VZCZCXRO3933
PP RUEHCHI RUEHFK RUEHHM RUEHKSO RUEHPB
DE RUEHKO #1708/01 1720831
ZNY CCCCC ZZH
P 200831Z JUN 08
FM AMEMBASSY TOKYO
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 5291
INFO RUEHZU/ASIAN PACIFIC ECONOMIC COOPERATION
RUEHOK/AMCONSUL OSAKA KOBE 2232

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 03 TOKYO 001708 
 
SIPDIS 
 
DEPT FOR EAP/FO AMBASSADOR HASLACH 
DEPT ALSO FOR E, EAP/EP AND EAP/J 
PASS USTR FOR CUTLER/MEYERS 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 06/20/2013 
TAGS: ETRD PREL APECO JA
SUBJECT: JAPANESE APEC OFFICIALS: LOOKING BEYOND 2010 
 
REF: 07 TOKYO 5608 
 
Classified By: Ambassador J. Thomas Schieffer.  Reason 1.4 (b)(d) 
 
¶1.  (C) Japan's commitment to APEC is unchanged and U.S. 
officials should not be concerned PM Fukuda failed to mention 
APEC in his recent speech outlining a GOJ vision for Asia's 
future, according to Japan's two APEC Senior Officials (SOM). 
 Fukuda'a aim was to emphasize a solid U.S.-Japan 
relationship is a critical to a prosperous and secure 
Asia-Pacific region and not to weigh various options for 
regional economic integration.  Looking to Japan's year 
hosting APEC and stressing the strong desire to work with 
Singapore, which hosts in 2009, and the U.S., which hosts in 
2011, the SOMs noted Japan wants to mark the achievement of 
the first stage of APEC's "Bogor Goals" in 2010 by reaching 
agreement among APEC's developed economies on a bold new 
vision for the region.  This vision should also inspire the 
organization's developing economies to accelerate their own 
integration efforts.  Internal reform of APEC is inextricably 
linked to the issues of enlargement but, regardless of what 
decisions are made on APEC reform over the next two years, 
Japan's SOMs argue the organization needs to retain a 
flexible structure.  The METI representative acknowledged 
concerns about Japan's having two APEC senior officials, but 
insisted METI makes a positive contribution to APEC 
deliberations and stressed a decision to change this 
structure is Japan's alone.  End Summary. 
 
¶2.  (U) Tokyo EMIN met recently with both of Japan's APEC 
Senior Officials to hear their views of the organization's 
future in advance of the 2009-2011 period during which member 
economies are scheduled to take major decisions on APEC's 
future direction.  Ministry of Economy, Trade, and Industry 
(METI) Deputy Director General Hideo Hato said it is 
important to set an ambitious and positive agenda once the 
first stage of the 1994 "Bogor Goals" of free and open trade 
and investment among APEC developed economies by 2010, is 
achieved.  Ministry of Foreign Affairs Senior Official 
Masashi Mizukami separately echoed this level of ambition, 
while praising the U.S. proposal for a Free Trade Area of the 
Asia-Pacific (FTAAP) as a model for the sort of ambitious 
objectives APEC needs to set. 
 
Fukuda Speech Focus Cross-Pacific Ties, not APEC 
--------------------------------------------- --- 
 
¶3.  (C) Clearly aware of U.S. concern over the failure of 
Prime Minister Yasuo Fukuda to mention APEC or Japan's 
scheduled chairmanship of the organization in his May 22 
speech "Five Pledges to a Future Asia that 'Acts Together'", 
Hato said the speech's intent was to set out "a Pacific 
vision, not an Asian vision."  For that reason, the Prime 
Minister several times stressed the importance of the 
U.S.-Japan partnership in ensuring stability and prosperity 
in the region.  "I am not worried about the lack of mention 
of APEC in the speech," he concluded, since "there is no 
change in Japan's commitment to APEC." 
 
¶4.  (C) MOFA's Mizukami took a similar tack.  He said the 
Prime Minister's aim was not to weigh various alternatives 
for Asian regional economic integrQion but rather, by using 
the metaphor of the Pacific Ocean as an "inland sea", to 
emphasize his conviction that a strong Asia-Pacific region is 
not possible without a solid U.S.-Japan relationship at its 
core.  Ensuring the U.S. remains committed to Asia was more 
important to Japan than the specific form integration might 
take.  Mizukami also noted the speech reflected, in part, 
Japan's concerns about U.S. long-term commitment to the 
Asia-Pacific region.  Those concerns, he said, are amplified 
by continued uncertainty over the next U.S. administration's 
policies toward Asia.  Japan, he concluded, "is not in a 
position to lead in the region, or in APEC, without the U.S. 
as a partner." 
 
¶5.  (C) Comment: Despite both Hato's and Mizukami's strenuous 
explanations, the lack of any mention of APEC in the Prime 
Minister's speech is glaring, particularly with Japan set to 
assume leadership of the organization in 18 months.  The 
charitable explanation is simply a bureaucratic mix-up, with 
the speechwriters failing to clear the text adequately.  The 
more likely explanation is that APEC continues to be seen 
within the GOJ as an subject for specialists, that may not 
attract the attention of the senior political leadership 
until much closer to 2010.  End Comment. 
 
How to Configure the Bogor Goals 
-------------------------------- 
 
TOKYO 00001708  002 OF 003 
 
 
 
¶6.  (C) In response to a question about how APEC developed 
economies should record the 2010 achievement of the Bogor 
Goals, Hato said he has been giving a good deal of thought to 
how to follow 2010 with commitment to a broader vision of the 
future integration.  The ideas he is currently considering 
revolve around twin policy pillars of "sustainable growth" 
and "safety and security for all."  This broader vision, he 
insisted, needs to be formulated in a way to appeal to all 
APEC citizens to encourage the organization's developing 
economies to sign on to more long-term integration goals. 
 
¶7.  (C) The first pillar of Hato's vision, sustainable 
economic growth, potentially includes issues such as ensuring 
protection of certain rights, including intellectual property 
rights, recognition of the role of innovation in triggering 
economic growth, and specific projects designed to make 
systemic improvements in developing economies in areas such 
as logistics, infrastructure and most importantly, structural 
reform and "behind the border initiatives."  Hato emphasized 
he believes a future vision of development needs to be 
defined as more than simple material improvement in people's 
lives, as important as that is.  To be sustainable, 
development requires establishing and maintaining appropriate 
physical and regulatory systems that effectively deliver 
public goods.  Such systems, Hato continued, ensure the 
benefits of development are distributed fairly.  As an 
example, he suggested APEC developed economies agree on a 
"concrete development agenda" that combines technical 
assistance, ecotech, and public/private partnerships to 
establish pilot projects in APEC developing economies 
demonstrating the long-term bQfits of structural and other 
regulatory reforms.  The second pillar -- ensuring the safety 
and security of all APEC citizens -- would encompass a wide 
range of issues beyond basic public safety.  It might include 
provision of clean water, energy security, and protection of 
consumers from counterfeit or unsafe food and medicines.  He 
plans to distribute a paper expanding on some of these ideas 
after the G8 Toyako summit. 
 
¶8.  (C) Mizukami was similarly forward-leaning on the post 
2010 agenda.  Instead of merely acknowledging what has been 
accomplished, the 2010 summit should establish a new set of 
priorities for 2015, and eventually 2020.  The FTAAP is one 
of the important long-term goals, but APEC should think even 
more broadly, he insisted.  Foreign Ministry APEC Division 
Director Mitsuko Shino added the 2010 Group, after declaring 
the Bogor Goals accomplished, should move quickly on laying 
out a new set of commitments that encompasses a shared vision 
of what APEC members want the region to be in 2020 and beyond. 
 
¶9.  (C) One question is which economies should be included in 
these new commitments.  It is a positive sign, Shino noted, 
that some economies, for example, Chile, Korea and Mexico, 
have signaled a willingness to consider themselves part of 
the 2010 Group, at least in some areas.  They may also be 
willing to sign on to a follow-on vision, even if they have 
not formally achieved the 2010 goals.  This development would 
provide positive momentum going forward. 
 
¶10.  (C) Hato agreed with EMIN on the importance of close 
cooperation with Singapore and the U.S. on advancing the APEC 
agenda, not only because they are two of the six advanced 
APEC economies who are committed to the 2010 goals, but also 
because they will be the next three APEC chairs.  Some broad 
discussion had already begun, but Hato hoped to expand that 
consultation at the next Senior Officials meeting to include 
the three other members of the "2010 group" -- Australia, 
Canada, and New Zealand. 
 
Internal APEC reform 
-------------------- 
 
¶11.  (C) Internal reform of APEC continues to be a GOJ 
priority, both senior officials said.  They also emphasized 
the issue of organizational reform is inextricably linked to 
the question of APEC enlargement, which will return to the 
APEC agenda in 2009-2010.  Shino noted with its current 21 
members, APEC's consensus model of decision making had 
reached the limit of its effectiveness.  If APEC decides in 
the next several years to admit new meQers, it must reform 
its decision-making processes, at least for certain issues. 
Hato expressed similar views, envisioning a system of 
decision-making that varied depending on the particular 
issue.  On some issues, he said, members could adopt a 
"pathfinder" approach that involved voluntary commitments. 
On other issues, majority voting might be used.  However, on 
the most critical issues, Hato said, full consensus would be 
 
TOKYO 00001708  003 OF 003 
 
 
required. 
 
¶12.  (C) Mizukami emphasized, however, that the present basic 
concept of APEC should be preserved, since APEC is "a unique 
forum" that provides benefits to members well beyond the 
annual APEC Leaders' meeting.  For example, Japan and the 
U.S. have a variety of fora, both bilateral and multilateral, 
through which they engage on important issues.  However, for 
many APEC members, including developed economy members such 
as Australia, APEC is one of the few multilateral 
organizations where they can exchange views with like-minded 
economies in the region.  Mizukami also expressed admiration 
of the P-4 sub-group, which brings together four widely 
distant and different economies into one framework to advance 
mutual economic interests.  The P-4 is a possible model for 
other APEC members wishing to create sub-groups to pursue 
specific mutual interests.  For that reason, Mizukami said, 
APEC needs to retain some flexibility in its organizational 
structure. 
 
Japan's System of Two APEC Senior Officials 
------------------------------------------- 
 
¶13.  (C) Regarding the unique Japanese system of having two 
APEC Senior Officials, Hato acknowledged U.S. officials had 
commented on this issue in Arequipa, and admitted the GOJ had 
discussed it internally as well.  However, APEC has been a 
METI responsibility since the organization's founding, and 
the ministry believes it contributes positively to APEC 
discussions.  Any change in this structure should be Japan's 
sole decision, although he welcomed USG views at any time "if 
there is some inconvenience in the future." 
SCHIEFFER