DAILY SUMMARY OF JAPANESE PRESS 06/09/09

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 13 TOKYO 001289

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 06/09/09

INDEX:

(1) Editorial: It is only natural for U.S. to re-designate North
Korea as terrorist sponsor (Nikkei)

(2) Editorial: U.S. government should relist North Korea as
terrorism-sponsoring country without hesitation (Sankei)

(3) U.S. Consul General Maher dismisses Marine commandant's remarks
on Futenma relocation, stresses "no renegotiation" (Ryukyu Shimpo)

(4) True intent of senior U.S. military officer's testimony on
"revising" USFJ realignment plans unclear (Ryukyu Shimpo)

(5) Futenma Replacement Facility: Conclusion comes first for Futenma
relocation to be completed in 2014; Gov't unveils more projects
after showing blueprint, pushes ahead with environmental assessment
(Mainichi)

(6) LDP's Gen Nakatani, DPJ's Seiji Maehara on enemy base strike
capability (Tokyo Shimbun)

(7) Editorial: HNS must not be expanded by putting utmost priority
on the military alliance with the United States (Akahata)

(8) Draft "big-boned policies, 2009": Fiscal restructuring delayed
to 2020; ratio of debt balance to GDP to be reduced (Nikkei)

(9) Bill amending Child Pornography Prevention Law (Part 1) -
Interview with LDP Lower House member Yasuhiro Hanashi: Banning
simple possession necessary (Yomiuri)

(10) Editorial: We should listen to international criticism over lax
measures against child porn (Mainichi)

ARTICLES:

(1) Editorial: It is only natural for U.S. to re-designate North
Korea as terrorist sponsor

NIKKEI (Page 2) (Full)
June 9, 2009

U.S. Secretary of State Clinton announced that the U.S. had started
looking into re-designating North Korea as a terrorist sponsor. That
nation's provocative acts threatening the security of the
international community and the region, including the second nuclear
test, cannot be overlooked. It is only natural that the Obama
administration had shifted its stance from holding dialogue to
applying pressure.

The former Bush administration in October last year removed the
North from the list of state sponsors of terrorism. As reasons for
that, it said that since the nation had moved ahead with efforts to
disable its nuclear facilities in accordance with the agreement
reached at the Six-Party Talks and had agreed to dismantle its
nuclear weapons programs in a verifiable way, it would prompt the
development of the nuclear issue to remove it from the list of state
sponsors of terrorism.

What is the reality then? North Korea declared that it will not be
bound by the Six-Party Talks agreement. It appears that it is

TOKYO 00001289 002 OF 013


restoring disabled nuclear facilities and has resumed the
reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel rods. It has repeatedly
test-fired missiles. It went ahead with the second nuclear test. The
removal of that nation from the list of state sponsors of terrorism
has thus produced no effects at all. On the contrary, it has
encouraged it to commit rash acts.

The prevailing view in Japan was against the U.S. removing that
nation, which abducted Japanese nationals, from the list of state
sponsors of terrorism. The blunder of the former Bush
administration, which rushed to produce a diplomatic result, should
be rectified. North Korea's nuclear ambition could pose a major
obstacle to the diplomatic policy of the Obama administration, which
is aiming at a world free of nuclear arms. Re-designating the North
as a terrorist state to ban economic assistance to it would blow a
major blow to it. We want to see the U.S. re-designate it as a
terrorist nation.

Coordination of views on the draft resolution condemning the North
is under way at the UN Security Council. Member nations are in
agreement on the policy of the international community taking a
harsh stance toward the North. However, China is reluctant to impose
harsh sanctions.

Even if the resolution is adopted, to what extent, China, a major
supplier of foods and energy to the North, will implement it is
unclear. Pressure on North Korea would remain limited, if the
resolution lacks efficacy.

In order to rein in North Korea, the U.S. should strengthen its own
sanctions in concert with Japan and South Korea. Financial sanctions
are effective.

The U.S. government in 2005 placed a freeze on funds in North
Korea-related accounts at Banco Delta Asia in Macau, designating it
as a bank suspected of being used for money laundering by the North.
As a result, North Korea had difficulty procuring funds in dollar.
Its administration also suffered a major setback. However, the
financial sanctions were lifted in 2007 in order to accelerate the
development of the nuclear issue. The frozen funds were also
returned to North Korea.

North Korea is suspected of having exported weapons of mass
destruction as well as to have been engaged in illegal trade of fake
dollars and drugs.

What is of concern is the fate of two American female journalists
detained by the North. North Korea's top court sentenced each of
them to 12 years of reform through labor. That nation probably
intends to make deals with the U.S. using them as bargaining chips.
It is only right for it to release them immediately.

(2) Editorial: U.S. government should relist North Korea as
terrorism-sponsoring country without hesitation

SANKEI (Page 2) (Full)
June 9, 2009

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has indicated that
Washington has begun considering placing North Korea, which has
repeatedly conducted nuclear and missile tests, back on the U.S.
list of countries sponsoring terrorism.

TOKYO 00001289 003 OF 013



Designating North Korea as a state sponsor of terrorism was the
United States' powerful bargaining chip along with financial
sanctions. The United States removed North Korea from its list in
exchange for the North's empty promise of disabling its nuclear
facilities. We hope the United States will swiftly relist North
Korea to meet Japan's strong desire.

Secretary Clinton's remarks came in response to a letter signed by
eight Republican Senators calling for putting North Korea back on
the list. The letter stated that North Korea has neither stopped
sponsoring terrorism nor headed in the direction that former
President George W. Bush had hoped for.

Appearing on an American television program, Clinton said that she
took the letter seriously and that North Korea was taken off the
list for a purpose, but now that purpose is being thwarted by the
North. She also indicated that the United States is shifting toward
pressure tactics in its policy of dialogue and pressure. Her
statement is in the right direction and Japan welcomes it.

Intending to continue with the Six-Party Talks, the Obama
administration was initially inclined toward dialogue. To their
disappointment and distress, U.S. Special Representative for North
Korea Policy Stephen Bosworth told the Association of the Families
of Victims of Kidnapped by North Korea during the group's visit to
the United States in April: "We are neither considering financial
sanctions nor putting North Korea back on our list of countries
sponsoring terrorism."

This was followed by missile launches, a nuclear test, and other
provocative acts by North Korea. This can explain why President
Barack Obama had to declare, "Rules must be binding and violations
must be punished," and to veer toward greater pressure. During his
recent visits to Japan, South Korea, and China, Deputy Secretary of
State James Steinberg also played up the need to take a resolute
stance.

It is good that the Obama administration has revised its view on
North Korea. But what is important is to concretely translate it
into effective action.

It has already been two weeks since the North conducted its second
nuclear test. Work to formulate a UN Security Council resolution has
run into difficulties due to China which wants to avoid irritating
the North. It is possible for the United States to unilaterally
relist North Korea as a terrorism-sponsoring and to impose financial
sanctions on that country. But such steps as cargo inspections and a
weapons embargo would be ineffective unless other member countries,
including China and Russia, remain aligned with the United States.

The North subsequently demanded an apology of the UN Security
Council and continued with what appeared to be preparing for
launching more missiles. The country does not show any signs of
reflecting on its own conducts.

In order to have the North modify its behavior, the United States
needs to persuade China and Russia in collaboration with Japan and
South Korea and to formulate a strong sanctions resolution over
time. Based on that, we hope to see the United States relist the
North as a terrorism-sponsoring country, impose financial sanctions
on that country, and demonstrate strong leadership in the

TOKYO 00001289 004 OF 013


international community.

(3) U.S. Consul General Maher dismisses Marine commandant's remarks
on Futenma relocation, stresses "no renegotiation"

RYUKYU SHIMPO (Page 2) (Full)
June 9, 2009

U.S. Consul General in Okinawa Kevin Maher gave a speech at a hotel
in Naha on June 8 where he commented on U.S. Marine Corps commandant
Gen. James Conway's remarks at the Armed Services Committee of the
U.S. Senate on June 4 regarding the possibility of reviewing the
U.S. Forces Japan (USFJ) realignment plans. Maher said: "I would
like to emphasize that there has not been any proposal to the
Japanese government for renegotiation," stressing that the U.S.
government's position is that there is no room for revising the
Futenma relocation plans.

Conway told the Senate committee, "There are ideas for revision
worth considering." But Maher said: "This is not only my personal
opinion; the U.S. government reaffirms its commitment to
implementing the 2006 road map for USFJ realignment as is. Since
this is a bipartisan policy, the U.S. government's position remains
unchanged even with a change of administration." He thus negated
Conway's statement.

Maher explained that the two goals of his Okinawa assignment have
been to promote USFJ realignment and to instill a realistic thinking
on security among Okinawa residents. He cited media reports of his
statements that had given rise to criticism and said: "The
prefecture needs to think seriously about the U.S.-Japan security
arrangements. This alliance is indispensable for peace in Okinawa,
Japan, and the Far East, and I have tried to explain this as clearly
as possible." He admitted that he has been playing the "bad guy."

Maher gave his speech at the monthly meeting of the Okinawa Keizai
Doyukai (Association of Corporate Executives) for June. He looked
back on his almost three years of assignment in Okinawa before
moving on to become the Japan desk director at the Department of
State in July.

(4) True intent of senior U.S. military officer's testimony on
"revising" USFJ realignment plans unclear

RYUKYU SHIMPO (Page 2) (Full)
June 9, 2009

U.S. Marine Corps commandant Gen James Conway testified at the
Senate Armed Services Committee that "there are ideas for revision
worth considering" with regard to the U.S. Forces Japan (USFJ)
realignment plans, including the relocation of Futenma Air Station
and the transfer of the marines to Guam.

This is the first time that a top U.S. military leader has mentioned
the revision of the agreement. His remarks are extremely important.
It would be good if the proposed revisions will lighten the burden
on Japan, but there are concerns that they will result in an even
heavier burden.

The Japanese and U.S. governments agreed in 2006 on the following
USFJ realignment plans as one package: (1) relocation of Futenma to
the coastal area of Camp Schwab; (2) transfer of some 8,000 marines

TOKYO 00001289 005 OF 013


in Okinawa to Guam: and (3) the return of U.S. military facilities
south of Kadena Air Base.

While the road map provides for the completion of these plans by
2014, a deadlock continues on the question of Futenma relocation,
the core issue.

The two governments signed an agreement on the relocation of marines
to Guam last February, which clearly stipulates the promotion of the
realignment process and sets Japan's share of the relocation cost at
2.8 billion dollars.

While Conway has stated that the revisions will be studied under the
Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) to be issued by next February, he
had also testified at the House Appropriations Committee in May that
"the current estimate of 4 billion dollars as the U.S.' share in the
cost for Guam relocation will be insufficient."

His latest testimony is a sequel to the May statement. The mention
of "revisions" appears to be a pressure tactic to increase the
Japanese side's share in the cost.

With regard to Futenma relocation, Democratic Party of Japan (DPJ)
Secretary General Katsuya Okada has pointed out in an interview with
the magazine Sekai: "We need to ask the U.S. to give some more
thought and discuss this thoroughly," and, "Relocation outside
Okinawa has been eliminated as an option from the beginning." There
is also an opinion that Japan should indicate its intention to
consider various candidate relocation sites, including those located
outside Japan or Okinawa, and review the Henoko relocation plan from
scratch.

Under its plans to reduce military spending, the U.S. has begun to
review its military bases at home and abroad. It is planning to
close down its military base in Kirgiz in Central Asia and the
Vieques naval training range in the U.S. commonwealth of Puerto
Rico, for instance. Yet, there has practically been no progress in
the consolidation and reduction of U.S. bases in Japan.

Conway's testimony must not be taken lightly as the statement of one
senior officer. The government should query the U.S. government on
the substance and true intent of the proposed "revisions" and
initiate discussions on this promptly.

(5) Futenma Replacement Facility: Conclusion comes first for Futenma
relocation to be completed in 2014; Gov't unveils more projects
after showing blueprint, pushes ahead with environmental assessment

MAINICHI (Page 3) (Full)
June 9, 2009

Teruhisa Mimori

Japan and the United States have concurred on relocating the U.S.
Marine Corps' Futenma Air Station in Okinawa Prefecture's Ginowan
City to a coastal area of Camp Schwab in the island prefecture's
northern coastal city of Nago. On this issue, the Japanese
government and Okinawa have become bogged down in their negotiations
over the question of where to place the Futenma replacement's
runway. However, the government is steadily pushing ahead with its
assessment of the Futenma replacement's potential impact on its
environs before relocating Futenma airfield. The Okinawa prefectural

TOKYO 00001289 006 OF 013


government's environmental assessment review panel will begin within
the month to examine the Defense Ministry's preliminary report.
Meanwhile, both inside and outside Japan, there are moves implying
the need to reconsider the Futenma relocation itself. There is a
conclusion to complete the relocation of Futenma airfield in 2014.
The Mainichi Shimbun verifies the assessment procedures.

In late May, the Okinawa Defense Bureau, an outlet in Okinawa
Prefecture of the Defense Ministry, held a briefing on its
preliminary report in a committee room of the Okinawa prefectural
assembly. "The procedures should be redone in conformity with the
assessment law's spirit," an Okinawa prefectural assembly member
from an opposition party said at the meeting. This is because the
Defense Ministry's replacement facility positioning plan had a
description of four helipads that were not in its procedural report.
"The government should remake the procedural report and conduct
another survey based on that," the assembly member asserted. A
senior official from the Okinawa Defense Bureau rejected this
suggestion, saying, "There is no need to redo the procedures for
this sort of revision."

The government unveiled the helipad construction plan after having
submitted its procedural report to the Okinawa prefectural
government. Furthermore, the government later came up with its plans
to set up additional facilities such as 1.3-kilometer aircraft
approach lighting off the coast and aircraft washers. Such plans
were shown four months after the procedural report was submitted to
the prefectural government when the government held a meeting with
officials from Okinawa's prefectural and municipal government
officials to consult on Futenma relocation.

The Environmental Impact Assessment Law allows base-hosting local
residents to make suggestions on the government's procedural and
preliminary reports. However, the government came up with additional
plans after submitting its procedural report. As it stands, the
government cannot be said to have provided enough information. This
fails to meet the law's purport that is for consensus building with
the participation of residents. Nevertheless, the Defense Ministry
has refused to redo the procedures, because there is an
intergovernmental agreement between Japan and the United States to
complete the relocation of Futenma airfield in 2014. Kunitoshi
Sakurai, a professor of environmentology at Okinawa University, hit
the Defense Ministry hard, saying: "If the government is allowed to
come up with anything later, environmental assessment makes no sense
in itself. If the government does not redo the procedures, it is not
an environmental assessment."

There is another question of how to procure landfill soil for the
Futenma replacement facility's construction site. In January 2008,
the Okinawa Defense Bureau provided the Okinawa prefectural
government's environmental impact assessment review panel with an
additional explanation of its procedural report. In this
explanation, the bureau estimates the necessary landfill soil at
about 21 million cubic meters, showing a plan to gather 17 million
cubic meters mainly from near Okinawa's main island. This is 14
times larger than the annual amount of soil gathered from near
Okinawa's main island. The review panel noted that this would have a
serious impact on the environment. The bureau, in its preliminary
report, added that the government would conduct specific studies,
including the feasibility of soil procurement from outside Okinawa
Prefecture, and that the government would make a careful decision.
However, the review panel pointed to the potential impact on

TOKYO 00001289 007 OF 013


fisheries. In addition, Japan's mainland prefectures facing the
Inland Sea have placed a total ban on soil gathering. As a result,
it will not be easy to gather soil from outside Okinawa Prefecture.

Ichiro Yuasa, 59, an advisor to the Inland Sea Conference
specializing physical oceanography, pointed out a possible impact on
ecosystems, saying: "In the Inland Sea, sand eels have lost their
egg-laying grounds because sea sand has been gathered, and as a
result, there are now fewer sea breams and Japanese Spanish
mackerels."

Focus on how to compromise

There were 5,317 public comments on the government's preliminary
report of its environmental assessment. The Okinawa Defense Bureau
will present an outline of the public comments and its own view to
Okinawa Prefecture Governor Hirokazu Nakaima possibly this fall.

The review panel is expected to set forth severe views regarding the
bureau's preliminary report. Gov. Nakaima adheres firmly to the plan
of moving the newly planned replacement facility's runway to an
offshore area. However, he has also said its location could be
slightly moved. He is fairly positive about relocating Futenma
airfield to a coastal area of Camp Schwab.

The focus is how the governor will settle the pending issue of
relocating Futenma airfield with the government and how he will
explain it to the local population.

(6) LDP's Gen Nakatani, DPJ's Seiji Maehara on enemy base strike
capability

TOKYO SHIMBUN (Page 2) (Full)
June 9, 2009

In light of North Korea's nuclear test and launching of a long-range
ballistic missile, there have been growing calls, especially in the
Liberal Democratic Party (LDP),for Japan to possess the capability
to attack enemy bases with cruise missiles and other weapons. We
asked one Diet member each from the LDP and the Democratic Party of
Japan (DPJ) (who are defense specialists) whether such a capability
is necessary, and whether this does not contradict Japan's
exclusive-defense (senshu-boei) policy, and related issues.

Gen Nakatani, chairman of the LDP Research Commission on Security:
Real threats need to be dealt with

-- Why is it necessary to possess the capability to attack enemy
bases?

Nakatani: The intent of North Korea has become clear with its
possession of nuclear weapons and firing of long-range ballistic
missiles. It is now inevitable that Japan should consider how to
deal with this real threat.

-- Isn't missile defense (MD) enough?

Nakatani: MD has three stages: launch, flight, and fall. Japan is
able to deal with flight and fall, but is unable to deal with
consecutive launches. The capability to deter the launching of
missiles is necessary.


TOKYO 00001289 008 OF 013


-- Is this constitutional?

Nakatani: (With regard to enemy base attack capability,) Prime
Minister Ichiro Hatoyama once stated in the Diet that, "To do
nothing and wait for our own destruction is not the spirit of the
constitution." Our options will be limited after North Korea fires a
missile. In a case where a missile is certain to be launched,
possessing the capability to strike the missile base is within the
scope of self-defense.

-- There has already been a government opinion half a century ago
that the possession of such a capability is possible but not much
discussion has ever taken place.

Nakatani: This is because there has been no need to do so. I also
believe that we should give importance to dialogue and seek a
diplomatic solution. However, despite the goodwill of the
international community, North Korea has gone ahead with developing
a nuclear arsenal. An appropriate system is necessary to deal with
this.

-- Don't you think discussions like this will provoke North Korea
instead?

Nakatani: If North Korea did not possess nuclear arms, this
discussion would not have taken place.

-- How will the debate proceed from now on?

Nakatani: The party has drafted a recommendation for the new
National Defense Program Guidelines to be adopted in late 2009. We
hope the people will also think about the defense of Japan in the
future. The government should also listen carefully to the opinion
of the people and other countries.

(Interviewer: Shunsuke Shimizu)

Seiji Maehara, DPJ vice president: Confirm the U.S.' expanded
deterrence first

-- There is a lively debate in the LDP on the possession of the
capability to strike enemy bases.

Maehara: First, I think this came too late. Prime Minister Ichiro
Hatoyama once told the Diet in 1965: "When a third country is
certain to fire ballistic missiles at Japan, it is not the spirit of
the constitution that we just do nothing and wait for our own
destruction. Attacking the bases from which the ballistic missiles
are going to be fired is within the scope of the constitution." The
basic assumption is that this is a debate allowed under the
constitution.

-- Do you think the debate itself is necessary?

Maehara: We should talk about this and possess (the enemy base
strike capability). Actually, this is not an issue to be dealt with
in haste in the aftermath of the North Korean missile problem.

-- How should we deal with a situation where the firing of missiles
is imminent?

Maehara: Even if Japan is to possess this capability in the near

TOKYO 00001289 009 OF 013


future, it does not have too many options. It does not have the
equipment. This is not something that can be dealt with hastily. In
dealing with North Korea, rather than talking about Japan possessing
its own enemy base attack capability, it is more effective to
confirm the United States' "expanded deterrence" - that if Japan is
attacked by nuclear arms, the U.S. will invoke the right of
collective self-defense and retaliate (against the DPRK).

-- Are you saying that right now, it is more realistic to rely on
the U.S.' expanded deterrence rather than Japan possessing enemy
base strike capability?

Maehara: Since Japan has relied heavily on the U.S., the U.S. is
also the one that serves as the "spear" in the "spear and shield"
combination. (In the future) Japan cannot rely entirely on the U.S.,
but U.S. cooperation is necessary in Japan's process of becoming
self-reliant.

-- What sort of discussions are taking place in the DPJ?

Maehara: None at all. While there is discussion on remedial steps to
be taken after something has happened, there has been no strategic
vision or systematic discussion.

(Interviewer: Takushi Soka)

(7) Editorial: HNS must not be expanded by putting utmost priority
on the military alliance with the United States

AKAHATA (Page 2) (Full)
June 8, 2009

The new approach of financing the cost of building and relocating
U.S. military facilities, which is supposed to be covered by Japan's
host-nation support (HNS),with public works spending has become a
topic of conversation.

To begin with, what is necessary for the U.S. military's activities
should be borne by the U.S. forces under the Status of U.S. Forces
Agreement, and there is no logic for Japan to bear such a cost. The
public in becoming increasingly angry with the enormous 200
billion-yen-a-year HNS, while their living expenditures are being
reduced. Maintaining the HNS by using the country's public works
spending from a position of putting top priority to the U.S.-Japan
military alliance runs counter to the public's wishes.

To meet U.S. military demands

HNS covers almost all matters related to U.S. military activities,
such as U.S. military housing, including churches, fighter shelters,
and training expense. (The HNS) is part of the country's defense
spending under the jurisdiction of the Defense Ministry. A move has
come to light recently to use the public works spending of the
Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism (MLIT) and
the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (MAFF)

In Sasebo, Nagasaki Prefecture, 11 housing units - costing 250
million yen per unit including the land development cost - have been
built for U.S. military officers by using the MLIT's road-related
tax revenues. The program was carried out in the pretext of
compensating for relocating the U.S. military housing, which had
been originally planned for by the U.S. military in 1990, due to a

TOKYO 00001289 010 OF 013


road construction project. It is the first case in which a ministry
other than the Defense Ministry has born the HNS.

In Ie Jima, Okinawa, a plan is under way to relocate old U.S.
barracks as part of MAFF's national irrigation and drainage project
for securing agricultural water. As the funding source, the MAFF
budget is being considered instead of the HNS under the Defense
Ministry. Because part of it overlaps with the U.S. base is an
excuse; it's real aim is to have MAFF bear part of the HNS.

Looming over the background is the necessity to reduce the HNS,
although it has been kept at about 200 billion yen due to strong
public reaction. HNS, including the Special Action Committee on
Okinawa (SACO) expenses, for fiscal 2005 stood at 235.8 billion yen
and for fiscal 2009 at 203.9 billion yen. Reacting strong to this
slight reduction, the U.S. military has applied pressure for greater
military spending. It is an unjust interference in Japan's domestic
political affairs.

The government is trying to make ministries other than the Defense
Ministry bear HNS with the aim of deflecting such pressure. The
government is trying to secure a level that can satisfy U.S. forces.
It reflects the government's servile attitude of putting utmost
priority on the military alliance (with the United States).

Abolition of HNS a way to eliminate U.S. bases

U.S. forces are stationed in Japan in line with the U.S.' military
strategy and are not for defending Japan. The safety of Japanese
people is threatened by them, including crimes committed by U.S.
service members. There is no logic in the HNS.

In 1995, then U.S. Assistant Secretary of Defense Joseph Nye said:
"Japan bears 70 percent of the cost of U.S. armed forces in Japan,
so stationing them in Japan is cheaper than keeping them in the
United States." Johns Hopkins University Professor Ken Calder, who
served as special advisor to the U.S. ambassador to Japan, also said
in 2008, "If the HNS is eliminated, Japan would become less
attractive as a country to host U.S. bases."

HNS does more harm than good to the Japanese people. In order to
build a peaceful Japan with no bases, HNS must be abolished.

(8) Draft "big-boned policies, 2009": Fiscal restructuring delayed
to 2020; ratio of debt balance to GDP to be reduced

NIKKEI (Top play) (Abridged)
June 9, 2009

The contents of the draft "big-boned policies, 2009," which spells
out the government's basic policy for economic and fiscal management
have been disclosed. With regard to the key issue of target date for
restoring fiscal health, a basic goal of "steadily lowering" the
ratio of national and local government debts to GDP by the early
2020s has been set. It also proposes to reduce the ratio of deficits
in the primary fiscal balance to GDP "by half" before 2014. The
previous target of achieving a surplus in the primary balance by
FY11 has been postponed to "within 10 years."

The government will submit the draft to the Council on Economic and
Fiscal Policy (CEFP) chaired by Prime Minister Taro Aso on June 9,
and the council will adopt this formally on June 23 after

TOKYO 00001289 011 OF 013


coordination with the ruling parties. This will be the first set of
"big-boned policies" for the Aso administration and will be, in
effect, its manifesto (set of campaign pledges) for the next House
of Representatives election to be held by this fall.

The main point of the draft is a review of the target date for
fiscal restructuring. The reduction of the ratio of national and
local debts to GDP is set as a central goal. Right now, the national
debt is 170 PERCENT of GDP, the highest among the industrialized
countries. The draft calls for "stabilizing" this ratio by the
mid-2010s and "reducing it steadily" by the early 2020s. It clearly
sets a policy of controlling the unbridled ballooning of the fiscal
deficit and reducing the debt-to-GDP ratio from 2020 onward.

With regard to revenue reform, the draft stresses the steady
formulation of concrete plans under the government's "mid-term
program" for the implementation of drastic tax reforms, including a
consumption tax hike, by the mid-2010s. It also calls for studying
the introduction of "tax deductions with benefit payments" combining
income tax cuts and social welfare benefits as part of steps to
remedy the sagging birth rate and support low income earners.

In terms of economic growth strategy, the government will promote a
"low carbon society" through the utilization of environmental
technology and support "health and longevity" through better medical
and nursing care services.

Regarding spending cuts, passages on "upholding the big-boned
policies of 2006" and "maximum reductions" had been deleted at an
early stage when the rough draft was being written, even before
entering into coordination with the ruling parties.

(9) Bill amending Child Pornography Prevention Law (Part 1) -
Interview with LDP Lower House member Yasuhiro Hanashi: Banning
simple possession necessary

YOMIURI (Page 13) (Full)
June 9, 2009

-- Please explain about child prostitution and child pornography.

First, attention was focused on child prostitution. In the early
1980's, tours of Southeast Asian countries to buy prostitutes by
Japanese men were planned and implemented. Such tours were sharply
criticized as treating children as goods. Around that time, a little
girl was abducted for the purpose of producing a porno image and was
killed in Belgium. In reaction, about 300,000 Belgians staged a
protest march.

An increasing number of people mainly in the U.S. and European
countries began to call for the need to protect children from sexual
abuse. Many countries enacted laws to ban pederosis and child
pornography. But Japan was slow to move so it was only 10 years ago
when the law was enacted.

-- Why did the government decide to amend the law now?

Japan's regulations are far more lenient than those of other
countries. Restricting child pornography is aimed to protect
children, but the victims will continue to suffer trauma as long as
their photographs exist. Because the nation's laws do not prohibit
the possession of child porn, it is impossible to stop the

TOKYO 00001289 012 OF 013


distribution of such materials.

To protect not only victims but all children, it is necessary to
spread the view that treating children as materials for pederosis is
an abuse. To that end, many countries have begun to set rules to
make anime (animated cartoons) and games subjected to regulations.
The ruling coalition recommends in its draft amendment to the law
that the government should launch research and study to work out
regulations for such materials.

-- The ruling parties' draft amendment includes a measure to ban the
possession of child porn.

Although Japan first introduced required minimum regulations, child
pornographic materials disappeared from the shelves of adult shops
the under the effect of the law. Later, online child pornography
became a major problem, but when the law was revised five years ago,
a rule to prohibit online child porn and a stricter punishment was
introduced.

Reflecting the global trend of criminalizing even the simple
possession of child pornography, Japan also should ban the simple
possession of child porn. It is a serious problem to see children as
sex objects. Even if a ban is placed on the sale and distribution of
child porn, there must be loopholes in proliferating child porn on
the Internet. As long as simple possession is allowed, such
materials will continue to flow out of Japan forever.

-- Some persons voice concern that if the nation prohibits the
individual possession of child porn, that measure might be abused in
investigation.

I feel the administration of justice has not been fully trusted.
Once it becomes clear what the law intends to protect, such a
situation will never take place.

-- The Democratic Party of Japan (DPJ) changed the name and
definition of "child pornography" in its proposal.

If the scope of subjects covered by the law is narrowed as a result
of the definition changed, it will become impossible to punish what
can be punished under the current regulations. Under the DPJ
proposal, the images of naked children with their sex organs covered
would not be designated as child porn. Under such a situation, I
wonder if children can be fully protected. The DPJ draft reflects
little awareness of the need to counter the social trend of
regarding children as materials.

Child pornography is an international common language. The DPJ's
proposal for using the expression, "materials portraying sex acts
with children," is tantamount to a declaration that Japan will move
away from the international fight.

-- The law should have been amended much earlier.

Some people are opposing banning the simple possession of porn as an
abuse of state authority. To prevent such a possibility, it is
necessary to conduct discussion before the people. The DPJ has
finally submitted its counterproposal, so we would like to openly
discuss the two parties' drafts in the Diet.

(10) Editorial: We should listen to international criticism over lax

TOKYO 00001289 013 OF 013


measures against child porn

MAINICHI (Page 5) (Full)
June 9, 2009

A computer game sold in Japan -- in which players through computer
graphics (CGs) rape girls and their mothers, make them pregnant and
then force them to get abortions -- has been criticized overseas. A
New York-based international human rights organization Equality Now
asked its members in 160 countries to send letters of protest not
only to the Japanese game maker that made the computer game, and
companies that sold the game, but also to Prime Minister Taro Aso
and his cabinet members. This kind of computer game is called
"disgraceful computer software." In Japan, the computer game
industry profits from games featuring sexual abuse and the child
pornography market has swelled. This situation in Japan has come
under fire.

Following this, the Ethics Organization of Computer Software (EOCS),
headed by Akihiko Suzuki, comprising about 230 makers, has decided
to prohibit making "disgraceful games" depicting sexual abuse, as
well as to establish and improve the criteria of such computer
software. There are active moves abroad to regulate child porn. It
has been pointed that Japan lags behind other industrialized
countries in measures to control child pornography. The Third World
Congress against Sexual Exploitation of Children and Adolescents,
which took place last November, came up with an action plan to ban
not only obtaining pictures but also browsing extreme animated
images. Many industrialized countries have imposed certain legal
restrictions on animated images and computer graphics. Even the
Philippines, which was criticized as "a provider of child
pornography," has deliberated on a bill prohibiting the possession
and browsing of animated images.

In Japan, however, the ruling parties last June submitted to the
Diet a bill amending the Law for Punishing Acts Related to Child
Prostitution and Child Pornography, designed to punish the
possession of images. In March this year, the Democratic Party of
Japan (DPJ) presented a bill to limit punishable subjects to the
acts of purchasing and repeatedly using them. However, no
deliberations on the two bills have carried out. Both the ruling and
opposition camps does not mention that animated images and CGs
should be included in the subjects to control.

There is a possibility that if a person receives a child porn image
sent with malicious intent, and the person is punished for
possessing it, such will lead to abuse of police authority. Once
animated images that do not harm children are restricted, freedom of
expression might be endangered. Discussion on the issue should be
deepened.

Once an image is posted on the web, the image will be disseminated
around the world. It is impossible to take it back. The serious
effects of victimization by sex crime against children have become a
problem in many countries. The child porn issue cannot be dealt with
unless the international community cooperates. "Neglecting such
crime is a shame to humanity," said Brazilian President Lula.
Although we should pay attention to self-restrictions by industrial
associations, it is not acceptable for Japan's Diet to neglect this
issue.

ZUMWALT