DAILY SUMMARY OF JAPANESE PRESS 02/26/07

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 08 TOKYO 000807

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 02/26/07

INDEX:

(1) Japan to legislate against nuclear terrorism during current Diet
session in order to cooperate with the international treaty to
punish possession and production of radioactive materials

(2) China approaches Japanese companies for technical support for
high-speed railway project

(3) Jiryu jiron (Opinion) column by Hitoshi Tanaka: The beginning of
the end of North Korea problem?

(4) Editorial: How will Japan, US respond to new Armitage report
calling for cooperation with China?

(5) Editorial: US force realignment legislation unfair to Okinawa

(6) Editorial: Japan should make efforts to resolve the Iran nuclear
issue

ARTICLES:

(1) Japan to legislate against nuclear terrorism during current Diet
session in order to cooperate with the international treaty to
punish possession and production of radioactive materials

YOMIURI (Page 1) (Full)
Eve., February 26, 2007

The government this morning decided to present to the current Diet
session a "bill to punish acts releasing radiation" (tentative
name),a domestic law needed in order for Japan to ratify the
International Convention for the Suppression of Acts of Nuclear
Terrorism -- which is intended to prevent nuclear terrorism. The
government intends to enact the bill during the current session.
Possession of radioactive materials and production of radioactive
devices to be used for acts of terror, including the stage prior to
carrying out the terrorist act, would be for the first time subject
to criminal punishment. The bill will also tighten the penalties to
be imposed on the act of releasing radioactive substances.

There are no laws at present other than the Law on the Control of
Nuclear Reactors, Etc., and the Law on Prevention of Radiation
Damage that provide for punishments against acts of releasing
radioactive substances. But these two laws are essentially aimed at
forcing electric power companies with nuclear power plants and
medical service workers to carefully handle radioactive materials.
The laws do not assume cases of terrorism using radioactive
materials.

The bills will newly regulate the possession of radioactive
materials, as well as the manufacturing and possession of devices to
produce radioactive substances. The bill will make subject to
punishment acts of blackmailing by pretending to possess nuclear
materials.

The current maximum prison term of 10 years or less applicable to
acts of releasing radioactive materials will be extended to life
imprisonment similar to the Chemical Weapons Ban Law and the Sarin
Gas Prevention Law.

Russia introduced in 1998 the International Convention for the
Suppression of Acts of Nuclear Terrorism out of concern for the

TOKYO 00000807 002 OF 008


outflow of nuclear weapons and nuclear materials. The convention was
unanimously adopted at the United Nations General Assembly in April

2005. Prime Minister Koizumi signed the convention in September of
that year. However, the number of countries that have ratified the
convention as of Feb. 1 of this year only totals 13, short of the 22
countries necessary for the convention to come into effect. Of the
eight major industrialized democracies (G-8),only Russia has
ratified it.

The above convention is the 13th international treaty regulating
acts of terrorism. Japan has ratified 12 other treaties that have
already gone into effect.

(2) China approaches Japanese companies for technical support for
high-speed railway project

NIHON KEIZAI (Top Play) (Slightly abridged)
February 26, 2007

The Chinese government has unofficially asked Japanese railroad
coach manufacturers and railway companies for technical support for
a project to construct a high-speed train route between Harbin and
Dalian in Heilungkiang Province in northeastern China. In Harbin and
Dalian, the temperature in the winter drops to minus 40 degrees.
Given this, China needs to acquire technical know-how from overseas
to ensure high-speed driving safety even in freezing temperatures.
The companies approached by China have begun to look into the
possibility of technical development. China appears to be focusing
on Japan's Shinkansen or bullet train technology. Japanese
companies, if they are able to prove the superiority of their
technologies, might be able to receive orders for a large-scale
railway project for the first time in China.

According to informed sources, the Chinese Ministry of Railways has
sounded out Japanese manufacturers, such as Kawasaki Heavy
Industries and Hitachi, as well as East Japan Railway Company, for
technical assistance. Beijing has revealed that it plans to develop
such key routes as one between Beijing and Shanghai on its own, but
it has yet to develop enough technology to operate high-speed trains
in extremely cold temperatures. Beijing reportedly has also made
similar approaches to European and American companies.

The about 950-kilometer route between Harbin and Dalian will be
newly established, but the South Manchuria Railway Company had also
offered services on the same route. China plans to operate trains at
a speed of 300 kilometers an hour, the same speed as the Shinkansen
bullet train. In northeastern China, technologies are necessary to
operate trains even in minus 50-degree temperatures. Japan has
already established technology for bullet trains to be able to run
in up to minus 25-degree temperatures.

The Chinese government plans to build a high-speed passenger railway
network covering 7,000 kilometers by 2010 or so. It intends to
construct new routes, including one between Beijing and Shanghai
(about 1,300 kilometers) and another between Beijing and Guangzhou
(about 2,000 kilometers). China is also pushing ahead with a plan to
operate on existing lines high-speed vehicles capable of running at
a speed of more than 200 kilometers an hour. In China, a high-speed
train modeled after the Japanese Tohoku Shinkansen bullet train
"Hayate" initiated commercial service in January.

The Japanese companies concerned had initially anticipated several
trillion yen worth of a project in China to transfer Shinkansen

TOKYO 00000807 003 OF 008


technology, similar to the project carried out in Taiwan.

China, though, has announced it would independently develop
technologies and vehicles for the key routes between Beijing and
Shanghai and between Beijing and Guangzhou. For these routes, China
is expected to order about 200 cars (eight cars for one train) to
foreign companies, including six Japanese companies such as Kawasaki
and Hitachi, Siemens of Germany, Alstom of France, and Bombardier of
Canada. For these routes, local companies are likely to be in charge
of production, based on foreign companies' technologies. Japanese
companies expect to receive orders worth several tens of billions of
yen mainly for the transfer of technologies.

Due to technical difficulties, contracts for a project to construct
the route between Harbin and Dalian may go to Japanese companies
should China finds independent technology development difficult.

(3) Jiryu jiron (Opinion) column by Hitoshi Tanaka: The beginning of
the end of North Korea problem?

ASAHI (Page 9) (Almost full)
February 26, 2007

Around the time when the six-party talks in Beijing reached
agreement on Feb. 13 on North Korea's nuclear programs, I was
traveling first to London and then to San Francisco. I attended as a
speaker international symposiums on the North Korea issue held in
the two cities, one hosted by the International Institute for
Strategic Studies in London and the other by the Asia Society in San
Francisco.

I told audiences at both symposiums that the recent six-party accord
reached in Beijing should be taken as an important step in the right
direction, but that we also must properly reaffirm what the
fundamental principles are in order to resolve the North Korean
problem.

First, we must not repeat the same mistake we made in the past. As
early as 1989, signs of nuclear activities by the North came to
light, but the international community in the end failed to prevent
Pyongyang from conducting a nuclear test. The reason is because the
United States, Japan, and other concerned countries lacked
consistency in their policies toward North Korea, allowing it to
take advantage of them, even though no doubt the fault ultimately
lies with North Korea. Moreover, there was a lack of cooperation
among the countries concerned. The countries involved needed to have
policy consistency and firm unity if they were to succeed.

Second, the nuclear deterrent theory that the use of nuclear weapons
would only invite massive nuclear retaliation cannot be applied to
North Korea's nuclear ambitions. Given past behavior by that
country, it is unlikely that North Korea would make the appropriate
decision during a highly tense situation. I conclude thus that
getting the North to scrap all of its nuclear weapons and programs
enabling it to manufacture nuclear weapons is absolutely essential.

Third, the issues must be resolved comprehensively. In order to get
Pyongyang to eliminate all of its nuclear programs, it will be
necessary to provide it with such incentives as economic cooperation
and security assurances. The premise for such would be the
normalization of relations and the resolution of such pending issues
as abductions.


TOKYO 00000807 004 OF 008


Fourth, I must stress that the abduction issue, regrettably, cannot
be resolved overnight. A rocky road toward resolution will likely
continue in the future, but I think the important factor is for
six-party talks to serve as a framework to monitor the
implementation of the agreement by using a variety of leverages.

These views that I presented at the conferences were met with
arguments both for and against them. For example, one participant
argued that the nuclear deterrent theory would function. Another
person said a second and third nuclear blast by North Korea would be
useless and meaningless. Others stressed the importance of halting
further nuclear development and preventing nuclear proliferation to
third parties. There were a few who stated that Japan, having
over-emphasized the abduction issue, might be isolated or ignored by
the other parties. There also was deep-rooted skepticism that the
latest Beijing accord was no more than a rehash of the 1994 Agreed
Framework between the US and North Korea, and so was of little
significance.

I said in my speech that the abduction issue was unlikely to be
resolved without resolving the nuclear issue or vice versa. I said
the North's nuclear programs and abductions of Japanese nationals
stemmed from the same policy. So, what is needed is the North's
strategic determination to resolve the abduction issue. What is
simply needed is a system to closely monitor implementation of the
agreement. The 1994 Agreed Framework did not have such a system, but
the six-party talks could serve as such an arrangement.

Also at the symposium in San Francisco was former US Secretary of
Defense William Perry, who has lengthy experience in North Korean
affairs, and my friend South Korean Ambassador to the US Lee Tae
Sik. I think all of us shared the view of how difficult it would be
to resolve the North Korea problem and how large the cost would be
if the effort ended in failure. Perry in particular stressed the
need for the US government to seriously tackle the problem, openly
revealing his irritation at the response Washington response had
taken prior to the recent Beijing accord.

I think we are seeing the beginning of the end of the North Korea
problem. Given the international community's deep distrust of that
country, it will not be easy to resolve the issues. But should the
North violate the recent six-party accord, the international
community would unite and take tough measures against it. With
regional security, nonproliferation of weapons of mass destruction,
and the stability of the international community in mind, Japan,
too, must settle down to addressing the issue writ large.

Hitoshi Tanaka: Born in 1947; after serving in such posts as the
director-general of the Ministry of Foreign Affair's Asian and
Oceanian Affairs Bureau and the deputy foreign minister, works as a
senior fellow at the Japan Center for International Exchange (JCIE)
and also as a guest professor at the University of Tokyo.

(4) Editorial: How will Japan, US respond to new Armitage report
calling for cooperation with China?

MAINICHI (Page 5) (Full)
February 26, 2007

An American bipartisan group who include former Deputy Secretary of
State Richard Armitage and former Assistant Secretary of Defense
Joseph Nye has just released a report titled, "The US-Japan
Alliance: Getting Asia right Through 2020." The report offers advice

TOKYO 00000807 005 OF 008


on how to meld a rising China and India into the cooperative
framework of Asia, centering on the Japan-US alliance.

In 2000, the same group of experts produced the so-called Armitage
Report, which served as the blueprint for the Japan and Asia
strategy of the Bush administration that was launched in 2001. The
new report can be identified as the revised edition of the Armitage
Report.

The new report identifies close cooperation between Japan and the
United States as the cornerstone of an Asia strategy, as was the
case with the first Armitage Report. The overall tone toward China
has subtly changed, however.

The latest report lists three scenarios Japan and the United States
must avoid: (1) unilateral control of Asia by the United States; (2)
a US-China joint control concept; and (3) conflict between the
Japan-US alliance and China.

It is no longer possible for the United States alone to be the sole
policeman in Asia where major powers are rising and energy security
and nationalism are emerging as issues. Joint control by the United
States and China also seems impossible, given the huge gap between
the two countries over such values as democracy, freedom, and human
rights. Any clash between the Japan-US alliance and China or the
road toward rivalry would only force other countries in Asia to make
foolish choices. That would not help China head in a positive
direction, either.

The best option would be for Japan and the United States to guide
China toward a desirable direction, while making efforts to spread
democratic values across the region. To that end, it is essential
for Japan, the United States, and China to forge friendly and
cooperative relations.

The international environment surrounding Asia has significantly
changed over the last seven years. When the first Armitage Report
first came out, Japan, the United States, and China were tense over
the issues of Taiwan and sovereignty over the Senkaku Islands.
Moving then to deepen the Japan-US alliance could have been taken as
an attempt to tighten the noose around China.

China today is accepting the role of a "responsible stakeholder"
through the six-party talks and other venues. Japan also has decided
to aim at a strategic relationship with China.

China's future remains unclear, and its defense spending and
national policy lack transparency, as well. Still, Japan is urged to
expand areas of cooperation with China for the common cause of
stability and prosperity in Asia.

If Japan and the United States wish to avoid being isolated in the
region, they must not excessively adhere to the bilateral nature of
the alliance. The two countries must seek cooperation with India,
Australia, Vietnam, and other countries through talks, while
endeavoring to engage China in their efforts. The new edition of the
Armitage Report paints such a vision.

The report aims at depicting an unwavering strategy toward Japan and
policy toward Asia regardless of which candidate, Republican or
Democratic, wins the US presidential race in 2008. How will Japan
respond to the proposals by the bipartisan American group? Japan
needs to broaden its perspective and boost its policymaking

TOKYO 00000807 006 OF 008


capability.

(5) Editorial: US force realignment legislation unfair to Okinawa

ASAHI (Page 3) (Full)
February 26, 2007

A bill has been submitted to the Diet to extend subsidies to local
governments depending on haw far they have cooperated with
realignment plans for the US military.

The aim is to advance the US force realignment plan, as was agreed
upon by the Japanese and US governments. The legislation
particularly seems to reflect the government's determination to win
over strongly resisting Okinawa municipalities to its side.

But will the incentive-award system work? It might end up rubbing
the sentiments of Okinawa residents the wrong way.

What worries us is not the high-handed approach alone. Extending
hefty financial assistance only to base-accepting municipalities is
unfair to other areas.

The government's packages of economic incentives have aimed at
reducing economic disparities between mainland Japan and all of
Okinawa. The government is about to make changes to such a system.

The incentive award system resulted from the government's bitter
lesson from a plan to relocated Futenma Air Station to waters off
Nago. Although the government has provided Okinawa, centering on
Nago, with generous packages of economic incentives, the relocation
plan has not moved forward.

The relocation site has shifted from offshore to the coastal area.
The government is apparently determined not to allow any local
municipalities to "eat and run." Under the proposed legislation, the
subsidies will be provided to host municipalities in four stages of
the realignment work: acceptance of a government plan; the start of
an environmental assessment; the start of construction work; and the
completion of the project.

There are factors other than the local circumstances that can
explain why the plan to relocate the Futenma airfield to waters off
Nago has not advanced. For example, the government has acted as if
relocating Futenma Air Station to a site within Okinawa was a done
deal, and that has revived the anti-base movement.

Another unique feature of the envisaged legislation is that the
Defense Ministry would be allowed to determine economic incentives.
Under the new system, the acceptance to bases would be directly
linked to economic incentives. It would be distinct from the
existing system to extend subsidies to municipalities already
hosting bases.

After Okinawa was returned to Japan, the now defunct Okinawa
Development Agency was responsible for mapping out economic packages
to the prefecture under the Okinawa Promotion and Development
Special Measures Law. An office in the Cabinet Office is now
responsible for the job. Given the government's tight financial
situation, it would be natural to think that force realignment
subsidies would take a toll on traditional packages of economic
incentives.


TOKYO 00000807 007 OF 008


The law is scheduled to expire on March 31, 2012. If the law ceased
to exist, Japan would be armed itself only with the US force
realignment legislation that would be good until March 31, 2017.

The envisaged US force realignment legislation has incorporated a
special system allowing the government to provide municipalities
shouldering a substantial burden from an additional base with
greater subsidies for public works projects.

In the eyes of Okinawa, there are many areas that merit government
assistance. Regardless of such local circumstances, the government
is planning a system to extend inappropriate subsidies only to those
municipalities that would accept bases. The system might prompt the
coffers of some municipalities to run dry, while those of some other
municipalities to become bloated.

It has been 35 years since Okinawa was returned to Japan. The
government's packages of incentives to Okinawa, along with US force
realignment, are at a crossroads. We are worried where they are
headed.

(6) Editorial: Japan should make efforts to resolve the Iran nuclear
issue

MAINICHI (Page 5) (Full)
February 24, 2007

With Iran repeatedly conducting large-scale military exercises, the
US and European media are reporting that the US military is now
drafting a plan to strike that country. Amid signs looming of future
US air strikes, the deadline for Iran to halt its uranium enrichment
activity, which the United Nations Security Council set, has
expired. On Dec. 23 last year, the UNSC adopted unanimously a
resolution calling on Iran to suspend its nuclear enrichment program
within 60 days. It is regrettable that Iran did not comply with that
dictum.

According to a report that the International Atomic Energy Agency
(IAEA) submitted to the UNSC, Iran has expanded its nuclear
enrichment activity instead of stopping it. The report notes that
Iran has activated two cascades linked to 164 centrifugal
separators, and that it will increase the number of centrifugal
machines to 3,000 by May.

The UNSC, therefore, has no choice but to consider additional
sanction measures against Teheran. The present UN sanctions on Iran
adopted based on Article 41 of the UN Chapter 7 are only ritual
measures such as vigilance against overseas travel by individuals
and organizations involved in nuclear weapons development, as well
as a freeze on financial assets overseas. The United States and
Britain, which have taken a hard-line stance against Iran, and
China, which is cautious about the further strengthening of UN
sanctions, will likely engage in a tug-of-war at the UNSC over the
issue of where to go next on Iran.

We ask the countries concerned to refrain from words and actions
that would unnecessarily inflame tensions. According to media
reports, should Iran's nuclear weapons development be confirmed or
should Iran's direct involvement in attacks on US forces in Iraq be
discovered, US forces would launch attacks on Iran's military and
nuclear facilities. Israel, a US ally, is rumored to be readying to
launch air strikes on Iran. There is precedent for in 1981, Israel
bombed a nuclear plant in Iraq.

TOKYO 00000807 008 OF 008



Of course, concerned parties have yet to confirm their conjectures.
This might be either a threat or a constraint. The Iranian nuclear
issue should be resolved in the UNSC. Otherwise the issue will
become overly complicated. Iran should stop its provocative
activities, including military exercises. Both sides must avoid
foolish actions that would pit them against each other in a battle
of wills.

To that end, not only self-restraint by the concerned parties but
also extra efforts by countries involved are necessary. As one US
research group on Iraq advocated, it is essential for Washington and
Teheran to hold a dialogue. Negotiations with Iran under the
framework of the five UNSC members and Germany should be continued.

It is also important for Japan to contribute to the international
framework. China has played the leading role in the six-party talks
on North Korea's nuclear programs. The focus will be on how China
and Russia will deal with the Iran issue. Since Japan has long had
friendly relations with Iran, there must be a scenario in which the
Japanese government can actively participate in helping find a
peaceful solution to the Iranian nuclear issue.

The ultimate goal is not to allow either North Korea or Iran to
possess nuclear weapons. It is not science fiction that the North
might be able to miniaturize nuclear bombs and load them into
missiles targeted at Japan. Considering the actual situation where
the North Korean and Iraqi nuclear issues delicately affect each
other, Japan could aim at becoming the key player calling for
denuclearization in both regions. Such an idea might meet Prime
Minister Shinzo Abe's advocate "assertive diplomacy" aimed to
contribute to Asia and the world.

DONOVAN