Press Conferences

Mr. IWAYA Takeshi, Minister for Foreign Affairs: Let me begin by briefing you all. At this G7 Foreign Ministers’ Meeting, which was the second one held under the Canadian Presidency, thorough discussions took place over three days on key issues that impact the future state of the international order, including the situation in Ukraine.

First, regarding the situation in Ukraine, various efforts towards achieving peace are ongoing. G7 members held an in-depth discussion on how to respond to the issue. I pointed out that the way of peace in Ukraine affects the entire international order, including the Indo-Pacific region, and stressed that unilateral attempts to change the status quo by force must not be allowed. I then stated that it was important for the G7 to unite with the involvement of the U.S. For our part, Japan will make an affirmative contribution to the efforts for peace.

On the situation in the Middle East, we reaffirmed the importance of the steady implementation processes of the Gaza ceasefire agreement. I stated Japan’s determination to also play an active role in medium- to long-term recovery and reconstruction support, taking into account the perspective of a two-state solution.

Regarding the situation in the Indo-Pacific, we mainly discussed the situation in the East and South China Seas, North Korea’s nuclear and missile issues, and military cooperation between Russia and North Korea. In addition, I shared serious concern about North Korea’s malicious cyber activities, including cryptocurrency thefts, and highlighted the need to address them together. Furthermore, I asked anew for understanding and cooperation from the other G7 countries for the immediate resolution of the abductions issue and gained their support.

Furthermore, at this meeting, there was also discussion on maritime security. The G7 ministers and I reaffirmed that we share fundamental principles, including the rule of law, which are the basis of the Free and Open Indo-Pacific vision promoted by Japan.

Additionally, on this occasion, I held meetings and informal talks with my G7 counterparts. With Secretary of State Rubio of the U.S., we followed up on last month’s Japan-U.S. Summit Meeting, including further strengthening the Japan-U.S. Alliance, and confirmed to work together on regional affairs, including Ukraine. Regarding the tariff measures on steel and aluminum, I conveyed that it is regrettable that additional tariffs were imposed without Japan being excluded, despite the series of claims that Japan had made. Furthermore, I conveyed that Japan should not be subject to reciprocal tariffs and tariffs on automobiles.

The G7, which shares values and principles such as freedom, democracy, and the rule of law, plays an extremely important role in addressing various challenges facing the international community. I solidly shared this view with my counterparts at the meeting. Over the course of the three-day discussion, we reaffirmed the G7 members’ determination to work toward peace, stability, and prosperity in the international community. We confirmed and shared the view on the importance and necessity of the G7 closely uniting together amid the ongoing international situation that demands careful steering. Japan will continue to make steadfast efforts in collaboration with the G7 toward peace and stability in the international community.

That is all from me at the outset.

Reporter: You have completed your three-day diplomatic schedule. First, I would like to ask about the unity of the G7. You mentioned G7 unity in your opening remarks. What aspects did you emphasize for strengthening G7 unity? Do you view that unity was confirmed at this meeting? In addition, the theme of the first session was “Strengthening the G7.” No outreach countries were invited to the meeting. Were they not invited so that the formal G7 members can confirm unity with one another at length? These are my questions. Thank you.

Minister Iwaya: At the meeting, at 50 years since the G7’s inception, we first reflected on the G7’s progress. Amid a highly unstable international situation, including the situation in Ukraine, the other ministers and I shared the view that the G7, which shares values and principles, plays an increasingly important role in addressing these various challenges. I believe this was the consensus reached by all G7 participants.

I appreciated the value of the G7 at its 50 years and stated that the G7 will continue to work together as a group. In particular, as Japan is the only G7 member from Asia, I believe it is required of us to ensure that we bring the Indo-Pacific perspective into the G7. I will continue to work to further strengthen the unity of the G7 through close communication.

Regarding your question about outreach, it is basically up to the Presidency to invite outreach countries. Therefore, Japan would like to refrain from making any definitive comments about the reason for outreach countries not participating this time. Given the sheer number of major challenges facing us, the Presidency may have felt it was important for the G7 to first come together, communicate with each other, and reaffirm its unity. In this sense, I believe this G7 Foreign Ministers’ Meeting was highly meaningful.

Reporter: I would like to ask about the Indo-Pacific region. My question has some overlaps with your opening remarks. With the interest of the G7 and the rest of the international community focused on the situation in Ukraine, there is concern that interest in security in the Indo-Pacific is diminishing. In this context, at the meeting, how did you advocate that the security of these two regions is inseparable? Were you able to obtain the G7’s understanding? Please also tell us what understanding the G7 members expressed on the issues surrounding China, North Korea, and the military cooperation between Russia and North Korea.

Minister Iwaya: I noted that peace, stability, and prosperity in the international community strongly rely on the situation in the Indo-Pacific. For this reason, I encouraged the involvement of European and North American countries in the Indo-Pacific. Needless to say, I strongly felt that the G7 members already share the recognition that the security of the Euro-Atlantic and the security of the Indo-Pacific and Asia are now inextricably inseparable. Accordingly, while it is true that the situation in Ukraine is drawing attention, I was convinced that the G7 members’ interest in the Indo-Pacific situation has not diminished.

On China, North Korea, or the military cooperation between Russia and North Korea, my G7 counterparts and I opposed any unilateral attempts to change the status quo by force or coercion in the Indo-Pacific region and shared our concerns over the advancement of North Korea’s nuclear and missile activities. We also shared serious concerns about the advancement of Russia-North Korea military cooperation, as well as about the fact that North Korea and China are supporting Russia’s war sustainability. Moreover, I asked for understanding and cooperation from the other G7 countries for the immediate resolution of the abductions issue and gained their support. Through the discussions, I believe we were able to reaffirm the importance of the G7 uniting on policies toward the Indo-Pacific as well.

Reporter: I would like to ask about the situation in Ukraine. President Putin of Russia has indicated that he cannot immediately accept the proposal for a temporary ceasefire between Russia and Ukraine put forward by the U.S. Trump administration. As G7 members, including the U.S., make ongoing diplomatic efforts toward a ceasefire, what are your thoughts on President Putin’s remarks? What is your view on how Russia should respond to the ceasefire proposal? At the same time, as you referred to in your opening remarks, if a ceasefire is agreed upon under the current conditions, a wrong precedent may be shown to countries around the world, that unilateral changes to the status quo by force are possible. What did the Government of Japan advocate during the Foreign Ministers’ Meeting, and was Japan able to reach a shared understanding with other G7 members?

Minister Iwaya: I am not aware of the remarks made by President Putin that you just mentioned. While I gather that there are various reports, I would like to refrain from assessing every comment made and every action taken by Russian government officials. On the 11th of this month, the governments of the U.S. and Ukraine reached an agreement during their talks. I believe it represents an important step forward in the process toward ending the prolonged war. We expect that the Russian side will act positively. In the session on Ukraine held yesterday, the G7 confirmed the importance of working together to ensure this. The way of peace in Ukraine could affect not only Europe but the entire international order, including the Indo-Pacific region. Accordingly, we must not allow a situation to arise from which wrong precedents can be drawn. I expect that discussions will be carried out toward peace. Therefore, it is premature to make any definitive or conclusive assessments at this point. We will continue to work closely with the international community, including the G7, to ensure that these developments lead to a just and lasting peace in Ukraine as soon as possible.

Reporter: Regarding the Japan-U.S. Foreign Ministers’ Meeting held on the margins of the G7 Foreign Ministers’ Meeting, I would like to follow up on the question I asked yesterday about security. Following on from his first administration, President Trump once again expressed dissatisfaction with the U.S. defense obligations toward Japan under the Japan-U.S. Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security. Was this issue raised during the meeting with Secretary Rubio? If so, please share with us the discussion that took place. In addition, Mr. George Glass, who has been nominated as the next U.S. Ambassador to Japan, indicated during his Senate Foreign Relations Committee nomination hearing that he would seek an increase in Japan’s share of the costs of the Host Nation Support (HNS). Please tell us whether this issue was also raised during your meeting. Mr. Glass mentioned that when Prime Minister ISHIBA Shigeru visited the U.S. in February, during the summit meeting, the Prime Minister himself touched on the possibility of considering increases in Japan’s defense budget. Is this true? Please tell us what discussion took place on the defense budget at this Foreign Ministers’ Meeting as well as how Japan will respond, given that the Trump administration is increasingly leaning toward seeking defense budget increases from Japan.

Minister Iwaya: At this Japan-U.S. Foreign Ministers’ Meeting, we concurred to advance cooperation to further strengthen the deterrence and response capabilities of the Japan-U.S. Alliance based on the outcomes of the Japan-U.S. Summit Meeting in February. We also reaffirmed our commitment to the steady implementation of the realignment of U.S. Forces in Japan as concurred in the past Summit Meeting. There was no discussion of the sort you mentioned at the outset.

That being said, the Government considers that HNS costs are shared appropriately based on the agreement between the governments of Japan and the U.S. While I will refrain from speculating about cost sharing after the current Special Measures Agreement expires, we will continue to constantly consider what constitutes an appropriate level of contribution from the Japanese side.

Furthermore, I was present throughout the Japan-U.S. Summit Meeting held recently. While I would like to refrain from disclosing the details of the discussion, Prime Minister Ishiba did not make the remark on the defense budget as you suggested. That being said, the National Security Strategy sets out that, in FY2027, as per its independent judgment, Japan will take the necessary measures to make the level of its budget, for both the fundamental reinforcement of defense capabilities and complementary initiatives, reach 2% of the GDP, and we are making steady progress toward this target.

As we have stated repeatedly, what is important is not the amount or percentage of GDP but the content of the defense budget. Japan’s defense budget will be decided independently by Japan. Amid the most severe and complex security environment since the end of World War II, the Government of Japan will constantly consider efforts for strengthening its deterrence and response capabilities independently and continue to make steady progress toward a fundamental reinforcement of our defense capabilities.