DAILY SUMMARY OF JAPANESE PRESS 05/18/07

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 07 TOKYO 002255 SIPDIS 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 05/18/07 INDEX: (1) Tokyo Gov. Ishihara on the comfort-women issue: "Not true the military procured them" 2 (2) Gov. Ishihara suggests possibility of Japan possessing nuclear weapons and China heading toward military adventurism 2 (3) Former Ambassador to US Yanai: Times demand change in interpretation of the right of collective defense 3 (4) Way to constitutional revision -- National referendum bill enacted into law: Final goal is amending Article 9 4 (5) Editorial: Iraq law extended without self-reflection, overview 6 (6) IWC annual meeting in Alaska on May 28-31, with focus on catch quota for US aboriginals, IWC normalization 7 ARTICLES: (1) Tokyo Gov. Ishihara on the comfort-women issue: "Not true the military procured them" ASAHI ONLINE NEWS (Full) May 18, 2007, at 10:37 Tokyo Gov. Shintaro Ishihara, who is taking part in the Large Cities Climate Change Summit in New York, yesterday attended a meeting of the Japan-US cultural exchange organization, The Japan Society, where he said this about the issue of wartime "comfort women": "It's not true at all that the military procured them." When asked by reporters after a speech about his view, Ishihara said: "It's absolutely not true that the military procured those women. However, there were some people who went into the business of providing such women to the military." In the United States, lawmakers on both sides of aisle in the Congress are sponsoring a resolution calling on the Japanese prime minister to make an official apology to the former comfort women, but Prime Minister Abe denied there had been "coercion in the narrow sense," which caused a backlash in the US. Afterwards, Abe said this about the comfort women: "I feel very sorry for them." The comfort-women issue has become a matter of great concern in the US. A government statement issued in 1993 by then Chief Cabinet Secretary Kono admitted the Japanese military's involvement, noting: 
 SIPDIS "At the request of the military, agents played a role in recruiting comfort women, and in some cases, police authorities were directly involved in recruitment." (2) Gov. Ishihara suggests possibility of Japan possessing nuclear weapons and China heading toward military adventurism Jiji, New York, May 17 Visiting Tokyo Gov. Shintaro Ishihara delivered a speech at the Japan Society in New York on May 17 in which he said regarding a contingency involving the Senkaku Islands and other events: "The extent to which the United States will take responsibility for the defense of Japan is extremely questionable. If the United States is TOKYO 00002255 002 OF 007 undependable, Japan will have to make independent efforts. The country might end up possessing nuclear weapons, an option the United States fears." Also predicting that China's economic growth "will not last" until the 2010 Shanghai World Expo, Ishihara noted in the speech: "An authoritarian regime will always head for military adventurism following an economic collapse and social turmoil." The governor also indicated that chances were extremely slim for the United States to shoulder Japan's defense in the event China took military action against the Senkaku Islands and other places. Additionally, Ishihara said that in the event a full-scale war broke out between the United States and China: "The United States would not be able to counter the Communist regime which looks up (former President Mao Zedong),who did not hesitate to kill 70 million people, as the father of the country." He also highlighted the need to build Japan-US relations on an equal footing, saying: "The peoples of Japan and the United States must renew the awareness that Japan has never been a country like (US-governed) Puerto Rico." (3) Former Ambassador to US Yanai: Times demand change in interpretation of the right of collective defense MAINICHI (Page 15) (Full) May 17, 2007 The informal council on improving legal security infrastructure will hold its first meeting on May 18. Prime Minister Shinzo Abe will call on the panel to review the interpretation of the Constitution. The panel will focus on a change in the government's interpretation of the right of collective defense, under which Japan is prohibited from exercising that right even though it possesses it. There is a growing view that Abe will decide to allow partial exercise of the right based on a conclusion the panel will reach in September. A Mainichi Shimbun reporter interviewed Shunji Yanai, the former ambassador to the US who will chair the panel, about his perception on the government's interpretation of the Constitution. -- The government interprets the Constitution to mean that Japan has the right of collective defense but it cannot exercise it. What your view on the government's interpretation? Yanai: Reading Article 9 of the Constitution, it is impossible to take it to mean that Japan can exercise only its right to individual defense. Considering the time when the Constitution was established, that interpretation was possible because the focus was on disarming Japan so that it would not invade other countries. Since then Japan has stopped thinking. Japan's pacifism means Japan does not invade other countries. But I wonder if Japan's safety can be secured by that pacifism alone. Next to Japan, there has now emerged a dictatorship with nuclear weapons. However, what Japan can only say is it will not invade that country. I wonder if it is good for Japan. -- Why should Japan be allowed to exercise its collective self-defense right? Does it mean to strengthen the Japan-US alliance? Yanai: In the end, Japan has to defend itself on its own. However, the purpose of the alliance is to help and complement each other. Japan's neighbors, excluding South Korea, have nuclear weapons. There is no answer for nuclear weapons except nuclear weapons. What TOKYO 00002255 003 OF 007 will Japan do? Going nuclear is an option in theory. However, in my view such an idea is not good. Therefore Japan has no choice but to remain under America's umbrella. -- The dominant view in the government, centering the Cabinet Legislation Bureau, is that since Japan is a country ruled by law, the interpretation of the Constitution should not be changed every time a government changes. Yanai: But how was the government's current interpretation of the Constitution that Japan can use only the right of individual self-defense reached? The government decided that there was no law stipulating that Japan was allowed to have only the individual self-defense right but not the right of collective defense. Why didn't it do so even though it could change the interpretation? Security should be considered based on the demands of the times. There are dangers in the world. -- You served as director general of the Treaties Bureau of the Foreign Ministry. I have heard that you had fierce debates with the director general of the Cabinet Legislation Bureau. Yanai: The prime minister, considering an overarching policy for the country, orders the director general of the Cabinet Legislation Bureau to think about a logical framework for implementing the prime minister's policy. However, the Legislation Bureau works for the Cabinet. Past prime ministers asked Cabinet Legislation Bureau chiefs, "What about your views?" Bureau chiefs had no choice but to repeat the conventional reply. -- If the exercise of the right to collective defense is allowed, people will likely be concerned, wondering how far Japan will follow the United States. Yanai: If the exercise of the right is allowed constitutionally, there will be another issue of legal interpretation. If it is decided that the right of collective defense is exercised this far, how far the right is used is a policy issue. That's where the Diet comes in. Our panel will discuss issues, including that point. Junji Yanai was born in 1937. He entered the Foreign Ministry in 1961, graduating from the law faculty of the University of Tokyo. He served as ambassador to the US from 1999 to 2001, after having served as administrative vice foreign minister. He has been serving as judge of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea. He also served on the council to strengthen the functions of the Prime Minister's Official Residence (Kantei) regarding national security to establish a Japan National Security Council (NSC). (4) Way to constitutional revision -- National referendum bill enacted into law: Final goal is amending Article 9 YOMIURI (Page 4) (Full) May 17, 2007 "I'm often asked whether to amend Article 9. Revising Article 9 has already been mentioned in (the Liberal Democratic Party's draft for a new constitution). I am one of the members responsible for the draft constitution," Prime Minister Abe said at a meeting yesterday of the Upper House Special Committee on the Constitution, making it clear the focus of constitutional revision is on Article 9. What underlies Abe's notion is the idea that the security TOKYO 00002255 004 OF 007 environment around Japan and the world has changed greatly and that expectations are rising that Japan will contribute greatly to the international community. For that, the legal basis needs to be prepared. Relations between international contributions and the Constitution must be made clear. The question is how to make the relations crystal clear? Will the relations be made clear by reinterpreting the previous interpretation of the right to collective defense by the Cabinet Legislation Bureau (CLB) that Japan has the right but is unable to exercise it? Opinion is divided even in the government and the ruling parties over the matter. Former LDP Vice President Taku Yamasaki and other party members insist that amending the Constitution is essential for Japan to exercise collective defense. The LDP's draft constitution allows the exercise of the right to collective defense by deleting the second paragraph of Article 9 and suggests setting provisions pertaining to the use of that right in a basic security law. In contrast, Abe's way of thinking is to allow under the current Constitution the use of the right to collective defense in some cases for the time being, and, after totally allowing the exercise of that right in the near future when Article 9 is amended, to consider policy measures not to mobilize the Self-Defense Forces (SDF) personnel to regions as far as the other side of the world. Apparently, SDF personnel's desperate call (for amending Article 9) has been conveyed to Abe. Ground Self-Defense Force (GSDF) troops were deployed in Samawah in the reconstruction of Iraq. How should they respond if they on their way back to their camp after finishing their activities of the day they see Australian troops guarding the road attacked by an armed group? One senior GSDF officer said: "Under the present law (Iraq Special Measures Law),we will bypass the scene and return to our camp. But I wonder if it is possible from a humanitarian point of view for us to do so." If there is fear that North Korean troops will invade South Korea, the United States will be certain to swiftly evacuate Americans residing in South Korea using commercial planes. In such a tense standoff, if an F-15 from the Air-Self Defense Force (ASDF) on patrol encounters the scene of a North Korean fighter attacking an American commercial plane, what would happen? This situation envisioned is an emergency around Japan, but under the present legislation, the F-15 cannot strike the North Korean plane. One ASDF officer revealed his conclusion after long years of agonizing: "If I were commander, I would give an order for the plane to strike. I will opt for the Japan-US alliance over Article 9 of the Constitution. Things that should be resolved by politicians are now put in the hands of commanders on the scene." Abe had asked the CLB about the possibility of reviewing the interpretation of the (right to collective self-defense) since the days of serving as chief cabinet secretary, but the bureau did not budge even an inch in its attitude, simply noting that no modification can be made to the current interpretation. However, after taking office as prime minister last September, Abe said in his Diet replies: "The CLB comes under my jurisdiction because it is merely one office of the cabinet." TOKYO 00002255 005 OF 007 "Will the CLB chief tender his resignation if I say this or that?" Abe asked one of his advisers on foreign and security affairs in this past January. With the launch of his cabinet, former CLB Director-General Masahiro Sakata retired from the post. "This" in the above question means, "The government will conclude that it is legally possible for the SDF to respond to cases that have been seen as being related to the exercise of the right to collective self-defense as prohibited by Article 9." "That" means, "(Abe) will have a council of experts study (the question of the right to collective self-defense)." Three months later, Abe's idea was embodied in the form of establishing a Council to Rebuild the Legal Basis for Security. The council's fist meeting is set to take place on May 18. One of Abe's advisers explained why the council was launched: "As of last December, the prime minister was most likely to come up with a conclusion on his own about the question of the right to collective self-defense. But if he had done so brushing off the CLB's opposition, the CLB's chief and some senior officials there would resign in succession, thereby causing a fuss. Taking all this into consideration, he decided to establish the council." Some in the government take the view that what the prime minister has in mind is his grandfather, former Prime Minister Kishi's Diet replies. Kishi repeatedly made this reply in the Diet in 1960: "One typical case in which Japan is constitutionally prohibited from exercising the right to collective self-defense is for Japan to mobilize troops in its ally's country to defend it." When he was asked on May 14 in a Diet session about using armed force for self-defense purposes to the level of slightly exceeding minimum necessity as prohibited by the Constitution, Abe said, "The term 'minimum necessity' implies a quantitative concept," suggesting that in some cases using armed force might be allowed even though it comes under the right to collective self-defense. In order to meet the changing security environment, the constitutional problems must be sorted out. Will the council of experts serve as a milestone on the road to amending Article 9, one policy goal for Abe? The curtain will go up and debate will begin. (5) Editorial: Iraq law extended without self-reflection, overview ASAHI (Page 3) (Full) May 16, 2007 The US Bush administration has been caught up in the morass of Iraq. How far will Japan go along with it... Many people may have such a feeling as the House of Representatives passed a bill yesterday to extend the Iraq Special Measures Law for two years. In Iraq, the Air Self-Defense Force has been tasked with airlifting cargoes. This airlift mission is to end in July this year. The bill extends it for another two years. Why is the government going to extend the ASDF's Iraq mission? The government explains that it will do so because the United Nations TOKYO 00002255 006 OF 007 and the Iraqi government asked Japan to stay on. However, the primary reason is probably because the government does not want to give up on its stance of supporting the Bush administration's Iraq policy. In the Diet, Prime Minister Abe and his government's officials reiterated the stance of defending the United States' decision on the Iraq attack. They must be concerned that the legal grounds for Japan's sending of the Self-Defense Forces to Iraq will be undermined should they admit that it was a wrong war. The decision to start the Iraq war was based on intelligence that was a product of mistakes and exaggerations. The United States and Britain themselves have now admitted to that. Above all, it is clear that any weapons of mass destruction-to which the decision on the Iraq war was ascribed-did not exist in Iraq. Nevertheless, the premier and his government's officials sounded as if to say the decision was right. This is almost intellectually degenerate. They might have had the Japan-US alliance in mind. That is not beyond comprehension. Stability in the region is critical for Japan, which depends on the Middle East for oil resources. They say the turmoil in Iraq cannot be left as is, and we also think so. Even so, continuing to ratify a fait accompli without admitting to an obvious mistake at the starting point is not an attitude to be assumed by responsible politicians. In Britain, Prime Minister Blair was driven to step down after he came under fire from the public. US President Bush also faced a budget plan and a resolution from Congress making it a precondition to pull US troops out of Iraq with a time limit set. His support rate is now down to its lowest level ever. Meanwhile, in Japan, a government-introduced bill to extend the SDF's Iraq mission easily sails through the Diet. Without any particular overview or self-reflection, the government continues to take part in the United States' Iraq policy, though it is not justifiable and is mistaken. We can only wonder how strange for it to do so. The prime minister says he wants to clear the SDF of constraints by revising Constitution Article 9 or otherwise pave the way for Japan to exercise the right of collective self-defense even under the current Constitution. However, using military power brings strict responsibilities to politics in its train. As in the case of Iraq, politics will not sincerely face up to a consequence. How can the public trust politics? Moreover, there is another matter of concern to us. We do not know at all what the ASDF is airlifting in Iraq. The government has not clarified anything but the number of flights and the weight of cargo. We do not know how much the ASDF has contributed to the United Nations. For the most part, the ASDF might have been tasked with airlifting US troops. There is also such suspicion. The government probably covers up the facts with safety in mind. In Iraq, however, Japanese personnel, resources, and taxpayers' money are used. The government does not report details even to the Diet. Is civilian control dead? The government should withdraw the SDF at TOKYO 00002255 007 OF 007 once and should fundamentally overhaul Japan's Iraq aid program from scratch. (6) IWC annual meeting in Alaska on May 28-31, with focus on catch quota for US aboriginals, IWC normalization NIKKAN SUISAN KEIZAI SHIMBUN (Page 3 & 4) (Excerpts) May 14, 2007 The annual meeting of the International Whaling Commission (IWC) will be held at the Captain Cook Hotel in Anchorage, Alaska, between May 28 and the 31st. The Scientific Committee has already been in session since May 5 at the same hotel. The United States proposed hosting the annual meeting in Anchorage this year, showing its interest in keeping the quota of catching bowhead whales allocated to Alaska's aboriginal people. Japan intends to maintain its conventional stance. Momentum gathering to rebuild whaling ship: Review of safety necessary Prior to the start of expanded research whaling in the Antarctic Ocean this year, a new "catch boat" Daisan Yushinmaru is under construction. Since the operation hours of the existing catch boat are increasing as more whales are being caught, expectations are being placed on the new ship's coming into service soon. In addition, the whaling mother ship Nisshinmaru has become superannuated and has also shown a lack of capacity with larger whales now being targeted for research and an increasing number of whales being caught. Given this, a move to rebuild the mother ship is gaining momentum. Reflecting the recent good performance in the shipbuilding industry, however, it will take time until the construction work starts (after the order is placed). Persons concerned appear to be willing to push ahead with this plan immediately. In order to gain accurate knowledge through research and produce good-quality by-products, it is certainly necessary to prepare superior equipment and build a new ship. Even so, the construction should not be hurried. A fire broke out on the research whaling ship this year, but even before, a fire had been reported, and the cause of the fire has yet to be clarified. Conducting substantial research is important, but the premise for such research should be to secure safety research. It is would be necessary to thoroughly review the safety of the current ship first and then to prepare new equipment and construct a new system. DONOVAN