Keep Us Strong WikiLeaks logo

Currently released so far... 143912 / 251,287

Articles

Browse latest releases

Browse by creation date

Browse by origin

A B C D F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W Y Z

Browse by tag

A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z
AORC AS AF AM AJ ASEC AU AMGT APER ACOA ASEAN AG AFFAIRS AR AFIN ABUD AO AEMR ADANA AMED AADP AINF ARF ADB ACS AE AID AL AC AGR ABLD AMCHAMS AECL AINT AND ASIG AUC APECO AFGHANISTAN AY ARABL ACAO ANET AFSN AZ AFLU ALOW ASSK AFSI ACABQ AMB APEC AIDS AA ATRN AMTC AVIATION AESC ASSEMBLY ADPM ASECKFRDCVISKIRFPHUMSMIGEG AGOA ASUP AFPREL ARNOLD ADCO AN ACOTA AODE AROC AMCHAM AT ACKM ASCH AORCUNGA AVIANFLU AVIAN AIT ASECPHUM ATRA AGENDA AIN AFINM APCS AGENGA ABDALLAH ALOWAR AFL AMBASSADOR ARSO AGMT ASPA AOREC AGAO ARR AOMS ASC ALIREZA AORD AORG ASECVE ABER ARABBL ADM AMER ALVAREZ AORCO ARM APERTH AINR AGRI ALZUGUREN ANGEL ACDA AEMED ARC AMGMT AEMRASECCASCKFLOMARRPRELPINRAMGTJMXL ASECAFINGMGRIZOREPTU ABMC AIAG ALJAZEERA ASR ASECARP ALAMI APRM ASECM AMPR AEGR AUSTRALIAGROUP ASE AMGTHA ARNOLDFREDERICK AIDAC AOPC ANTITERRORISM ASEG AMIA ASEX AEMRBC AFOR ABT AMERICA AGENCIES AGS ADRC ASJA AEAID ANARCHISTS AME AEC ALNEA AMGE AMEDCASCKFLO AK ANTONIO ASO AFINIZ ASEDC AOWC ACCOUNT ACTION AMG AFPK AOCR AMEDI AGIT ASOC ACOAAMGT AMLB AZE AORCYM AORL AGRICULTURE ACEC AGUILAR ASCC AFSA ASES ADIP ASED ASCE ASFC ASECTH AFGHAN ANTXON APRC AFAF AFARI ASECEFINKCRMKPAOPTERKHLSAEMRNS AX ALAB ASECAF ASA ASECAFIN ASIC AFZAL AMGTATK ALBE AMT AORCEUNPREFPRELSMIGBN AGUIRRE AAA ABLG ARCH AGRIC AIHRC ADEL AMEX ALI AQ ATFN AORCD ARAS AINFCY AFDB ACBAQ AFDIN AOPR AREP ALEXANDER ALANAZI ABDULRAHMEN ABDULHADI ATRD AEIR AOIC ABLDG AFR ASEK AER ALOUNI AMCT AVERY ASECCASC ARG APR AMAT AEMRS AFU ATPDEA ALL ASECE ANDREW
EAIR ECON ETRD EAGR EAID EFIN ETTC ENRG EMIN ECPS EG EPET EINV ELAB EU ECONOMICS EC EZ EUN EN ECIN EWWT EXTERNAL ENIV ES ESA ELN EFIS EIND EPA ELTN EXIM ET EINT EI ER EAIDAF ETRO ETRDECONWTOCS ECTRD EUR ECOWAS ECUN EBRD ECONOMIC ENGR ECONOMY EFND ELECTIONS EPECO EUMEM ETMIN EXBS EAIRECONRP ERTD EAP ERGR EUREM EFI EIB ENGY ELNTECON EAIDXMXAXBXFFR ECOSOC EEB EINF ETRN ENGRD ESTH ENRC EXPORT EK ENRGMO ECO EGAD EXIMOPIC ETRDPGOV EURM ETRA ENERG ECLAC EINO ENVIRONMENT EFIC ECIP ETRDAORC ENRD EMED EIAR ECPN ELAP ETCC EAC ENEG ESCAP EWWC ELTD ELA EIVN ELF ETR EFTA EMAIL EL EMS EID ELNT ECPSN ERIN ETT EETC ELAN ECHEVARRIA EPWR EVIN ENVR ENRGJM ELBR EUC EARG EAPC EICN EEC EREL EAIS ELBA EPETUN EWWY ETRDGK EV EDU EFN EVN EAIDETRD ENRGTRGYETRDBEXPBTIOSZ ETEX ESCI EAIDHO EENV ETRC ESOC EINDQTRD EINVA EFLU EGEN ECE EAGRBN EON EFINECONCS EIAD ECPC ENV ETDR EAGER ETRDKIPR EWT EDEV ECCP ECCT EARI EINVECON ED ETRDEC EMINETRD EADM ENRGPARMOTRASENVKGHGPGOVECONTSPLEAID ETAD ECOM ECONETRDEAGRJA EMINECINECONSENVTBIONS ESSO ETRG ELAM ECA EENG EITC ENG ERA EPSC ECONEINVETRDEFINELABETRDKTDBPGOVOPIC EIPR ELABPGOVBN EURFOR ETRAD EUE EISNLN ECONETRDBESPAR ELAINE EGOVSY EAUD EAGRECONEINVPGOVBN EINVETRD EPIN ECONENRG EDRC ESENV EB ENER ELTNSNAR EURN ECONPGOVBN ETTF ENVT EPIT ESOCI EFINOECD ERD EDUC EUM ETEL EUEAID ENRGY ETD EAGRE EAR EAIDMG EE EET ETER ERICKSON EIAID EX EAG EBEXP ESTN EAIDAORC EING EGOV EEOC EAGRRP EVENTS ENRGKNNPMNUCPARMPRELNPTIAEAJMXL ETRDEMIN EPETEIND EAIDRW ENVI ETRDEINVECINPGOVCS EPEC EDUARDO EGAR EPCS EPRT EAIDPHUMPRELUG EPTED ETRB EPETPGOV ECONQH EAIDS EFINECONEAIDUNGAGM EAIDAR EAGRBTIOBEXPETRDBN ESF EINR ELABPHUMSMIGKCRMBN EIDN ETRK ESTRADA EXEC EAIO EGHG ECN EDA ECOS EPREL EINVKSCA ENNP ELABV ETA EWWTPRELPGOVMASSMARRBN EUCOM EAIDASEC ENR END EP ERNG ESPS EITI EINTECPS EAVI ECONEFINETRDPGOVEAGRPTERKTFNKCRMEAID ELTRN EADI ELDIN ELND ECRM EINVEFIN EAOD EFINTS EINDIR ENRGKNNP ETRDEIQ ETC EAIRASECCASCID EINN ETRP EAIDNI EFQ ECOQKPKO EGPHUM EBUD EAIT ECONEINVEFINPGOVIZ EWWI ENERGY ELB EINDETRD EMI ECONEAIR ECONEFIN EHUM EFNI EOXC EISNAR ETRDEINVTINTCS EIN EFIM EMW ETIO ETRDGR EMN EXO EATO EWTR ELIN EAGREAIDPGOVPRELBN EINVETC ETTD EIQ ECONCS EPPD ESS EUEAGR ENRGIZ EISL EUNJ EIDE ENRGSD ELAD ESPINOSA ELEC EAIG ESLCO ENTG ETRDECD EINVECONSENVCSJA EEPET EUNCH ECINECONCS
KPKO KIPR KWBG KPAL KDEM KTFN KNNP KGIC KTIA KCRM KDRG KWMN KJUS KIDE KSUM KTIP KFRD KMCA KMDR KCIP KTDB KPAO KPWR KOMC KU KIRF KCOR KHLS KISL KSCA KGHG KS KSTH KSEP KE KPAI KWAC KFRDKIRFCVISCMGTKOCIASECPHUMSMIGEG KPRP KVPR KAWC KUNR KZ KPLS KN KSTC KMFO KID KNAR KCFE KRIM KFLO KCSA KG KFSC KSCI KFLU KMIG KRVC KV KVRP KMPI KNEI KAPO KOLY KGIT KSAF KIRC KNSD KBIO KHIV KHDP KBTR KHUM KSAC KACT KRAD KPRV KTEX KPIR KDMR KMPF KPFO KICA KWMM KICC KR KCOM KAID KINR KBCT KOCI KCRS KTER KSPR KDP KFIN KCMR KMOC KUWAIT KIPRZ KSEO KLIG KWIR KISM KLEG KTBD KCUM KMSG KMWN KREL KPREL KAWK KIMT KCSY KESS KWPA KNPT KTBT KCROM KPOW KFTN KPKP KICR KGHA KOMS KJUST KREC KOC KFPC KGLB KMRS KTFIN KCRCM KWNM KHGH KRFD KY KGCC KFEM KVIR KRCM KEMR KIIP KPOA KREF KJRE KRKO KOGL KSCS KGOV KCRIM KEM KCUL KRIF KCEM KITA KCRN KCIS KSEAO KWMEN KEANE KNNC KNAP KEDEM KNEP KHPD KPSC KIRP KUNC KALM KCCP KDEN KSEC KAYLA KIMMITT KO KNUC KSIA KLFU KLAB KTDD KIRCOEXC KECF KIPRETRDKCRM KNDP KIRCHOFF KJAN KFRDSOCIRO KWMNSMIG KEAI KKPO KPOL KRD KWMNPREL KATRINA KBWG KW KPPD KTIAEUN KDHS KRV KBTS KWCI KICT KPALAOIS KPMI KWN KTDM KWM KLHS KLBO KDEMK KT KIDS KWWW KLIP KPRM KSKN KTTB KTRD KNPP KOR KGKG KNN KTIAIC KSRE KDRL KVCORR KDEMGT KOMO KSTCC KMAC KSOC KMCC KCHG KSEPCVIS KGIV KPO KSEI KSTCPL KSI KRMS KFLOA KIND KPPAO KCM KRFR KICCPUR KFRDCVISCMGTCASCKOCIASECPHUMSMIGEG KNNB KFAM KWWMN KENV KGH KPOP KFCE KNAO KTIAPARM KWMNKDEM KDRM KNNNP KEVIN KEMPI KWIM KGCN KUM KMGT KKOR KSMT KISLSCUL KNRV KPRO KOMCSG KLPM KDTB KFGM KCRP KAUST KNNPPARM KUNH KWAWC KSPA KTSC KUS KSOCI KCMA KTFR KPAOPREL KNNPCH KWGB KSTT KNUP KPGOV KUK KMNP KPAS KHMN KPAD KSTS KCORR KI KLSO KWNN KNP KPTD KESO KMPP KEMS KPAONZ KPOV KTLA KPAOKMDRKE KNMP KWMNCI KWUN KRDP KWKN KPAOY KEIM KGICKS KIPT KREISLER KTAO KJU KLTN KWMNPHUMPRELKPAOZW KEN KQ KWPR KSCT KGHGHIV KEDU KRCIM KFIU KWIC KNNO KILS KTIALG KNNA KMCAJO KINP KRM KLFLO KPA KOMCCO KKIV KHSA KDM KRCS KWBGSY KISLAO KNPPIS KNNPMNUC KCRI KX KWWT KPAM KVRC KERG KK KSUMPHUM KACP KSLG KIF KIVP KHOURY KNPR KUNRAORC KCOG KCFC KWMJN KFTFN KTFM KPDD KMPIO KCERS KDUM KDEMAF KMEPI KHSL KEPREL KAWX KIRL KNNR KOMH KMPT KISLPINR KADM KPER KTPN KSCAECON KA KJUSTH KPIN KDEV KCSI KNRG KAKA KFRP KTSD KINL KJUSKUNR KQM KQRDQ KWBC KMRD KVBL KOM KMPL KEDM KFLD KPRD KRGY KNNF KPROG KIFR KPOKO KM KWMNCS KAWS KLAP KPAK KHIB KOEM KDDG KCGC
PGOV PREL PK PTER PINR PO PHUM PARM PREF PINF PRL PM PINS PROP PALESTINIAN PE PBTS PNAT PHSA PL PA PSEPC POSTS POLITICS POLICY POL PU PAHO PHUMPGOV PGOG PARALYMPIC PGOC PNR PREFA PMIL POLITICAL PROV PRUM PBIO PAK POV POLG PAR POLM PHUMPREL PKO PUNE PROG PEL PROPERTY PKAO PRE PSOE PHAS PNUM PGOVE PY PIRF PRES POWELL PP PREM PCON PGOVPTER PGOVPREL PODC PTBS PTEL PGOVTI PHSAPREL PD PG PRC PVOV PLO PRELL PEPFAR PREK PEREZ PINT POLI PPOL PARTIES PT PRELUN PH PENA PIN PGPV PKST PROTESTS PHSAK PRM PROLIFERATION PGOVBL PAS PUM PMIG PGIC PTERPGOV PSHA PHM PHARM PRELHA PELOSI PGOVKCMABN PQM PETER PJUS PKK POUS PTE PGOVPRELPHUMPREFSMIGELABEAIDKCRMKWMN PERM PRELGOV PAO PNIR PARMP PRELPGOVEAIDECONEINVBEXPSCULOIIPBTIO PHYTRP PHUML PFOV PDEM PUOS PN PRESIDENT PERURENA PRIVATIZATION PHUH PIF POG PERL PKPA PREI PTERKU PSEC PRELKSUMXABN PETROL PRIL POLUN PPD PRELUNSC PREZ PCUL PREO PGOVZI POLMIL PERSONS PREFL PASS PV PETERS PING PQL PETR PARMS PNUC PS PARLIAMENT PINSCE PROTECTION PLAB PGV PBS PGOVENRGCVISMASSEAIDOPRCEWWTBN PKNP PSOCI PSI PTERM PLUM PF PVIP PARP PHUMQHA PRELNP PHIM PRELBR PUBLIC PHUMKPAL PHAM PUAS PBOV PRELTBIOBA PGOVU PHUMPINS PICES PGOVENRG PRELKPKO PHU PHUMKCRS POGV PATTY PSOC PRELSP PREC PSO PAIGH PKPO PARK PRELPLS PRELPK PHUS PPREL PTERPREL PROL PDA PRELPGOV PRELAF PAGE PGOVGM PGOVECON PHUMIZNL PMAR PGOVAF PMDL PKBL PARN PARMIR PGOVEAIDUKNOSWGMHUCANLLHFRSPITNZ PDD PRELKPAO PKMN PRELEZ PHUMPRELPGOV PARTM PGOVEAGRKMCAKNARBN PPEL PGOVPRELPINRBN PGOVSOCI PWBG PGOVEAID PGOVPM PBST PKEAID PRAM PRELEVU PHUMA PGOR PPA PINSO PROVE PRELKPAOIZ PPAO PHUMPRELBN PGVO PHUMPTER PAGR PMIN PBTSEWWT PHUMR PDOV PINO PARAGRAPH PACE PINL PKPAL PTERE PGOVAU PGOF PBTSRU PRGOV PRHUM PCI PGO PRELEUN PAC PRESL PORG PKFK PEPR PRELP PMR PRTER PNG PGOVPHUMKPAO PRELECON PRELNL PINOCHET PAARM PKPAO PFOR PGOVLO PHUMBA POPDC PRELC PHUME PER PHJM POLINT PGOVPZ PGOVKCRM PAUL PHALANAGE PARTY PPEF PECON PEACE PROCESS PPGOV PLN PRELSW PHUMS PRF PEDRO PHUMKDEM PUNR PVPR PATRICK PGOVKMCAPHUMBN PRELA PGGV PSA PGOVSMIGKCRMKWMNPHUMCVISKFRDCA PGIV PRFE POGOV PBT PAMQ

Browse by classification

Community resources

courage is contagious

Viewing cable 08TOKYO1573, DAILY SUMMARY OF JAPANESE PRESS 06/09/08

If you are new to these pages, please read an introduction on the structure of a cable as well as how to discuss them with others. See also the FAQs

Understanding cables
Every cable message consists of three parts:
  • The top box shows each cables unique reference number, when and by whom it originally was sent, and what its initial classification was.
  • The middle box contains the header information that is associated with the cable. It includes information about the receiver(s) as well as a general subject.
  • The bottom box presents the body of the cable. The opening can contain a more specific subject, references to other cables (browse by origin to find them) or additional comment. This is followed by the main contents of the cable: a summary, a collection of specific topics and a comment section.
To understand the justification used for the classification of each cable, please use this WikiSource article as reference.

Discussing cables
If you find meaningful or important information in a cable, please link directly to its unique reference number. Linking to a specific paragraph in the body of a cable is also possible by copying the appropriate link (to be found at theparagraph symbol). Please mark messages for social networking services like Twitter with the hash tags #cablegate and a hash containing the reference ID e.g. #08TOKYO1573.
Reference ID Created Released Classification Origin
08TOKYO1573 2008-06-09 22:58 2011-08-26 00:00 UNCLASSIFIED Embassy Tokyo
VZCZCXRO4994
PP RUEHFK RUEHKSO RUEHNAG RUEHNH
DE RUEHKO #1573/01 1612258
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
P 092258Z JUN 08 ZDK
FM AMEMBASSY TOKYO
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 4889
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/USFJ //J5/JO21//
RUYNAAC/COMNAVFORJAPAN YOKOSUKA JA
RUAYJAA/CTF 72
RUEHNH/AMCONSUL NAHA 0614
RUEHFK/AMCONSUL FUKUOKA 8239
RUEHOK/AMCONSUL OSAKA KOBE 1930
RUEHNAG/AMCONSUL NAGOYA 6519
RUEHKSO/AMCONSUL SAPPORO 8829
RUEHBJ/AMEMBASSY BEIJING 3786
RUEHUL/AMEMBASSY SEOUL 9785
RUCNDT/USMISSION USUN NEW YORK 0211
UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 10 TOKYO 001573 
 
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 06/09/08 
 
 
INDEX: 
 
(1) LDP's Machimura faction internally strained by leadership 
struggle between Machimura and Nakagawa (Yomiuri) 
 
(2) China may be testing ballistic missiles in the Yellow Sea 
(Sankei) 
 
(3) Energy ministerial among Japan, U.S., China, India and South 
Korea exposes difficulty in policy coordination; Differences in 
views evident over subsidies (Nikkei) 
 
(4) Energy ministers feel sense of impasse over unusually high 
current price of oil (Yomiuri) 
 
(5) Closed-loop of Japan-China gas field issue: Odds are against 
Japan's claim (Sentaku) 
 
(6) Fukuda's Kantei and Sichuan earthquake (Part A): Inside story on 
aid to China after quake; Foreign Ministry: "If U.S. is to extend 50 
million yen in aid, Japan needs to provide 10 times that amount"; 
Chinese vice-foreign minister: "Time is not ripe for SDF dispatch" 
(Yomiuri) 
 
(7) Japan should not join cluster banning treaty (Sankei)  8 
 
ARTICLES: 
 
(1) LDP's Machimura faction internally strained by leadership 
struggle between Machimura and Nakagawa 
 
YOMIURI (Page 4) (Full) 
June 8, 2008 
 
Discord has surfaced in the Machimura faction, the largest in the 
ruling Liberal Democratic Party (LDP).with a membership of 86. A 
leadership struggle between Chief Cabinet Secretary Nobutaka 
Machimura, 63, chief caretaker of the faction, and former LDP 
Secretary General Hidenao Nakagawa, 64, another faction heavyweight, 
has opened up. Gaps are now clear in their views on the selection of 
a successor to Prime Minister Yasuo Fukuda. The discord in the 
faction from which Fukuda hailed could rock the political base of 
his administration. 
 
Nakagawa, in a party he hosted on June 5, was proud of a best 
selling book he wrote that is titled Collapse of a 
Bureaucracy-Controlled Nation. He bragged: "In just 10 days after 
its release, more than 40,000 copes were sold." 
 
In the book, Nakagawa refers to bureaucrats and special-interest 
cliques in the Diet as a "stealth complex", and he severely 
criticizes those calling for a tax hike and the bureaucracy. The 
book has created a major stir in the faction. 
 
Based on this book, the faction's policy committee on June 4 set up 
a study group to consider measures to bring about fiscal 
reconstruction. A total of 32 faction members, including Nakagawa, 
Kosuke Ito, former national land agency chief, and former Justice 
Minister Seiken Sugiura, joined it. The members included some 
lawmakers who do not have close ties with Nakagawa, but the words 
"Nakagawa Study Group" were printed on the materials distributed to 
the participants. Some are therefore calling it a subgroup of the 
 
TOKYO 00001573  002 OF 010 
 
 
faction. Some faction members refrained from taking part in it, with 
one lawmaker saying: "I can only surmise that there is a separate 
intention for using a book as a text written by a certain 
politician." 
 
Nakagawa has not served in any key party post after serving as 
secretary general last July, when the LDP suffered a crushing defeat 
in the Upper House election. In place of Machimura who is now 
serving as chief cabinet secretary, Nakagawa has been in charge of 
policies in the faction. He does not hide his enthusiasm for being 
able to stand on the political front stage, saying: "The next three 
years will become a compilation of my political career." He has 
reportedly made critical comments about the way Machimura is 
handling his job, such as: "He is unable to communicate with the 
prime minister." Many faction members think that Nakagawa wants to 
change the faction's name from the Machimura faction to the Nakagawa 
faction. 
 
Machimura, meanwhile, appears to be taking a wait-and-see approach, 
with an aide saying, "(Machimura) does not regard Nakagawa's move as 
creating a group within the faction." Some faction members see 
Machimura as calm and composed since he has served in such key posts 
as foreign and education ministers. They see him as the faction's 
hope. But one junior lawmaker said: "I am sometimes invited 
separately by the two to small meetings." This remark indicates that 
a leadership struggle is indeed going on behind closed doors. 
 
Some in the faction are concerned about the fact that Machimura and 
Nakagawa, who are responsible for supporting the Fukuda government, 
have made provocative remarks. Machimura's call for a review of the 
government's rice acreage reduction policy incited resentment in the 
LDP. On the other hand, Nakagawa referred to possible political 
realignment centered on reform of the government office district of 
Kasumigaseki. Their remarks have made some inside and outside the 
faction concerned. 
 
Former Prime Minister Yoshiro Mori, supreme advisor to the faction, 
appears to be increasingly frustrated with the internal discord. In 
a meeting on June 5 of the faction, Mori said: "I want you to 
refrain from hamstringing the prime minister." Although Mori 
reportedly told his aides that what he had said in the meeting was 
"a general view," he, after a Lower House plenary session on June 6, 
intentionally had stand chatting for a long time with former 
Secretary General Taro Aso, who has distanced himself from Nakagawa. 
A senior faction member, who saw the two chatting, reportedly said: 
"I felt that Mori was showing off toward Nakagawa." 
 
While some faction members support Machimura as a candidate for the 
next prime minister once Fukuda steps down, there is speculation 
that Nakagawa may field former Defense Minister Yuriko Koike as a 
presidential candidate instead of running himself. Former Prime 
Minister Shinzo Abe, advisor to the faction, has strong ties with 
Aso. 
 
Of the faction's 60 Lower House members, 27 are those serving in 
their first- and second-term in the Diet. Of the 27 Upper House 
members, 15 are now serving in their first-term. The observation is 
that junior lawmakers have a weak sense of loyalty to factions and 
many of them are quietly watching the leadership struggle between 
Nakagawa and Machimura. 
 
(2) China may be testing ballistic missiles in the Yellow Sea 
 
TOKYO 00001573  003 OF 010 
 
 
 
SANKEI (Top play) (Full) 
June 4, 2008 
 
It was learned yesterday from intelligence analysis by the Defense 
Ministry and the U.S. Forces Japan that there is a high probability 
China's Navy in late May carried out the testing of ballistic 
missiles (SLBM), scheduled to be mounted on state-of-the-art 
submarines, in the Yellow Sea in a direction facing west toward the 
Korean Peninsula. The SLBMs that were launched appear to have been 
JL2 types now being developed. An investigation and analysis has 
begun on the details by the Defense Ministry's Intelligence 
Headquarters and other offices. 
 
According to the Defense Ministry, the missile launch was carried 
out on May 29. They were launched from a Golf-class ballistic 
missile submarine constructed for use in developing the JL2 
missiles. The JL2 missile has a range of 8,000 kilometers, placing a 
portion of the U.S. mainland under its range. Reportedly, the 
missile will be mounted on the Chinese Navy's state-of-the art Type 
094 Jin-class atomic-powered ballistic missile- submarine. 
 
The first Jin-class submarine was launched in 2004. It reportedly 
has undergone every kind of navigational test, the aim being to 
combat deploy it to a port on Hainan Island, a strategic point in 
southern China. The submarine reportedly is capable of mounting 12 
code JL2 missiles. 
 
The Defense Ministry, from analysis of every sort of intelligence, 
sees the SLBM that was test launched this time from underwater as 
having flown low over the water for a short range. In addition, the 
U.S. forces did not adopt a stance of heightening its warning 
posture, such as bringing in its "observation island," a 
missile-tracking vessel that is deployed in case there were signs of 
a ballistic missile launch by North Korea. 
 
For that reason, intelligence analysis in the Defense Ministry is 
proceeding from the standpoints of: 1) it was a dummy missile 
mounted with a simulated warhead; 2) the experiment launched from 
underwater only the missile body without a warhead; or 3) the launch 
was a failure. 
 
The Defense Ministry strengthened its warning surveillance after 
having received U.S. intelligence that there was a possibility 
around May 20 that the Chinese military would carry out a 
ballistic-missile firing test. In addition, on May 30, North Korea 
launched into the same Yellow Sea three short-ranged ship-to-ship 
missiles. Intelligence is being collected to see if the two 
incidents were connected. 
 
(3) Energy ministerial among Japan, U.S., China, India and South 
Korea exposes difficulty in policy coordination; Differences in 
views evident over subsidies 
 
NIKKEI (Page 3) (Excerpts) 
June 8, 2008 
 
A meeting of the energy ministers of the Group of Eight, held amid 
soaring oil prices, has again exposed difficulty in policy 
collaboration. 
 
The G-8 ministerial followed a meeting of responsible ministers of 
 
TOKYO 00001573  004 OF 010 
 
 
Japan, the United States, China, India and South Korea. The meeting 
agreed on countermeasures against skyrocketing oil prices, but it 
exposed differences in views between industrialized and 
less-developed countries over specifics. 
 
Following the meeting, a joint press conference, including a 
question-and-answer session, was held. A disturbing mood enveloped 
when questions were asked on the governments' price subsidy systems 
for crude oil and natural gas. METI Minister Amari still said: "It 
was significant that an agreement was reached on the gradual 
abolition of subsidies with courage." Indian Ambassador to Japan 
Singh rebutted Amari, "We have not reached an agreement." This 
forced Amari to rephrase his statement, "An agreement was reached on 
the need to abolish subsidies." 
 
According to the International Energy Agency, China's subsidies 
total 25 billion dollars a year and that of India 20 billion 
dollars. Industrialized countries hope that if subsidies are 
reduced, domestic prices would rise to meet the reality of markets 
and would lead to curbing consumption and promotion of energy 
conservation. 
 
In response, Ambassador Singh said: "It is not possible for 
developing countries to completely reflect soaring oil prices in the 
prices of goods." China's State Development Planning Commission 
Vice-Chairman Zhang Guobao also rebutted, "Although you called it 
China's and India's problem, the United States, too, subsidizes 
renewable energy." Abolishing subsidies in developing counties at 
one stroke might result in strong discontent among farmers and 
others as a result of inflation. 
 
(4) Energy ministers feel sense of impasse over unusually high 
current price of oil 
 
YOMIURI (Page 3) (Full) 
June 8, 2008 
 
Although the meeting of the energy ministers of five countries that 
was held on the 7th could have served as perfect timing to stem the 
flow of 'hot money' of speculators into the oil market, it turned 
out instead to underscore the difficulty of achieving unity among 
oil consumers. 
 
At the meeting attended by Japan and the United States, China, South 
Korea, and India - five countries that command a 50 PERCENT  share 
of world energy consumption (calculated in crude oil) - a joint 
statement was issue that expressed strong alarm: "The recent rise in 
oil prices have been the fastest and biggest in history." The other 
ministers nodded their heads when Minister of Economy and Trade 
Amari said: "The recent soaring oil prices are unusual. They are 
neither in the best interests of the oil consumers nor that of the 
oil producers."  The debate hardly ever focused on measures to 
counter global warming, which was supposed to have been the main 
subject, but it instead focused on the high price of oil. 
 
But since the situations for developed countries and developing 
countries are different, the summary of meeting went no further than 
to say that all shared the same sense of alarm. Even on the cause of 
the high oil prices, U.S. Energy Secretary Bodman gave as the reason 
an insufficient supply of crude oil in the market, saying, "Compared 
with the steep rise in demand, production has been flat." In 
response, China and India, where demand is rapidly growing, 
 
TOKYO 00001573  005 OF 010 
 
 
expressed the view that the money game was driving up prices, with 
Zhang Guobao, chief of China's State Energy Bureau, stating, "(Oil 
markets, with the flowing in of speculative money) are becoming 
financial playgrounds." 
 
The United States, whose economy is centered on its financial 
market, is negative about any means that would restrict excessive 
movements of money in the market. On the other hand, China and 
India, which are regarded as the major culprits driving up the 
prices on the oil market through their rising domestic demand, are 
concerned they will be forced by the international community to 
constrain crude-oil consumption and find their economic growth 
blocked. 
 
Even among the consuming countries, adjusting the interests of 
developed countries and developing countries is proving to be 
difficult, and even at the G-8 plus China, India, and the Republic 
of Korea meeting that is being held on the 8th, it will not be easy 
to come up with cooperative measures that will quiet the markets. 
 
(5) Closed-loop of Japan-China gas field issue: Odds are against 
Japan's claim 
 
Sentaku (Page 66-67) (Excerpts) 
June, 2008 
 
Chinese President Hu Jintao visited Japan starting on May 6. His 
visit brought attention to the issue of settling the development of 
gas fields in the East China Sea, a thorny issue that has become 
politicized between the two countries since 2004. However, no 
progress has been made, despite a beaming Prime Minister Yasuo 
Fukuda stressing that there had been major achievements. 
 
Touching on the East China Sea gas field issue, Fukuda, during the 
two-hour press briefing on May 7 after the summit, played up the 
talks: "Significant progress has been made. We have reached an 
outlook for settling this long-standing issue." Hu also echoed 
Fukuda, "We now see prospects for settling the issue." 
 
Various dailies gave top play coverage to a report that following an 
agreement in principle on the joint development of gas fields, Japan 
and China would work out the details at the working level. However, 
the released joint statement simply notes that the two countries 
would make the East China Sea a "sea of peace, cooperation and 
friendship." Little progress has been made since Junichiro Koizumi's 
tenure as prime minister, when a statement that the two countries 
would make the East China Sea "a sea of friendship" instead of a 
contested area was adopted. 
 
Key is demarcation of development area 
 
The real crux of the gas field issue is the designation of areas 
that would subject to joint development. If the government fails to 
specify which gas fields would be jointly developed and when the 
projects would be launched, it is the same as a failure to produce 
results. Demarcating areas subject to joint development is not an 
issue that can be settled at the working-level. It is a highly 
politicized issue to be tackled at the heads of state level. As 
such, it is nothing more than the usual pesky diplomatic issue that 
the Foreign Ministry always tries to put off. 
 
All countries are entitled to claim their right to natural resources 
 
TOKYO 00001573  006 OF 010 
 
 
in areas extending up to the outer edge of the continental shelf. 
However, the adoption of the UN Convention of the Law of the Sea has 
made it complicated to settle disputes among states. The Treaty 
includes two definitions for an exclusive economic zone (EEZ) -- 
either up to the outer edge of the continental shelf or up to 200 
nautical miles (approximately 379 kilometers) from the coast line, 
or if the distance between the coast lines of the two countries is 
less than 400 nautical miles, up to the median line between the two 
countries. 
 
Japan has consistently made the following self-serving requests at 
the bilateral working-level talks: (1) jointly developing four gas 
fields, starting with the Chunxiao gas field (Shirakaba in 
Japanese), where development by the Chinese side is underway; (2) 
provision of geologic information on areas around the East China 
Sea, which China has already obtained; and (3) halting the 
development of the Chunxiao gas field until the two countries arrive 
at an agreement on joint development. The Chinese government has 
brushed aside those requests. 
 
The tension between the two countries eased when Shinzo Abe took 
office as prime minister in September 2006. Japan and China agreed 
to settle the issue of jointly developing four gas fields by the 
time Abe visited China in the fall of 2007. 
 
However, no conclusion has been reached even when Prime Minister 
Fukuda visited China in December 2007. It was then decided to settle 
the issue when Hu visited Japan during the cherry blossom season in 
ΒΆ2008. However, the talks that were held then in 2008 made no 
headway. 
 
International trend is continental shelf 
 
As such, the Prime Minister's Official Residence (Kantei) and the 
Foreign Ministry have resorted to using a secret card: Foreign 
Minister Masahiko Koumura and Vice Foreign Minister Mitoji Yabunaka 
quietly working on Chinese Foreign Minister Yang to put the EEZ 
demarcation issue on the back burner and to persuade China instead 
to agree to press ahead with talks aimed at realizing joint 
development. 
 
The Chinese government also had a vulnerable aspect in that Hu 
wanted to show his eagerness to improve relations with Japan in 
order to secure its support for the Beijing Olympic Games, which 
were being affected by the Tibet issue. 
 
One confident Foreign Ministry official optimistically commented 
that since Hu had agreed to a joint development of the Chunxiao gas 
field and to distribute profits in proportion to the amount of money 
the two countries had invested, all that needed to be done now was 
for China to deal with domestic public opinion. 
 
However, reaching an actual accord on joint development is nothing 
but wishful thinking by the Japanese government, for it goes against 
the domestic situation in China and international conventional 
wisdom regarding joint resources development. 
 
Given the situation in China, in the event the Chinese government is 
quick to make a compromise on the joint development of gas fields on 
the Chinese side of the median line, the military, which takes a 
hard-line stance of being prepared to take a military action if 
Japan starts exploring an oil field near the median line, is bound 
 
TOKYO 00001573  007 OF 010 
 
 
to object. The Hu administration is not united. It has yet to 
completely put the military under its control. China has disputes 
with Vietnam, Taiwan and the Philippines over the development of oil 
resources in and around the Spratly Islands in the South China Sea. 
If it makes concessions on the development of oil fields in the East 
China Sea in such a way as to damage its national interests, it 
could have an adverse effect on its other disputes with neighboring 
countries over natural resources. 
 
Prime Minister Fukuda said that prospects had been obtained for the 
joint development of the Chunxiaon gas field. However, China's New 
China News Agency carried no report about that. If China swallows 
Japan's proposal, an anti-Japanese movement centered on the Internet 
would spring up among young people, influence by their patriotic 
education, even if the government imposed news censorship. Should 
that occur, it would seriously shake the very foundation of the 
administration. 
 
The commonsense trend in the world in settling disputes over natural 
resources involving two countries is contrary to the Japanese 
government's scenario. In the dispute between Australia and Timor 
over the development of oil resources, Australia claimed its 
exploration right up to the outer edge of the continental shelf, 
while Timor claimed its right up to the median line. In other words, 
China takes the position similar to that of Australia, while Japan 
takes the stand similar to that of Timor. 
 
In the end, a settlement was reached on adopting the stand of 
Australia, that is to say, the area subject to joint development is 
the area from the median line up to the outer edge of the 
continental shelf. It means that China's claim has become the main 
trend in the world. Japan and China jointly exploring an area from 
the median line up to the Okinawa trough on the Japanese side of the 
median line is a settlement in line with the global trend. 
Hard-liners against China, such as former Economy, Trade and 
Industry Minister Shoichi Nakagawa and Yoshiko Sakurai, are bound to 
object strongly, if the Fukuda administration agrees on such an 
idea. In other words, there is no feasible compromise resolution at 
all with the public opinion in Japan and in China differing on the 
issue. 
 
Working-level talks are under suspension due to the Sichuan quake. 
Settling the issue by the G-8 in July, as senior government 
officials optimistically hoped for, is sheer nonsense. 
 
(6) Fukuda's Kantei and Sichuan earthquake (Part A): Inside story on 
aid to China after quake; Foreign Ministry: "If U.S. is to extend 50 
million yen in aid, Japan needs to provide 10 times that amount"; 
Chinese vice-foreign minister: "Time is not ripe for SDF dispatch" 
 
MAINICHI (Pages 1 and 3) (Abridged slightly) 
June 8, 2008 
 
It has been nearly one month since the devastating earthquake struck 
Sichuan, China. In the wake of the deadly quake, the strength of the 
"mutually beneficial relationship," confirmed by Prime Minister 
Yasuo Fukuda and President Hu Jintao during the Chinese president's 
visit to Japan days before the temblor, is now being tested. 
Although the government sent the Japan Disaster Relief Team to China 
ahead of other countries, it has become clear that public opinion 
and administrative work are lagging behind the improved top-level 
Japan-China relations. 
 
TOKYO 00001573  008 OF 010 
 
 
 
The quake occurred at 3:28 p.m. May 12, Japan time. 
 
On the evening of May 12, Fukuda ordered the Foreign Ministry to 
send letters of sympathy to President Hu and Premier Wen Jiabao. In 
the wake of a major disaster in a foreign country, it is customary 
for Japan to send a telegram to that country in the name of the 
prime minister. In addition to this custom, Fukuda revealed his 
intention to send personal letters expressing his thoughts. 
 
Before the day was over, the Foreign Ministry via its embassy in 
Beijing presented China with an aid plan including: (1) financial 
aid, (2) relief supplies, (3) an emergency relief team, (4) a 
medical team, and (5) SDF troops. The ministry immediately began 
determining the size of the financial aid. 
 
Upon obtaining information from a U.S. source that Washington would 
extend aid worth approximately 50 million yen, the Foreign Ministry 
determined the size of the aid on May 12 on the grounds that if the 
United States is to extend 50 million yen, Japan should contribute 
10 times that amount. Foreign Minister Masahiko Koumura announced on 
May 13 that Japan would extend 500 million yen in aid to China as 
its neighbor. 
 
After some twists and turns, Japan has implemented the first four 
aid measures. The SDF dispatch plan followed a wild path. 
 
On May 27, China sounded out Japan on mobilizing SDF aircraft as a 
means of delivering relief supplies. Although it was an informal 
request from the Chinese military, the government, carried away by 
the excitement of the request for the SDF, took it as an official 
request from Beijing. 
 
The information found its way to the Japanese media on May 28, and 
Machimura told a press conference: "There has been requests for aid, 
including one request involving the SDF. They are under 
consideration by the government." The matter made front-page 
headlines on May 29, and Chinese Internet forums were swamped by 
anti-SDF posts. The government generally decided to forgo the SDF 
plan on the night of May 29. 
 
A meeting was held between Chinese Vice-Foreign Minister Wu Dawei 
and Asian and Oceanian Affairs Bureau Director-General Akitaka Saiki 
in Beijing on May 29 in which the former said, "The time is 
premature," while pointing out public opinion expressed via the 
Internet. Wu's statement was conveyed to Prime Minister Fukuda that 
day, and the prime minister decided to call off the plan, according 
to a senior Foreign Ministry official. 
 
An agreement was also reached in the Saiki-Wu meeting on the need to 
avoid the Japanese public stiffening their attitude toward China by 
attributing the government's decision to a rejection of the SDF by 
China. Both Tokyo and Beijing, which had been elated by the 
Fukuda-Hu talks, misread Chinese public opinion. 
 
(7) Japan should not join cluster banning treaty 
 
SANKEI (Page 13) (Full) 
June 6, 2008 
 
Satoshi Morimoto, professor at Takushoku University's graduate 
school 
 
TOKYO 00001573  009 OF 010 
 
 
 
I wonder why there are so many would-be pacifists in Japan. They 
should now stop holding on to the negative legacy of Japan's defeat 
in the war. They think to themselves that peace is attainable if 
they only keep saying something about it. It is an illusion that 
cannot pass muster with international realpolitik. Such an attitude 
is a betrayal of Japan and its people. It will become clear when 
Japan encounters a crisis. If they do not understand it or pretend 
not to understand it, they are not real pacifists. 
 
One good example is participation in a treaty that bans cluster 
munitions. Japan should not join this treaty. If the government 
signs the treaty, the Diet should not ratify it. 
 
Japan is an exception that has reduced its defense budget, while 
other countries have been spending more on their defense. Basically, 
the cluster munitions that the Self-Defense Forces would use to 
defend Japan are an effective use of the budget. They are defensive 
weapons. Cluster munitions, each of which contains a number of 
submunitions or bomblets, are effective weapons to block airborne or 
seaborne landing enemy troops. Their deterrent effect is 
significant, and it would not be easy to replace them with a large 
number of troops and other weapons. 
 
Cluster bomblets do have a defect, for approximately 10 PERCENT  of 
them do not explode. But when using cluster munitions in Japan, 
civilians would be evacuated under the Civil Protection Law. The 
SDF, after using cluster munitions, would sufficiently remove 
unexploded shells. It is not appropriate to cite the case of 
civilian victims in East Europe, the Middle East, and Gulf states, 
where such unexploded ordnance (UXO) was not well removed. As a 
matter of course, Japan will not use cluster munitions on the 
enemy's land. 
 
Needless to say, Japan has a long coastline. Besides, the SDF's 
manpower is also limited. Cluster munitions are effective not only 
for the defense of Japan's mainland but also for the defense of its 
outlying islands. Britain used cluster bombs in the Falklands War of 
1982 and conducted operations to its advantage. 
 
Some people argue like this: "Where on earth is the country that 
would try to invade Japan?" China, South Korea, North Korea, Russia, 
and the United States have cluster munitions. However, they do not 
participate in the cluster bomb banning treaty, nor will they come 
out to attend even a conference on the treaty. Yet people think that 
although there is a threat of aggression against these countries, 
there can never be aggression against Japan... Such thinking is a 
fantasy that does not make sense in the real world. Those thinking 
in this fashion are not qualified to talk about national defense or 
security. 
 
Many European countries have joined this treaty. However, if cluster 
bombs are not used in East European countries or other countries 
that are not in the treaty, for example, the North Atlantic Treaty 
Organization (NATO), they would not be seriously troubled in their 
military operations. The Cold War is over. Nowadays, NATO is tasked 
with securing Europe by organizing and dispatching multinational 
forces to the outside of its members' territorial space, instead of 
protecting their territories. 
 
The security of a region like Asia-where a country is being 
threatened or endangered-cannot be discussed in the same logic as 
 
TOKYO 00001573  010 OF 010 
 
 
Europe's. Moreover, this time, foreign governments are only catering 
to the fierce campaign of nongovernmental organizations that once 
worked for the Convention on the Prohibition of Antipersonnel 
Landmines. Germany proposed exempting technologically advanced 
munitions from the definition of cluster munitions. However, Germany 
produces bombs to be exempted. Germany wants to sell its weapons 
after cluster munitions are banned. This is why. 
 
There are objections to the definition of cluster munitions. The 
treaty bans only those that have no self-destructive or guiding 
functions and that are unreliable and inaccurate. In the Diet, there 
is a suprapartisan group of lawmakers who are aware of this fact 
about Europe but forget all about the strategic environment of Asia. 
In response to the cluster ban treaty that would spoil Japan's 
national defense or security resources, they have formed a 
parliamentary league seeking to prohibit cluster munitions and 
campaigning against cluster munitions. That is quite absurd. 
 
It is only natural that weapons are inhumane. Some people develop 
their own logic, maintaining that cluster bombs are inhumane because 
such weapons do not take the lives of people all at once. Then, what 
about weapons that take the lives of people all at once? Are they 
humane? There are also people asserting that cluster bombs are 
inhumane because they victimize civilians. This kind of logic is not 
convincing, either. Many of them account for noncombatant victims 
while citing the case of countries where weapons are under extremely 
insufficient control. Why don't they place more confidence in the 
SDF? 
 
As a consequence of participating in the treaty, Japan will have to 
spend a lot of its taxpayers' money to scrap its weapons. 
Furthermore, U.S. Forces Japan will also be substantially affected 
in its operations for the defense of Japan. Troubling the U.S. 
forces, at least in materiel transportation or training, will be 
unavoidable. This could bring about a serious problem for the 
Japan-U.S. alliance. 
 
At any rate, Japan possesses weapons from the perspectives of how to 
use and manage them as deterrent resources for its national defense 
and how to save the lives of its people. To say it is humane to 
prohibit such weapons is only the logic of people insisting on 
unarmed neutrality. 
 
SCHIEFFER