Cablegate: Daily Summary of Japanese Press 01/21/10

VZCZCXRO4557
PP RUEHFK RUEHKSO RUEHNAG RUEHNH
DE RUEHKO #0136/01 0220106
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
P 220106Z JAN 10
FM AMEMBASSY TOKYO
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 8880
INFO RUEKJCS/SECDEF WASHDC PRIORITY
RHEHAAA/WHITE HOUSE WASHINGTON DC PRIORITY
RUEAWJA/USDOJ WASHDC PRIORITY
RULSDMK/USDOT WASHDC PRIORITY
RUCPDOC/USDOC WASHDC PRIORITY
RUEAIIA/CIA WASHDC PRIORITY
RUEKJCS/JOINT STAFF WASHDC//J5//
RHHMUNA/HQ USPACOM HONOLULU HI
RHHMHBA/COMPACFLT PEARL HARBOR HI
RHMFIUU/HQ PACAF HICKAM AFB HI//CC/PA//
RHMFIUU/USFJ //J5/JO21//
RUYNAAC/COMNAVFORJAPAN YOKOSUKA JA
RUAYJAA/CTF 72
RUEHNH/AMCONSUL NAHA 0774
RUEHFK/AMCONSUL FUKUOKA 8433
RUEHOK/AMCONSUL OSAKA KOBE 2249
RUEHNAG/AMCONSUL NAGOYA 5515
RUEHKSO/AMCONSUL SAPPORO 8929
RUEHBJ/AMEMBASSY BEIJING 2739
RUEHUL/AMEMBASSY SEOUL 9411
RUCNDT/USMISSION USUN NEW YORK 8814

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 11 TOKYO 000136

SIPDIS

DEPT FOR E, P, EB, EAP/J, EAP/P, EAP/PD, PA;
WHITE HOUSE/NSC/NEC; JUSTICE FOR STU CHEMTOB IN ANTI-TRUST DIVISION;
TREASURY/OASIA/IMI/JAPAN; DEPT PASS USTR/PUBLIC AFFAIRS OFFICE;
SECDEF FOR JCS-J-5/JAPAN,
DASD/ISA/EAPR/JAPAN; DEPT PASS ELECTRONICALLY TO USDA
FAS/ITP FOR SCHROETER; PACOM HONOLULU FOR PUBLIC DIPLOMACY ADVISOR;
CINCPAC FLT/PA/ COMNAVFORJAPAN/PA.

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: OIIP KMDR KPAO PGOV PINR ECON ELAB JA

SUBJECT: DAILY SUMMARY OF JAPANESE PRESS 01/21/10

INDEX:
(1) MOFA tells SDP: Difficult to arrange inspection tour of U.S.
military bases in Guam (Ryukyu Shimpo)

(2) SDP team told inspection tour to Guam difficult to arrange
because U.S. side will only accommodate "government officials"; team
sent to Iwo Jima (Sankei)

(3) Chief Cabinet Secretary Hirano: Possible delay in final solution
on Futenma relocation beyond May (Sankei)

(4) Three days until Nago mayoral election: Shop owner rejects
building of new military base (Asahi)

(5) Japan's future course - 50th anniversary of revision of
Japan-U.S. Security Treaty (Part 2-2): Significance of U.S. military
presence (Yomiuri)

(6) Japan's future course - 50th anniversary of revision of
Japan-U.S. Security Treaty (Part 2-3): A sense of solidarity between
Japanese and U.S. units under the alliance (Yomiuri)

(7) 50-year-old Japan-U.S. Security Treaty; (Part 1): Armed with no
exit strategy, DPJ administration examines secret pacts; distrust in
underdeveloped foreign policy deepening (Nikkei)

(8) Actions are more important than a statement (Nikkei)

(9) Interview with Professor Joseph Nye: Further redefinition of
Japan-U.S. alliance from military, civilian perspectives (Asahi)

(10) Filing suit against foreign companies in Japan to be made
easier (Nikkei)

ARTICLES:

(1) MOFA tells SDP: Difficult to arrange inspection tour of U.S.
military bases in Guam

RYUKYU SHIMPO (Page 2) (Full)
January 21, 2010

Tokyo - The Social Democratic Party (SDP) disclosed on Jan. 20 that
it has been told by the U.S. side that its planned inspection tour
of U.S. military bases in Guam from Jan. 25-27 will be difficult to
arrange. The SDP was informed in writing by the Japan-U.S. Security
Treaty Division of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, which was
notified by the U.S. side on the same day.

The written message cited the following reasons: the bases in Guam
are very busy and they have no authority to answer questions
relating to the relocation of the Futenma Air Station.

In reaction to this, SDP House of Representatives member Kantoku
Teruya said: "The SDP believes that Guam is the best relocation site
for the Futenma Air Station, so an inspection tour of Guam is
indispensable. The U.S. side is saying that it can only explain the
facts (as reasons for rejecting the visit). The facts are enough for
us. We are furious at this response." The SDP will persist in
demanding the realization of the inspection tour to Guam.

(2) SDP team told inspection tour to Guam difficult to arrange

TOKYO 00000136 002 OF 011

because U.S. side will only accommodate "government officials"; team
sent to Iwo Jima

SANKEI ONLINE (Full)
11:52, January 21, 2010

In connection with the issue of the relocation of the U.S. forces'
Futenma Air Station (in Ginowan City, Okinawa), it was learned on
Jan. 21 that the Andersen Air Force Base has rejected the plan by a
Social Democratic Party (SDP) team to visit the U.S. territory of
Guam, which the party regards as a candidate relocation site. This
was disclosed by DPJ Secretary General Yasumasa Shigeno at a news
conference on Jan. 21. The reason given by the U.S. side for
rejecting the visit was that "we can only accommodate government
officials."

The SDP asked Chief Cabinet Secretary Hirofumi Hirano to coordinate
the visit for them, but Hirano was unsuccessful. Shigeno stated at
the news conference that the decision not to accept a visit from the
SDP, which is a ruling coalition party, is "regrettable." He added,
"If they refuse to accept an SDP team, we will look into the
possibility of a visit by a delegation of the ruling parties."

Meanwhile, the SDP sent House of Representatives members Kantoku
Teruya and House of Councillors member Tokushin Yamauchi to Iwo Jima
(Tokyo) on Jan. 21. The SDP has cited this island, along with Guam,
as a possible relocation site.

(3) Chief Cabinet Secretary Hirano: Possible delay in final solution
on Futenma relocation beyond May

SANKEI ONLINE (Full)
12:42, January 21, 2010

At a news conference on the morning of Jan. 21, Chief Cabinet
Secretary Hirofumi Hirano said that with regard to the government's
commitment to reach a conclusion on the relocation site of the U.S.
forces' Futenma Air Station (in Ginowan City, Okinawa) by the end of
May, "the Japanese government will be in a position to draw up our
proposal after negotiating with the local governments and the United
States (in May)," and a final solution based on Japan-U.S. talks may
be delayed until June or later.

Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama stated last December that "May is the
target date for reaching a final solution between Japan and the
U.S." It appears that there is already disagreement within the
government on the target date for Japan and the U.S. to reach
agreement at this early stage.

Discussing the current plan to relocate the Futenma base to the
coastal area of Camp Schwab, Hirano said: "I don't think the Okinawa
Governor (Hirokazu Nakaima) has agreed to this." He pointed out that
while Nakaima agrees to constructing a replacement facility in the
coastal area of Camp Schwab, he has set the condition of moving the
runways further offshore than the location under the existing
relocation plan. Hirano indicated that Nakaima has not agreed to the
existing plan.

Furthermore, with regard to the "Okinawa base issues examination
committee" of the government, the Social Democratic Party, and the
People's New Party, where the committee members are supposed to
submit their proposals for the relocation site by the end of

TOKYO 00000136 003 OF 011

January, Hirano pointed out that there is a possibility that this
may be delayed until February or later.

(4) Three days until Nago mayoral election: Shop owner rejects
building of new military base

ASAHI (Page 34) (Full)
January 21, 2010

Hisatoshi Tanaka

The election campaign vans of the two camps in the mayoral election
pass every 30 minutes through an intersection in the center of Nago
City. The loudspeakers blare out the names and theme songs of the
two candidates.

"Susumu (neophyte candidate Susumu Inamine) moves forward (susumu in
Japanese)!"

"Go! Go! Yoshikazu (incumbent Mayor Yoshikazu Shimabukuro)."

The Shimabukuro camp was the first to cruise in a campaign van, and
the Inamine camp followed suit from Jan. 20. There are also groups
of campaigners marching around holding placards. Shoppers can hardly
be seen in this area now, but at one time it was the busiest
shopping district in northern Okinawa.

Morimasa Inamine, 78, sits at the back of his shop plastered with
posters declaring "closing-down sale" and "everything 300 yen." He
does not react to the loud noise of the campaign vans. His is a
variety store selling cigarettes, alcoholic beverages, snacks, and
so forth. He has operated this business with his wife Chizuko, 79,
for years. He gets about 10 customers each day. The store, which his
father started 55 years ago by selling surplus goods from the U.S.
forces, will close at the end of March.

Construction work to remove the arcade behind his shop started on
Jan. 18. This area will be redeveloped as a two-story reinforced
concrete building to house a shopping mall. The total cost of the
project is approximately 1.6 billion yen, most of which will be
funded by the northern Okinawa economic development budget, which
was allocated in return for accepting the relocation of the U.S.
forces' Futenma Air Station.

While Inamine would like to continue to run his business, rent for a
shop in the new building will be several times what he is paying
now. Even though both mayoral candidates pledge a "prosperous city,"
there is no guarantee that shoppers will return. All five of his
children have grown up. Inamine thinks it's time to close his
business.

Inamine has kept his distance from elections. He thinks such should
be the "merchant's ethic." The last time he cast a vote was in the
1997 referendum on whether to accept the Futenma's replacement
facility. He voted "no."

At the height of the Battle of Okinawa, he fled into the mountains
with his mother, elder sister, and younger brother. He has memories
of the crimes and accidents involving U.S. soldiers after the war.
"If military bases can bring prosperity, Okinawa would have been
prosperous a long time ago."

TOKYO 00000136 004 OF 011

This time he will vote. Since there has been a change of
administration, a solution to this issue that has profoundly
affected Nago will be possible. "It is shameful to build yet another
military base after keeping bases (in Okinawa) for over 60 years."

(5) Japan's future course - 50th anniversary of revision of
Japan-U.S. Security Treaty (Part 2-2): Significance of U.S. military
presence

YOMIURI (Page 2) (Full)
January 18, 2010

"If Japan sends a message conveying that the U.S. military is
unnecessary, as the Philippine government did, (Japan-U.S.
relations) will inevitably deteriorate." Daniel Inouye, a
Japanese-American Democratic Senator, made the above remark when he
met with Liberal Democratic Party President Sadakazu Tanigaki at
party headquarters on Jan. 15. Inoue was concerned about the current
state of Japan-U.S. relations, which have been strained over the
relocation of the U.S. Marine Corps' Futenma Air Station.

In the Cold-War era, the Republic of the Philippines was a key
strategic foothold for the U.S. military. But in 1991 the Philippine
Senate refused to ratify a treaty designed to allow the continued
presence of Subic Navy Base. Taking the refusal to mean that the
Philippines judged the presence of U.S. forces unnecessary, the U.S.
withdrew its troops from that nation. Afterward, the U.S. military
significantly reduced its support for the Philippines, and as a
result, the Chinese military invaded the Spratly (Nansha) Islands,
over which both China and the Philippines claimed sovereignty.
Inouye said, "The move to relocate the Futenma facility to an
isolated island could result in sending the wrong message to the
U.S. concerning its military presence in Japan."

Under the Japan-U.S. Security Treaty, U.S. military bases are
regarded as strongpoints for the defense of Japan and for peace and
stability in the Far East region. A senior Defense Ministry official
said: "U.S. Marines have received training, hearing instructors say
they should be prepared to die for Japan." A senior official of the
Singaporean government commented: "In view of the East Asian
situation, the U.S. military presence in Japan is far more
significant for its neighbors" than was the presence of the Subic
Navy Base.

In 2003, which marked the 50th anniversary of the signing of the
U.S.-South Korea alliance, the U.S. forces in South Korea, which has
been exposed to North Korea's nuclear and missile threats, were
drastically reorganized under the government of President Roh Moo
Hyun. At that time, there were 37,000 U.S. troops in South Korea,
but the number was reduced to 28,500. The U.S. military unit
stationed near the demilitarized zone is scheduled for redeployment
south of Seoul.

Bearing in mind the possibility that North Korea might wage a battle
against South Korea, many South Koreans, particularly conservatives,
expect the U.S. to participate in such a battle with the aim of
preventing casualties among U.S. military personnel stationed near
the DMZ and their family members. Thus there are concerns that the
U.S. soldiers' redeployment south of Seoul might signal the U.S. has
no intention of continuing to commit itself to South Korea's
protection.

TOKYO 00000136 005 OF 011

In recent years, East European countries such as Latvia have been
eager to draw in U.S. forces, against the backdrop of a growing
Russian military threat. But the U.S. government has made a somewhat
cool response. A senior Foreign Ministry official explained why the
U.S. is not eager to protect East European countries: "The U.S. has
coolly calculated the risk to its own soldiers and their families
entailed by venturing to protect those countries."

In contrast to countries that recently have keenly sensed a threat,
Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama's theory of a security arrangement
without the permanent presence of U.S. forces is close to an
arm-chair theory. His argument for U.S. troops to be sent to Japan
only in the event of an emergency demonstrates his different view of
the significance of the U.S. military presence.

If the U.S. judges it is meaningless to continue to protect Japan,
the U.S. military will voluntarily withdraw the Marines from
Okinawa. The common view among experts on security issues, including
Inouye, a former soldier, is that in such a case, the Senkaku
Islands, over which China claims sovereignty, will without doubt be
occupied by the Chinese military."

(6) Japan's future course - 50th anniversary of revision of
Japan-U.S. Security Treaty (Part 2-3): A sense of solidarity between
Japanese and U.S. units under the alliance

YOMIURI (Page 2) (Full)
January 19, 2010

Japan and the U.S. will hold a joint exercise (Exercise Keen Edge)
starting on Jan. 22, based on the scenario of an emergency on the
Korean Peninsula. The exercise will begin with a scene of
servicemembers transporting Japanese and American residents in South
Korea to Japan.

A ballistic missile that they failed to shoot down strikes the Tokyo
Metropolitan area. U.S. military bases, such as Camp Zama in
Kanagawa Prefecture and Yokota Air Base in Tokyo, are exposed to
attacks by terrorists and guerrillas.

The scenario has been kept confidential, so this is only one scene.
Keen Edge is the largest-ever exercise using computer simulation by
linking the Defense Ministry's Central Command Post in Ichigaya,
Tokyo; Self-Defense Force bases across the nation; U.S. Pacific
Forces in Hawaii; and U.S. forces in South Korea and in Japan via
the Internet.

Japan and the U.S. prepared the scenario of an emergency on the
Korean Peninsula, reflecting that recent moves in North Korea are at
an alert level due to such issues as the transfer of power and
economic disorder. A senior Defense Ministry official also said:
"Exhausted with the fight on terror, the U.S. military has failed to
make full arrangements to respond to contingencies in South Korea
and in Japan. In the prior coordination process, a U.S. military
official even told us to increase scenes in which U.S. troops are
attacked. They are serious."

Joint exercises by the Self-Defense Force (SDF) and the U.S.
military moved into high gear in the 1980s. At that time, the U.S.
expected Japan as an "unsinkable aircraft carrier" to play an
important role in containing the Soviet Union. That is why the U.S.
decided to provide only the Maritime Self-Defense Force (MSDF) with

TOKYO 00000136 006 OF 011

its state-of-the-art Aegis system.

With the end of the Cold-War and the Gulf War in 1991 as a turning
point, Japan-U.S. relations significantly changed. Based on the
judgment there is no need to strengthen SDF troops, who are not
allowed to engage in operations with U.S. troops, joint drills
between the U.S. Air Force and the Air Self-Defense Force (ASDF)
sharply decreased, and the U.S. Air Force began to send reservists
and state soldiers standing by in the U.S. to joint exercises with
the Ground Self-Defense Force (GSDF). Remembering the situation at
that time, the senior Defense Ministry official said: "For the U.S.
military, which shifted priority to multinational exercises,
training between the U.S. and Japan was not the first priority."

This situation, however, completely changed in the wake of the
terrorist attacks on the U.S. in September 2001. In the Indian Ocean
and Iraq, GSDF, MSDF and ASDF personnel engaged in operations as
members of the coalition of the willing. In Japan, the SDF and the
U.S. military have discussed how to defend key facilities. The
bilateral relationship has developed to the extent that they discuss
even equipment and training of special units although such details
are highly confidential.

Last April, in response to North Korea's launch of the ballistic
missile Taepodong 2, Joint Staff Chief Ryoichi Oriki, Japan's top
military officer, talked with U.S. Pacific Command Chief Timothy
Keating on the phone many times.

Oriki said: "We two commanders were able to confirm information on
many matters, ranging from moves by the North Korean military to
unit redeployment in Japan and the U.S. I realized that the
bilateral alliance is not just a piece of paper; I felt a sense of
solidarity."

The Japan-U.S. alliance is now being roiled by the relocation of the
U.S. Marine Corps' Futenma Air Station in Okinawa. Speaking before
the GSDF and U.S. military personnel when he visited Japan for an
exercise with the GSDF last December, Benjamin Mixon, commander of
U.S. Army, Pacific, said: "Many people have presented different
views from political motives. ... The SDF and the U.S. military have
strengthened their ties to this extent. The ties will never waver.
(Japan and the U.S.) as a team must be powerful."

(7) 50-year-old Japan-U.S. Security Treaty; (Part 1): Armed with no
exit strategy, DPJ administration examines secret pacts; distrust in
underdeveloped foreign policy deepening

NIKKEI (Page 1) (Abridged)
January 21, 2010

A meeting was held between foreign and defense officials of Japan
and the United States at the U.S. Department of Defense in Virginia
on Jan. 14. During the meeting, one participant said: "We cannot
afford to pass up the golden opportunity of the 50th anniversary (of
the bilateral security treaty). Let's work hard to prevent distrust
in the bilateral alliance from growing."

Earlier, on Jan. 12, an agreement was reached between Foreign
Minister Katsuya Okada and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to
begin talks to strengthen the bilateral alliance on the occasion of
the 50th anniversary of the revision of the Japan-U.S. Security
Treaty. The two countries immediately began looking into specific

TOKYO 00000136 007 OF 011

steps.

According to persons concerned, Japan and the United States are
trying to focus on China's rapid military buildup with the aim of
confirming the significance of the bilateral alliance. Their plan is
to analyze the situation, share the results of the analysis, and
draw up a future vision for the bilateral alliance before President
Barack Obama's planned visit to Japan in November.

Japan and the United States are still plagued by the issue of
relocating the U.S. Marine Corps' Futenma Air Station. "We want to
strengthen our alliance, but nothing will start unless the Futenma
issue is settled," a U.S. official said during the Jan. 14 meeting.

On Jan. 19, Japan and the United States issued a joint statement
commemorating the treaty's 50th anniversary. The statement could
have borne the signatures of Prime Minister Hatoyama and President
Obama, but it ended up with just the signatures of four of the
cabinet ministers of the two countries due to a lack of enthusiasm
on the part of the White House, according to the sources.

The security treaty requires Japan to provide bases and the United
States to defend Japan. During the Cold War when Japan and the
United States were exposed to the tremendous threat of the Soviet
Union, there was no need to consider the significance of the
security treaty. It has been over 20 years since the Soviet Union
collapsed, and today both Japan and the United States are less
appreciative of the bilateral alliance.

"It is acceptable to deepen the bilateral alliance, but not
acceptable to expand it, because that would be suggestive of
military expansion," a Democratic Party of Japan (DPJ) executive
warned the government last fall. Since then, the expression of
"expanding the alliance" has rarely been used in policy speeches.
Even one DPJ lawmaker seriously asked a government official why U.S.
forces in Japan are necessary.

The United States' trust in the alliance with Japan has also been
shaken. In late December, the White House hastily held a director
general-level National Security Council meeting to strictly discuss
Japan. "Does Japan really want to resolve the Futenma issue?" a
senior official asked. The State Department reportedly managed to
confirm the policy of holding talks on the bilateral alliance by
convincing the frustrated official to look at the overall picture of
the alliance with Japan.

The Japan-U.S. Security Treaty that has turned 50 appears to be
suffering from fatigue. With the change of government in Japan,
contradictions that have long been sealed off are about to come to
light. In a conference room in the Foreign Ministry in Tokyo's
Kasumigaseki district, some experts have been sifting voluminous
diplomatic documents on the Japan-U.S. secret pacts that were
purportedly concluded during the revision of the security treaty in
1960. The investigation that was launched on orders from Foreign
Minister Okada is now in its final stage.

Japan has three non-nuclear principles, including one prohibiting
the introduction of nuclear weapons into the country. Despite that,
the existence of a secret pact allowing U.S. warships carrying
nuclear weapons to call at Japanese ports has come to light. Japan
is advocating denuclearization as the only country to have suffered
an atomic attack on one hand and is protecting itself under the

TOKYO 00000136 008 OF 011

U.S.' nuclear umbrella on the other. The secret agreement shows that
Japan's security policy that contains such double standards has
reached its limit.

The Hatoyama administration will soon face the tough question of how
to bridge the gap between the realities being exposed by the secret
pact and the three non-nuclear principles prohibiting the
introduction of nuclear weapons into Japan.

Several ambassadors in Tokyo recently expressed their concerns to
the Japanese side that Japan might become another New Zealand.
Turning around its policy in the 1980s, New Zealand did not allow
the U.S. military to bring nuclear weapons into the country.
Reacting strongly, the United States has stopped meeting its defense
obligations that are required as New Zealand's ally.

If Japan allowed the introduction of nuclear weapons into the
country with the aim of avoiding such a situation, questions would
be raised about consistency with the three rules. The Hatoyama
administration has begun to probe the contradictions in the
Japan-U.S. alliance. But the administration remains unable to come
up with measures to be taken after uncovering the truth about the
secret pacts. The announcement of the results of the investigation,
planned for January, might be put off until February or even later.

(8) Actions are more important than a statement

NIKKEI (Page 3) (Full)
January 20, 2010

Hiroyuki Akita, editorial board member

Yesterday marked the 50th anniversary of the revised Japan-U.S.
Security Treaty. What should Japan and the United States do to keep
the bilateral alliance based on the security treaty sound and extend
its life?

A joint statement released by the foreign and defense ministers of
Japan and the United States praised the role of the bilateral
alliance and included many expressions of their determination to
further strengthen it. If those who don't know anything about the
present bilateral relationship read this statement, they would
probably be under the illusion that the solidarity between Japan and
the United States is strong and the two countries have enjoyed a
honeymoon-like relationship.

However, the reality is completely different from the content of the
joint statement. There remains a rift over the Futenma issue between
Tokyo and Washington. Relations between Prime Minister Yukio
Hatoyama and President Barack Obama have become strained. The fact
of the statement being signed by the four ministers, not by the two
leaders, reflected such an atmosphere.

On the afternoon of Jan. 15 in Washington an audience of
approximately 270 turned out at a symposium for the 50th anniversary
of the revised security treaty. One attendee said: "Some panel
members contended that the United States should patiently observe
Japan, which recently experienced a change of government, but some
others expressed concern about the future of the bilateral
alliance."

If the Hatoyama administration fails to demonstrate its

TOKYO 00000136 009 OF 011

determination to strengthen the security treaty through actions, the
joint statement will be no more than a mere composition written by
bureaucrats and its advocacy of providing political leadership would
be merely nominal.

Needless to say, what Prime Minister Hatoyama should do is to
resolve the Futenma relocation issue by May as he promised. This is,
however, just the beginning of a long road.

Moreover, in order to bring the alliance near to "equality" in the
true sense, Japan should assume more responsibilities and roles.
Those would include, for example, "tangible contribution" to
Afghanistan and creating a system necessary for Japan's defense.

The Hatoyama government terminated the Maritime Self-Defense Force's
refueling mission in the Indian Ocean and has postponed formulating
a set of new national defense program guidelines. Despite its
advocacy of an equal Japan-U.S. alliance, the Hatoyama
administration has taken actions that run counter to its assertion.
Japan won't be able to gain the U.S.'s understanding if it seeks a
position of equality without assuming responsibilities.

The 1960 revision of the security treaty, which includes the U.S.
obligation to protect Japan, was a great step toward an equal
Japan-U.S. relationship. In order to continue such an effort, the
Hatoyama government should take decisive action rather than make a
statement pleasing to the ear.

(9) Interview with Professor Joseph Nye: Further redefinition of
Japan-U.S. alliance from military, civilian perspectives

ASAHI (Page 17) (Full)
January 19, 2010

Interviewer: Hiroshi Ito

The Japan-U.S. relationship, like NATO in Europe, has been a great
success in international politics. While it started in response to
the East-West Cold War, this was redefined at the time of former
President Bill Clinton and Prime Minister Ryutaro Hashimoto and has
contributed to stability and prosperity in East Asia in the
post-Cold War era. Looking back on the last 50 years, we can say
that this has been a good and close alliance relationship, and one
needs to take special note of the fact that the Japan-U.S. alliance
has adapted to changes in the environment after the Cold War.

Security issues emerged in East Asia soon after the end of the Cold
War, namely, North Korea's development of nuclear arms and the rise
of China. With the redefinition of the alliance after the Cold War,
Japan and the U.S. have worked together to deal with the North Korea
issues, and with regard to China, they have created a framework for
China's participation in international politics and developed a
stable long-term trilateral relationship with China.

The triangular relationship among the three countries will probably
continue to be good. We must not forget that Japan and the United
States are both democratic countries and are allies. The Japan-U.S.
relationship is the closest in this triangle, and the U.S. should
have closer relations with Japan. On this basis, China should be
incorporated as a "responsible stakeholder." On the other hand,
preventive measures should be taken against offensive behavior.
Japan and the U.S. should have an intelligent long-term strategy

TOKYO 00000136 010 OF 011

toward China.

Japan has expanded the role of its Self-Defense Forces in the
international community in the past decade. This should be welcome,
but that is not all that has changed in the past 10 years. Japan has
also come to play a greater role through the United Nations. A
typical example is the climate change issue.

As the Japan-U.S. alliance marks its 50th anniversary, the alliance
should be redefined further.

There are two aspects to this. One is the question of regional
security. The bilateral alliance is still important for stability in
East Asia. A case in point is North Korea's nuclear and missile
issues.

In addition, I think it would be good for the alliance to become a
framework for working together in new areas. Climate change is a
good example, and there are numerous other issues that the two
countries should jointly deal with, such as world economic
stability, pandemics, and public health issues. The alliance should
be redefined further from both the military and the civilian
perspectives.

It is not surprising that a sort of friction has arisen between
Japan and the U.S. There should be a clear recognition that this is
not an indication of the future of the alliance relationship. The
administration is currently in a transition period, and the present
state of the relationship is not what the alliance is going to be in
the future.

With regard to the relocation of the U.S. forces' Futenma Air
Station, while the current plan is not perfect, I don't think there
are better options. The existing plan is the product of over 10
years of careful consideration. All the other alternative plans that
had been discussed before were thought to be dysfunctional in an
emergency.

The pursuit of a perfect solution is dangerous. This would take
another 10 years, which would mean that the burden on the people of
Okinawa would continue and would increase.

However, since Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama has said that he will
reach a conclusion by May, we should be patient until then.

The Hatoyama administration advocates an "equal Japan-U.S.
relationship," but it should be careful and make sure that the word
"equal" is not misunderstood. Militarily speaking, the Japan-U.S.
alliance is not totally equal. Japan decided not to possess military
capabilities at a level comparable to America's for historical and
domestic political reasons. To be honest, I don't think the Japanese
people want that (such a level of military capability). Therefore,
it is unwise to pursue an "equal alliance" in this aspect.

However, if we look at the new areas relating to the redefinition of
the alliance, there are areas where Japan will assume a leadership
role in the future - such as climate change. For sure, it will be
possible to build an equal relationship in such areas.

It is also desirable for the U.S. for Japan to have good relations
with China and other countries in the region. I can understand the
concept of an "East Asian community." However, whether the U.S.

TOKYO 00000136 011 OF 011

accepts this concept will depend on what it means.

If it means the exclusion of the U.S., it will also not be
beneficial for Japan and China. This is because if U.S. products are
excluded, the U.S. will shut out Japanese and Chinese products.

(10) Filing suit against foreign companies in Japan to be made
easier

NIKKEI (Page 4) (Full)
January 16, 2010

The international jurisdiction legislative subcommittee of the
Legislative Council of the Justice Ministry, an advisory panel
reporting to the justice minister, on Jan. 15 drafted an outline for
preparing legislation for international jurisdiction, which
stipulates in what cases it is possible to hold court in Japan
regarding civil complaints involving more than one country. The core
of the outline is that in the event a Japanese consumer files a
lawsuit against a foreign company, if the company has an address in
Japan, the suit can be filed in Japan The aim of the legislation is
to facilitate international transactions by clarifying where a case
will be brought before the court.

At present, since there are no regulations on international
jurisdiction under the Law of Civil Procedure, law courts are
handling individual cases based on precedents. If a lawsuit is filed
abroad when it can be filed in Japan, the litigator may have to
shoulder a great burden in cost and time. In view of a possible
increase in trouble with foreign trade partners as Internet-based
trading expands in the future, the government has decided to
consolidate domestic rules.

Specifically, it will be made possible for a consumer to file a
lawsuit against a foreign company if his or her current address or
address at the time of the conclusion of the contract is in Japan.
If a company in Japan did business over the Internet with a foreign
company without an office in Japan, it can file a complaint against
the company with regard to business the company conducted in Japan.

ZUMWALT

© Scoop Media