Sectoral Analysis of the International Situation
and Japan's Foreign Policy
Political and Security Situations
Ensuring the Security of Japan
There remain various uncertain factors in the international community today. While the Asia-Pacific region, where Japan is situated, has witnessed increased political and social stability with remarkable economic growth, there are still unpredictable and uncertain elements, including the existence of large-scale military capabilities - nuclear arsenals, the expansion and modernization of military forces by many countries - and the continuing tension on the Korean Peninsula.
In this situation, Japan embraces a security policy with three main pillars: firmly maintaining the Japan-U.S. security arrangements; securing Japan's own appropriate defense capability; and making active diplomatic efforts to ensure international peace and security.
i) The Japan-U.S. Security Arrangements (refer to section b) The Japan-U.S. Security Arrangements)
ii) Defense Capability
Under its Constitution, Japan has moderately built up its defense capability in accordance with the fundamental principles of maintaining an exclusively defense-oriented policy and not becoming a military power that might pose a threat to other countries. Based on these principles, the National Defense Program Outline adopted on 29 October 1976 was reviewed for the first time in 19 years. On 28 November 1995, the Security Council and the Cabinet adopted the National Defense Program Outline in and after FY1996 (hereinafter, the New National Defense Program Outline).
iii) Diplomatic Efforts to Ensure International Peace and Security
With ever-increasing interdependence in the international community, the stability and prosperity of Japan is inevitably linked to the peace and prosperity of the Asia-Pacific region and of the world. From this perspective, in order to ensure Japan's security as well as regional peace and stability, various efforts must be made while maintaining the U.S. military presence: 1) bilateral and subregional dialogue and cooperation must be carried out with a view to promoting the settlement of conflicts and confrontations and fostering regional stability; 2) region-wide political and security dialogue and cooperation must be conducted to enhance the transparency of policies and mutual reassurance; and 3) political stability must be strengthened through such means as providing assistance and cooperation for economic development in the countries of the region. With regard to bilateral dialogue in Northeast Asia - Japan and the People's Republic of China held their first security dialogue meeting in 1994, and the second meeting was held in Tokyo in January 1995 (the third meeting is to be held in January 1996 in Beijing). With regard to regional cooperation in Northeast Asia, the countries concerned - mainly Japan, the United States, and the Republic of Korea - are currently working cooperatively toward a solution to the issue of nuclear development in North Korea. It is also important to continue talks on the stability of Northeast Asia from the medium- and long-term perspectives. Furthermore, political and security dialogue in the Asia-Pacific region has been underway in the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF). (For more details on ARF, see Chapter I, Part B, Section 2.)
i) The Significance of the Japan-U.S. Security Arrangements
U.S. military deterrence based on the Japan-U.S. Security Treaty is necessary in order for Japan, with its policy of maintaining a minimum defense capability, to enjoy peace and prosperity. The Japan-U.S. security arrangements serve as a political foundation for a broad range of cooperative relations between Japan and the United States in the international community. Furthermore, the security arrangements have been increasingly important in promoting peace and prosperity in the Asia-Pacific region by securing the U.S. presence as a stabilizing factor in the region.
Based on this recognition, in order to implement the Japan-U.S. security arrangements effectively and promote cooperation in the security area, Japan and the United States have been engaged in close dialogue and exchanges of views. As for recent developments, the Japan-U.S. Security Consultative Committee (2+2 Meeting) was held in September 1995, and in November, Secretary of Defense William Perry and Vice President Albert Gore each visited Japan, and reaffirmed that the Japan-U.S. security arrangements constitute an essential element for the security of Japan and for maintaining the peace and stability of the Asia-Pacific region.
ii) Efforts to Ensure the Smooth and Effective Implementation of the Japan-U.S. Security Arrangements
The Government of Japan has been of its own accord making the utmost effort to support the stationing of U.S. forces in Japan. It has borne the labor costs of Japanese employees working for the U.S. forces in Japan, as well as the costs of water supply, heating and other utilities, pursuant to the Special Measures Agreement. (The stationing expenses of U.S. forces in Japan borne by the Government of Japan, including those related to the Special Measures Agreement, amounted to approximately 625.7 billion yen in FY1995.) In December 1995, a new Special Measures Agreement was concluded to replace the existing Special Measures Agreement which expires in March 1996. As a result of the new Agreement, Japan's assistance for labor and other costs would be extended from FY1996 for five years. Furthermore, Japan agreed to bear the burden for costs related to the relocation of training, which was requested by Japan in order to resolve problems such as noise. The Government of the United States has highly appreciated these efforts by the Government of Japan. Japan's efforts, including cost sharing for the stationing of U.S. forces in Japan, are important for ensuring the presence of U.S. military forces, which serve as a stabilizing factor in this region.
iii) United States Forces Facilities and Areas in Okinawa
Ways to minimize the impact of U.S. military activities in Japan on residents living in the vicinity of U.S. military facilities and areas have been important issues for ensuring smooth implementation of the Japan-U.S. security arrangements. As a result of the tragic incident in Okinawa at the beginning of September 1995, in which a school girl was raped by three U.S. servicemen, there has been a growing concern focused on various issues related to the stationing of U.S. forces in Okinawa. In order to reduce the burden on the people of Okinawa and to enhance the credibility of the Japan-U.S. security arrangements, the Government of Japan has been engaged in consultations with the Government of the United States and has taken various measures, recognizing the vital importance of taking a sincere approach to coping with this issue, by paying full attention to the views and opinions of the people of Okinawa. First of all, as to the issue of handing over the accused U.S. servicemen and other individuals to the Japanese authorities, an ad hoc subcommittee on criminal jurisdiction procedures was established at the September meeting between Foreign Minister Yohei Kono and United States Ambassador Walter Mondale in order to consider whether or not there was room for improvement in the criminal jurisdiction procedures based on the Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA). After an intensive study undertaken by this ad hoc subcommittee, a Joint Committee Agreement on Criminal Jurisdiction Procedures was reached at the end of October, which made possible the transfer of custody of the accused to the Japanese authorities, in certain cases even before indictment.
Furthermore, in order to ensure good communication between the Central Government and Okinawa Prefecture, where U.S. forces facilities and areas are highly concentrated, a consultative body between the Central Government and Okinawa Prefecture was established in November to discuss issues regarding facilities and areas in Okinawa.
In the same month, at the meeting between Prime Minister Murayama and Vice President Gore, both Governments agreed to establish the Special Action Committee on Facilities and Areas in Okinawa as an organ for high-level bilateral consultations between Japan and the United States. At this Special Action Committee, the issues of consolidation, realignment and reduction of U.S. military facilities and areas, and issues related to the activities of U.S. forces including training, noise and safety, are discussed, while at the same time seeking consistency with the objectives of the Japan-U.S. Security Treaty. It was decided that the Committee would reach a conclusion after approximately one year.
Within the U.S. forces facilities and areas in Okinawa, there are lands owned by private persons or local authorities, usage rights over which are obtained by the Government of Japan in accordance with the Law for Special Measures Regarding Expropriation of Land Provided for U.S. Forces in Japan. The title to use these lands will expire in May 1997. Furthermore, the lease contract for a specific portion of land was to expire in March 1996, and the owner of the land was refusing to renew the contract after the expiration. In March 1995, the Government of Japan had no choice but to initiate procedures to obtain the title to use those lands in accordance with the above-mentioned Law. Under these procedures, the Government of Japan requested the Governor of Okinawa to sign necessary documents; the Governor refused. The Prime Minister then decided to take procedures based on the Local Autonomy Law, and in December filed a suit against the Governor, seeking a court decision requiring him to sign the documents.
iv) Cooperation with the United States on Security and Defense
The United States has shown a high level of interest in mutual exchange of technology with Japan in the defense area, and it is important to promote exchanges of technology between Japan and the United States in terms of the effective operation of the Japan-U.S. security arrangements. In addition to the ongoing joint research on the ducted rocket engine, joint research was initiated in October 1995 on advanced steel technologies and ceramic engines for combat vehicles. Furthermore, in October, the first successful flight was carried out for the first prototype of a new support fighter for the Air Self-Defense Force (F-2). As a result, in December at the time of the adoption of the Mid-Term Defense Program (FY1996-FY2000), the Cabinet approved the future procurement of 130 F-2 planes.
Recognizing the danger of proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, the Clinton Administration has made clear its policy of advancing development of Theater Missile Defense (TMD) systems to protect U.S. forward-deployed forces, U.S. allies, and friendly nations from missile attack. The United States has been calling on its allies for cooperation on the TMD initiative. The Government of Japan recognizes that ballistic missile defense is an important area of study in planning future defense policy and has been conducting studies on this matter at the working level with the Government of the United States.
Since the Cold War ended, the international community has worked cooperatively in seeking a solution to conflicts in such areas as Africa, the Middle East, the former Yugoslavia, and Haiti. As was clear from the progress made in the Middle East peace process and the peace agreement in the former Yugoslavia, those efforts have born fruit, and 1995 was a year which witnessed creation of a heightened momentum toward achieving peace. At the same time, however, there are many difficult issues yet to be solved, such as ensuring the implementation of peace agreements, providing assistance for rehabilitation and reconstruction, and solving refugee issues. Further cooperation in the international community is required to address these issues.
Among the regional conflicts that continue in the world, some take place in areas geographically distant from Japan. Still, solving and preventing such conflicts is a matter of global importance, directly linked to the creation of an international order in the post-Cold War era. It is therefore vital that Japan play an even more positive role in seeking solutions by appropriate combinations of different types of cooperation such as financial assistance, humanitarian assistance, peace-keeping operations, and other activities suited to the situation of each regional conflict.
i) The State of the Middle East Peace Process
The Middle East peace process, which has been ongoing since the October 1991 Madrid Middle East Peace Conference, made great progress in 1995 through the mediation of the United States. In September 1995, the Israeli-Palestinian Interim Agreement on the West Bank and the Gaza Strip was concluded between Israel and the PLO, and a signing ceremony was held in Washington, D.C. This agreement expanded the interim self-government arrangement, which had been initiated by the May 1994 Gaza-Jericho agreement, to the entire West Bank, and achieved the withdrawal of Israeli forces from various areas of the West Bank including six cities, transferred civil authority to the Palestinians, and provided for the holding of elections for the Palestinian Council. Foreign Minister Yohei Kono represented Japan at the signing ceremony and delivered a speech welcoming the agreement and stating the assistance measures that Japan had taken and would take to contribute to the advancement of the peace process. The tragic assassination of Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin on 4 November 1995 committed by an Israeli youth who opposed the peace negotiations shocked the international community; however, the international community closed ranks in its firm support of the peace process, and the new Prime Minister, Shimon Peres, made clear his determination to carry out the will of late Prime Minister Rabin and laid out his firm commitment to peace. As for the overall Middle East peace process, achieving progress in the negotiations between Israel, Syria, and Lebanon, and the negotiations on the permanent status of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, which began in May 1996, will be the major issues.
In order to support the Middle East peace process, the international community provides assistance for the Palestinian Interim Self-government and promotes regional cooperation through the multilateral negotiations of the Middle East peace process. Furthermore, the Middle Eastern and North Africa Economic Summit has been held annually since 1994 in order to provide assistance to invigorate the region's economy. In October 1995, more than 1,000 people from both the public and private sectors of more than 60 countries attended the Amman Summit which led to the adoption of the Amman Declaration, which included discussions on the establishment of the Middle East and Mediterranean Travel and Tourism Association and a Development Bank in the Middle East and North Africa. Parliamentary Vice-Minister for Foreign Affairs Yasuo Fukuda represented Japan at this summit.
ii) The Visit to the Middle East by Prime Minister Tomiichi Murayama and Japan's Role in that Region
As will be outlined later (please refer to Chapter III, Part F), in a visit to the Middle East in September 1995 Prime Minister Tomiichi Murayama was welcomed by the parties involved in the Middle East peace process - namely Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Israel and the Gaza Strip - where he showed Japan's positive attitude in promoting the Middle East peace process.
Japan has positively contributed to the multilateral negotiations on the Middle East peace process especially in the environmental and tourism fields. In addition, Japan made positive contributions in order to advance the Middle East peace process as well as to ensure the stability of that region through, for example, participating in international observation teams monitoring the Palestinian Council elections in January 1996 and also providing material assistance for the elections, and also through dispatching its Self-Defense Forces in February to the United Nations Disengagement Observer Force (UNDOF) in the Golan Heights.
b) The Former Yugoslavia
i) The Situation of the Conflict in the Former Yugoslavia
The year 1995 saw great progress toward settling the conflict in the former Yugoslavia, the largest regional conflict in the post-Cold War era, which has persisted for more than four years since June 1991.
During the first half of 1995, the situation in the former Yugoslavia remained quite tense. In Bosnia-Herzegovina, fighting continued between the Muslim-Croat Federation forces and the Serbian forces, and, during the fighting, the Serbian forces resorted to taking United Nations peace-keeping personnel hostage in response to air strikes carried out by NATO. The international community was united in the recognition that a decisive approach, including the use of military force, was necessary in response to these actions by the Serbian forces. Implementing the understanding reached at the Halifax Summit in June, the United Nations Rapid Reaction Force was dispatched and repeated air strikes were carried out by NATO. As a result, the military offenses of the Serbian forces were suppressed. On the other hand, in Croatia, after a wide-scale reduction in the scale of United Nations peace-keeping operations was implemented in response to a request for withdrawal by the Croatian Government, in August the Croatian Government used military force to bring its Serbian residential areas (the Krajina region), under the control of the Government.
Such new developments as the military setback of Serbian forces created an opening for the initiation of negotiations toward peace, and from August 1995 onward there was progress seen in efforts for peace mainly through the initiatives of the United States. Among these peace efforts, parallel progress was made in: 1) peace efforts undertaken through individual negotiations between the United States and the parties to the conflict regarding such closely interrelated issues as creating a future regime in Bosnia, demarcation of areas to be governed by the parties, and lifting of economic sanctions imposed by the United Nations Security Council on the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia which maintains close ties with the Bosnian Serbs; 2) the creation of an international support system in both military and civil aspects in order to ensure the implementation of a peace agreement by the parties. As a result of these peace efforts, on 21 November, initialing of a peace agreement took place in Dayton, Ohio, in the United States, which consists of: 1) the continued existence of Bosnia as a state and the holding of a series of elections in Bosnia; 2) the recognition of two political entities in Bosnia - namely the Bosnian Federation (led by Muslims and Croats) and the Republika Srpska, and the demarcation of their respective territories; and 3) the lifting of sanctions against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. In order to provide assistance for peace implementation, in the military aspect, the Peace Implementation Force (IFOR), composed of approximately 60,000 personnel - mainly contributed by NATO countries - was put in place to replace the United Nations peace-keeping operations, and agreement was reached that, if necessary, force would be used to ensure compliance with the peace agreement. In the civil aspect, on 8-9 December, the London Peace Implementation Conference reached an agreement on political measures including humanitarian and refugee assistance, assistance for the holding of elections, and the creation of a coordinating mechanism for rehabilitation and reconstruction assistance. Following these developments, on 14 December, formal signing of the peace agreement took place at the Paris Peace Conference.
ii) The Role of Japan
It is of vital significance that a path to peace in the former Yugoslavia was paved through the joint efforts of the international community. However, this peace agreement has a number of vulnerable elements, and in order to establish lasting peace in this region through the implementation of the agreement by the parties, the next task facing the international community is to work in cooperation on assistance in both the military and civil aspects. Japan has viewed the conflict in the former Yugoslavia as a regional conflict in Europe which is also an important international issue related to the creation of a new international order in the post-Cold War era. As such, Japan has played a positive role in seeking a peaceful solution to the conflict, by providing humanitarian and refugee assistance totaling US$180 million and by conducting preventive diplomacy through economic assistance to the surrounding countries. Furthermore, in April and May 1995, Foreign Minister Yohei Kono visited this region and urged the parties to commit themselves to peaceful settlement of the conflict. Specifically, at the London Peace Implementation Conference, where Japan was represented by Foreign Minister Kono, Japan became a member of the Steering Board of the Peace Implementation Council which was newly established for civil implementation. It is essential that Japan maintain its active participation in and its contribution to the international efforts for the civil implementation of the peace agreement.
With the end of the Cold War, much attention was given to the role of United Nations peace-keeping operations as a means to resolve regional conflicts. While great successes have been achieved in such places as Cambodia and Mozambique, U.N. peace-keeping has failed to meet expectations during recent years in Somalia and the former Yugoslavia. These situations highlighted certain limits to U.N. peace-keeping operations and pointed out a need to reconsider the way they are conducted. Furthermore, large scale deployments such as UNTAC in Cambodia and the increasing number of peace-keeping operations established after the end of the Cold War made it more difficult to secure the adequate number of personnel for the initial stage of operations. U.N. peace-keeping operations face a fiscal crisis also.
As for the fiscal aspect of the operations, in addition to their qualitative and quantitative expansion, the situation is extremely serious because of the increasing arrears of assessed contributions. This fiscal predicament also causes delays in reimbursement to troop-contributing countries, thus making it difficult to secure necessary personnel, and creating a vicious circle. In order to break free from this predicament and create a sound fiscal foundation for peace-keeping, deliberations are currently underway in the High-level Open-ended Working Group on the Financial Situation of the United Nations in order to review the PKO budgetary system.
Under these circumstances, the Supplement to the Agenda for Peace presented by Secretary-General of the United Nations Boutros Boutros-Ghali in January 1995 again stressed the importance of such traditional principles of PKO as the consent of the parties to the conflict, impartiality and the non-use of force except in self-defense. Furthermore, this report stressed the need to increase the rapid reaction capacities of the United Nations and led to active discussions in the U.N. on a variety of measures.
Although U.N. PKO are faced with the issues outlined above, they continue to play a vital role for solving regional conflict and efforts should continue to be made to seek measures to conduct effective operations. As a Vice-Chair of the Special Committee on Peace-Keeping Operations, Japan has actively participated in the formulation of policies toward this goal. Japan's positive approach was reflected in the statement made by Foreign Minister Yohei Kono in the General Debate of the United Nations General Assembly in September 1995, in which he mentioned the importance of continued efforts for further reform of U.N. peace-keeping operations. In particular, with regard to ensuring the safety of PKO personnel - an issue that Japan has long advocated - the United Nations Convention for the Safety of United Nations and Associated Personnel was adopted in September, 1994 at the United Nations General Assembly, and Japan became a party to that Convention in June of 1995.
Based on the Law Concerning Cooperation for United Nations Peace-keeping and Other Operations, or the International Peace Cooperation Law, which came into effect in 1992, Japan has participated in U.N. peace-keeping operations in Cambodia and Mozambique, and others, as was outlined earlier (Chapter II, Part A, Section 2.a). In February 1996, Japan dispatched 45 members from its Self-Defense Forces transport unit and other personnel to UNDOF. Furthermore, apart from U.N. peace-keeping, Japan dispatched the Self-Defense Forces to Zaire in 1994 to provide assistance for Rwandan refugees. The international community has highly commended Japan for its cooperation in such instances, and there has been a high level of understanding and support for these activities among the Japanese people as well. In the public opinion survey on foreign policy conducted in October 1995 by the Prime Minister's Office, approximately 70% of those who answered the survey expressed their support for Japan's participation in PKO activities. As of August 1995, three years had passed since the promulgation of the International Peace Cooperation Law. Currently, the government ministries and agencies concerned are in the process of reviewing the issues related to that Law in view of the experiences garnered through past participation in U.N. peace-keeping operations. It is essential that Japan continue to cooperate positively for U.N. peace-keeping operations and international humanitarian relief activities in the future.
In the post-Cold War era, there continues to exist danger of the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction such as nuclear, chemical and biological weapons, and the entire international community is faced with the task of promoting disarmament and arms control and strengthening the non-proliferation regime. During 1995, steady efforts were made for this task in regard not only to nuclear weapons (for more information on trends in nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation please refer to Chapter I, Part F), but also to biological and chemical weapons.
Furthermore, due to regional conflicts that have frequently erupted since the end of the Cold War and as a result of the economic growth of developing countries, there is an increasing demand for conventional weapons. However, the unfettered transfer and excessive stockpiling of these weapons could become a major destabilizing element in the international community.
Therefore, it is necessary to promote transparency in transfer of conventional weapons and to prevent excessive transfer and stockpiling of such weapons. In 1995, issues on anti-personnel land mines and small arms were addressed in the United Nations. Also, great progress was made through the establishment of the Wassenaar Arrangement on Export Controls for Conventional Arms and Dual-Use Goods and Technologies, which was established as a new international export control regime on conventional weapons and related products and technologies.
Japan has been actively making efforts to promote arms control and disarmament and strengthen the non-proliferation regime. For example, in 1995 among the resolutions on disarmament in the United Nations, Japan co-sponsored 15 draft resolutions, and, in particular, Japan displayed initiative and took actual leadership in drafting four of those 15 resolutions.
a) Disarmament and Non-proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction
i) The Chemical Weapons Convention
The Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) (Note 2) is a comprehensive treaty aiming at the abolition of chemical weapons, and was opened for signature in January 1993; as of December 1995, 160 States had signed and 45 States had ratified the Convention. It is possible that the Convention will come into effect during 1996, and with a view to achieving that, the administrative and fiscal aspects of the establishment of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) as well as verification procedures are now being examined. (Note 3) Japan ratified this convention in September 1995 and has actively contributed to these considerations as it makes preparations for the early entry into force of the CWC.
ii) Biological Weapons Convention
The Biological Weapons Convention (BWC) is a treaty which aims to prohibit the production, stockpiling, retention, and transfer of biological weapons. However, since the time of its adoption in 1976, it has been pointed out that this convention lacks a verification system, which is its major shortcoming. Based on the results of considerations from a scientific and technical viewpoint since 1991 by the ad hoc working group of governmental experts with regard to verification measures, the Special Conference of the State Parties to the BWC held in September 1994 decided to establish a new expert's group to consider the creation of a new legal framework aiming to strengthen the effect of the Convention, including the establishment of a verification system. This expert's group meeting began its work in July 1995, and Japan has also actively been making efforts toward the strengthening of the BWC. As of 30 June 1995, 132 countries, including Japan, had acceded to the Biological Weapons Convention.
b) Regulations on Conventional Weapons and Their Transfer
In the international environment of the post-Cold War era it has become an important task for the international community to prevent destabilization of regional situations through excessive transfer and accumulation of conventional weapons, as well as through proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.
As a result of the initiative taken by Japan and other member States of the United Nations, in January 1992, the United Nations Register of Conventional Arms was inaugurated for the purpose of increasing transparency and openness of armaments. In 1993, 92 countries reported on exports and imports of offensive weapons classified into seven categories, such as tanks and fighter planes, for 1992; in 1994, 90 countries for 1993; and in 1995 (as of December 1995), 90 countries for 1994. A major issue for the Register is to ensure universality by expanding the number of participating States, and Japan has played a major role in ensuring the smooth operation of the Register by promoting understanding and participation of all States through such efforts as hosting the Asia-Pacific Workshop. Furthermore, although there is no requirement for the submission of data on the possession of arms under the Register, Japan has voluntarily provided such data and is making efforts in cooperation with other States to improve the Register system.
Another issue that must be addressed is the fact that the unfettered transfer of conventional weapons has brought about humanitarian problems. In particular, anti-personnel land mines placed indiscriminately during times of conflict and left underground have caused many casualties among civilians, which has become a major issue from a humanitarian standpoint. In 1993 at the United Nations General Assembly, a resolution was adopted calling for the review of the Convention on Prohibitions or Restrictions on Certain Conventional Weapons (CCW), including restrictions on land mines. Based on this resolution, in September 1995 the CCW Review Conference was held with a view to strengthening restrictions on anti-personnel land mines. The preparation process for that conference involved four inter-governmental meetings. Yet, differences in views of the participating countries could not be overcome regarding strengthening restrictions on land mines, and it was agreed that the review process would be continued with meetings to be held in January and April of 1996 in order to adopt an amended protocol on land mines.
The unfettered or illicit transfer of small arms is also an important issue to be dealt with, for it has led to aggravation of fighting and an increase of casualties in civil wars in certain regions of Africa and elsewhere. At the 50th General Assembly of the United Nations, Japan took initiative in submitting a draft resolution on small arms calling for the establishment of a panel of governmental experts under the United Nations Secretary-General for the purpose of considering measures to solve this problem. This resolution was adopted by an overwhelming majority.
c) Strengthening the Export Control Regimes
i) Export Control Regimes for Non-Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMDs) and Missiles
Prohibiting possession of WMDs alone is not sufficient enough to prevent proliferation of WMDs and missiles; it is also essential to improve and strengthen the existing export control regimes in pursuit of our non-proliferation goal. From this perspective, international efforts have been made to coordinate control of those items and technologies that can be used for production of nuclear, biological and chemical weapons and of missiles, which serve as their delivery systems, under the current international export control regimes. Nuclear-related items and technology are controlled in accordance with the London Guidelines (Note 4) by the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG), which consists of 32 countries. The items and technologies related to biological and chemical weapons are controlled by the 29 participating States of the Australia Group (AG), and the items and technologies related to missiles are controlled by the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR) which now counts 28 members. Japan actively participates in these international export control regimes. One of our positive contributions to such international efforts has been the undertaking of Point of Contact for London Guidelines Part 2 since its establishment in 1992, as well as for London Guidelines Part 1 since April 1995, by the Permanent Mission of Japan to the International Organizations in Vienna.
ii) The Wassenaar Arrangement: Agreement on Establishing a New International Regime on Export Controls for Conventional Arms and Dual-Use Goods and Technologies
Unlike the case for weapons of mass destruction, there has been no international export control regime for conventional weapons and dual-use goods and technologies since the termination of the Coordinating Committee for Multilateral Export Controls (COCOM), which was designed with the goal of controlling the outflow of strategic items and technologies to the former communist countries. However, in December 1995, after more than two years of consultations, an agreement was reached on the establishment of the Wassenaar Arrangement (TWA) (Note 5) as a new export control regime on conventional arms and dual-use goods and technologies.(Note 6)
In contrast to COCOM, which designated specific countries (the former communist countries) as subject to the export restrictions by its member States, the Wassenaar Arrangement does not predetermine any regions targeted for export control. Rather, it aims to prevent excessive transfer and stockpiling of conventional weapons which could undermine regional stability. Furthermore, while the former COCOM required approvals from the other participating countries for the export of restricted materials, the decision to grant or deny licensing for export is left to the discretion of each country, based on information exchanged among the members of the Arrangement.
The Wassenaar Arrangement currently counts 31 member States (Note 7) including Japan, the United States, European countries, and the Republic of Korea, as well as the Russian Federation and the countries of Eastern Europe which were formerly subject to the restrictions enacted under COCOM. Japan has given serious consideration to an approach to controlling the flow of conventional arms in the international community in the post-Cold War era, and has positively contributed toward the early inauguration of an appropriate international export control regime. Japan intends to continue to make efforts, together with other countries, toward the steady development of the Wassenaar Arrangement.
iii) Cooperation with Other Countries to Develop Export Control Systems
In order to further enhance the effectiveness of international export controls, the above-mentioned export control regimes (NSG, MTCR, AG, etc.), are calling on non-members to develop export control systems. Japan promotes cooperation and dialogue on export controls by holding seminars and providing training courses for Asian countries and the New Independent States (NIS) and so on.
Back to Index