DAILY SUMMARY OF JAPANESE PRESS 12/01/09

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 18 TOKYO 002748 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 12/01/09 INDEX: (1) U.S. Ambassador Roos tells Okinawa governor Japan-U.S. Futenma relocation accord is only viable option (Ryukyu Shimpo) (2) Government moving toward settling Futenma relocation issue before year's end; plan centers on shifting the replacement facility farther offshore than in existing plan (Sankei) (3) Futenma relocation issue: There is now an urgent need to reach a decision with an eye on year-end budget compilation (Sankei) (4) Obstacles to resolving Futenma issue by year's end; difficult coordination likely to continue (Nikkei) (5) Futenma Air Station relocation: Foreign minister to give up on Kadena integration idea, leaning toward Henoko plan (Ryukyu Shimpo) (6) Focus of investigation by expert committee on why secret accords were concluded (Asahi) (7) Editorial: Put end to lie to people over Japan-U.S. secret nuclear accords (Tokyo Shimbun) (8) Interview with Columbia University Professor Gerald Curtis on assessment of Hatoyama administration's performance (Nikkei) (9) Editorial: COP15 - U.S., China set own targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions; seeds of progress should be carefully nurtured (Tokyo Shimbun) (10) Editorial: CO2 reduction goals set by U.S., China insufficient (Nikkei) (11) Media polls show majority favors Futenma relocation outside Okinawa (Okinawa Times) (12) Poll on Hatoyama cabinet, political parties (Nikkei) (13) Poll on Hatoyama cabinet, political parties (Tokyo Shimbun) (14) Japanese woman in Gifu to appeal to Diet members over her son taken away by Czech father (Chunichi Shimbun) ARTICLES: (1) U.S. Ambassador Roos tells Okinawa governor Japan-U.S. Futenma relocation accord is only viable option RYUKYU SHIMPO (Page 1) (Full) December 1, 2009 Gov. Kazuhiro Nakaima met yesterday afternoon with U.S. Ambassador John Roos, visiting Okinawa Prefecture for the first time, at the prefectural government office. In connection with the issue of relocating the U.S. Marine Corps' Futenma Air Station, Roos told Nakaima: "The United States believes that the alternate facility for Futenma Air Station (agreed between Japan and the U.S.) is the best and only viable option," stressing that the Futenma base should be moved to the Henoko district in Nago City. Nakaima asked when the Japan-U.S. ministerial-level task force would reach a conclusion, but Roos said, "A conclusion has not yet been reached. I hope a TOKYO 00002748 002 OF 018 conclusion will be arrived at as soon as possible, and doing so is important." Mentioning his meeting with Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama on the morning of Nov. 30, Nakaima said: "I told the Prime Minister that residents of Okinawa have been stepping up calls for relocating the Futenma facility outside the prefecture." Roos only said: "The ministerial task force is working to resolve the issue." With regard to the hit-and-run incident that occurred in the village of Yomitan and the stray bullet incident in the Ige district of the town of Kin, Nakaima asked for U.S. cooperation in investigations by the prefectural police. Roos said: "The hit-and-run incident resulted in a tragic death, and I offer my condolences to the victim's family. I will do what I can to help resolve these two cases." Roos described to Nakaima his 25-year-career in Silicon Valley, California. "I want to strengthen business ties between the United States and Okinawa. I especially want to collaborate in clean technology," he said, demonstrating enthusiasm. Yesterday Roos visited the Peace Memorial Museum and the Cornerstone of Peace memorial in Mabuni, Itoman City. (2) Government moving toward settling Futenma relocation issue before year's end; plan centers on shifting the replacement facility farther offshore than in existing plan SANKEI (Page 3) (Abridged slightly) December 1, 2009 The government has begun taking steps toward settling the U.S. Marine Corps' Futenma Air Station (in Ginowan, Okinawa) by the end of the year. Before the press corps yesterday, Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama emphasized the need to settle the matter at an early date. The existing relocation plan is designed to build a V-shaped pair of runways on the coastal area of Camp Schwab (in Henoko, Nago). The government is now in the final phase of coordination for resolving the issue before year's end by building the replacement facility farther offshore than the planned site in order to reduce its danger. A Japan-U.S. cabinet-level working group involving their foreign and defense ministers is looking into the Futenma relocation issue. Given the working group's plan to reach a conclusion in mid-December, the government intends to convey its policy to the Okinawa side before the end of this month. A plan is also being floated to effectively close down Futenma Air Station by moving the Futenma-based helicopter unit's training area out of the prefecture as a measure for the people in Okinawa. Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama held talks with Okinawa Gov. Hirokazu Nakaima at the Prime Minister's Official Residence (Kantei) yesterday. "There are growing demands for moving (Futenma) out of the prefecture or even out of the country," Nakaima said in explaining the sentiments of the people in Okinawa. The governor also urged the government to swiftly remove the danger of Futenma Air Station and to actively promote plans for reuse of vacated U.S. bases. TOKYO 00002748 003 OF 018 During his talks with Nakaima, the Prime Minister simply said: "I want to deal with the matter after seeing the results of verification by the Japan-U.S. working group." But later in the day after the talks, the Prime Minister outlined before the press corps at the Kantei a plan aiming at an early solution, with a settlement before year's end in mind. He said: "Governor Nakaima called for a swift and concrete conclusion in view of the danger (of Futenma Air Station). I want to arrive at a conclusion to reduce the burden on Okinawa while maintaining close contact with the governor who has made a difficult decision (to accept the Henoko relocation plan)." According to some government sources, the government is studying a plan to move the replacement runways 55 to 100 meters farther offshore than in the existing plan with the aim of increasing the safety of the areas under the helicopter flight paths. Specifically, the government is considering reducing noise and the chances for accidents near Futenma Air Station by having the Futenma helicopter unit conduct training outside Okinawa, such as in Kyushu, until the replacement facility is completed in 2014. The governments of Japan and the United States agreed in 2006 to build the replacement facility on the coastal area of Camp Schwab. Nakaima has expressed his intention to accept the construction of the replacement facility on the condition of moving the runways farther offshore than the existing plan in order to eliminate the danger. If the Prime Minister officially presents a concrete plan to lessen the burden on Okinawa, Nakaima is expected to accept the relocation of Futenma functions to Nago. (3) Futenma relocation issue: There is now an urgent need to reach a decision with an eye on year-end budget compilation SANKEI (Page 3) (Full) December 1, 2009 The government has decided to seek a settlement of the Futenma Air Station relocation issue before the end of the year. The compilation of the fiscal 2010 budget is close at hand later in the month. In addition, the government appears to have determined that if it puts off decision making, the U.S. Force Japan realignment plan itself could derail. However, with the Social Democratic Party (SDP) and the People's New Party (PNP) increasingly calling for putting off the decision, Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama will likely be pressed to undergo difficult coordination of views. Okinawa Governor Hirokazu Nakaima during a meeting with the prime minister conveyed a growing feeling of hope for the relocation out of the prefecture or the nation held by the people of Okinawa. He then called on the prime minister to reach a decision at an early date, noting, "I would like the government to come up with its policy and specific roadmap swiftly." Among government officials, Foreign Minister Katsuya Okada and Defense Minister Toshimi Okada are frequently holding talks in pursuit of a settlement before the end of the year. Okada, who met with the U.S. Forces Pacific Command commander on Nov. 30, told him of his strong desire to settle the issue before the end of the year. He said, "I would like to settle the issue before year's end, if possible." He is expected to make a second visit to Okinawa on the 5th. During the visit, he will strengthen efforts to persuade local residents to agree on the relocation plan. TOKYO 00002748 004 OF 018 Appearing on a commercial TV talk show, Defense Ministry Parliamentary Defense Secretary Akihisa Nagashima on the 30th said, "Saying one thing, doing another. Realistically, relocation out of the prefecture or the nation is difficult. This notion is widely shared in the administration." The government will rush to settle the relocation issue before the end of the year in order to adopt the fiscal 2010 budget in late December. Unless the government earmarks necessary expenses for the relocation of the Futenma functions, it would become impossible to complete the relocation by 2014 as scheduled. There is only a slim chance of the U.S. approving a plan other than the Futenma plan. Depending on Japan's decision, the U.S. Forces realignment plan, including the transfer of about 8,000 U.S. Marines stationed in Okinawa to Guam, following the relocation of the Futenma facilities, would be put in limbo. Should that occur, the removal of the danger posed by Futenma Air Station - the major purpose of the Futenma relocation - would become unachievable. However, the views of the SDP, which is calling for the relocation out of the prefecture or the nation, and the PNP, which is calling for cautious consideration, cannot be ignored. SDP leader Mizuho Fukushima on the 30th at a meeting of the ministerial basic policy committee attended by the leaders of the ruling parties insisted, "We cannot possibly support the plans proposed up until now (the existing plan, the Kadena integration plan, etc.)." PNP leader Shizuka Kamei chimed in with Fukushima, noting, "There is a possibility of the SDP bolting from the coalition, unless a decision is reached by the three parties."As such, the DPJ agreed to undergo coordination of views of the ruling parties at the venue of the committee. The prime minister at the Upper House plenary session emphasized he "will make a final decision, including a decision on the timeframe." However, how he is going to allay opposition from within the ruling parties and realize the expectations of the people of Okinawa is unclear. A senior government official on the 30th said: "We must solve the complicated issue involving feelings of the people of Okinawa, the Japan-U.S. agreement and the agreement reached by the three parties. We must be cautious at any rate." (4) Obstacles to resolving Futenma issue by year's end; difficult coordination likely to continue NIKKEI (Page 2) (Full) December 1, 2009 Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama met with Okinawa Governor Hirokazu Nakaima yesterday to discuss the issue of relocating the U.S. Marine Corps' Futenma Air Station in Ginowan City, Okinawa Prefecture, following their meeting on Nov. 27. Hatoyama also met with concerned cabinet ministers yesterday to discuss the Futenma issue. As it stands, coordination work has been actively carried out in the government, but there are a number of obstacles to resolving the issue by the end of the year, as proposed by the U.S. Speaking before reporters at the Prime Minister's Official Residence last evening, Hatoyama emphasized: "When considering the danger of the Futenma airfield, I think a conclusion should be reached as soon as possible." The Hatoyama-Nakaima meeting on the 27th lasted for about one hour, but their meeting yesterday lasted only for about 20 minutes. It makes sense to assume that they had substantive TOKYO 00002748 005 OF 018 discussions in the meeting on the 27th, but Hatoyama has only said: "I cannot disclose what we discussed." In a meeting of Japanese and U.S. bureau chiefs on Nov. 24, the Japanese side insisted on the need to remove the danger of the Futenma base, but coordination work has not progressed smoothly. Hatoyama reportedly heard about the current situation in Okinawa from Nakaima and explained the U.S. measures to remove the danger of the base. In an effort to break the impasse in the Futenma issue, the U.S. has also begun to approach Okinawa. U.S. Ambassador to Japan John Roos visited Okinawa and met Governor Nakaima at the prefectural office yesterday. Roos said: "The U.S. believes the current plan is the best and only viable option.... The U.S. is working hard to solve various problems." The Foreign Ministry and other relevant government agencies are becoming nervous about recent moves by Japan Research Institute Chairman Jitsuro Terashima, who is said to be on friendly terms with Hatoyama. Terashima, who met with Hatoyama on the night of Nov. 26 for about 40 minutes, left for the U.S. on the 29th. Terashima has said: "The visit has nothing to do with the Futenma issue," but some government officials speculate that he might be visiting the U.S. as an envoy of the prime minister." Some Foreign Ministry officials are worried about "dual-track diplomacy." In addition, coordinating views among the ruling parties will be inevitably difficult. Social Democratic Party (SDP) President Mizuho Fukushima clearly said in a meeting of the Ministerial Committee on Basic Policies yesterday: "If a conclusion is reached on the (current) plan to relocate the Futenma base to the waters off Henoko, the SDP will oppose it." She also proposed setting up a working group on the Futenma issue of the three ruling parties under the said ministerial committee. After the meeting, Fukushima told reporters: "No discussions have been conducted on such options as moving the Futenma base outside the prefecture or the nation." She voiced her opposition to the proposal of reaching a settlement by the end of the year. Some party member takes the view that Fukushima, in the run-up to the party presidential election, might have no choice but to loudly assert what the party desires. People's New Party President Shizuka Kamei has also called for a settlement based on an agreement among the three ruling parties. Coordination among the three ruling parties will probably be difficult. (5) Futenma Air Station relocation: Foreign minister to give up on Kadena integration idea, leaning toward Henoko plan RYUKYU SHIMPO (Page 1) (Full) December 1, 2009 (Tokyo) Foreign Minister Katsuya Okada will likely give up on the idea of integrating the U.S. Marine Corps' Futenma Air Station into U.S. Force's Kadena Air Base. This was revealed by a government source and multiple ruling party members on Nov. 30. According to the government source, Okada has given up on the idea of integrating the Futenma facilities into Kadena Air Base, saying, "The Kadena idea has been defeated. I'm being pushed in the direction of the Henoko TOKYO 00002748 006 OF 018 relocation plan." Okada until today has cited the advantage of the Kadena integration idea by saying: "It would be a major advantage if two major bases in Okinawa could be integrated into one. If the existing Henoko (in Nago City) plan is implemented, the two bases could become fixed." The U.S. side had proposed the Kadena plan in past talks. Based on this fact, Okada has been studying the feasibility of the Kadena integration plan, saying, "I would like to probe into (the Kadena plan) until I am convinced." The same government official said, "The foreign minister has been aware for a long time that the Kadena plan would be difficult. He has been reviewing the (Kadena integration idea) in order to give up on it." Okada and Defense Minister Toshimi Kitazawa on Nov. 30 discussed the Futenma relocation issue at the Prime Minister's Official Residence (the Kantei). They apparently talked about the timeframe for reaching a decision. The Japan-U.S. cabinet-level working group is expected to be held later in the week. Okada will visit Okinawa on Dec. 5. He hopes to hear a wide range of views of the people of Okinawa. He plans to hold meetings in Itoman City, where there are no U.S. military bases, as well as in Nago City to exchange views with residents there. (6) Focus of investigation by expert committee on why secret accords were concluded ASAHI (Page 3) (Abridged slightly) November 27, 2009 A committee consisting of experts will hold its first meeting on Nov. 27, following the Ministry of Foreign Affairs' launch of investigations into Japan-U.S. secret accords. The expert panel will cut to the core of the long-standing issue of whether there were secret accords between the two countries on such matters as the bringing of nuclear weapons into Japan. The panel will vet the documents discovered and focus on the process and circumstances where those accords were concluded. The panel is expected to submit a report of recommendations to Foreign Minister Katsuya Okada in mid-January next year. The report will affect the government's view on the secret accords and its three non-nuclear principles. Okada at a Lower House Foreign Affairs Committee meeting on the 25th stressed: "There is strong suspicion that (the secret accords) exist. I would like the panel to prove into under what historical backdrop the issue has come to light." The panel is made up of six members, including Tokyo University Professor Shinichi Kitaoka. One of the members views their role as double-checking MOFA's investigation. MOFA during the investigation found the Japanese government's documents bearing out the existence of a record of discussions held in 1960 between the two countries, in which they are believed to have reached a consensus. This record forms the basis of an arcane agreement on nuclear introduction into Japan. It is said that most of the secret accord-related documents specified by the investigative team are those compiled up until the 1970s. However, the committee will probe into documents compiled up until around ¶1989. As a result, there is a possibility that (the Japanese side's) TOKYO 00002748 007 OF 018 responses to former U.S. Ambassador to Japan Reischauer's 1981 statement, which revealed the existence of the secret nuclear accords. Regarding the secret accords, some say that the Japanese negotiators were not aware that what they said during the meeting would be taken as allowing nuclear introduction into Japan. The expert committee will also look into the circumstances in which the Japanese side realized that (what the Japanese negotiators said during the talks) was taken as a secret accord. Another panel member said, "It is important to look into why Japan had to conclude the secret accords." The survey conducted by MOFA was unable to discover several documents that hold the key to that point. How the secret accords have been handled internally and to whom they have been passed on are also key points to be probed by the panel. Former senior MOFA officials have testified that around 2001 they ordered all documentations of the secret accords be scrapped. The panel will also check whether the documents were actually scrapped or not. Okada will attach importance to revealing the nuts and bolts of the mater, as he stated before the Lower House Foreign Affairs Committee on the 25th: "The objective of the investigation this time is to warn that continuing to insist that there are no secret accords will have an adverse impact on Japanese politics." However, confirming the secret nuclear accord would result in raising a fundamental question about Japan's three nuclear principles, which will have a major impact on the Japanese government's nuclear policy. The U.S. government has removed tactical nuclear weapons from U.S. naval vessels, so U.S. naval vessels carry no nuclear weapons onboard when calling at Japanese ports or passing through Japan's territorial waters. There is a possibility of nuclear arms once again being fitted to U.S. vessels in the event of emergency. Should that occur, the government would be urged to decide whether to accept such or not. There is a view that since the Social Democratic Party (SDP),one of the ruling coalition, advocates firmly upholding the three nuclear principles, it would be impossible for the Hatoyama administration to review the principles until the Upper House election next summer. U.S. Defense Secretary Gates warned when he visited Japan last month, "We would like Japan to be careful so that the matter will not have an adverse impact on extended deterrence and Japan-U.S. relations." Chances are that the issue could affect the Japan-U.S. alliance, depending on how the government will deal with it. (7) Editorial: Put end to lie to people over Japan-U.S. secret nuclear accords TOKYO SHIMBUN (Page 5) (Full) November 28, 2009 A panel of experts in the Foreign Ministry has started work to examine documents related to alleged secret accords between Japan and the U.S., including one on the introduction of nuclear weapons into the country. In the examination process, we expect the panel will put an end to the lie told to the people by successive governments and to restore public trust in the nation's foreign policy. The panel was established in response to Foreign Minister Katsuya TOKYO 00002748 008 OF 018 Okada's strong desire. Six experts on the history of Japan-U.S. relations will closely examine the related documents found through the ministry's internal investigation and compile a report, including historical assessment, in January. The panel will look into four alleged secret accords: (1) a pact allowing U.S. military warships carrying nuclear weapons to make port calls in Japan; (2) a pact on combat action in times of emergency on the Korean Peninsula; (3) a pact regarding Japan's payment of fees for restoring the land the U.S. military has used to its original state; and (4) a pact allowing the U.S. military to reintroduce nuclear weapons into Japan in the event of a contingency. The secret deal regarding the introduction of nuclear weapons into Japan was allegedly agreed to when the Japan-U.S. Security Treaty was revised in 1960, although the treaty stipulates the need for Washington to hold prior consultations with Tokyo before its military aircraft or vessels carrying nuclear weapons make stopovers in Japanese territory. The presence of this secret pact has already been unveiled through the U.S. side's disclosure of related official documents and testimony by former Vice Foreign Minister Ryohei Murata. But the ruling Liberal Democratic Party continued to claim for years that such an agreement did not exist. If the government has hidden the truth about a matter that inevitably affects the foundation of the nation's security policy, it will never be able to obtain public trust in its foreign policy. Now that documents that support the presence of the secret pact have been discovered through the Foreign Ministry's internal investigation, Foreign Minister Okada is said to be going to admit the presence of the secret accord. This stance is welcomed as the first step for the government to regain public trust. If the government admits the presence of the secret pact, it will have to take the next step. If the government only lays the blame on the successive administrations, it will be irresponsible. Japan, the only nation to have suffered nuclear bombing, has put forth the three non-nuclear principles of not possessing, producing and allowing nuclear weapons into the country as its national policy. Some persons suggest that the ministry's investigation into the alleged secret pacts should be used as an opportunity for Japan to decide to allow U.S. vessels carrying nuclear weapons to make stopovers in its territory, changing the three principles into "2.5 principles." But the U.S. has removed tactical nuclear weapons from its warships and nuclear-powered submarines since the early 1990s. Given this, the U.S.'s nuclear umbrella" is functioning even under the three principles. In his speech in the latest UN general assembly, Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama said: "I renew my pledge to maintain the three non-nuclear principles." Japan has long called for nuclear abolition and has made efforts to bring about a nuclear-free world in cooperation with the administration of U.S. President Barack Obama since its TOKYO 00002748 009 OF 018 inauguration. But if Japan changes its three non-nuclear principles, it may drop in status in the international community. What the Hatoyama administration should do after the documents related to the secret accords are examined is to reveal its stance of holding fast to the three principles and step up efforts for the challenge of abolishing nuclear weapons. (8) Interview with Columbia University Professor Gerald Curtis on assessment of Hatoyama administration's performance NIKKEI (Page 5) (Full) December 1, 2009 Interviewer: Washington Bureau Chief Itaru Oishi Q: How do you assess the performance of the Hatoyama cabinet so far? Curtis: For an administration that is only two months old, it is doing quite well. I'll give it an A- or B+. Q: The administration seems to be bound hand and foot by its manifesto (campaign pledges). Curtis: A manifesto is only an indication of policy direction. If it has to be followed at all costs, then there will be no need for politics. If the economic situation is worse than previously expected after taking political power, politicians will change their policies, although they will be obliged to explain the reasons for the changes. Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama should be judged on his adaptability, leadership, decisiveness, and foresight. In some cases, he will need to have the courage not to stick to the manifesto. Purging bureaucratic control is revolutionary Q: Do you think (the Hatoyama administration's) efforts to move away from reliance on bureaucrats are successful? Curtis: The ruling party's reliance on bureaucrats is a tradition dating back to the Taisho era. (The Hatoyama administration) is trying to change this completely. Policymaking will be unified in the government. The Cabinet and not the bureaucrats will make the decisions. It is still premature to judge whether or not this will succeed, but the endeavor is revolutionary. Q: Is the administration not relying on the Ministry of Finance (MOF)? Curtis: The MOF very much welcomes spending cuts, but the Government Revitalization Unit is the one deciding which projects are to be eliminated. The budget formulation process is taking place with an unprecedented level of transparency. Q: Isn't the appointment of former Vice Finance Minister Jiro Saito as Japan Post president an indication of reliance on bureaucrats? Curtis: No matter how good Mr. Saito is, this will damage the image of the Democratic Party of Japan (DPJ),which has advocated the elimination of bureaucratic control. Although this was a decision made by the People's New Party's State Minister for Postal Reform TOKYO 00002748 010 OF 018 Shizuka Kamei, Prime Minister Hatoyama should have said no. It is absurd for a minority party to wield that much power. Q: It is said that with DPJ Secretary General Ichiro Ozawa not joining the cabinet, there is a dual structure of power. Curtis: It is quite natural for Mr. Ozawa, who is good at managing elections and Diet affairs, to become the secretary general. While he has unrivalled power over party management, there is no evidence that he is interfering in government policymaking or manipulating the Prime Minister on such issues as spending cuts and the Futenma relocation issue. Q: Continuity is much more important in foreign policy than in domestic policy. Curtis: While continuity is important, in a democracy foreign policy may change with a change of administration. U.S. President Obama scrapped the plan to deploy missiles in Eastern Europe -- a plan decided by the previous administration. The question is whether policies serve the national interest. Q: Do you think the relocation of the U.S. forces' Futenma Air Station need not follow the existing plan? Curtis: Foreign policy cannot move forward on the basis of idealism alone. While I take issue with the U.S. Defense Department's high-handedness, the Hatoyama administration should look at reality and reach a conclusion at an early date if it has no prospect of finding a relocation site other than Nago City in Okinawa. The destabilization of the Japan-U.S. alliance is not in Japan's national interest. Come up with recommendations for an equal relationship Q: Don't you think Prime Minister Hatoyama lacks decisiveness? Curtis: President Obama is also being criticized for taking too much time to decide on the deployment of additional troops to Afghanistan. The problem is that the concerned ministers talk too much before a policy is made. In the case of foreign policy, it is not necessarily good to reveal all the details of the decision-making process. Prime Minister Hatoyama will probably make a decision before the end of 2009. The Nago mayoral election is taking place next year, so the situation will become even more complicated. However, next year marks the 50th anniversary of the Japan-U.S. security treaty. This will be a good opportunity to have a dialogue on how to develop the alliance in the future. The issues are not limited to the military alliance; there are also other issues, such as environmental destruction, climate change, prevention of epidemics, and terrorism. Q: The security treaty requires the U.S. to defend Japan, but Japan has no obligation to defend the U.S. Curtis: Prime Minister Hatoyama seeks a more equal Japan-U.S. relationship but the substance of his argument remains unclear. The Hatoyama administration should come up with concrete recommendations and proposals for greater equality. TOKYO 00002748 011 OF 018 (9) Editorial: COP15 - U.S., China set own targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions; seeds of progress should be carefully nurtured TOKYO SHIMBUN (Page 5) (Full) November 30, 2009 Ahead of the 15th session of the Conference of the Parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (COP15) starting on Dec. 7 in Copenhagen, the U.S. and China announced in succession their midterm targets for cutting greenhouse gas emissions. They are only seeds, but it is necessary to carefully nurture their growth. In COP15, the question of what targets should be set for curbing greenhouse gas emissions will take center stage. The U.S. has announced that in Copenhagen, President Barack Obama will announce the U.S. target of cutting carbon emissions by 17 PERCENT from 2005 levels by 2020. In the U.S., legislation that specified a 17 PERCENT target passed the House in June, but deliberations are unlikely to take place before next spring on a bill presented by the Senate calling for reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 20 PERCENT . Under this situation, many observers had anticipated that it would be difficult for the U.S. to present any specific target at COP15. China has overtaken the U.S. and is now the world' largest emitter of global warming gases. Immediately after the U.S. announced its target, China also announced its goal of reducing emissions per unit of gross domestic product (GDP) by 40 to 45 PERCENT compared with 2005 levels by 2020. If calculated on the basis of 1990 levels, the U.S. offer is no more than just about 3 PERCENT , falling far short of the 25 PERCENT target of Japan and the European Union (EU). In the case of China, if its economy continues to grow, its greenhouse gas emissions may double as a result of GDP growth. Even so, in view of the U.S.'s refusal to undertake the obligations set in the Kyoto Protocol and China's stance of pushing for industrialized countries to take the lead in cutting greenhouse gas emissions, it is significant that these two countries, which have generated 40 PERCENT of the world's emissions, set "their own obligations". In COP15, participants will aim at reaching a political agreement without trying to adopt new legal obligations for reducing gas emissions following the 2012 expiration of the Kyoto Protocol. The two countries' announcements of their "positive" commitments will surely contribute to moving the first environmental summit in history forward. To prevent global warming from causing major damage, scientists insist on the need to limit the rise in temperature from the level before the industrial revolution to within two degrees. To that end, it is necessary to reduce the greenhouse gas emissions of the entire world by 25 PERCENT to 40 PERCENT from 1990 levels. The future of our earth hinges on more ambitious commitments by these two largest gas emitters. A game of tactics is usually played in international negotiations. In talks on global warming, however, all participants should discuss how to cooperate and avoid a common crisis, instead of engaging in a game. According to advice from scientists, all countries will have TOKYO 00002748 012 OF 018 to attain the 25 PERCENT goal offered by Japan sometime in the future. While upholding its goal, Japan should present specific mechanisms to provide financial aid and transfer technology to developing countries. By giving a supportive push to the two largest greenhouse gas emitters, which have finally begun to take action, Japan should pave the way for success at COP15 and for a new protocol to be adopted. (10) Editorial: CO2 reduction goals set by U.S., China insufficient NIKKEI (Page 2) (Full) November 29, 2009 The U.S. and China have moved forward in their efforts to curb global warming. They both have released goals to cut greenhouse-gas emissions to be proposed at the 15th session of the Conference of the Parties to the Climate Change (COP15) to be held in Copenhagen in December. The U.S. will cut emissions by 17 percent by 2020 in comparison with the 2005 level. China, which needs to emit carbon dioxide in order to achieve a GDP of a certain size, will curtail emissions by 40-45 percent compared with the 2005 level by 2020. The U.S. and China are the two major carbon-dioxide emitters, accounting for 40 percent of the greenhouse gas emissions in the world. However, under the Kyoto Protocol, an international pledge aimed to prevent global warming, neither country is obligated to cut emissions. We would like to give high scores to proposals made by both countries as advancing efforts to create a new international system to succeed the Kyoto Protocol. However, we cannot say that their goals are sufficient. The U.S. goal is no more than a 3 percent cut, compared with the 1990 level, which is smaller in comparison with Japan's mid-term goal of achieving a 25 percent cut from the 1990 level, and the European Union's goal of cutting emissions by between 20-30 percent from the same level. A 17 percent reduction by 2020 is merely the reduction factories and power stations can achieve without fail if a domestic emissions credit trading system is set up. In Japan, that would be equivalent to a reduction mainly in the industrial sector. The U.S. goal does not reflect the effects of improved automobile fuel efficiency or the conservation of forests. There is further room for the U.S. to reduce emissions. Deliberations in the U.S. Congress on legislation to combat greenhouse gas emissions, which will give a legal basis to the 17 percent reduction goal, are facing rough going. The U.S. government is not empowered to refer to a figure higher than that mentioned in the legislation. U.S. President Obama will visit Copenhagen. However, he will not take part in any summit meetings. He is playing it safe, not wanting to stimulate Congress, even though he has demonstrated a desire to prevent global warming. According to the Chinese proposal, its total emissions will continue to increase as its economy grows. We give high scores to the fact that its goal largely exceeds the domestic target of improving energy efficiency (20 percent improvement from 2006 through 2010). TOKYO 00002748 013 OF 018 However, there still is great room for improvement. A low-carbon economy should be desirable for China itself, which depends on imported crude oil. We would like to see the Chinese government aim to improve energy efficiency for the present time, while demonstrating a determination for a reduction in its total carbon emissions by 2020 and beyond. The Japanese government should not just accept the announcements made by the U.S. and China almost simultaneously as progress in the talks. We want the government to approach the talks with an eye on the national interest amid the two major emitters showing signs of trying to exercise leadership. (11) Media polls show majority favors Futenma relocation outside Okinawa OKINAWA TIMES (Page 1) (Abridged) November 29, 2009 A majority of the nation also wants the U.S. military's Futenma base moved out of Okinawa Prefecture. In all public opinion surveys conducted by four major dailies and NHK this November, those calling for the U.S. Marine Corps' Futenma Air Station to be relocated outside Okinawa Prefecture or Japan and those seeking to review and modify the current plan agreed on between Japan and the United States to relocate Futenma airfield to the Henoko area of Nago City outnumbered those insisting on relocating Futenma airfield as planned. There is even a survey with more than half of its respondents calling for a review of the bilateral agreement. In the polling of people in Okinawa Prefecture by two Okinawa-based dailies, the Okinawa Times and the Ryukyu Shimpo, the proportion of those calling for the Futenma base to be moved out of Okinawa Prefecture or Japan ranged between 63 PERCENT and 69 PERCENT . All these polls, conducted not only by the local dailies in Okinawa Prefecture but also by the nation's major dailies, show a strong sense of resistance to the planned relocation of Futenma airfield within Okinawa Prefecture. The four major dailies are the Yomiuri, Asahi, Mainichi, and Sankei Shimbun newspapers. The four papers carried findings from their respective nationwide public opinion surveys in their morning editions dated between Nov. 10 and Nov. 24. NHI aired its survey results on Nov. 9. Asahi (Nov. 17) Q: Japan, before its change of government, reached an intergovernmental agreement with the U.S. to relocate Futenma airfield to Okinawa Prefecture's Nago City. Do you think it would be better to honor this agreement, or do you think it would be better to review the agreement and renegotiate with the U.S.? Honor the agreement 28 PERCENT Review it and renegotiate with the U.S. 54 PERCENT Mainichi (Nov. 24) Q: What do you think Prime Minister Hatoyama should do? Negotiate with the U.S. to move Futenma airfield out of Okinawa TOKYO 00002748 014 OF 018 Prefecture or Japan 50 PERCENT Look for another relocation site in Okinawa Prefecture 17 PERCENT Accept the current plan to relocate Futenma airfield to Henoko 22 PERCENT Sankei (Nov. 24) Q: Do you think Futenma airfield should be relocated outside Okinawa Prefecture? Yes 46.2 PERCENT No 36.1 PERCENT Don't know, etc. 17.7 PERCENT Yomiuri (Nov. 10) Q: What do you think about the pending issue of relocating Futenma airfield? It would be better to relocate the airfield in line with the agreement reached between the Japanese and U.S. governments 31 PERCENT It would be better to slightly modify the relocation plan 32 PERCENT It would be better to overhaul the relocation plan 19 PERCENT No answer 17 PERCENT NHK (Nov. 9) Q: What do you think Prime Minister Hatoyama should do about the Japan-U.S. agreement to relocate Futenma airfield to Nago City? He should push for the Japan-U.S. agreement 23 PERCENT He should review the Japan-U.S. agreement 35 PERCENT Can't say which 34 PERCENT (12) Poll on Hatoyama cabinet, political parties NIKKEI (Page 2) (Full) November 30, 2009 Questions & Answers (Figures are percentages. Parentheses denote results from the last survey conducted in October.) Q: Do you support the Hatoyama cabinet? Yes 68 (73) No 24 (21) Can't say (C/S) + don't know (D/K) 8 (6) Q: Which political party do you support or prefer? Democratic Party of Japan (DPJ or Minshuto) 56 (55) Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) 19 (21) New Komeito (NK) 3 (4) Japanese Communist Party (JCP) 3 (3) Social Democratic Party (SDP or Shaminto) 3 (1) People's New Party (PNP or Kokumin Shinto) 1 (0) Your Party (YP or Minna no To) 1 (1) New Party Nippon (NPN or Shinto Nippon) 0 (0) Other political parties 1 (0) TOKYO 00002748 015 OF 018 None 11 (9) C/S+D/K 3 (5) (Note) Percentages may not add up to 100 PERCENT in some cases due to rounding. Polling methodology: The survey was taken Nov. 27-29 by Nikkei Research Inc. over the telephone on a random digit dialing (RDD) basis. For the survey, samples were chosen from among men and women aged 20 and over across the nation. A total of 1,503 households with one or more eligible voters were sampled, and answers were obtained from 931 persons (61.9 PERCENT ). (13) Poll on Hatoyama cabinet, political parties TOKYO SHIMBUN (Page 2) (Abridged) November 30, 2009 Questions & Answers (Figures are percentages. Parentheses denote the results of the last survey conducted Nov. 1.) Q: Do you support the Hatoyama cabinet? Yes 63.7 (61.8) No 25.1 (22.9) Don't know (D/K) + no answer (N/A) 11.2 (15.3) Q: (Only for those who answered "yes" to the previous question) What's the primary reason for your approval of the Hatoyama cabinet? Pick only one from among those listed below. The prime minister is trustworthy 5.1 (11.5) Because it's a coalition cabinet of the Democratic Party of Japan, Social Democratic Party, and People's New Party 7.8 (6.7) The prime minister has leadership ability 1.8 (4.3) Something can be expected of its economic policies 10.2 (15.1) Something can be expected of its foreign policy 2.6 (1.5) Something can be expected of its political reforms 37.2 (29.6) Something can be expected of its tax reforms 6.1 (3.6) Something can be expected of its administrative reforms 13.7 (11.6) There's no other appropriate person (for prime minister) 13.9 (14.4) Other answers (O/A) --- (0.7) D/K+N/A 1.6 (1.0) Q: (Only for those who answered "no" to the first question) What's the primary reason for your disapproval of the Hatoyama cabinet? Pick only one from among those listed below. The prime minister is untrustworthy 20.2 (12.8) Because it's a coalition cabinet of the Democratic Party of Japan, Social Democratic Party, and People's New Party 12.9 (16.7) The prime minister lacks leadership ability 9.2 (5.0) Nothing can be expected of its economic policies 33.4 (25.3) Nothing can be expected of its foreign policy 2.0 (4.5) Nothing can be expected of its political reforms 5.9 (16.4) Nothing can be expected of its tax reforms 4.6 (7.0) Nothing can be expected of its administrative reforms 2.5 (2.0) Don't like the prime minister's personal character 7.2 (7.6) O/A --- (0.5) TOKYO 00002748 016 OF 018 D/K+N/A 2.1 (2.2) Q: Which political party do you support? Democratic Party of Japan (DPJ or Minshuto) 45.0 (43.4) Liberal Democratic Party (LDP or Jiminto) 16.2 (21.1) New Komeito (NK) 4.1 (3.4) Japanese Communist Party (JCP) 2.4 (2.7) Social Democratic Party (SDP or Shaminto) 2.1 (1.9) Your Party (YP or Minna no To) 1.4 (1.3) People's New Party (PNP or Kokumin Shinto) 0.3 (0.5) Reform Club (RC or Kaikaku Kurabu) --- (---) New Party Nippon (NPN or Shinto Nippon) 0.4 (0.4) Other political parties, groups --- (0.1) None 27.8 (24.5) D/K+N/A 0.3 (0.7) Q: The government has introduced a new method to screen budget requests from its ministries and agencies before compiling the budget for the next fiscal year. Do you approve of this budget screening? Yes 77.3 No 13.2 D/K+N/A 9.5 Q: (Only for those who answered "yes" to the foregoing question) What's the primary reason for your approval? Because it's effective in reducing the budget 18.6 Because disclosing the budget compilation process to the public is significant 54.8 Because the budget screening teams' judgment is precise 2.8 Because the budget also should be compiled from the private sector's perspective 23.1 O/A 0.3 D/K+N/A 0.4 Q: (Only for those who answered "no" to the foregoing question) What's the primary reason for your disapproval? Because it's less effective in reducing the budget 3.2 Because the budget screening teams' discussion is unilateral and they should listen more to those concerned 67.5 Because there is a problem regarding appointments to the budget screening teams 16.5 Because the budget screening teams' discussion appears to be led by the Finance Ministry 11.6 O/A --- D/K+N/A 1.2 Q: There are also objections from among those concerned to the results of budget screening. Do you think the results of budget screening are appropriate? Appropriate 10.7 Appropriate to a certain degree 62.0 Not very appropriate 15.6 Inappropriate 5.5 D/K+N/A 6.2 TOKYO 00002748 017 OF 018 Q: Do you think the budget screening should be continued next fiscal year and beyond? Yes 83.6 No 10.3 D/K+N/A 6.1 Q: What do you think should be done about the planned relocation of the U.S. military's Futenma airfield in Okinawa Prefecture's Ginowan City? Futenma airfield should be relocated to a coastal area of the U.S. military's Camp Schwab in line with a Japan-U.S. agreement 25.4 Japan and the U.S. should review their agreement and reconsider Futenma relocation outside Okinawa Prefecture or Japan 32.8 Japan and the U.S. should review their agreement and consider integrating Futenma airfield's functions with the U.S. Kadena base in Okinawa Prefecture 26.8 O/A 0.2 D/K+N/A 14.8 Q: Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama's fund-managing body has falsified its political fund reports. On this issue, his former secretary, who was in charge of accounting, is alleged to have violated the Political Funds Control Law. The prime minister said: "I don't know the details because I have entrusted them to the accounting chief. I will leave it to the prosecutors." Is this account convincing to you? Yes 18.9 No 74.9 D/K+N/A 6.2 Q: What do you think Prime Minister Hatoyama should do about this problem? He should resign as prime minister to take responsibility 11.4 He should fulfill his accountability and stay on as prime minister while taking steps to improve the situation 75.5 He should dissolve the House of Representatives to elicit public opinion 3.9 The act was committed by his former secretary, so Prime Minister Hatoyama does not need to take responsibility 4.3 O/A 0.2 D/K+N/A 4.7 Polling methodology: The survey was conducted across the nation on Nov. 28-29 by Kyodo News Service on a computer-aided random digit dialing (RDD) basis. Among randomly generated telephone numbers, those actually for household use with one or more eligible voters totaled 1,471. Answers were obtained from 1,026 persons. (14) Japanese woman in Gifu to appeal to Diet members over her son taken away by Czech father CHUNICHI SHIMBUN (Page 32) (Full) December 1, 2009 Marie Kubota, Gifu Reporting Team Over three months have passed since the son, 5, of Kayoko Yamada, TOKYO 00002748 018 OF 018 40, a nurse living in Yamagata City, Gifu Prefecture, disappeared from their home. There is a strong possibility that he was taken away by Yamada's Czech husband, 31, to the Czech Republic. Since Japan is not a signatory to the Hague Convention that prevents either parent from taking away children (without the other parent's consent),Yamada has no way to look for her son. She will go to Tokyo on Dec. 3 to tell Diet members about how hard it is to be separated from her son at a symposium. Yamada misses her son very much. "Did he cry when he was taken away or was he resigned to what happened? Since he has nobody to go to now except his father, he may not be able to speak his mind." On Aug. 23, Yamada's husband told the boy, "I will buy you some toys," took him out, and never returned. When Yamada returned home in the evening, the husband's computer and other belongings were gone. On the evening of Aug. 24, the husband made an international call to tell her that he was in Frankfurt (with the son). She went to the Gifu Prefectural Police for advice, but was told that since the boy is with his father, this "does not constitute a criminal case." Yamada married her Czech husband, whom she met when she was studying overseas, in Japan five years ago. They lived in the Czech Republic from autumn last year to last March according to the husband's wishes, but returned to Japan because his job did not go well. Discord between the husband and wife in their daily life had escalated, and they were at the point of beginning to discuss their plans for the future. In mid-October, after pleading with her husband many times, Yamada was informed of her husband's new cell phone number via e-mail, and she was able to talk to the son just once. She told him: "Mama will go and rescue you. Wait for me." The husband probably learned about what she told the boy. He wrote back in his e-mail that: "We are living happily. There is no need for you to rescue him." Yamada has not been able to call her son again after that, fearing that calling him will make his position even more difficult in a foreign country. The symposium to be held at the Diet members' office building in Nagata-cho, Tokyo will be about the Hague Convention and the enactment of related domestic legislation. Yamada sometimes thinks that the only thing she can do is to wait for her son's return. Yet, she says: "The situation in Japan is such that whoever takes the children away wins. This case is different from one in which a husband and wife have agreed to divorce. I think there must be other people in the same situation as me. I hope that more people will find out about the Convention and that it will be ratified." ROOS