DAILY SUMMARY OF JAPANESE PRESS 11/24/09

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 15 TOKYO 002697 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 11/24/09 INDEX: (1) Poll on Hatoyama cabinet, political parties (Mainichi) (2) Hatoyama's miscalculation over Futenma issue; was Pandora's Box opened? (Nikkei) (3) Column: Abduction and nuclear issues: Is Japan's strategy adequate? (Mainichi) (4) Column: Hatoyama's and Okada's view of America (Mainichi) (5) Avoid being at mercy of community concept and making misjudgments (Sankei) (6) Candidates' positions on Futenma relocation two months ahead of Nago mayoral race that may affect the outcome of relocation issue (Ryukyu Shimpo) (7) Heads of local governments in Okinawa react coolly to foreign minister's idea of integrating Futenma base into Kadena Air Base (Mainichi) (8) Editorial: Foreign Minister Okada must give up new base and Futenma relocation in Okinawa (Akahata) (9) Japan-U.S. Cultural Exchange Center opens at U.S. Yokosuka Base (Asahi) (10) SDP finds itself on horns of dilemma (Yomiuri) (11) Removal of children: Children's rights should be discussed first (Asahi) ARTICLES: (1) Poll on Hatoyama cabinet, political parties MAINICHI (Page 5) (Full) November 24, 2009, 2009 Questions & Answers (T = total; P = previous; M = male; F = female) Q: Do you support the Hatoyama cabinet? T P M F Yes 64 (72) 67 61 No 21 (17) 18 23 Not interested 15 (10) 14 15 Q: (Only for those who answered "yes" to the above question) Why? T P M F Because the prime minister is from the Democratic Party of Japan 4 (1) 4 3 Because something can be expected of the prime minister's leadership 4 (4) 3 6 Because something can be expected of the prime minister's policies 11 (16) 12 11 Because the nature of politics is likely to change 78 (78) 80 77 TOKYO 00002697 002 OF 015 Q: (Only for those who answered "no" to the above question) Why? T P M F Because the prime minister is from the Democratic Party of Japan 4 (8) 1 (6) Because nothing can be expected of the prime minister's leadership 16 (12) 14 18 Because nothing can be expected of the prime minister's policies 48 (57) 47 49 Because the nature of politics is unlikely to change 30 (21) 35 26 Q: Which political party do you support? T P M F Democratic Party of Japan (DPJ or Minshuto) 39 (40) 43 35 Liberal Democratic Party (LDP or Jiminto) 15 (14) 15 14 New Komeito (NK) 3 (4) 3 4 Japanese Communist Party (JCP) 3 (4) 3 2 Social Democratic Party (SDP or Shaminto) 1 (1) 1 1 People's New Party (PNP or Kokumin Shinto) 1 (0) 1 1 Your Party (YP or Minna no To) 2 (2) 2 1 Reform Club (RC or Kaikaku Kurabu) 0 0 0 New Party Nippon (NPN or Shinto Nippon) 0 (0) 0 0 Other political parties 0 (1) 0 0 None 33 (32) 30 36 Q: The Hatoyama cabinet intends to prioritize the policy measures the DPJ pledged in its manifesto in compiling the budget for next fiscal year. Pick the response that is closest to your opinion. T P M F The Hatoyama cabinet should prioritize the manifesto 24 22 26 The Hatoyama cabinet should not stick to the manifesto 69 71 66 Q: The Government Revitalization Unit of the Hatoyama cabinet is now screening budget requests from all ministries and agencies for next fiscal year to determine whether to abolish or reduce funding for them. Do you approve of this budget screening? T P M F Yes 74 76 72 No 17 16 19 Q: The Hatoyama cabinet has appointed Mr. Jiro Saito, who was administrative finance vice minister, as Japan Post's new president. Do you approve of this appointment? T P M F Yes 28 29 26 No 57 58 57 Q: On the issue of relocating the U.S. Marine Corps' Futenma Air Station in Okinawa Prefecture to the Henoko area of Nago City in the same prefecture, Prime Minister Hatoyama expressed his opinion that Futenma airfield should be moved out of Okinawa Prefecture or Japan in his campaign for this summer's election for the House of Representatives. What do you think the prime minister should do? T P M F Negotiate with the U.S. to move Futenma airfield out of Okinawa Prefecture or Japan 50 44 54 Look for another relocation site in Okinawa Prefecture 17 16 18 TOKYO 00002697 003 OF 015 Accept the current plan to relocate Futenma airfield to Henoko 22 31 15 Q: The DPJ and the New Komeito are considering presenting a bill to the Diet allowing foreign nationals with permanent resident status to vote in local elections. Do you approve of this suffrage legislation? T P M F Yes 59 58 59 No 31 34 29 Q: Prime Minister Hatoyama's fund-managing body has falsified its political fund reports. Do you place priority on this problem when you rate the Hatoyama cabinet? T P M F Yes 41 36 45 No 48 55 43 (Note) Figures shown in percentage, rounded off. "0" indicates that the figure was below 0.5 PERCENT . "No answer" omitted. Figures in parentheses denote the results of the last survey conducted Oct. 17-18. Polling methodology: The survey was conducted Nov. 21-22 over the telephone across the nation on a computer-aided random digit sampling (RDS) basis. A total of 1,581 households with one or more eligible voters were sampled. Answers were obtained from 1,066 persons (67 PERCENT ). (2) Hatoyama's miscalculation over Futenma issue; was Pandora's Box opened? NIKKEI (Page 5) (Excerpts) November 23, 2009 By Yasuhiro Tase, guest columnist Beginning with the invasion of Ryukyu (the old name for Okinawa) by the Shimazu clan of Satsuma, Okinawa has undergone hardships in succession, such as the battle of Okinawa and the control by the U.S. At present, more than 70 PERCENT of the total area of U.S. military facilities in Japan is concentrated in Okinawa. Okinawan people wonder why only Okinawa has to be sacrificed. Meanwhile, Yamatonchu (main islanders) understand their feelings but have been seized by a sense of helplessness. I have an unforgettable memory that reminds me of the existence of a difference in both sides' feelings. In a speech in Okinawa in the year before the Okinawa Summit in 2000, loud boos came from the audience when I made this remark: "I feel somewhat embarrassed by the slogan of the Okinawa Summit. The slogan is 'let's direct the eyes of the world toward Okinawa and the attention of Okinawa toward the world,' but the upcoming summit is not held for the sake of Okinawa but for Japan, and the venue happens to be Okinawa." When the Okinawa issue, particularly, the base issue is involved, the government's commitment to the Japan-U.S. alliance -- the cornerstone of Japan's foreign policy -- and public feelings in Okinawa conflict sharply. Due to this conflict, the issue of TOKYO 00002697 004 OF 015 relocating the U.S. Marine Corps' Futenma Air Station has become very serious. In addition, the change of government and the continuation of foreign policy have made the issue complicated. Prior to U.S. President Barack Obama's first visit to Japan, the U.S. government appears to have made careful arrangements so as not to give the Japanese people the impression that the U.S. was highhanded. On the Futenma issue, in particular, the U.S. only called for a swift conclusion. Despite such consideration on the U.S. side, there reportedly was the following exchange of views, as disclosed by Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama in the e-mail magazine of his cabinet: Prime Minister Hatoyama presented President Obama with one blue rose, a variety developed by Japan, in hopes of conveying the message that the impossible can be accomplished. In return, the President presented the first edition of Profiles in Courage, written by former President John F. Kennedy, to Hatoyama. When considering the meaning of these two presents in connection with the Futenma issue, we think these presents must carry heavy weight. Afterward, the two leaders reportedly exchanged these words: Hatoyama: "I want you to trust me." Obama: "Of course, I trust you." Through this conversation, I assume President Obama believed that the Futenma facility will be moved to the waters off the Henoko district as per the agreement between Japan and the U.S. If Hatoyama had a different idea in mind, he should not have said, "Trust me." But Hatoyama said the next day: "I do not regard the existing Japan-U.S. agreement as a precondition." He might have sent a wrong message to the President. He might have opened Pandora's Box of Greek mythology. Anyhow, Hatoyama wavers in his opinions. Although high public support for his administration has covered the inconsistency, he seems to be more inconsistent in his claims than former Prime Minister Taro Aso, who was criticized for a lack of consistency in his remarks. I wonder whether the Democratic Party of Japan (DPJ) made a wrong conjecture on the Futenma issue. In the U.S., its policy toward Iraq has changed as a result of the Democratic Party taking over the reins of government from the Republican Party. Focusing on this, the DPJ might have anticipated that the U.S. would understand the new government's review of the foreign policies taken by its predecessors. Prime Minister Hatoyama seems to have judged it possible to make requests directly to the President. Foreign Minister Katsuya Okada also tried to make arrangements to go to Washington in hopes of reaching an agreement with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on his proposal for integrating the Futenma facility into Kadena Air Base. Hatoyama made a mistake from the beginning. In the House of Representatives election campaign he pledged to move the Futenma facilities outside the prefecture, but he had no specific alternative site in mind. He considered foreign policy from the position of standing against the Liberal Democratic Party, in the same way as dealing with domestic issues, such as the attempt to halt a dam-construction project. TOKYO 00002697 005 OF 015 "People in Okinawa have harbored greater expectations through the election campaign," Hatoyama said as if he were not involved in the Futenma issue: He might be finding it difficult to suggest the implementation of the initial coastal relocation plan because of growing expectations among people in Okinawa for moving the facility out of the prefecture. Hatoyama has complicated the Futenma issue to the point of destabilizing the Japan-U.S. alliance. I cannot figure out his motives. With no prospects for a resolution in sight, time is passing. (3) Column: Abduction and nuclear issues: Is Japan's strategy adequate? SANKEI (Page 5) (Full) November 24, 2009 Hiroshi Fuse, commentary writer Looking back on U.S. President Barack Obama's tour of Asia, something in his speech in Tokyo on Nov. 14 bothers me. The President said that the normalization of North Korea's relations with its neighbors can only come if families of the Japanese abductees receive a "full accounting." It is quite understandable that he received a big round of applause for this. However, the Japanese translation of this passage is a bit questionable. Yomiuri Shimbun rendered this as "disclosure of all information to the families," while Asahi Shimbun's translation was "full disclosure of their whereabouts." While all the newspapers seem to have worked very hard, what will eventually go down in history are the two English words "full accounting." Personally, I think this English expression is a bit weak and ambiguous. One of the top political officials of the Ministry of Defense from the Democratic Party of Japan also expressed the same concern on TV. While we have no intention to find fault with the President's statement, what happens if North Korea argues arbitrarily that it has already given a "full accounting"? That there would be no doubts about this on the Japanese side should have been the test of the speech writer's caliber. I hope I am just worrying too much. However, there are two reasons for my anxiety. First, U.S. researchers and people close to the government have recently stopped talking positively about the outlook for resolving North Korea's nuclear issue. As evidenced by the removal of North Korea from the list of state sponsors of terrorism, the U.S. does not necessarily link the abductions to terrorism. And what if it has also lost confidence on resolving the nuclear issue? Is the phrase "full accounting" only meant as lip service to placate Japan amid the dim prospects? Or is it using this phrase to lower the hurdle on the abductions surreptitiously? Careful analysis is needed on this question. Second, at the Japan-South Korea editors' seminar in Seoul sponsored by the Japan Newspaper Publishers and Editors Association and other groups, I asked the South Koreans about their fear of North Korea's nuclear weapons. A South Korean journalist who used to be a correspondent in Tokyo retorted that if Japan attaches importance to the threat of nuclear weapons, "why do the Japanese media report so TOKYO 00002697 006 OF 015 extensively on the abduction issue?" Whether the reporting is "extensive" or not is a matter of opinion, but it seems that in South Korea, where nearly 500 of its citizens have been abducted, the dominant view is that this issue should be resolved through behind-the-scenes negotiations rather than at the Six-Party Talks. Regardless of the Japanese government's efforts on the abduction issue beneath the surface, it appears that the South Korean media's opinion of Japan's stance is not flattering. This lack of common purpose among Japan, the U.S. and South Korea on the nuclear issue, as well as the abduction issue, bothers me. In this situation, can any progress be made even if the Six-Party Talks resume? Japan should not be satisfied with President Obama's Tokyo speech alone; it should reexamine its strategy for resolving both issues. (4) Column: Hatoyama's and Okada's view of America MAINICHI (Page 2) (Full) November 21, 2009 Takao Iwami Former Prime Minister Kiichi Miyazawa, who was involved in the most important negotiations between Japan and the United States in the postwar period, first stepped foot on American soil in the summer ¶1939. He was a 19-year-old University of Tokyo student participating in a conference of students from both countries. The voyage by ship took him two weeks each way, and the conference took place at the University of Southern California in Los Angeles. The bilateral relationship was beginning to deteriorate at that time, but the American participants kept saying: "What Japan is saying is most reasonable. The U.S. is also at fault." This came as a great shock to Miyazawa. He later said: "America is such a great nation. I thought that we had no chance of winning if we fought these people." Half a century later, during the Gulf War (1991),what was the view of Miyazawa, an expert on America, of the Japan-U.S. relationship? Miyazawa wrote: "Today, 50 years after Pearl Harbor, while both Japan and the U.S. claim that the bilateral relationship is most important, many Americans think that Japan is more threatening than the Soviet Union (the USSR disintegrated soon afterwards)." (Sengo Seiji no Shogen (Testimony on Postwar Politics),Yomiuri Shimbun Publishing) Do Americans still think that Japan is threatening? Japan's view of its relations with the U.S. has been in flux since the change of administration this year. The U.S. is suspicious of the Democratic Party of Japan (DPJ) administration under Hatoyama, which advocates a "close and equal Japan-U.S. relationship." What is meant by "equal"? The issue of the TOKYO 00002697 007 OF 015 relocation of the U.S. forces' Futenma Air Station has become a litmus test. The statements of Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama and Foreign Minister Katsuya Okada on the relocation issue often differ, and the two have often been in discord. Their views of the United States intrigue me. As in the case of Miyazawa, the impression of the first visit to the U.S. is significant. Both Hatoyama and Okada studied in the U.S. Hatoyama went to Stanford University after graduating from the University of Tokyo. He graduated from Stanford with a doctorate in ¶1976. He became a politician 10 years later, and the political figure he respects most is President John F. Kennedy. However, Hatoyama has a harsh view of the U.S. In 2002, when he first became DPJ president, he remarked at an interview: "The politicians of the ruling party (Liberal Democratic Party) have given up on drawing a conclusion against the wishes of the U.S. from the very beginning. They are unable to raise the issue of the bases in Okinawa or the issue of the Status of Forces Agreement. "Therefore, the only solution is a change of administration. I think the rebuilding of the Japan-U.S. relationship is the most necessary structural reform. "The U.S. is evading discussions on contingencies. We no longer have a deep relationship in which Japan is guaranteed assistance under the bilateral security treaty." He advocated a review of the Japan-U.S. security treaty. On the other hand, Okada was a visiting researcher at Harvard University's Center for International Affairs for one year from 1985, 10 years after Hatoyama went to America. He was sent by the former Ministry of International Trade and Industry (now the Ministry of Economy, Trade, and Industry). At Harvard, he witnessed Ronald Reagan's leadership of America as a strong president. When the spaceship Challenger exploded right after takeoff, killing the seven astronauts onboard in January 1986, it is said that Okada was moved by the solidarity of the American people and their trust in the president. He wrote in his book published last year, "Seiken Kotai - Ko no Kuni wo Kaeru (Change of Administration - The Transformation of This Country)" (Kodansha): "I realized the great potential of politics in America. At the same time, I was disheartened by Japanese politics, which was plagued by scandals and revolved around factional struggles. "I strongly felt that something must be done about Japan's politics. I returned home having made a choice that I had never thought I would make before I went to America." For Okada, America is the country that instilled in him the dream to become a politician. It appears that Hatoyama's view of the past Japan-U.S. relationship TOKYO 00002697 008 OF 015 is one of "subservience" while Okada views America as a political model. Such a difference in their perceptions of America has had a subtle influence on the negotiations on Futenma relocation. What would be Miyazawa's verdict if he were alive? (5) Avoid being at mercy of community concept and making misjudgments SANKEI (Page 7) (Excerpts) November 19, 2009 Takenori Inoki, Director General, International Research Center for Japanese Studies In late October, I attended the second international conference of the Japanese Studies Association in Southeast Asia, held in Hanoi, Vietnam. It was a two-day forum for humanities and social science scholars on Japan from ASEAN countries to make presentations and conduct panel discussions. The conference was truly international with participants coming from even Australia, the United States, Britain, and China. Needless to say, Japan needs good scholars on other countries. By the same token, for the future of Japan, it is essential to have a large number of good scholars on Japan in the world, especially in Asia. In that context, academic exchanges among scholars can be described as the foundation of "good diplomacy.' At this conference, many participants reported that it is essential to assess Japan from a historical angle in an Asian context rather than to confine Japanese studies on Japan in Japan - an idea that is becoming the norm in the study of history. Nevertheless, "assessing something from a historical angle" does not mean to find fault with the past or dwell on the past. It must be based on the correct understanding of the present toward the future. This conference also reminded of Marc Bloch's words, "Misunderstanding of the present is the inevitable consequence of ignorance of the past," which was cited by my respected friend, Matao Miyamoto. Rough road to the EU There have been many comments on the concept of an East Asian Community by lawmakers and media outlets. But they have rarely discussed what it takes to realize this concept, such as the need to have the correct understanding of history, what efforts must be made, and in what time span. Many are hoping to see Japan become a member of the envisaged community in the region someday. But it is also necessary to recall the rocky path that led to the European Union (EU). The history of nearly 1,200 years from the Frankish King Charlemagne to the EU Treaty in Maastricht shows that the road leading up to the European Community was not smooth. East Asian countries do not share the same basic values, and there is a lack of mutual understanding even in the academic area. It is too risky for such countries to jump at the East Asian Community concept that will restrict national sovereignty. The problem associated with the East Asian Community concept is that it is a movement to apply restrictions to the use of violence by states, i.e., wars, as a means of settling international conflicts. The TOKYO 00002697 009 OF 015 concept involves complicated factors. There was the beginning of the "nation-state" and there will be an end to it. The question is when the end will come. For realizing the concept, it is lawmakers' important duty to keep working with the spirit of "endurance and accumulation." But they must avoid being at the mercy of the idea and misjudging reality as a result. I keenly felt at the conference in Vietnam that it is our important duty to avoid adhering to Japan's narrow regional interests and its traditions -- an act of folly that would force Japan into isolation -- and to explore Japan's future position from a broad perspective, including the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC). (6) Candidates' positions on Futenma relocation two months ahead of Nago mayoral race that may affect the outcome of relocation issue RYUKYU SHIMPO (Page 2) (Abridged) November 24, 2009 Nago - Only two months is left before the Nago mayoral election on Jan. 24. This election is likely to be a one-on-one contest between the ruling and opposition parties represented by incumbent mayor Yoshikazu Shimabukuro, 63, who is running for a second term, and new candidate Susumu Inamine, 64, a former chief of the city's education board. The acceptance of the relocation of the U.S. forces' Futenma Air Station to Nago is the main point of contention, and the outcome of the election may affect the Japan-U.S. negotiations on this issue. The citizens are also very interested in the candidates' strategies for revitalizing the local communities and how they propose to revive the sluggish economy and employment situation. With regard to the Futenma issue, Shimabukuro reached basic agreement with the Tokyo government on the plan to relocate Futenma to the coastal area of Camp Schwab in 2006 under the Liberal Democratic Party-New Komeito administration. However, amid the indecision of the Hatoyama administration dominated by the Democratic Party of Japan on this issue, Shimabukuro held a news conference on Nov. 12 in which he indicated: "I would welcome an alternative plan if the government would come up with one promptly." He emphasized that Nago did not ask to host the Futenma replacement facility. Shimabukuro also asserted that "the debate has been exhausted over three past elections," expressing his resentment at making this issue the point of contention in the mayoral race again. At his meeting with Foreign Minister Katsuya Okada on Nov. 15, he asked that there be no more division among the citizens of Nago and that the government take the responsibility to reach a conclusion at an early date. Inamine had limited himself at first to demanding a review of the existing relocation plan on the grounds that "there are problems with this plan because the process through which the plan came about lacked transparency." However, on Nov. 6, after a support group consisting mostly of reformist city assembly members was formed, he said: "I will not allow the building of a new military base in Henoko and Oura Bay," taking one step further to advocate relocation out of Okinawa or out of Japan. With Inamine coming out to oppose relocation to Henoko, Yasushi Higa, who had planned to run in the election, has agreed to withdraw TOKYO 00002697 010 OF 015 his candidacy. He signed a memorandum with Inamine on basic policies on Nov. 18. This avoided a division in the opposition camp in the election, and Inamine is now the common candidate for "striving to build a new Nago City" and revitalizing the city administration. (7) Heads of local governments in Okinawa react coolly to foreign minister's idea of integrating Futenma base into Kadena Air Base MAINICHI (Page 2) (Full) November 17, 2009 Teruhisa Mimori, Yoshichika Imoto Foreign Minister Katsuya Okada visited Okinawa for the first time since assuming his post, in connection with the pending issue of relocating the U.S. Marine Corps' Futenma Air Station (in Ginowan City, Okinawa Prefecture). Judging that that it would be difficult to relocate the Futenma base outside the prefecture, which Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama advocated during the campaign for the latest House of Representatives election, Okada is now looking into the possibility of integrating the Futenma base into the U.S. Kadena Air Base (in the town of Kadena). This has become his mantra. The heads of local governments concerned gave the cold shoulder to Okada, however. As a result, the gap in views between Okada and Okinawa became evident. Meanwhile, Hatoyama has taken a stance of spending more time to reach a conclusion, while placing importance on his party's campaign pledge to move the Futenma base out of Okinawa. Disarray is growing in the Hatoyama government. In a meeting held at the Kadena Town Hall on the morning of Nov. 17, Kadena Mayor Tokujitsu Miyagi told Okada that many aircraft accidents had occurred at the Kadena Air Base. Okada explained that the Futenma-Kadena merger plan "is one of the options (under consideration)." "It is not a problem of emotions," said Miyagi. "These accidents actually occurred. I can't accept the merger option." He reacted strongly to the merger idea, which could transfer the danger of Futenma to the Kadena Air Base, where many accidents have occurred. "How about the existing measures to ease the burden?" Miyagi asked Okada, who said the idea was "based on the precondition of reducing the burden on Kadena Town." The 1996 agreement on measures to reduce noise have not been observed and the noise level has instead increased even with the relocation of training activities of F-15 fighters based at the Kadena Air Base. "The government said many times that it would ease the burden, but it has not been reduced," said Okinawa Mayor Mitsuko Toumon, who was also attending the session. She said, "Not considering the base issue Okinawa's problem, all Japanese people should think about it." Miyagi told reporters after the meeting: "I judge that the merger plan is off the table," because Okada said that a conclusion should be reached within the year, remarking that the easing of Kadena's burden is the premise (for Futenma relocation). Miyagi said, "I am considering possible obstruction tactics" in case action is taken for the Futenma-Kadena merger plan. He played up his strong determination to oppose the merger plan. Okada held an informal meeting the previous day with the representatives of the prefectural assembly groups, excluding the one comprised of members belonging to the opposition Liberal TOKYO 00002697 011 OF 015 Democratic Party (LDP). During the meeting, one assembly member asked Okada to look into the possibility of relocating Futenma out of Okinawa, and another member stressed that the land reclamation of Henoko Bay would be a typical example of useless public works projects. Pointing out that the Futenma relocation and the transfer of U.S. Marines to Guam is a package, Okada said, "If we start from scratch looking for an appropriate relocation site, the process will grind to a halt. We are being forced to make a tough decision," implying a direction toward relocation within Okinawa. The DPJ Okinawa Chapter's policy chief Tadashi Uesato said, "We will support the government by trusting Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama, not Foreign Minister Okada." (8) Editorial: Foreign Minister Okada must give up new base and Futenma relocation in Okinawa AKAHATA (Page 2) (Full) November 18, 2009 Foreign Minister Katsuya Okada made his first official visit to Okinawa Prefecture. During his visit there, Foreign Minister Okada reiterated that he would like to reach a conclusion within the year on the issue of constructing a new U.S. military base (as an alternative for the U.S. Marine Corps' Futenma Air Station) and the issue of integrating the heliport functions of Futenma airfield into the Kadena base in the prefecture. On the other hand, Foreign Minister Okada said he "didn't promise to relocate Futenma airfield outside Japan or Okinawa Prefecture." He also said, "I can't say we have only to close down (the Futenma base)." These remarks brought about a local backlash in the prefecture. Okinawa Prefecture's local residents do not want a new base constructed in the prefecture, nor do they want the Futenma base relocated within the prefecture. Based on this fact, Foreign Minister Okada should negotiate with the United States. Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama said, "I will take the wishes of people in Okinawa Prefecture most seriously." Foreign Minister Okada's attitude, as long as he does not change it, will remain inconsistent with what Prime Minister Hatoyama said. Futenma relocation within Okinawa unfeasible Last weekend, Prime Minister Hatoyama met with U.S. President Obama. On that occasion, the two leaders agreed to set up a ministerial working group to consult on the Futenma base issue. President Obama said he did so to carry out an "agreement" to build a new base. Prime Minister Hatoyama said, "I think the agreement is important, but if that's going to decide everything, we don't have to discuss anything." The question is whether or not to reach a conclusion within the year. In this regard, Foreign Minister Okada also said, "It means that the working group will do so before the year is out if possible, and it also implies something else." Foreign Minister Okada is a Japanese member of the working group, as is Defense Minister Toshimi Kitazawa. His reiterated remarks running counter to the prime minister's explanation raises a question about the Hatoyama government's basic stance on the matter. In Okinawa Mr. Okada said that moving the Futenma base out of Japan or Okinawa Prefecture is a "very narrow path." However, the local population of Okinawa Prefecture desires the Futenma base to be removed. This is a "narrow path," but the base can be moved TOKYO 00002697 012 OF 015 elsewhere in Okinawa Prefecture. This is what he means to say. If that is the case, we must say he does not see the realities. Such an attitude is tantamount to trampling the local people's wishes under foot. The Futenma base occupies a vast expanse of land in a densely populated area of Ginowan city. It is clear that the base must be removed without a moment's delay for the safety and daily lives of local residents. Mr. Okada is sticking to his idea of integrating the Futenma base's heliport functions into the Kadena base. This base merger will only exacerbate the suffering of the local people from, among other things, the roar of fighter jets that is serious even now. Obviously, his proposal of such a base integration is unwelcome to local residents. In point of fact, Okinawa Prefecture's base-hosting communities are opposed to moving the Futenma base within the prefecture. They have not allowed government contractors to drive piles anywhere in their municipalities since the government unveiled its plan 13 years ago to build a new base. What is required of the Japanese government is to negotiate with the United States so as to remove the Futenma base as Okinawa Prefecture's local residents demand. That is the responsibility of Mr. Okada as foreign minister. Far from negotiating with the United States for removing the Futenma base, Mr. Okada said the ruling Democratic Party of Japan did not pledge the Futenma relocation outside Japan or Okinawa Prefecture in its manifesto. That is an outrageous 'so-what' attitude. It is DPJ President Hatoyama who promised in the election campaign to move the Futenma base out of Japan or Okinawa Prefecture. At the time, Mr. Okada was DPJ secretary general. During the campaign, he did not raise an objection to the DPJ president's remarks. Now he says it is not a public pledge. That is extremely outrageous. Japan should quit kowtowing to U.S. After his Okinawa visit, Mr. Okada held a press conference, where he said the government will negotiate with the United States on the basis of what came out of the former government's negotiations with the U.S. government. At the same time, he also said, "If the agreement is called off, the transfer of Marines (from Okinawa to Guam) and the return of the (Futenma) base will also be called off." This remark is serious. U.S. Secretary of Defense Gates recently came to Japan. On that occasion, he used exactly the same expression and urged Japan to accept the construction of a new base. It was too coercive and inconsiderate of him to say such a thing. Japan will now have to make a fundamental changeover from the policy of kowtowing to the United States, which lasted into the previous coalition government of the Liberal Democratic Party and the New Komeito. Prime Minister Hatoyama and Foreign Minister Okada are at a moment of truth in their foreign policy. (9) Japan-U.S. Cultural Exchange Center opens at U.S. Yokosuka Base ASAHI (Kanagawa edition) (Page 31) (Full) November 19, 2009 A Japan-U.S. Cultural Exchange Center opened on Nov. 18 at the U.S. Yokosuka Naval Base, in Yokosuka City. Yokosuka residents can visit the center freely. The opening of such a center is a prime challenge for U.S. bases in Japan. The center is intended to deepen mutual TOKYO 00002697 013 OF 015 understanding between the Japanese and Americans through activities held there. The center is located on the first floor of the three-story building on the left side of the main entrance of the base. The center was established in a remodeled room 50 square meters in area. The center has a model of the destroyer used in the film Last Operations Under the Orion, and a movie screen showing images of exchanges between the base and Japan. Yokosuka residents and tourists will be allowed to visit only the center without a base pass. The U.S. side will hold regular events and offer free English conversation classes in the center. The center can be reserved by the public. The center's first events, to be held on Nov. 20, are a talk on the American holiday of Thanksgiving for Japanese one o'clock and an origami class for Americans from 2:30. The center is open from Monday through Thursday from 1:00 to 06:00 p.m. It is only open on Friday by reservation. (10) SDP finds itself on horns of dilemma YOMIURI (Page 4) (Full) November 24, 2009 In connection with the relocation of U.S. Marine Corps Air Station Futenma (Ginowan City) in Okinawa Prefecture, some members of the Social Democratic Party (SDP),which has strongly insisted that the Futenma base be relocated outside the prefecture or even out of Japan, have begun voicing the hard-line argument that there will be no choice for the party to withdraw from the coalition government if Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama tries to solve the relocation issue by accepting the existing relocation plan. As it stands, the SDP leadership is now facing difficulties in dealing with the issue. Appearing on a Tokyo Broadcasting System (TBS) program on Nov. 21, SDP head Mizuho Fukushima, currently state minister for consumer affairs, strongly opposed the existing plan to relocate the Futenma heliport functions to the coastal area of Camp Schwab, by saying: "This is not the relocation of Marines, but a new military base at sea. I don't think that building a new base will ease the burden on the people of Okinawa." Also at an informal cabinet meeting on Nov. 20, Fukushima cited the names of specific relocation sites, saying, "How about relocating the Futenma base to Guam or Iwo Jima?" She urged the cabinet to make a decision on the issue. Worried about possible criticism that there is discord in the cabinet, Fukushima had refrained from voicing different opinions from other cabinet members up until now. However, she appears to have judged that this is a crucial juncture considering the present situation in which the U.S. government is calling for an early implementation of the existing relocation plan at a ministerial-level working group on the Futenma issue comprising foreign and defense officials of Japan and the United States, which was launched on Nov. 17. Fukushima intends to ask Hatoyama to hold a meeting of the cabinet committee on basic policy matters, which handles the Futenma issue. She will also work upon the Democratic Party of Japan (DPJ) to set up a consultative organ of the three ruling parties. SDP Secretary General Yasumasa Shigeno and Sadao Fuchigami, a deputy party head, are scheduled to visit Okinawa at the end of this month. TOKYO 00002697 014 OF 015 There is growing alarm in the SDP that the party will lose its political presence if the Futenma issue is resolved without changing the existing plan. In their national convention in September, many SDP local organizations took a cautious stance toward joining the coalition government, with one member saying, "The SDP will be brought over to the DPJ's side." In the August House of Representatives election, the SDP won only three single-seat constituencies. One of the three constituencies the SDP won was the Okinawa No. 2 district, which includes Ginowan City. Lower House member Kantoku Teruya, who represents this district, told people close to him: "It is time to make a tough decision. There will be no future for the SDP if it presents a weak-kneed response." There is a growing view in the SDP that if the party leaves the ruling coalition, it will be able to retain its supporters. On the other hand, some other members think that the party will be caught in its own trap if it talks casually about withdrawing from the coalition, and that priority should be placed on bringing results of the participation in the government. Because the SDP will employ a strategy of increasing its number of Diet seats in the House of Councillors election next summer in cooperation with the DPJ, the party leadership is now facing a dilemma. (11) Removal of children: Children's rights should be discussed first ASAHI (Page 17) (Full) November 20, 2009 Mikiko Otani, attorney An American husband (of a Japanese woman) was arrested in September in Fukuoka Prefecture for allegedly trying to take away their two children whom the woman had brought back from the U.S. Because of this incident, cases in which one of the parents in a broken international marriage return home with a child (without the consent of) the other are drawing attention. Japan is being criticized by Europe and the U.S. because it has not yet ratified the Hague Convention. The media often report this issue as a diplomatic one. However, it should be discussed from the perspective of children's rights. The Hague Convention, adopted in 1980, stipulates that if the parent of a child taken away by the other seeks the child's return, the other country is obliged to return the child to his or her country of residence. Eighty-one countries, mainly European countries and the U.S., have ratified the Convention. The Convention on the Rights of the Child protects children's right to see and visit their divorced or separated mother or father. Signatory countries, including Japan, are obliged to protect children from being removed from either of their parents. For that reason, the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child in 2004 urged Japan to ratify the Hague Convention. According to a survey conducted in Britain, children whose relations with their parents were cut off suddenly and unilaterally feel a sense of mistrust in the parent who took them away. These children are suffering a serious impact from their removal--- they find it difficult to blend into a new life due to a language barrier. In Europe and the U.S., there are cases in which a law court did not TOKYO 00002697 015 OF 015 allow a child (of broken international marriage or separated couples) to return to Japan, because Japan has not yet ratified the Hague Convention. There are also cases in which a child who has been taken away to a foreign country cannot see the other parent in Japan. In order to spare children from suffering, a realistic approach is to explore ways to settle this issue, while working together with other countries. As is often pointed out, violence and domestic violence are behind the cross-border removal of children. In reality, since there are many cases in which Japanese wives take away their child from their European or American husbands, there is deep-rooted opposition in Japan to ratifying the Hague Convention for reason of protecting Japanese women and their children. It is necessary to examine more specifically who will protect women's rights in the event of Japan's ratifying the Convention. Even in signatory countries, there are cases in which law courts did not order the return of a child when his or her mother removed the child from a situation of domestic violence. This should be of reference when considering whether Japan should sign the Convention or not. Nowadays international marriages, divorces and cross-border residence of family members are common. How to coordinate the rights of children, parents and women in the event of their parents' separation or divorce is a challenge for all countries. Japan should immediately ratify the Hague Convention and, while learning from other countries' practices and experiences, establish a domestic law. Viewing the Hague Convention from the perspective of the best interests of children will encourage the 193 countries and regions that have signed the Convention of the Rights of the Child to tackle the issue. I would like to point out that it is essential for the U.S., which is spearheading the promotion of the ratification of the Hague Convention, to fall in step with the world, by ratifying the Convention of the Rights of the Child. ROOS