DPJ BACKTRACKING ON SUPPORT FOR OEF REFUELING

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 TOKYO 001731 SIPDIS E.O. 12958: DECL: 07/28/2019 TAGS: PGOV PINR PREL JA SUBJECT: DPJ BACKTRACKING ON SUPPORT FOR OEF REFUELING MISSION? REF: A. TOKYO 1595 ¶B. TOKYO 1706 ¶C. TOKYO 1575 TOKYO 00001731 001.2 OF 002 Classified By: CHARGE D'AFFAIRES, a.i. JAMES P. ZUMWALT, REASONS 1.4(B) AND (D). ¶1. (C) Summary: The Democratic Party of Japan (DPJ) will end Japan's refueling support to Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF) if it takes the reins of government in the August 30 election, according to July 29 Japanese press reports. Media quote DPJ President Hatoyama as saying that if the party wins the election, it will terminate the current anti-terror special measures law authorizing the refueling mission when the law expires in January 2010. Officials from the ruling Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) strongly criticized the DPJ for the apparent change from recent statements by Hatoyama and DPJ Secretary General Okada, which indicated the party was "not opposed" to extending the mission. Contacts note the apparent wavering over support for the mission may come from a DPJ appeal to the Social Democratic Party (SDP),a possible partner, depending on the election results, but one that opposes the refueling. DPJ representatives have told Embassy Tokyo that the party would plan to replace refueling with other support in Afghanistan. End summary. -------------- To Refuel or Not to Refuel -------------- ¶2. (C) In recent weeks, the DPJ had moderated the tone of earlier positions on security matters, from Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) revision to support for the refueling mission (Ref A). As recently as October 2008, the DPJ in its policy manifesto called for "drastic revision" to the SOFA and said it would end OEF refueling support if and when it took over the Japanese government, as there had not been an examination of the refueling mission's effectiveness against terrorism. Earlier this week, however, the DPJ released its Policy Index for 2009, which carried no statements on the refueling mission (Ref B). ¶3. (C) DPJ leaders have indicated in past weeks that the party will take a more "pragmatic line" on security issues. Specifically on refueling, Secretary General Okada said in a July 24 press conference that the DPJ was not opposed to approving OEF support "after making necessary amendments." Senior LDP leaders have harshly criticized the DPJ for its shifting policies, with Chief Cabinet Secretary Kawamura telling the media July 29 that he doubted whether the DPJ was speaking with a unified voice on the refueling matter. -------------- -------------- Lack of Support From SDP For Refueling Mission the Reason for Shift? -------------- -------------- ¶4. (C) Media reports point to the fact that the DPJ does not hold a majority in the Upper House of the Diet as likely at the root of the party's changing stance on the refueling issue. Even if the DPJ has a strong showing in the August 30 election, the party will have to coordinate with smaller parties such as the SDP to maintain control in the Upper House (which will have its own election in July 2010). SDP President Fukushima has said that the party "expects" to be part of a "coalition government," publicly opposes the refueling mission, and has also called on the DPJ to "drastically revise" the SOFA. -------------- Replace Refueling With Something Else? -------------- ¶5. (C) If the DPJ wins the August 30 election and does, in fact, discontinue support for OEF, it will not do so immediately upon taking power, DPJ Representative Shu Watanabe told visiting senior Department of Defense officials July 16. While not saying when the DPJ might end the mission, Watanabe said that the party would push for different contributions to Afghanistan should the refueling TOKYO 00001731 002.2 OF 002 cease, a position that other DPJ members have taken in statements to the media. Watanabe did not, however, offer specifics on what additional contributions might entail. -------------- Comment -------------- ¶6. (C) Although the DPJ had stopped short of explicitly supporting Japan's OEF mission, its statements of late had clearly indicated an increasingly pragmatic approach on this and other security issues. The apparent about-face on OEF support may be one indication of the DPJ's taking into consideration the policy positions of possible coalition government partners, such as the SDP and People's New Party, both of which have expressed strong opposition to refueling. Given the diverse nature of the DPJ's membership, however, wavering on this and potentially other policy issues is not particularly surprising, and even DPJ officials admit that these kinds of contradictory statements may continue (Ref C). Failure to elicit a coordinated set of clear messages on security (and other) issues, though, will give the LDP an opportunity to focus on the DPJ's lack of leadership experience in the election campaign. End comment. ZUMWALT