VZCZCXRO5653
PP RUEHFK RUEHKSO RUEHNAG RUEHNH
DE RUEHKO #6650/01 3252241
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
P 212241Z NOV 06
FM AMEMBASSY TOKYO
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 8510
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 1383
RUEHFK/AMCONSUL FUKUOKA 8891
RUEHOK/AMCONSUL OSAKA KOBE 2301
RUEHNAG/AMCONSUL NAGOYA 8487
RUEHKSO/AMCONSUL SAPPORO 9934
RUEHBJ/AMEMBASSY BEIJING 4953
RUEHUL/AMEMBASSY SEOUL 1057
RUCNDT/USMISSION USUN NEW YORK 2555

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 07 TOKYO 006650 
 
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 11/21/06 
 
 
INDEX: 
 
(1) US lawyer: Priority to efficiency caused incident of unapproved 
glandular material mixed in shipment 
 
(2) In BSE debate, US lawyer points out loose management of anti-BSE 
safety measures: "Even beef from sick cattle is allowed into US food 
chain" 
 
(3) Changing Okinawa (Part 1): Voters place emphasis more on economy 
than base issue; New governor to look for common ground on Futenma 
relocation 
 
(4) Interview with former defense chief Shigeru Ishiba -- Nuclear 
debate must not be suppressed 
 
ARTICLES: 
 
(1) US lawyer: Priority to efficiency caused incident of unapproved 
glandular material mixed in shipment 
 
NIHON NOGYO SHIMBUN (Page?) (Full) 
November 10, 2006 
 
It has been disclosed that sweetbread, a glandular material that is 
not authorized for exports to Japan, was found in a US veal shipment 
to Japan. In this connection, Felicia Nestor, an American lawyer who 
supports whistle-blowing activities about the insufficient 
implementation of anti-BSE safety measures in the US, stressed in a 
speech in Osaka on Nov. 9 that the meatpacker in question is "famous 
for its quick slaughter process." He attributed the incident to its 
stance of giving priority to efficiency. Nestor also reported on the 
loose management of safety measures across the US, saying, "There 
are not many government meat inspectors. In addition, they have not 
been granted enough authority to give instructions on improvement 
measures." 
 
In slaughterhouses in the US, meat inspectors determine the age of 
cattle and check if specified risk materials are fully removed. 
Nestor said, "Some inspectors are asked to inspect (almost 
simultaneously) two or three plants which are located 200 kilometer 
away from one another. The number of inspectors should be increased 
by 10 to 15%." 
 
When a violation of rules on anti-BSE and other measures takes 
place, the responsible inspector submits a report on the violation 
to the government, but according to Nestor, "(They have no authority 
to give instructions to the plant in question, and) only with the 
plant's presentation of improvement measures, it is concluded that 
improvement measures have already been taken." 
 
Of the 35 plants certified to export meat to Japan, violation cases 
involving 26 facilities have been recorded. Regarding these cases, 
the Japanese government's data note that improvement measures have 
been taken, but Nestor said, "The plants in problem might have taken 
only make-shift measures." 
 
Nestor handled internal complaints from meat inspectors until 2004 
as a government project member in the US Food Safety Department. He 
still supports whistle-blower activities. 
 
(2) In BSE debate, US lawyer points out loose management of anti-BSE 
safety measures: "Even beef from sick cattle is allowed into US food 
 
TOKYO 00006650  002 OF 007 
 
 
chain" 
 
AKAHATA (Page?) (Full) 
November 12, 2006 
 
"The United States has not excluded sick cattle from its 
distribution channel." During a debate session on BSE in Toyo on 
Nov. 11, Felicia Nestor, a US lawyer supporting whistle-blowing 
activities by meat inspectors of the US Department of Agriculture, 
underscored the sloppiness of safety procedures taken at 
slaughterhouses and packing plants in the US. 
 
In Japan, the government has taken safeguard measures, but in the 
US, meatpackers are responsible for ensuring the safety of beef. 
According to Nestor, six cows are slaughtered in one second, but 
"government inspectors have no authority to stop the process even if 
they think it is dangerous." Nestor further said that the process is 
slowed down when foreign inspectors are watching it, adding, "The 
speed is picked up again once the investigators leave the site. It 
is impossible to conduct a snap inspection (as suggested by the 
Japanese government)." 
 
Just after Japan ended its original import ban on US beef imports, 
vertebral columns, designated as a specified risk material, were 
found in a US veal shipment. In reaction, Japan reinstated the ban. 
The reinstated ban was lifted this July, but only three months after 
that, sweetbread, an unapproved glandular material, was found in a 
shipment. Nestor said, "Most of the workers at leading companies are 
migrant workers. Even if executives intend to thoroughly observe 
safety procedures for Japan-bound beef, such workers do not 
understand English." 
 
In a lecture delivered in the debate session, Tokyo Medical College 
Professor Kiyotoshi Kaneko (former acting chairman of the prion 
panel under the Food Safety Commission) explained how the 
government, though the safety of US beef remained unconfirmed 
scientifically, used the panel's report of recommendation compiled 
on the assumption of implementation of a program of exports to 
Japan. He then pointed out, "The US and Japan have used different 
safety standards." 
 
Zenkoku Shokkenren (National Food Health Association) sponsored the 
debate session. One participant stressed, "The fog is now clearing. 
Japan should call on the US to take the same safety measures as 
Japan's." 
 
Focusing on the repeated Beef Export Verification (BEV) violations 
by the US, the office of House of Councillors member Tomoko Kami of 
the Japanese Communist Party has produced a report titled, "BEV 
violation records at US slaughterhouses with licenses to ship beef 
to Japan. 
 
(3) Changing Okinawa (Part 1): Voters place emphasis more on economy 
than base issue; New governor to look for common ground on Futenma 
relocation 
 
ASAHI (Page 37) (Full) 
November 21, 2006 
 
Hirokazu Nakaima, 67, former chairman of Okinawa Electric Power 
Company, won Sunday's Okinawa gubernatorial election, defeating 
former House of Councillors member Keiko Itokazu, who had the 
backing of opposition parties, by a margin of about 37,000 votes. 
 
TOKYO 00006650  003 OF 007 
 
 
Nakaima won about 350,000 votes. What is now occurring in Okinawa? 
 
Late at night of Nov. 19 Yoshikazu Shimabukuro, 60, the mayor of 
Nago City, to which area the US Marine Corps Air Station Futenma is 
slacted to be relocated (from Ginowan City), was in the office of 
Nakaima, the candidate-backed by the ruling coalition for the 
gubernatorial election. When it was reported that Nakaima was sure 
to win the race, Shimabukuro, his face beaming, said: "The 
prefecture's administration cannot be run by advocating only peace. 
(This view) became a strong driving force for the victory." 
 
Shimabukuro was elected the mayor of Nago City in January, pledging 
to take over the policy led by the late Mayor Takeo Kishimoto. 
 
Kishimoto locked horns with the central government over the Futenma 
relocation issue, while joining hands with the central government. 
He urged the government to accept seven requests, including reaching 
a conclusion on the use of the base, as conditions for constructing 
a facility in the offing of Henoko district, in Nago City. When the 
Japanese and US governments picked Cape Henoko adjacent to 
residential areas as a new relocation site, Kishimoto reacted 
strongly, arguing, "That's out of question!" 
 
During the campaign for the mayoral election, Shimabukuro also 
vowed: "I cannot accept any ideas that are not within the scope of 
the Henoko offing plan." However, he eventually accepted the 
government's V-shaped runway plan, which was designed to avoid 
flights over residential areas. 
 
On the morning of Nov. 20, Shimabukuro told a group of press corps: 
"We have assumed a position of accepting the V-shaped runaway plan. 
I will move things while consulting with Mr. Nakaima." 
 
Nakaima will follow the prefectural administration led by Gov. 
Kenichi Inamine. Like Shimabukuro, Nakaima seems to be willing to 
cooperate with the central government regarding the Futenma 
relocation. 
 
Inamine accepted the relocation of Futenma heliport within the 
prefecture on the condition that a 15-year limit should be set on 
the use of the replacement facility for Futenma. He opposed, 
however, the Cape Henoko plan even though tensions grew between 
Okinawa and Tokyo. 
 
Nakaima, who was serving as chairman of the Okinawa Chamber of 
Commerce and Industry, was one of those who openly criticized 
Inamine's policy line. Nakaima said in a meeting of an economic 
circle: "It is not to good to clash with the government." The 
dominant view in Okinawan business organizations was that it would 
be wise for Okinawa to elicit assistance from the government to 
promote its economy, making compromises with Tokyo. 
 
Nakaima, however, took a vague stance toward the V-shaped runaway 
plan, while saying, "I cannot accept the plan as is." When asked by 
reporters about how he would deal with the V-shaped plan, he 
revealed the view of seeking common ground, responding, "I would 
like to look for a satisfying answer, consulting with the 
government." 
 
The mayor of Nago City has changed from Kishimoto to Shimabukuro, 
and Nakaima will replace Okinawa Gov. Inamine. Changing times call 
for new leaders. 
 
 
TOKYO 00006650  004 OF 007 
 
 
In a bid to reduce Okinawa's burden of US military bases, the Henoko 
offing plan was hammered out within the framework of the Japan-US 
Special Action Committee on Okinawa (SACO), which was set up 
following the rape of a schoolgirl by US servicemen in 1995. 
 
The purpose of the transformation of US forces is to bolster the US 
military posture to cope immediately with global terrorism. In 
Japan-US consultations, the priority was placed on reaching an 
agreement between the two governments, leaving local sentiments on a 
back burner. 
 
One Okinawa government official, feeling a change in the tide, 
said: 
 
"The maneuvering of taking US bases hostage no longer worked in 
negotiating the realignment of US forces. Gov. Inamine, who followed 
SACO, had to wrap up his term in office along with SACO. Mr. Nakaima 
will likely place emphasis on the economy rather than politics in 
dealing with the US base issues." 
 
(4) Interview with former defense chief Shigeru Ishiba -- Nuclear 
debate must not be suppressed 
 
Shukan Asahi (Pp.22-25) (Abridged slightly) 
December 1, 2006 
 
LDP Policy Research Council Chairman Shoichi Nakagawa's remarks have 
ignited "debate on possessing nuclear weapons." Many segments of the 
Japanese media are dismissive of nuclear debate. Is Japan not 
allowed to discuss such an option? Isn't it appropriate for Japan to 
discuss it as the only country in the world that suffered from 
atomic bombings? Writer Eiji Oshita interviewed former Defense 
Agency Director-General Shigeru Ishiba. 
 
Q: Remarks on possessing nuclear weapons by Foreign Minister Taro 
Aso and LDP Policy Research Council Chairman Shoichi Nakgawa have 
sparked controversy. As the person holding the record of the 
second-longest serving defense chief in the country, what do you 
think of their comments? 
 
A: The Japanese media have been dismissive of just discussing the 
subject. I think we should debate whether or not Japan should 
possess nuclear weapons. If you compare advantages and disadvantages 
of possessing a nuclear arsenal, the disadvantages outnumber 
advantages, making it clear that possessing nuclear arms does not 
serve our national interests in any way. 
 
Q: Prime Minister (Shinzo) Abe has indicated that no Cabinet, 
government, or party panels would discuss the option of possessing 
nukes. What do you think of that? 
 
A: If one thinks Japan should go nuclear or make changes to the 
three non-nuclear principles, including one not allowing bringing 
nuclear weapons into Japan, and believes that is important for 
Japan's independence and peace, then voicing such a view openly 
would be his responsibility as a lawmaker. 
 
Q: One should express one's view openly. 
 
A: I agree. I hear that Secretary General (Hidenao) Nakagawa said in 
a press conference that the party would not discuss it. If we don't 
discuss matters, we will lose our ability to think. If we don't give 
logical thought to security affairs, the country could swing to an 
 
TOKYO 00006650  005 OF 007 
 
 
extreme direction, giving way to idealistic arguments, as it did in 
the past. Not discussing matters is very dangerous. 
 
Q: You have a point there. Without discussion, the country will head 
for a dangerous direction. 
 
A: As a party in power, the LDP must have its panel discuss the 
matter. That's lawmakers' job. If one is keeping his mouth shut for 
fear of losing votes from being labeled as a hawk or a rightist, he 
is not fulfilling his responsibility as a lawmaker. 
 
Q: Prime Minister Abe has presented himself as a 
middle-of-the-roader. But his lack of warnings to Mr. Aso and Mr. 
Nakagawa suggests that he is flying a trial balloon by using those 
two. 
 
A: I don't know about that. But if he really believes that Japan 
should uphold the three non-nuclear principles, he should present 
the reasons for it in party-head debates. His ambiguity may come 
from his hesitation about paving the way for possessing nuclear 
weapons at this point in light of his international strategy. 
 
Q: What is your view as a former defense chief? 
 
A: Some people think Japan should possess nukes but I don't find 
their argument realistic. Their argument is impulsive rather than 
strategic. I'm afraid other countries feel Japan's nuclear debate is 
dangerous. We, security experts, are realists. My belief is that 
defense affairs must be discussed pragmatically, not 
idealistically. 
 
Q: What would happen if Japan goes nuclear? 
 
A: National livelihood would be affected tremendously. Forty% of 
Japan's electricity depends on nuclear power generation. Possessing 
nuclear weapons means a departure from the Nuclear Nonproliferation 
Treaty. As the next step, Japan would have to cancel its nuclear 
cooperation treaties with America, Canada, Australia, France, 
Britain, and other countries. As a result, the imports of fuel, 
reprocessing, and the supply of technology would stop, and nuclear 
power plants would eventually cease to operate. 
 
Q: Can the country's electricity generated by the nuclear power 
plants now in place be substituted by other means? 
 
A: It's not possible to substitute it with wind electricity because 
we wont' be able to build enough windmills. The use of solar light 
and heat would require a tremendous area just for generating the 
electricity equivalent to one nuclear reactor, and would cost 25 
times more. I'm sure Mr. (Shoichi) Nakagawa is aware all that 
because he once served as economy, trade, and industry minister. 
 
Q: What about relations with the United States? 
 
A: Japan going nuclear would be regarded as a declaration that 
America's nuclear umbrella is untrustworthy. There are all sorts of 
people in the United States. Some academics think Japan should 
possess nuclear arsenal. Even some government officials say the same 
thing off the record. But the US government will never think that 
Japan should arm itself with nuclear weapons, for such would lead to 
an announcement of its distrust of the Japan-US alliance that might 
tremendously deteriorate relations with Japan. To Americans, Japan 
is a fearful country, with which they fought war for four years. 
 
TOKYO 00006650  006 OF 007 
 
 
 
Q: You think America has latent fear toward Japan? 
 
A: I think so. It has fear toward China, as well. A US-China 
alliance might emerge the day Japan possesses nuclear arms. Japan 
would lose a great deal of what it has gained from the Japan-US 
security setup. "Anti-America" might strike a chord with many 
Japanese people because it sounds cool, but we must discuss squarely 
what we might lose because of it. That's why I'm saying that nuclear 
deterrence and nuclear armament should be discussed. 
 
Q: I would like to see more debate on those factors. 
 
A: Japan's possession of nuclear weapons would fundamentally rock 
the NPT system. Some other countries would say, "Because Japan, the 
only country ever to have suffered nuclear devastation, possesses 
nuclear arsenal, we will follow suit." South Korea, Taiwan, 
Malaysia, and Indonesia would all rush to nukes. A world filled with 
nuclear powers would be far worse than the NPT system today. I don't 
understand why Japan has to trigger to build such a world. 
 
Q: Obviously, those believing in advantages in a "nuclear deterrent" 
don't agree with you. 
 
A: Japan is becoming like North Korea. (Laughter) Having nukes as a 
deterrent is North Korea's logic. North Korea is isolated in the 
world, whereas Japan is America's ally and has relations with many 
countries in the world. The two should not say the same thing. 
 
Q: Some people just don't see reality. 
 
A: Nuclear weapons would inflate defense spending. Maintaining nukes 
would require tremendous costs. It would be even more costly if 
Japan pursues a complete, independent defense capability by walking 
away from the Japan-US alliance. That would take a heavy toll on 
people's livelihood. That is exactly what's happening in North 
Korea. 
 
Q: Then, how should Japan deal with nuclear weapons targeting 
Japan? 
 
A: In the near future, Japan will be able to intercept an incoming 
nuclear missile by using the missile defense system. 
 
Q: What are the chances of intercepting an incoming missile? 
 
A: Pretty high, because it's a two-staged system - at sea and 
ground. 
 
Q: You mean right now? 
 
A: The ground system will be in place in December this year, ahead 
of original schedule. Japan will finish deploying the overall system 
in five to ten years. 
 
Q: Progress in research will enable Japan to shoot down 999 missiles 
out of 1,000? 
 
A: That's possible in the future. 
 
Q: Will the government budget funds for it? 
 
A: The government decided to introduce the missile defense system 
 
TOKYO 00006650  007 OF 007 
 
 
when I was serving as defense chief. At that time, many people 
harshly criticized me. They didn't know anything about the missile 
defense system. They said the system would be useless. 
 
Q: Mr. Ishiba, you are now serving as chair of the LDP defense 
policy subcommittee. 
 
A: Once our debate on the right to collective self-defense is over, 
we are scheduled to discuss "Japan's national policy," including the 
three non-nuclear principles. 
 
Q: But the secretary general has indicated that the party should not 
discuss such matters. Is there a possibility that Mr. Nakagawa will 
order discontinuing discussion? 
 
A: That would depend on the time. 
 
Q: If he said so, you would not be able to discuss the subject? 
 
A: The Policy Research Council has exclusive authority over policy 
discussion. I don't know at this point if the secretary general's 
decision can sway the PRC's policy direction and what would be 
discussed by the General Council. 
 
Q: The situation is quite severe, isn't it? The other day, I watched 
the TV program "Discuss until Morning," in which 55% of viewers said 
Japan should consider going nuclear, while 41% did not think so. 
Such figures might prompt some lawmakers to call for Japan going 
nuclear. 
 
A: I didn't expect those figures. I noticed that even those who 
think Japan should not go nuclear remained in the realm of emotional 
argument. They repeated, "as the only country in the world that ever 
suffered atomic bombings." People on either side lacked solid logic. 
That's why I think realists must step in and clearly explain why 
Japan must not possess nuclear arms. 
 
SCHIEFFER