Press Conferences

Mr. IWAYA Takeshi, Minister for Foreign Affairs: I have two announcements at the outset.

First, today, I held a Foreign Ministers’ Meeting with Minister of State Aitaro of Palau.

I visited Palau and attended the Presidential inauguration ceremony in January, this was the second meeting since then, in just a month.

Following the Japan-Palau Summit Meeting held on February 12, we were able to further deepen the “Tokubetsu” (special) (also in Palauan) relationship between the two countries through this meeting.

Palau is also an important partner toward realizing a “Free and Open Indo-Pacific” (FOIP). We will continue to closely cooperate with the country.

Minister Iwaya: Next, taking this opportunity of my visit to Munich, Germany from today, the Japan-U.S.-ROK Foreign Ministers’ Meeting will be held in addition to the G7 Foreign Ministers’ Meeting.

I intend to confirm that Japan, the U.S., and the ROK will continue to maintain solidarity and lead efforts towards peace and prosperity in the region, as the security environment in the region becomes increasingly severe.

That is all from me at the outset.

Nikkei Shimbun, Baba: I would like to ask about the Japan-U.S.-ROK Foreign Ministers’ Meeting you just explained in your opening remarks. You stated that the meeting will be held. You have already held meetings with the respective ministers in person. Could you once again tell us the significance of holding this meeting and how you intend to maintain the trilateral cooperation to date following the inauguration of the Trump administration?

Minister Iwaya: At both the Japan-U.S. Foreign Ministers’ Meeting last month and the Japan-ROK Foreign Ministers’ Meetings so far, I have confirmed the importance of cooperation among the three countries with Secretary of State Rubio of the U.S. and Minister of Foreign Affairs Cho Tae-yul of the ROK, respectively. In addition, at the recent Japan-U.S. Summit Meeting, Japan and the U.S. affirmed the importance of the Japan-U.S.-ROK trilateral partnership in responding to North Korea and upholding regional peace and prosperity.

On this occasion, which will bring the three ministers together, a Japan-U.S.-ROK Foreign Ministers’ Meeting will be held. Following the inauguration of the new U.S. administration, I would like the meeting to serve as an opportunity to confirm that the three countries will continue to work in solidarity toward the peace and prosperity of the region.

As the regional security environment becomes ever more severe, it remains unchanged that strategic collaboration among Japan, the U.S., and the ROK has become more important than ever. Based on this recognition, I would like to make this meeting a meaningful opportunity to advance concrete efforts.

NHK, Yonezu: The government policy on Japan’s participation as an observer in the third Meeting of States Parties to the TPNW next month has not been announced yet. Please allow me to ask a question on this issue. The Government has stated that it would review the cases of other countries that have participated in the past. Could you update us on its status and share your current thoughts on whether Japan will participate as an observer or not?

Minister Iwaya: Regarding our response on the TPNW, we have been collecting not only public information but also information from governments and other entities in examining the background that led to the attendance by countries that participated as an observer in the past, their domestic affairs, their diplomatic and security challenges, their relations with allies, among other aspects.

As you are aware, the meeting of States Parties to the TPNW has been held twice, in June 2022 and November 2023. At the first meeting, there were five observer States, which are thought to have had alliances with nuclear-weapon-States and were under their nuclear extended deterrence at the time. They were Germany, Norway, Belgium, Australia, and the Netherlands. At the second meeting, there were four such states: Germany, Norway, Belgium, and Australia.

We know that each state had various circumstances for participating as an observer.

For example, in the case of Germany, Belgium, and Norway, we understand that observer participation was incorporated into their coalition agreements for forming coalition governments following general elections.

In the case of the Netherlands, we understand that a parliamentary motion calling for observer participation was passed. We also understand that, after the first meeting, the Dutch Foreign Minister submitted a letter to the President of the House of Representatives stating, “Based on our experience of participating in the meeting, further participation as an observer is not useful,” and did not participate in the second meeting.

Sweden and Finland participated as observers only in the first meeting. Before the second meeting, Finland was approved for NATO membership, and Sweden was in the process of applying for NATO membership. The two countries have disclosed that the treaty was incompatible with their obligations arising from NATO membership.

Next, I would like to explain our findings on these countries’ actions at the meetings of States Parties.

Overall, countries under NATO’s extended deterrence emphasized their support for nuclear deterrence while stating that this treaty is fundamentally incompatible with their national security policies and that they would not become States Parties.

For example, at the first meeting, Germany stated that it is “fully committed to NATO’s nuclear deterrence. Germany will not accede to the TPNW.”

Furthermore, these countries underscored the importance of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), stating that it is the cornerstone of the international nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation regime.

Through this review, we have obtained various information, including information other than what I just mentioned now. However, as our relationships with these countries are involved, there are aspects that cannot be disclosed publicly. I ask for your understanding.

To determine whether or not to participate as an observer, we believe it is necessary to carefully consider, in addition to the points I mentioned, the potential impact on our national security and the efforts that would be truly effective for making substantive progress in nuclear disarmament, as the only country to have ever suffered atomic bombings during war.

Based on a comprehensive and careful consideration of these factors, we will make an appropriate decision regarding our policy on the third Meeting of States Parties.

Kyodo News, Sakaguchi: I have a question about President Trump’s remark. President Trump signed a presidential memorandum to initiate reciprocal tariffs. He has also instructed the Secretary of Commerce and other officials to investigate non-tariff barriers and report on improvement measures. A senior official in the administration has cited Japan, stating that it has “relatively low tariffs, but high structural barriers,” which raises concerns about the impact on the Japanese economy. Please tell us how you intend to respond to this.

Minister Iwaya: We are aware of this announcement on the introduction of reciprocal tariffs by the U.S. In response to this announcement, Japan has already begun communication with the U.S. side.

Japan will closely examine the details of the measures that will come to light in the future and their impact on Japan, and respond appropriately.

Jiji Press, Kawakami: I would like to ask about Ukraine. During the recent U.S.-Russia Summit Telephone Talk, the two countries agreed to launch negotiations toward a ceasefire in Ukraine. President Trump also stated that restoring Ukraine’s pre-2014 borders is unlikely. What are your views on the series of developments, including whether a ceasefire agreement without the restoration of Ukraine’s territory would be acceptable?

Minister Iwaya: I am aware of the remarks by President Trump you are referring to.

The Government is closely following the various developments surrounding Ukraine with great interest. We are also gathering information. As the international community is in the midst of discussing this matter, I believe it is premature to give Japan’s definitive assessment at this stage.

We will continue to work closely with the international community to realize a just and lasting peace in Ukraine as soon as possible.

Yomiuri Shimbun, Kamimura: I have a question related to this matter. You will be attending the Munich Security Conference. At the meeting, what do you intend to emphasize on the issue of Ukraine?

Minister Iwaya: As I just stated, we are closely following the various developments surrounding Ukraine with great interest and are gathering information. As a matter of course, we believe it is important to realize a just and lasting peace as soon as possible with the full involvement of Ukraine as a party to the conflict.

Japan attaches critical importance to sovereignty and territorial integrity, and we intend to engage in the discussions based on this standpoint.

Independent Web Journal, Hamamoto: As mentioned earlier, a meeting between Mr. Trump and Mr. Putin may be realized, which could dramatically transform U.S.-Russia relations. Japan continues to follow the Russia-weakening strategy since the Biden administration era, and has maintained its support for Ukraine and sanctions against Russia even after the transition from the Kishida administration to the Ishiba administration. Just recently, Japan announced the provision of 8.8 billion yen in assistance for Ukraine. If U.S.-Russia relations were to change dramatically in the future, will the Government of Japan be ready to shift its stance 180 degrees and seek to improve its relations with Russia?

Minister Iwaya: We consider dialogue between the U.S. and Russia to be critically important in addressing this issue of Russia’s aggression against Ukraine. The Government of Japan is closely following the developments.

As I have stated earlier, Japan believes it is important to achieve a just and lasting peace in Ukraine, and intends to address in steadfast coordination with the G7 and other relevant countries.

Regarding the Japan-Russia relations, there are outstanding issues between the two countries. Currently, Japan-Russia relations are in a difficult situation; however, we believe it is necessary to communicate with our neighboring country of Russia.

We will also continue to consider relations with Russia appropriately from the standpoint of what will contribute to Japan’s national interests in the context of Japan’s overall diplomacy.

Mainichi Shimbun, Kim: I have a question about the TPNW. Based on what we just heard, it seems that the Government’s review has made significant progress. Is it correct to understand that the review has been completed for the most part? In addition, is it correct to understand that, based on the review, the Government is considering not participating as an observer?

Minister Iwaya: We have not yet arrived at a conclusion. We believe that we must make an appropriate decision based on a comprehensive and careful consideration of the factors I mentioned earlier, and keep in mind that the third Meeting of States Parties is scheduled to be held in early March.

Mainichi Shimbun, Kim: I would like to ask a follow-up question. I believe the right and wrong of Japan’s observer participation has been discussed before. What was the meaning of launching a review once again? There are also issues underlying the TPNW, such as the weakening of the NPT regime, the slow progress of the nuclear disarmament negotiations, and the issue of arms control. Please share with us your views on these matters once again?

Minister Iwaya: As we have not yet reached our final conclusion, I would like to comment on those matters when we announce our conclusion. Basically, Japan has been making efforts believing in the importance of acting as a bridge between nuclear-weapon States and non-nuclear-weapon States in the NPT regime, which is participated by both sides. We will make an appropriate decision based on further consideration of such matters as well as provide a thorough explanation when we make our decision.

Pan Orient News, Azhari: Japan in the last two decades has been asking for the help and support of successive American presidents to help bring back on the Japanese abductees from North Korea. American presidents have promised to help but nobody was freed. President Trump seems to be taking a different approach. For example, with Hamas, he threatened to turn Gaza into hell if the Israeli hostages are not freed by this coming Saturday. So my question is: Does Japan, based on the alliance with United States, want from president Trump to make similar approach, threat to turn North Korea into hell, for example, if the Koreans don't free the Japanese abductees by a certain day or deadline?

Minister Iwaya: At the Japan-U.S. Summit Meeting, Prime Minister Ishiba asked President Trump for his continued understanding and cooperation for the immediate resolution of the abductions issue, and gained full support from President Trump. This was a significant achievement. Furthermore, I believe this contributes to Japan’s proactive efforts toward the resolution of the abductions issue.

Based on the strong relationship of trust and cooperation between Japan and the U.S., including between the leaders, the Government of Japan, under Prime Minister Ishiba’s strong determination, intends to explore the most effective measures and make efforts toward achieving the return of all abductees at the earliest possible date. This is a matter that Japan should resolve proactively with the cooperation of the U.S.