, we were focusing attention on aforestation and the conservation of forests. For these projects, we were giving concessional loans at 0.75%, at a redemption period of 40 years. This is very preferential ODA treatment. Apart from reforestation and so forth, however, more areas are to be covered by these loans. For example, the introduction of monorails, subways and public transportation, as well as hydroelectric and natural-gas power plants and energy-saving resources development -- all this will also be covered by this ODA and the concessional loans.

As for the environmental issues, we must take into consideration the advanced developing countries. To these advanced developing countries, which are also undertaking measures to combat global warming, Japan will also be giving concessional loans, at the rate of 1.8%. Malaysia, Brazil, Chile, South Africa, and the Czech Republic will be eligible to receive those loans, at 1.8%. And of course, we will be undertaking expanded programs through multinational organizations -- GEF, the UNGP, the World Bank and so forth.

At the same time, G77/China also gave statements, in which they emphasized that the biggest environmental issue is the issue of eradicating poverty. They solicited our understanding of their poverty problems and asked us to lend our assistance, in order to alleviate their poverty issues. Japan responded that it would do its best to do so. Of course, Japan alone cannot do that, so we would like to call upon the EU, the U.S. and other advanced countries to cooperate with Japan in assisting G77/China and developing countries, in eradicating the problem of poverty.

With this as my opening statement, I would like to go into the question and answer session, now.

Question: Aritake, from the BNA. It seems to me that despite all the tremendous efforts that have been made at this Kyoto conference, the only progress that has been accomplished in negotiations under the framework of COW has been the definition of words. I got the feeling there has not been much progress, other than the definition of words, and that there has been no real agreement or consensus on the major core issues, so far. Has there been any progress, yesterday or today, on the major core issues?

Ambassador Toshiaki Tanabe: Well, in the press briefing, I believe that Ambassador Estrada was quoted by the press as saying that in terms of the final products of the COW negotiations, when you look at the clean text generated by COW, we still have a quite a number of substantial issues pending. Even though COW has not really reached a substantial point in terms of resolutions, there have been substantial discussions in terms of communications. I think there has been a lot of progress. There are a lots of other areas in which we have seen a lot of progress in COW meetings. For example, the quantified targets and related areas, and also various clauses relating to developing countries. All those issues are still pending and are interrelated, and they could possibly follow under the package proposal. So, the parties have achieved a certain degree of convergence, even though we still have not reached agreement on substantial issues, as you know.

But having said that, I recognize that very intensive discussions and negotiation have been completed and are still continuing. In this sense, I believe that there has been some degree of convergence in several areas among the different parties.

Question: Robert Sasson, from the Orange County California, U.S.A. Register. Earlier today, the U.S. congressional delegation indicated that there would be great difficulty in getting any treaty in Kyoto ratified by the U.S. congress, because of a belief on their part that the science had not yet proven a human cause for global warming. Is there any liaison between the Japanese government and leaders of the U.S. congress, to give them the benefit of Japanese science on this point?

Ambassador Toshiaki Tanabe: I have nothing to say about the position of the U.S. congressmen and senators or their interpretation of the state of affairs. At the same time, we recognize that there is a very close connection between the climate change and the increase in the concentration of greenhouse-effect gasses. We having been working on the assumption that, yes, there is some scientific justification for addressing global warming matters.

That is my assessment of our position. I know that there are various views within the U.S., not only in the industrial societies, but also in the congress.

Question: Alexander Rising, with the Dutch Financial Daily. Vice President Alexander Gore mentioned increased flexibility for his negotiating team. Have you experienced any more flexibility? Have you found out what he means by that, exactly? And has there been any coming closer together of the U.S. and developing countries?

Ambassador Toshiaki Tanabe: All of us have heard the statement made by U.S. Vice President Gore. He mentioned that the U.S. delegation will use more flexibility. I sense that they have been trying to work out a compromise in a more flexible way. At least up until now, we noticed that not only the U.S. but all delegates whom we have contacted on various occasions have begun to show flexibility, in terms of working out a compromise. In terms of tangible results, we are still in the midst of tough negotiations. We will have to wait until the end of these negotiations.

Question: Nicholas Scone, from the Independent. If there are to be different targets for the three main industrialized blocks -- Japan, the U.S. and Europe -- what should that differentiation be based on, in Japan's view?

Ambassador Toshiaki Tanabe: I assume that you have already studied the proposals. We emphasize the importance of relying upon energy efficiency. From this point of view, one of the elements in the yardstick used to judge achievement of emissions targets is emission per GDP. That is one of the most important elements of the yardstick. At the same time, you probably know that differentiation targets are a matter still up for negotiation. When it comes to a final compromise, I think that various elements will come in. That is what the negotiations are about.

Question: Lela Bolten, from the Financial Times. In your view, what would a compromise between the developing countries look like? I mean the kind of compromise that the Americans need to take home?

Ambassador Toshiaki Tanabe: That is, in a sense, a very good question, but at the same time a very delicate question to answer in a straight way. The Kyoto Conference will be ending in three days, including today. I would have to make a terrific prophecy, to respond directly to your question. It's best that I not take the challenge of your question by responding directly. I think that, in any case, we hope that there will be some kind of agreement on, say, joint effort by developed and developing countries in tackling the climate change, which is our common concern. I have no doubt that all delegates from both developing and developed parties have been working seriously, in good faith, with the common hope of working out come kind of compromise solution. So, I'm confident.

Question: Shimizu, from Energy and Nature. You referred to bridges between developed and developing countries. If there are to be bridges, how can you build bridges between developed and developing countries? The U.S. is in favor of emissions trading. If the developing nations accept that, does that mean that the developing countries accept any efforts made by developed countries? As Prime Minister Hashimoto indicated, what, for example, economic measures to be jointly taken by the developed countries would be feasible?

Ambassador Toshiaki Tanabe: I think you're asking what can be done via joint efforts by developed countries. As Prime Minister Hashimoto indicated, each developed country can engage in domestic efforts to raise energy efficiency, for one thing. Joint implication (JI) is the subject of very tough discussions at the moment. The issues raised about JI are very delicate issues. I think I should wait until the completion of discussions on this matter, before commenting on how we interpret JI.

Question: Alexander Rezing, the Dutch Financial Daily. The Dutch minister of financial affairs mentioned a taxation of, for instance, international aviation fuel. The same would apply for international shipping. How does Japan feel about having such international policies and measures, staying within the protocol?

Ambassador Toshiaki Tanabe: We know that such matters have been taken up at various occasions. Our basic position on this question is that these matters should be left up to the competent international organizations, such as ICAO. That is our basic position on such questions.