VZCZCXRO2850
PP RUEHFK RUEHKSO RUEHNAG RUEHNH
DE RUEHKO #6432/01 3120824
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
P 080824Z NOV 06
FM AMEMBASSY TOKYO
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 8133
INFO RUEKJCS/SECDEF WASHDC PRIORITY
RHEHAAA/THE WHITE HOUSE WASHINGTON DC PRIORITY
RUEAWJA/USDOJ WASHDC PRIORITY
RULSDMK/USDOT WASHDC PRIORITY
RUCPDOC/USDOC WASHDC PRIORITY
RUEAIIA/CIA WASHDC PRIORITY
RUEKJCS/JOINT STAFF WASHDC//J5//
RHHMUNA/HQ USPACOM HONOLULU HI
RHHMHBA/COMPACFLT PEARL HARBOR HI
RHMFIUU/HQ PACAF HICKAM AFB HI//CC/PA//
RHMFIUU/COMUSJAPAN YOKOTA AB JA//J5/JO21//
RUYNAAC/COMNAVFORJAPAN YOKOSUKA JA
RUAYJAA/COMPATWING ONE KAMI SEYA JA
RUEHNH/AMCONSUL NAHA 1251
RUEHFK/AMCONSUL FUKUOKA 8737
RUEHOK/AMCONSUL OSAKA KOBE 2140
RUEHNAG/AMCONSUL NAGOYA 8386
RUEHKSO/AMCONSUL SAPPORO 9790
RUEHBJ/AMEMBASSY BEIJING 4814
RUEHUL/AMEMBASSY SEOUL 0924
RUCNDT/USMISSION USUN NEW YORK 2457

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 09 TOKYO 006432 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SIPDIS 
 
DEPT FOR E, P, EB, EAP/J, EAP/P, EAP/PD, PA 
WHITE HOUSE/NSC/NEC; JUSTICE FOR STU CHEMTOB IN ANTI-TRUST DIVISION; 
TREASURY/OASIA/IMI/JAPAN; DEPT PASS USTR/PUBLIC AFFAIRS OFFICE; 
SECDEF FOR JCS-J-5/JAPAN, 
DASD/ISA/EAPR/JAPAN; DEPT PASS ELECTRONICALLY TO USDA 
FAS/ITP FOR SCHROETER; PACOM HONOLULU FOR PUBLIC DIPLOMACY ADVISOR; 
CINCPAC FLT/PA/ COMNAVFORJAPAN/PA. 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: OIIP KMDR KPAO PGOV PINR ECON ELAB JA
SUBJECT:  DAILY SUMMARY OF JAPANESE PRESS 11/08/06 
 
 
INDEX: 
 
(1) Japan, Australia to enter EPA talks with focus on beef, flour, 
etc. 
 
(2) FTA proposed for all APEC member nations: US concerned about 
integration of East Asia; China, ASEAN likely to oppose US 
involvement 
 
(3) Bases and options -- 2006 Okinawa gubernatorial race (Part 2): 
Government steadily developing plans behind the scenes 
 
(4) Propriety of nuclear debate: Argument that Japan should go 
nuclear is unrealistic: Yukio Okamoto, international affairs 
consultant 
 
(5) Interview with former defense chief Fukushiro Nukaga on the 
North Korean nuclear issue: Collaboration among five members of 
six-party talks necessary 
 
(6) Questions and answers about the debate on reform of the 
education board system: Abe administration intends to deepen the 
government's involvement 
 
ARTICLES: 
 
(1) Japan, Australia to enter EPA talks with focus on beef, flour, 
etc. 
 
YOMIURI (Page 11) (Full) 
November 8, 2006 
 
The governments of Japan and Australia yesterday held working-level 
talks in Canberra with a view to starting talks on the signing of an 
economic partnership agreement (FPA) featuring a free trade 
agreement (FTA). Participants of the meeting agreed to aim at 
embarking on talks in the new year. They hope to see a formal 
agreement reached at the summit between Prime Minister Abe and 
Australian Prime Minister Howard to be held on the sidelines of the 
East Asia summit to be held in the Philippines in December. 
 
The case in point before entering EPA talks with Australia is how to 
treat Japan's key trade items, such as beef, dairy products and 
flour. No agreement was reached on this issue at yesterday's 
meeting. The scrapping of tariffs on those items is bound to have a 
serious impact on domestic agriculture. Agriculture Minister 
Matsuoka noted, "We should not start talks with Australia before 
working out how to handle key items." Tokyo and Canberra will speed 
up final-stage efforts to sort out the issue. 
 
(2) FTA proposed for all APEC member nations: US concerned about 
integration of East Asia; China, ASEAN likely to oppose US 
involvement 
 
YOMIURI (Page 11) (Full) 
November 8, 2006 
 
It has been learned that a draft declaration to be released at the 
summit to be held on the sidelines of the Asia-Pacific Economic 
Cooperation (APEC) forum meeting would include a call for looking 
into the feasibility of a free trade area for the Asia and Pacific 
(FTAAP) initiative in response to a strong request from the US. The 
US is increasingly alarmed about moves to integrate Asian economies, 
 
TOKYO 00006432  002 OF 009 
 
 
an initiative being promoted by the Association of Southeast Asian 
Nations (ASEAN). It aims at deepening its involvement in Asia 
through APEC. Since China and ASEAN are expected to oppose this move 
by the US, coordination of views to approve the statement will 
likely be complicated. 
 
US aim 
 
The concept of an FTA involving all APEC members has thus far been 
proposed only at the private sector level. If APEC leaders share the 
same view as the private sector on having an APEC FTA as mentioned 
in the draft declaration, the feasibility of adopting such an 
initiative will move a step forward. The US intends to give momentum 
to its FTAAP proposal over the next year through joint research with 
APEC member nations on challenges and advantages in materializing 
the initiative. 
 
What motivated the US to attach importance to APEC in its trade 
strategy toward East Asia is Washington's concern that with China 
increasing its economic presence in Asia through a proposed FTA with 
ASEAN, an economic bloc might be formed in East Asia without US 
participation. 
 
Regarding the economic integration of Asia, a direction for trade 
liberalization policy and how efforts to realize such should be made 
were adopted at ASEAN summits and ASEAN plus Three -- Japan, China 
and South Korea - meetings held on the sidelines of the ASEAN 
summits. Both meetings take place in November or December every 
year. 
 
A number of initiatives proposed 
 
Japan has also proposed an East Asia Economic Partnership Agreement 
(EPA) and an East Asia-version of the Organization for Economic 
Cooperation and Development (OECD). Talks for realizing those 
initiatives have also kicked off. Sixteen countries - ASEAN Plus 
Three Plus Three (India, Australia and New Zealand) -- are taking 
part in the talks. 
 
APEC and East Asian nations include newly emerging markets with high 
economic potential, such as Russia, India and China. The European 
Union (EU) is also increasingly strengthening its efforts to sign 
FTA's with Asian countries, such as ASEAN. 
 
Using APEC is apparently the most realistic means for the US to get 
involved in the process of the economic integration of Asia. Japan 
sees that the US is motivated by the desire to wrench-open the Asian 
market, using APEC, as a government source put it. This source also 
noted, "APEC members will probably agree by and large with the US 
idea of launching a joint study of an FTA at the Hanoi summit." 
 
Binding power 
 
China, which is increasing its economic impact on ASEAN, is strongly 
opposing US involvement, however. 
 
China already proposed the East Asia Free Trade Area Initiative 
targeting ASEAN, Japan, China and South Korea in 2004. Opposing the 
US move, it insists, "Liberalization among ASEAN Plus Three should 
be promoted before an FTA for all APEC members." 
 
The degree of liberalization and developments of the economies of 21 
APEC members largely differs. Even factoring out the US motive of 
 
TOKYO 00006432  003 OF 009 
 
 
trade strategy, APEC members are expected to encounter considerable 
difficulties in actually pressing ahead with economic integration. 
 
As a feature, APEC is a mild consultative framework that does not 
bind its members to accept liberalization of trade and investment. 
However, the US has proposed at high working-level meetings held in 
preparation for the Hanoi APEC meeting, letting some liberalization 
measures promoted by APEC members be equipped with binding power. 
 
There is concern that if the US continues to strengthen its move to 
reinforce the functions of APEC, the sense of wariness about the US 
move would heighten mainly among developing countries, escalating 
discord within APEC. 
 
(3) Bases and options -- 2006 Okinawa gubernatorial race (Part 2): 
Government steadily developing plans behind the scenes 
 
ASAHI (Page 3) (Abridged slightly) 
November 8, 2006 
 
The ruling camp's "face of the election" was not Abe but Obuchi. 
 
Representing the ruling coalition, Yuko Obuchi (daughter of the late 
prime minister who know holds his Diet seat) attended Hirokazu 
Nakaima's pep rally on Nov. 3, the day after Okinawa gubernatorial 
election campaign officially kicked off. 
 
Obuchi said on the podium: 
 
"Gov. Keiichi Inamine's father, the late Ichiro Inamine, who served 
as an Upper House member, took good care of my father. My father 
decided to host the Okinawa Summit in return for his kindness. We 
must not stop the cooperative trend created by Gov. Inamine and the 
central government." 
 
Yuko Obuchi's father, former Prime Minister Keizo Obuchi, picked 
Okinawa as the venue for the 2000 G-8 Summit, but he passed away 
three months before the landmark event. "In Okinawa, Obuchi carries 
greater weight than Abe and Koizumi," a senior Liberal Democratic 
Party lawmaker noted. 
 
Okinawa was returned to Japan during the Sato administration and an 
agreement was reached between the Hashimoto administration and the 
United States to return Marine Corps Air Station (MCAS) Futenma to 
Japan. The Obuchi administration also endeavored to strengthen ties 
to Okinawa. But the clock seems to have stopped since then. 
 
The Okinawa Summit was hosted by Obuchi's successor, Yoshiro Mori, 
whose administration was short-lived. In May, the Koizumi 
administration reached a final agreement with the United States on 
force realignment. But the administration made little effort to 
coordinate views with affected municipalities. Even asked by Okinawa 
lawmakers for changes to the government plan, Koizumi always said 
curtly, "I have no intention of altering it." 
 
The Okinawa issue is not high on the Abe administration's list of 
priorities. There was a sign of this. 
 
A consultative body composed of Tokyo, Okinawa, and affected 
municipalities held its inaugural meeting on Aug. 29, a month before 
the LDP presidential election. The meeting was void of a seat for 
Abe, who was certain to become Koizumi's successor. 
 
 
TOKYO 00006432  004 OF 009 
 
 
It was just after the LDP and the New Komeito decided to field 
Nakaima as Inamine's successor. "No matter who becomes the new 
governor, I think Mr. Abe thought that touching on the Okinawa issue 
was dangerous," a senior Defense Agency official explained. 
 
The Abe administration has a strong tendency to regard 
Okinawa-related issues as a risk. 
 
Minister for Okinawa Affairs Sanae Takaichi's comment in late 
October that the government would link the base relocation issue to 
its package of economic incentives drew fire from affected 
municipalities. 
 
The sensation created by Takaichi's comment has heightened Kantei's 
(Prime Minister's Official Residence) sense of alarm toward Okinawa 
affairs, according to a Cabinet Office official responsible for 
economic measures. 
 
Plans are being made behind the scenes with an eye on the days after 
the gubernatorial election. 
 
The Defense Agency will come up with a fiscal 2007 budget that will 
include a new subsidy system linked to progress in the planned base 
relocation. The agency also aims to submit to next year's regular 
Diet session a 10-year legislation enabling the country to offer 
economic stimulus measures and bear the Guam relocation cost. 
 
Even if Nakaima loses to Keiko Itokazu, the candidate backed by the 
opposition bloc, the government and the ruling coalition will 
consider a special measures law to shift the power to authorize the 
use of the surface of public waters from prefectural governors to 
the central government. 
 
The government has reportedly told President George W. Bush through 
US Ambassador to Thomas Schieffer that Itokazu's victory could 
hinder the envisaged force realignment. 
 
"The view that the Bush administration will be troubled in such a 
case is not correct. It will be the Okinawa public that will be 
troubled by it," a former US official said. The White House's basic 
stance is, "If Japan does not want it, we won't push it." 
 
At the same time, there are strong expectations in the US government 
that even if the new governor opposes the plan, Prime Minister Abe 
will implement the bilateral agreement by taking appropriate 
measures, such as a special measures law. The Defense Agency has 
reportedly conveyed such a scenario to the US government. 
 
The US Defense Department is working out a master plan for building 
military facilities in Guam on the assumption that Okinawa Marines 
and their families will move there. The department also established 
a joint Guam program office in late August. 
 
The Guam project is closely associated with the Futenma relocation. 
A lack of progress in Japan for over two years would markedly delay 
the Guam relocation, according to the office. "It's not good to 
build facilities first and leave them unused for years," the office 
said. A delay in Japan would force the US Marine Corps to miss the 
2014 Guam relocation deadline. 
 
Tokyo and Washington officials are watching the gubernatorial race 
from afar. But they cannot stay on the landing forever. Sooner or 
later their determination to implement the US force realignment 
 
TOKYO 00006432  005 OF 009 
 
 
final agreement, including the Futenma relocation project, will be 
tested. 
 
(4) Propriety of nuclear debate: Argument that Japan should go 
nuclear is unrealistic: Yukio Okamoto, international affairs 
consultant 
 
SANKEI (Page 1) (Full) 
November 8, 2006 
 
I think the argument that Japan should arm itself with nuclear 
weapons is not realistic. This conclusion should come out in 
short-time discussion even if we do not mention that Japan is the 
sole victim in the world of atomic bombs. 
 
First, Japan, unlike India and Pakistan, is a member nation of the 
Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT). It also ratified the 
International Atomic Energy Agency's (IAEA) additional protocol 
designed to require countries to accept rigorous inspections. 
 
Second, although Iran is an NPT member but allegedly has developed 
nuclear weapons secretly, it is impossible for Japan to construct an 
underground factory. 
 
If Japan decides to develop nuclear weapons, it first would have to 
withdraw from the NPT. In such a case, Japan, like North Korea, 
would be driven into isolation and be placed under sanctions while 
meeting stern condemnation from the international community. Unlike 
"Generallissimo" Kim Jong Il in our neighbor, the Japanese people of 
today are so mentally fragile that they cannot endure such 
pressure. 
 
Third, should Japan withdraw from the NPT, the nation would have to 
suspend its nuclear fuel cycle, and atomic power generation would 
eventually stop. Some persons courageously say that Japan should 
have nuclear weapons, but I doubt that there is realistic evidence 
for this argument. 
 
I wonder if such advocates know how difficult it is for a nation to 
possess and keep nuclear weapons. I once visited a nuclear missile 
base in Wyoming. Within the base complex, 150 Minuteman III missiles 
are deployed. They are spread in a wide area, equivalent to Shikoku 
Island's total area, with the aim of preventing the missile base 
from being completely destroyed by foreign military attacks. To 
possess nuclear weapons, huge land and money are necessary. In 
Japan, financial authorities have gradually decreased the number of 
even F-2 fighters for this or that reason, although the fighter is 
the nation's treasure. Under such a tight budget, what can Japan 
do? 
 
Given this, there is no need to worry about discussing the 
possibility of a nuclear option for Japan and reaching a natural 
conclusion. The propriety of Japan's introduction of US nuclear 
weapons also should be discussed. In the early 1980s, the Soviet 
Union deployed intermediate-range SS20 missiles taking aim at 
Europe. Faced with a national crisis, West German Chancellor Kohl 
deployed in West Germany the US Pershing II and GLCM (Ground 
Launched Cruise Missile) missiles over objections within the nation. 
He made a bold decision on the issue that divided the public. The 
result was that the Soviet Union made concessions and scrapped all 
its SS20 missiles in exchange for having the Pershing II and GLCM 
missiles removed from Germany. Kohl saved Germany, and he worked for 
the sake of national defense. 
 
TOKYO 00006432  006 OF 009 
 
 
 
Assuming if Kohl were the prime minister of Japan, what would he do? 
He might decide to introduce US nuclear weapons. North Korea, an 
abnormal state, might ignore it, but China would turn pale when 
learning about the deployment of US nuclear weapons its neighboring 
country. China would do its best to persuade North Korea to scrap 
its nuclear programs with the aim of letting Japan remove the US 
nuclear weapons. 
 
An introduction of US nuclear weapons will politically cost too 
much, so it is not a proper option for Japan. The sole way Japan 
should choose for its national security is to keep the credibility 
of the current Japan-US security arrangements by further deepening 
the bilateral relationship. 
 
Under the current severe global circumstances, however, a nuclear 
option should be naturally discussed in other independent states. 
Being told not to discuss even such theme is tantamount to being 
told to be an ostrich putting its head in the sand. 
 
Japan is now faced with only threats from North Korea. China 
declared in 1998 that it would stop pointing its nuclear missiles at 
the US, but that nation has yet to make a similar declaration toward 
Japan. This means that there is a possibility of China launching 
missiles at Japan. 
 
What is worse, Chinese atomic submarines carrying nuclear missiles 
are navigating in waters near Japan. It seems to be a taboo in terms 
of relations with China to deem that nation a military threat. 
 
Being told not to say this or that, we stop making statements. By 
only doing so, will Japan's national security be ensured? The 
question of whether Japan should arm itself with nuclear weapons is 
the most important theme for the nation. A discussion that is 
necessary for Japan's safety must be thoroughly discussed without 
being sealed off, even though temporary friction occurs inside and 
outside the nation. Doing so is our responsibility for the benefits 
of future generations. 
 
(5) Interview with former defense chief Fukushiro Nukaga on the 
North Korean nuclear issue: Collaboration among five members of 
six-party talks necessary 
 
TOKYO SHIMBUN (Page 2) (Full) 
November 8, 2006 
 
Questioner: What has been the overall impact of North Korea's 
nuclear test? 
 
Nukaga: Any increase in the number of nuclear powers will have an 
impact on global peace and stability. North Korea's defiance in 
carrying out nuclear testing, even though the international 
community had been urging it not to do so, is a provocative act in 
violation of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. It must be 
resolutely denounced for it. The sanctions resolution against the 
North that the United Nations Security Council adopted unanimously 
is the trend in the international community. 
 
Questioner: Japan and other countries have not recognized North 
Korea as a nuclear power. 
 
Nukaga: We must not accept North Korea's possession of nuclear 
weapons as an accomplished fact. I understand that the range of 
 
TOKYO 00006432  007 OF 009 
 
 
their missiles has been extended since the launch of the Taepodong-1 
in 1998 and ballistic missile launches in July. The North's missile 
technology has steadily improved. If such is taken into account, we 
must conclude that North Korea poses a threat to Japan. There is 
also concern that North Korea's nuclear weapons and missiles may 
fall into the hands of other countries and terrorist organizations. 
 
Questioner: The expectation is that the six-party talks will be 
resumed. 
 
Nukaga: We must avoid the situation of seeing the six-party talks 
turn into disarmament talks and that North Korea returns to the 
talks as a new nuclear power. The five countries should take 
concerted action in urging Pyongyang to take concrete steps, 
including abandoning its nuclear programs and dismantling its 
nuclear facilities. 
 
Questioner: How about specific roles of the five countries? 
 
Nukaga: In past negotiations, the five countries mainly offered 
carrots to North Korea, but no agreement has ever been reached on 
sticks. China, which has major influence over North Korea, should 
apply more pressure on Pyongyang. Beijing has to exercise its 
leadership as a responsible superpower, taking advantage of its 
alliance with the North. South Korea has pushed ahead with a 
conciliatory policy, but North Korea conducted a nuclear test. This 
is the proof of the failure of Seoul's policy of placing emphasis on 
dialogue with Pyongyang. South Korea also should step up pressure on 
the North. 
 
Questioner: South Korean Foreign Affairs and Trade Minister Ban Ki 
Moon and US Under Secretary of State Nicholas Burns recently visited 
Japan. 
 
Nukaga: Japan and the United States are allies, as are the United 
States and South Korea. So cooperation is important. It is necessary 
for the five countries, including China and Russia, to constantly 
cooperate and take action in unison. If the five nations do not 
cooperate in implementing sanctions, the UNSC resolution will never 
produce any effect. 
 
Questioner: There are views calling for recognizing a regional 
contingency. 
 
Nukaga: Situations in areas surrounding Japan correspond to 
emergency situations. Japan must ascertain North Korea's moves. I 
would like to think about such should tensions grow more. However, 
Japan needs first to exchange views with the United States, South 
Korea and China before deciding that such a situation exists. 
 
(6) Questions and answers about the debate on reform of the 
education board system: Abe administration intends to deepen the 
government's involvement 
 
TOKYO SHIMBUN (Page 2) (Full) 
November 5, 2006 
 
Okihiro Iwata, Haruka Osugi 
 
Calls for reviewing the present board of education system are rising 
in conjunction with two issues: a succession of children committing 
suicides due to bullying at school, and the failure of many high 
schools to teach certain compulsory courses. There is a broad range 
 
TOKYO 00006432  008 OF 009 
 
 
of debates on the review of the current board of education system 
from strengthening the functions of the system to dismantling it. 
What are some of the problems associated with the boards of 
education and what needs to be revised? 
 
Question: What is a board of education? 
 
Answer: It is a council in charge of things relating to school 
education, lifelong learning, and promotion of arts, culture, and 
sports. Every prefecture, city, town, and village is obligated to 
establish a board of education respectively. Each board of education 
is not under the control of the prefectural governor or the mayor of 
the city, town, or village. 
 
Q: Why is it independent from the head of a local government? 
 
A: That's because neutrality and fairness are required in education. 
The purpose is to avoid any influence of the head of a local 
government or a certain political group. 
 
Q: Well then, is the system of the board of education functioning 
properly? 
 
A: It's hard to say so. Regarding the recently revealed problem of 
the failure of high schools to teach certain compulsory subjects, 
the school principal was held accountable, but the boards of 
education that failed to check to see whether the curriculum was 
appropriate should also have been seen as a problem. The failure is 
attributable in part to the cozy relationship between the 
superintendent of the board of education and teachers, given that 
the post of superintendent has been almost always been occupied by 
former teachers. Another conceivable reason is that the members of 
the board of education are part-timers, so they do not actually 
engage in educational administration. State Minister in Charge of 
Regulatory Reform Genichiro Sata criticizes the current state of the 
board of education, raising this question: "Is it enough for 
nonprofessional part-timers to gather only once or twice a month?" 
 
Q: It is difficult to understand why a board of education must be 
established in every prefecture, city, town and village. 
 
A: Relations between the prefectural, city, town, and village boards 
of education are so complicated that it is unclear who is 
responsible and who has power and authority. For example, school 
personnel at a municipal primary school are classified as employees 
of a municipal government, but the authority over personnel issues 
lies with the prefectural board of education. That's why even though 
there might be a known bad teacher at one school, the local board of 
education cannot do anything about it. 
 
Q: Is it a wise policy for the central government to engage in 
reforming the system of the board of education? 
 
A: Considering Prime Minister Shinzo Abe's views of education and 
the state, he surely wants to strengthen the central government's 
involvement in the reform of the board of education. State Minister 
Sata, as well, treats education on part with foreign policy and 
defense affairs, and he has stated, "The central government will 
guide and supervise." 
 
But the government's engagement could give rise to criticisms like 
"state control." The government's Council for the Promotion of 
Regulatory Reform has come up with a report suggesting that the 
 
TOKYO 00006432  009 OF 009 
 
 
regulations requiring each municipality to establish a board of 
education be repealed, and that power and authority be put in the 
hand of the school principal on the responsibility of the head of a 
municipality. In short, in view of decentralization of authority (to 
local governments) and deregulation, the central government's 
involvement in education goes against the spirit of regulatory 
reform. 
 
Q: We hear there have been calls for dismantling the board of 
education system. 
 
A: The opposition Democratic Party of Japan (Minshuto) asserts that 
the board of education system should be abolished, and that the head 
of the local municipality should serve as the top responsible 
official for educational administration. But the problem about this 
idea is that there may emerge a big difference in educational 
administration from one community to the next. Incidentally, from a 
political point of view, the ruling coalition parties are unlikely 
to accept the opposition party's proposal. At any rate, the reform 
of the board of education system is a difficult issue because it 
involves the intricate relationship of education, local autonomy, 
and deregulation. 
 
SCHIEFFER