VZCZCXRO4367
PP RUEHFK RUEHKSO RUEHNAG RUEHNH
DE RUEHKO #2417/01 2930634
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
P 200634Z OCT 09
FM AMEMBASSY TOKYO
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 6925
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 9339
RUEHFK/AMCONSUL FUKUOKA 6984
RUEHOK/AMCONSUL OSAKA KOBE 0802
RUEHNAG/AMCONSUL NAGOYA 4252
RUEHKSO/AMCONSUL SAPPORO 7496
RUEHBJ/AMEMBASSY BEIJING 1467
RUEHUL/AMEMBASSY SEOUL 8125
RUCNDT/USMISSION USUN NEW YORK 7655

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 15 TOKYO 002417 
 
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 10/20/09 
 
INDEX: 
 
(1) Editorial: Taking advantage of U.S. defense secretary's visit to 
Japan today, government urged to settle bilateral issues to maintain 
alliance (Sankei) 
 
(2) Gov. Nakaima negative about settlement of Futenma relocation by 
just moving new facility offshore (Okinawa Times) 
 
(3) Why isn't the Futenma relocation plan moving forward? (Asahi) 
 
(4) New and previous governments' procedures for receiving 
petitions/requests (Nikkei) 
 
(5) Government plans to submit 11 bills to extraordinary Diet 
session; child allowance bill not included (Jiji Com) 
 
(6) "Seiron" column: The Hatoyama administration's misunderstanding 
of the Japan-U.S. relationship (Sankei) 
 
(7) Poll on Hatoyama cabinet, political parties (Mainichi) 
 
(8) Poll: Hatoyama cabinet at 1 month since its debut (Yomiuri) 
 
(9) Trouble over custody of children in failed international 
marriages: Japanese mother indicted in U.S. on suspicion of 
abduction of her own children (Mainichi) 
 
(10) Editorial: Disputes arising from international divorces: 
Discussions on parental and visitation rights needed (Asahi) 
 
ARTICLES: 
 
(1) Editorial: Taking advantage of U.S. defense secretary's visit to 
Japan today, government urged to settle bilateral issues to maintain 
alliance 
 
SANKEI (Page 2) (Full) 
October 20, 2009 
 
U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert will visit Japan on Oct. 20-21 to 
hold talks with senior Japanese government officials, including 
Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama. 
 
In the planned meetings, the focus of attention is likely to be on 
the planned relocation of the U.S. Marine Corps' Futenma Air Station 
in Ginowan City, Okinawa Prefecture. Besides the Futenma issue, the 
Hatoyama administration has been saddled with numerous issues that 
affect the Japan-U.S. alliance fundamentally, such as alternative 
contributions to the ongoing Maritime Self-Defense Force's refueling 
mission in the Indian Ocean and what to do about the U.S. nuclear 
umbrella. To prevent the Japan-U.S. alliance from being put at risk, 
Hatoyama is urged to make realistic judgments in a bid to resolve 
Futenma and other pending. 
 
Ahead of the defense secretary's visit to Japan, a senior U.S. 
Defense Department official indicated that the U.S. would approve 
the proposed plan to move the construction site for the alternative 
runways further offshore (in Nago City, Okinawa Prefecture). Last 
week, Okinawa Governor Hirokazu Nakaima had said that the Okinawa 
government would approve the relocation of the Futenma facility 
within the prefecture based on the existing plan, on the condition 
 
TOKYO 00002417  002 OF 015 
 
 
of moving the site into the sea. Apparently in response to the 
governor's flexible stance, the U.S. official took a concessionary 
approach, saying that "it is possible to make a compromise if the 
plan is altered only slightly." 
 
The local communities concerned and the U.S. government have thus 
begun to take joint steps. Despite this progress, senior government 
officials, including Prime Minister Hatoyama, have indicated that 
the government would put off a final decision until the middle of 
next year, citing the need to probe the will of the people in the 
prefecture. Probably the officials are bearing in mind the 
Democratic Party of Japan's campaign pledge for the latest general 
election to relocate the Futenma air station out of the prefecture, 
as well as the upcoming Nago mayoral election in January and the 
Okinawa gubernatorial election in November of next year. Showing 
such an (indecisive) posture is a problem. 
 
The Futenma issue, however, has been left pending between Japan and 
the U.S. for the 14 years since the U.S. agreed in 1996 to return 
the Futenma air station to Japan. The existing plan is an 
indispensable part of the planned global-scale realignment of U.S. 
forces. A further delay in implementing the agreed plan might 
constitute a serious hindrance to the U.S. military's strategy for 
the entire Asia-Pacific region and the joint deterrence setup of 
Japan and the U.S. Focusing on expectations among the residents and 
the request by Japan's ally, Hatoyama should quickly demonstrate his 
leadership. 
 
The Hatoyama administration plans to halt the refueling mission in 
the Indian Ocean, citing the reason that the Afghan government has 
not eagerly called on Japan to continue the mission. But the 
government has yet to work out any alternative assistance measures. 
 
Regarding the U.S. nuclear umbrella as well, Foreign Minister 
Katsuya Okada has called on the U.S. to come up with the policy of 
no-first-use of nuclear weapons and suggested holding a discussion 
between Japan and the U.S. But the U.S. nuclear umbrella is the most 
reliable tool to ensure Japan's security in preparations against 
such threats as China's military expansion and North Korea's nuclear 
and missile development. Given this, the appropriateness of the call 
for relinquishing the deterrence capability of Japan's ally, the 
U.S., is questionable. 
 
The concept of an East Asia Community proposed by Hatoyama also 
makes some persons worried that it might exclude the U.S. Although 
Hatoyama has advocated the slogan of establishing a close and equal 
partnership between Japan and the U.S., his concept might make the 
U.S., Japan's ally, distrustful of Japan. 
 
Taking advantage of Gates' visit to Japan, Japan and the U.S. should 
work hard to dissolve such doubts and pending issues. The prime 
minister is urged to make specific decisions and take decisive 
action in order to strengthen the bilateral relationship of trust. 
 
(2) Gov. Nakaima negative about settlement of Futenma relocation by 
just moving new facility offshore 
 
OKINAWA TIMES (Page 2) (Full) 
October 20, 2009 
 
With regard to the relocation of the U.S. Marine Corps' Futenma Air 
Station, a high U.S. Defense Department official said that if the 
 
TOKYO 00002417  003 OF 015 
 
 
Japanese government proposes that runaways be moved farther offshore 
than currently planned, the United States will "consider" this 
proposal. Okinawa Gov. Hirokazu Nakaima lauded the U.S. official's 
remarks, saying: "Because I wrote in a position paper on the 
preparatory documents for the environmental impact assessment (of 
the site of the replacement facility for Futenma Air Station) that 
(a new military airfield) should be moved farther offshore, it would 
be good if a conclusion is arrived in line with that direction." 
When asked whether the Futenma relocation issue would move toward a 
conclusion if the hurdle of moving the alternative facility further 
offshore is cleared, Nakaima expressed a negative view, saying, "It 
is not that moving the military facility offshore is the only 
obstacle." 
 
Meanwhile, citing the enforcement of the Environmental Assessment 
Law as an example, Vice Governor Zenki Nakazato expressed his view 
for the first time, noting, "If the purpose is to reduce the impact 
on the environment, the relocation site will move 100 meters or 200 
meters, as far from the coastline as possible." Both Nakaima and 
Nakazato were speaking to reporters at the prefectural government 
building. 
 
Referring to his position paper on the preparatory documents on the 
environmental impact assessment, Nakaima said: "It is not only me. 
As many as 500 residents in the prefecture, the Environmental 
Assessment Council, and the heads of municipalities have expressed 
their opinions. It is not just moving the facility further offshore; 
a variety of issues raised by them must be overcome." Asked about 
the option of moving the facility 50 meters farther offshore than 
the existing plan, Nakaima said, "It is a matter that engineers 
should decide on. It is not appropriate for a person at the 
political level to make a suggestion." 
 
Regarding the idea of moving the facility by 50 meters offshore, 
Nakazato said: "A judgment should be made in relation to the 
environment. It is presupposed that building a reclaimed base in 
that region will destroy the natural environment." 
 
He stressed: "The government is a contracting party for the 
replacement facility requiring the environmental impact assessment. 
Procedurally the governor has to express his opinion." 
 
(3) Why isn't the Futenma relocation plan moving forward? 
 
ASAHI (Page 2) (Abridged slightly) 
October 20, 2009 
 
Takateru Doi 
 
Kobukuro: What is the issue of the relocation of Futenma Air Station 
in Okinawa all about? 
 
Answer: Futenma Air Station is a U.S. Marine Corps base. It sits in 
a densely populated residential area in the city of Ginowan. 
Concerned about noise and safety, the prefectural and city have long 
been calling for the return of the air station. A local schoolgirl 
was gang-raped by U.S. service members in 1995 and that exacerbated 
the sentiments of people in Okinawa. In 1996, the governments of 
Japan and the United States reached an agreement to return Futenma 
Air Station in five to seven years' time on the condition that its 
functions are relocated to a new site within the prefecture. 
 
 
TOKYO 00002417  004 OF 015 
 
 
Ko: That was 13 years ago. Why hasn't the relocation plan moved 
forward? 
 
A: Although it accounts for less than 1 percent of Japan's land 
mass, Okinawa hosts 75 percent of the U.S. bases in Japan. People in 
Okinawa raised strong objections to relocating the Futenma facility 
to a site within the prefecture, and it took a long time to decide 
on the relocation site. In 2002, the central, prefectural, and city 
governments agreed on a plan to reclaim a site off Henoko in Nago, 
but the plan made little progress due to backlash from local 
residents. The Japanese and U.S. governments re-discussed the matter 
and decided in 2005 to relocate the Futenma functions to the coastal 
area of Camp Schwab in the Henoko district. The plan was revised 
again in 2006. Japan successfully convinced the United States, 
saying, "(The replacement facility) can be constructed without fail 
in this off-limits area." The talks were held only between Tokyo and 
Washington, and local residents criticized the decision as a deal 
made behind their back. 
 
Ko: Can't (Futenma Air Station) be moved outside Okinawa? 
 
A: Futenma Air Station plays the role of a helicopter base for 
transporting the Marine Corps' ground troops of other bases in the 
prefecture. The U.S. military has insisted that the relocation site 
must be close to where the ground troops are located. In 2008 the 
Democratic Party of Japan (DPJ) produced its "Okinawa Vision," which 
called for the relocation of (Futenma Air Station) out of Okinawa or 
even out of Japan. Meanwhile, in its manifesto for the general 
election this year, the DPJ pledged to move "in the direction of 
reexamining" the realignment of U.S. forces and the modalities of 
U.S. bases. Defense Minister Toshimi Kitazawa said: "The project is 
already underway, so searching for a new path would be quite 
difficult. It would take a lot of time to find a relocation site 
outside the prefecture or outside the country. 
 
Ko: It's a difficult problem. 
 
A: In an Asahi Shimbun opinion poll conducted in May, some 70 
percent of people of Okinawa expressed opposition to relocating 
(Futenma functions) to a site within the prefecture. The relocation 
is falling behind schedule. In the meantime, in 2004 a U.S. military 
helicopter crashed into the campus of the university adjacent (to 
Futenma Air Station). Gov. Hirokazu Nakaima has accepted relocation 
within the prefecture because he thinks the danger of Futenma Air 
Station must be eliminated promptly. The plan is a package deal that 
also includes the relocation of U.S. Marine Corps from Okinawa to 
Guam and the return of other bases in the prefecture. Prime Minister 
Yukio Hatoyama has expressed his intention to postpone the 
conclusion until next January when the Nago mayoral election will be 
held. But he will still be pressed to make a tough decision (next 
January). 
 
(4) New and previous governments' procedures for receiving 
petitions/requests 
 
NIKKEI (Page 2) (Full) 
October 17, 2009 
 
(Chart not available) 
 
(5) Government plans to submit 11 bills to extraordinary Diet 
session; child allowance bill not included 
 
TOKYO 00002417  005 OF 015 
 
 
 
JIJI.COM (Full) 
October 14, 2009 
 
The government decided on Oct. 14 to submit 11 bills to the 
extraordinary Diet session opening in late October and has notified 
the ruling parties of this. The government and the ruling parties 
will give priority to formulating the FY2010 budget before the end 
of 2009 and plan to schedule the extraordinary Diet session to close 
by the end of November. The number of bills to be submitted has been 
narrowed down, and the bills for the child allowance and abolishing 
the provisional tax rates for gasoline, among others, will be 
deferred to the regular Diet session next year. 
 
Among the major bills to be submitted are a "bill on prevention of 
credit crunch and loans recalls," providing for a repayment 
moratorium on loans incurred by small and mid-sized businesses, and 
a bill to freeze the planned sale of the shares of Japan Post group 
companies. There will also be five bills to ratify treaties and 
approve previous cabinet decisions, including a decision made last 
June regarding a complete ban on exports to North Korea. 
 
Other bills to be submitted are: 
 
? Amendment to the law on the salaries of rank-and-file civil 
servants 
? Amendment to the law on the salaries of civil servants in special 
service 
? Amendment to law on civil servants' childcare leave 
? Amendment to law on salaries of judges 
? Amendment to law on salaries of prosecutors 
? Amendment to law on childcare leave for judges 
? Bill on measures to deal with new-strain influenza 
? Bill on the independent administrative agency Organization for the 
Promotion of Regional Medical Services 
? Amendment to law on salaries of Ministry of Defense employees 
 
(6) "Seiron" column: The Hatoyama administration's misunderstanding 
of the Japan-U.S. relationship 
 
SANKEI (Page 7) (Full) 
October 20, 2009 
 
James Auer, director, Center for U.S.-Japan Studies, Vanderbilt 
University 
 
Result of "typically Japanese" decision 
 
New administrations have been launched both in Japan and the United 
States, and the fate of the bilateral relationship is in the 
limelight. Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama advocates a more equal 
relationship between Japan and the U.S. However, as far as I can 
remember, over the past 45 years the U.S. has consistently asked 
Japan to "speak out more positively." So I'm not clear what Mr. 
Hatoyama means by "equal." 
 
I think Mr. Hatoyama is laboring under misapprehensions about the 
Japan-U.S. relationship. I would like to discuss four points that 
come to mind. I hope those who have pinned hopes on a change of 
administration will bear them in mind. 
 
The first misunderstanding is that Japan has been in a servile 
 
TOKYO 00002417  006 OF 015 
 
 
position in its relationship with the U.S. from 1945 until present. 
It is a fact that during this period the U.S. wielded several times 
the military clout as Japan. However, Japan was not asked to share 
the fate of the United States. Japan of its own volition chose to 
enter into an alliance with America after the U.S. occupation. It 
was a question of choice made by Japan itself. 
 
In fact, as the Japanese economy recovered and its competitiveness 
increased, until 1970 many members of the U.S. Congress had begun to 
complain that the Japan-U.S. alliance was unequal in favor of Japan. 
Japan could have parted ways with the U.S., but did not. Japan 
remained with the U.S. not because the U.S. ordered it to do so, but 
because it made a "typically Japanese" decision very much to its 
advantage at its own discretion. 
 
Alliance unequal for the U.S. 
 
The second misunderstanding is that the Japan-U.S. relationship 
impedes the deepening of Japan's relations with the Asian countries. 
This also requires careful consideration. 
 
In the 20 years until the end of the Cold War, Japan faced a 
dangerous military threat from the former Soviet Union, which 
counted more than 100 submarines in its Pacific fleet alone. For 
sure, even after the end of the Cold War and the disappearance of 
the threat of the former USSR, Japan is still threatened by the 
unpredictable dictatorial regime in North Korea. There are also 
serious concerns about the future direction of China. 
 
Japan has apologized repeatedly to Korea, its former colony, and to 
China, and made a great effort to get along with them. Yet its 
effort has not been rewarded. In China in particular certain 
elements carry out highly biased anti-Japanese education and 
criticize Japan for not having sufficiently apologized. What's more, 
such criticism is used to divert attention from government 
corruption. 
 
What would happen if Japan were to cease relying on the U.S. for its 
security and make an effort to provide for its national defense on 
its own? Asian countries would probably ratchet up their criticism 
of Japan's defense policy. To think Asian countries would welcome 
Japan's distancing itself from the U.S. would be the height of 
naivet. 
 
The third misunderstanding is that the burden on Japan will be 
reduced if its relations with the U.S. become more equal. Why is 
this also wrong? 
 
Often cited as proof of inequality are the hard-to-overlook 
pollution at several U.S. bases in Japan and the fact that U.S. 
soldiers guilty of crimes are not handed over to the Japanese police 
before indictment. But in my opinion these are trivial matters, 
especially in comparison with the inequality in the operation of the 
Japan-U.S. alliance. 
 
Through this alliance, the U.S. keeps an eye on the nuclear powers 
in Japan's vicinity and provides continuous security to prevent 
military attacks on Japan and disruptions of the sea lanes in the 
Indian Ocean and southwest Pacific. The U.S. does not want to 
emphasize China and ignore Japan, a major democratic power embracing 
a free market economy. Therefore, the argument that Japan is not 
needed is wrong. If Japan makes little or no effort to place its 
 
TOKYO 00002417  007 OF 015 
 
 
relationship with the U.S. on a more equal footing, the U.S. will 
only look beyond Japan. 
 
Japan has been engaged in the refueling mission in the Indian Ocean 
since the second half of 2001. While this is not a dangerous 
operation, the U.S. appreciates Japan's efforts. At least Japan is 
doing "something." Yet, the Hatoyama administration is saying the 
mission will be discontinued without even offering any alternative 
proposals. 
 
Fulfillment of role and obligations is the issue 
 
The fourth misunderstanding is that reducing its support for the 
alliance will enable Japan to reduce its expenditure for security 
without weakening it. For sure, the alliance is no longer as 
important to the U.S. as it was during the Cold War. If Japan were 
to demand U.S. Forces relocate out of Japan, the U.S. would comply, 
albeit with reluctance. In such a case, however, it is unlikely that 
North Korea or China would also reduce their military strength. 
Japan's military spending is just 1 percent of GNP in spite of its 
being situated in a dangerous part of the world. Japan is only able 
to enjoy peace and prosperity because of its security arrangements 
with the U.S. 
 
Clearing up the above four misunderstandings leads to the conclusion 
that if Japan now makes a greater effort to fulfill its role and 
obligations, it will be able to have a more equal relationship with 
the U.S. Let me reiterate that it is up to Japan to decide whether 
or not it wants to do so. Just as previous Japanese governments have 
done of their own volition, I hope that the Hatoyama administration 
will with wisdom ponder what is in Japan's national interest. 
 
(7) Poll on Hatoyama cabinet, political parties 
 
MAINICHI (Page 3) (Full) 
October 19, 2009 
 
Questions & Answers 
(T = total; P = previous; M = male; F = female) 
 
Q: Do you support the Hatoyama cabinet? 
 
 T P M F 
Yes 72 (77) 75 69 
No 17 (13) 16 19 
Not interested 10 (9) 9 11 
 
Q: (Only for those who answered "yes" to the above question) Why? 
 
 T P M F 
Because the prime minister is from the Democratic Party of Japan 1 
(3) 2 1 
Because something can be expected of the prime minister's leadership 
4 (4) 2 6 
Because something can be expected of the prime minister's policy 
measures 16 (15) 15 17 
Because the nature of politics is likely to change 78 (77) 81 76 
 
Q: (Only for those who answered "no" to the above question) Why? 
 
 T P M F 
Because the prime minister is from the Democratic Party of Japan 8 
 
TOKYO 00002417  008 OF 015 
 
 
(8) 8 8 
Because nothing can be expected of the prime minister's leadership 
12 (9) 6 15 
Because nothing can be expected of the prime minister's policy 
measures 57 (58) 61 54 
Because the nature of politics is unlikely to change 21 (23) 23 20 
 
Q: Which political party do you support? 
 
 T P M F 
Democratic Party of Japan (DPJ or Minshuto) 40 (45) 45 37 
Liberal Democratic Party (LDP or Jiminto) 14 (12) 13 14 
New Komeito (NK) 4 (4) 4 5 
Japanese Communist Party (JCP) 4 (3) 2 5 
Social Democratic Party (SDP or Shaminto) 1 (2) 1 1 
People's New Party (PNP or Kokumin Shinto) 0 (0) 0 0 
Your Party (YP or Minna no To) 2 (3) 2 2 
New Party Nippon (NPN or Shinto Nippon) 0 (0) 0 0 
Other political parties 1 (1) 1 1 
None 32 (27) 30 34 
 
Q: Do you think people's lives will improve or worsen with the DPJ 
running the government? 
 
 T P M F 
Improve 43 (47) 50 39 
Worsen 10 (6) 11 10 
Remain unchanged 45 (44) 39 50 
 
 
Q: The Hatoyama cabinet is trying to make policies under the 
initiative of politicians, with its ministers and subcabinet-level 
political appointees giving directions to bureaucrats. Do you 
approve of this? 
 
 T P M F 
Yes 80  85 76 
No 17  13 21 
 
Q: The former Aso cabinet adopted a supplementary budget totaling 
over 14 trillion yen for the current fiscal year. On this extra 
budget, the Hatoyama cabinet has decided to suspend spending on 2.9 
trillion yen on budgeted projects. Do you approve of this? 
 
 T P M F 
Yes 71  76 68 
No 26  23 28 
 
Q: Land, Infrastructure and Transport Minister Maehara has clarified 
his intention to call off the construction of Yamba Dam in Gumma 
Prefecture. This is a policy measure based on the DPJ's manifesto 
for this summer's election for the House of Representatives. 
However, there are also calls from among local communities for the 
continued construction of this dam. Do you think this dam 
construction should be suspended? 
 
 T P M F 
Yes 58  62 55 
No 36  35 38 
 
Q: Prime Minister Hatoyama has set forth a policy goal of reducing 
Japan's greenhouse gas emissions by 25 PERCENT  from 1990 levels by 
 
TOKYO 00002417  009 OF 015 
 
 
2020, and he declared this at the United Nations. Do you approve of 
this? 
 
 T P M F 
Yes 79 (69) 79 80 
No 17 (25) 20 16 
 
Q: The DPJ falls short of a majority in the House of Councillors, so 
the DPJ has formed a coalition government with the SDP and the PNP. 
Would you like to see the DPJ form a single-party government after 
next summer's election for the House of Councillors? 
 
 T P M F 
A single-party DPJ government 36 (33) 41 31 
A DPJ coalition with the SDP and the PNP 32 (34) 30 34 
A DPJ coalition with other political parties 27 (25) 26 29 
 
Q: The LDP has elected Mr. Sadakazu Tanigaki as its new president. 
Do you have high expectations for him? 
 
 T P M F 
Yes 40  42 39 
No 55  56 55 
 
Q: The LDP has become an opposition party as a result of this 
summer's election for the House of Representatives. Would you like 
the LDP to reconstruct itself? 
 
 T P M F 
Yes 59 (56) 66 54 
No 38 (41) 33 42 
 
(Note) Figures shown in percentage, rounded off. "0" indicates that 
the figure was below 0.5 PERCENT . "No answer" omitted. Figures in 
parentheses denote the results of the last survey conducted Sept. 
16-17. 
 
Polling methodology: The survey was conducted Oct. 17-18 over the 
telephone across the nation on a computer-aided random digit 
sampling (RDS) basis. A total of 1,669 households with one or more 
eligible voters were sampled. Answers were obtained from 1,067 
persons (64 PERCENT ). 
 
(8) Poll: Hatoyama cabinet at 1 month since its debut 
 
YOMIURI (Page 11) (Full) 
October 18, 2009 
 
Questions & Answers 
(Figures in percentage) 
 
Q: There will be an election for the House of Councillors next 
summer. Which political party are you going to vote for in your 
proportional representation bloc, or which political party are you 
going to vote for? 
 
Democratic Party of Japan (DPJ or Minshuto) 35 
Liberal Democratic Party (LDP or Jiminto) 18 
New Komeito (NK) 3 
Japanese Communist Party (JCP) 1 
Your Party (YP or Minna no To) 1 
People's New Party (PNP or Kokumin Shinto) 0 
 
TOKYO 00002417  010 OF 015 
 
 
New Party Nippon (NPN or Shinto Nippon) 0 
Other political parties 0 
Undecided 39 
No answer (N/A) 1 
 
Q: It has now been nearly a month since Prime Minister Hatoyama came 
into office. What's your impression of Prime Minister Hatoyama? Pick 
only one from among those listed below on the following points. 
 
Leadership 
Very much 15 
Somewhat 59 
Not very much 16 
Not at all 4 
N/A 6 
 
 
Reform 
Very much 37 
Somewhat 45 
Not very much 11 
Not at all 3 
N/A 4 
 
Public accountability 
Very much 12 
Somewhat 46 
Not very much 29 
Not at all 7 
N/A 6 
 
Q: The Hatoyama cabinet is a tripartite coalition of the DPJ, SDP, 
and PNP. Looking back on the past month, do you think this 
three-party coalition has been functioning well? 
 
Yes 33 
No 53 
N/A 14 
 
Q: What would you like the Hatoyama cabinet to tackle on a priority 
basis? If any, pick as many as you like from among those listed 
below. 
 
Economic stimulus measures 73 
Job security measures 47 
Fiscal turnaround 23 
Tax reform, including consumption tax 20 
Healthcare reform 41 
Pension reform 49 
Low birthrate, childcare support 31 
Japan-U.S. relations 8 
North Korea policy 14 
National security 13 
Public service reform 16 
Public investment review 19 
Postal privatization review 8 
Decentralization 8 
Agriculture 16 
Greenhouse gas emissions cut 14 
Other answers (O/A) 1 
Nothing in particular (NIP) + N/A 2 
 
 
TOKYO 00002417  011 OF 015 
 
 
Q: What do you think divides the tripartite ruling coalition of the 
DPJ, SDP, and PNP? If any, pick as many as you like from among those 
listed below. 
 
Economic stimulus measures 10 
Job security measures 5 
Fiscal turnaround 11 
Tax reform, including consumption tax 6 
Healthcare reform 4 
Pension reform 5 
Low birthrate, childcare support 9 
Japan-U.S. relations 18 
North Korea policy 5 
National security 21 
Public service reform 3 
Public investment review 7 
Postal privatization review 15 
Decentralization 2 
Agriculture 3 
Greenhouse gas emissions cut 2 
Other answers (O/A) 1 
NIP+N/A 39 
 
Q: In the past, the government and the ruling parties used to plan 
national policies separately. The Hatoyama cabinet, however, is 
trying to unify this bipolar policymaking process into its 
government. Do you think this effort is going well? 
 
Yes 36 
No 43 
N/A 21 
 
Q: Do you think politicians should play the role of making decisions 
on national policies, or do you otherwise think central government 
bureaucrats should do so? 
 
Politicians 63 
Central government bureaucrats 6 
Can't say which 28 
N/A 3 
 
 
Q: Do you think politicians are taking the lead in making policy 
decisions for Japan, or do you think central government bureaucrats 
are taking the lead in doing so? 
 
Politicians 30 
Central government bureaucrats 42 
Can't say which 25 
N/A 4 
 
Q: Do you think politicians should have the capability of 
controlling bureaucrats instead of confronting bureaucrats? 
 
Yes 87 
No 9 
N/A 4 
 
Q: Do you think it would be better for Japan to have a single-party 
government, or do you otherwise think it would be better for Japan 
to have a multiple-party coalition government? 
 
 
TOKYO 00002417  012 OF 015 
 
 
A single-party government 33 
A coalition government 58 
N/A 10 
 
Q: There is an opinion saying a coalition government will 
unnecessarily take much more time in its process of making policy 
decisions. Do you think this is true? 
 
Yes 74 
No 21 
N/A 6 
 
Q: There is an opinion saying a coalition government can reflect 
various opinions among the people in its policies. Do you think this 
is true? 
 
Yes 60 
No 32 
N/A 8 
 
Q: Generally speaking, do you think it would be better to see a 
change of government at times? 
 
Yes 75 
No 19 
N/A 6 
 
Q: (Only for those who answered "yes" to the foregoing question) 
Why? Pick up to three reasons from among those listed below. 
 
Policy course changes 45 
Political structure changes 31 
Political corruption hardly occurs 63 
Interparty policy debate kicks off 44 
Bureaucrats' influence weakens 21 
O/A 1 
No particular reason 2 
N/A 0 
 
Q: (Only for those who answered "no" to the foregoing question) Why? 
Pick up to three reasons from among those listed below. 
 
Policies lack consistency 71 
Government gets confused 58 
Political corruption persists 9 
Elections tend to court public favor rather than to focus on 
policies 29 
Bureaucrats' influence grows 12 
O/A 2 
No particular reason 3 
N/A -- 
 
Q: Do you think political parties should translate their manifestos 
into action without any modifications when they win an election for 
the House of Representatives and take the reins of government, or do 
you otherwise think they may modify their manifestos as needed? 
 
Translate their manifestos into action without any modification 21 
Modify their manifestos as needed 76 
O/A 0 
N/A 3 
 
 
TOKYO 00002417  013 OF 015 
 
 
Q: What do you think Japan's political parties will need in 
particular? If any, pick up to three from among those listed below. 
 
Political ethics 25 
Policyplanning capability 19 
Policy implementation 55 
Human resources development 21 
A party head's leadership and accountability 29 
Public sensitivity 59 
Coordination 11 
Transparency 25 
O/A 0 
NIP+N/A 3 
 
Q: Would you like to see the existing political parties break up or 
join for the so-called "political realignment"? 
 
Very much 13 
Somewhat 24 
Not very much 37 
Not at all 21 
N/A 6 
 
Polling methodology 
Date of survey: Oct. 10-11. 
Subjects of survey: 3,000 persons chosen from among all eligible 
voters throughout the country (at 250 locations on a stratified 
two-stage random-sampling basis). 
Method of implementation: Door-to-door visits for face-to-face 
interviews. 
Number of valid respondents: 1,801 persons (60 PERCENT ) 
Breakdown of respondents: Male-46 PERCENT , female-54 PERCENT ; 
persons in their 20s-8 PERCENT , 30s-14 PERCENT , 40s-16 PERCENT , 
50s-19 PERCENT , 60s-25 PERCENT , 70 and over-18 PERCENT ; big 
cities (Tokyo's 23 wards and government-designated cities)-21 
PERCENT , major cities (with a population of more than 300,000)-18 
PERCENT , medium-sized cities (with a population of more than 
100,000)-26 PERCENT , small cities (with a population of less than 
100,000)-23 PERCENT , towns and villages-11 PERCENT . 
 
(Note) In some cases, the total percentage does not add up to 100 
PERCENT  due to rounding. "0" denotes percentages less than 0.5 
PERCENT . "--" denotes that no respondents answered. 
 
(9) Trouble over custody of children in failed international 
marriages: Japanese mother indicted in U.S. on suspicion of 
abduction of her own children 
 
MAINICHI (Page 31) (Full) 
October 20, 2009 
 
Lately, reflecting a spike in broken international marriages, there 
has been a succession of cases in which a parent removed a child 
from the care of their ex-spouse. A Japanese fiftysomething woman 
living in Greater Tokyo who was indicted in the U.S. for allegedly 
abducting her own children gave an interview to the Mainichi 
Shimbun. 
 
In the U.S. and Europe there is the view that such incidents 
frequently occur because Japan has not yet signed the Hague 
Convention, which provides rules for the settlement of disputes 
arising from international marriages. However, women (married to 
 
TOKYO 00002417  014 OF 015 
 
 
foreigners) hope that the government will take a cautious stance 
toward this issue. As the woman noted, "My children dislike their 
father. If Japan signs the convention, they might be taken away to 
the U.S." 
 
In the 1980s, this woman married an American man, whom she met while 
studying in the U.S. She gave birth to two children. The family 
started living in Japan in 1992. However, she and her husband fell 
out with each other over differences in customs and his use of 
abusive language. Subsequently the woman walked out of the marriage 
and sued her husband for divorce. She also filed a lawsuit seeking a 
provisional injunction for denying her ex-husband access rights to 
the children. She won both cases. The couple formally divorced in 
¶1999. Her ex-husband returned to the U.S. before the divorce was 
approved. 
 
In the meantime, her ex-husband, after returning to the U.S., filed 
a report of damage with a public prosecutors office in the U.S., 
noting that his ex-wife is retaining their children in Japan, 
intentionally obstructing his exercising legal custody of them." The 
U.S. grand jury indicted her on a charge of abducting the children 
from the U.S. The woman was never given an opportunity to refute the 
charge. 
 
The woman employed an attorney in the U.S., paying more than 5 
million yen. Later, she was surprised to learn that Interpol regards 
the children as "missing persons" and is looking for them. Because 
this woman has not violated any Japanese law, she will not be 
arrested as long as she does not leave Japan. 
 
Some Japanese parents of children who have been taken away from 
Japan are calling for Japan's early signing of the Hague Convention. 
However, this woman is cautious toward the idea. "If Japan signs the 
convention," she said, "the children will be returned to their 
fathers against their will. I might be held criminally responsible. 
I would like the Japanese government to decide whether or not to 
sign the convention after carefully considering what will make 
children happy." 
 
(10) Editorial: Disputes arising from international divorces: 
Discussions on parental and visitation rights needed 
 
ASAHI (Page 3) (Full) 
October 20, 2009 
 
The Western countries are complaining that more than 100 children 
have been "abducted" to Japan. 
 
This is not a made-up story. Problems pertaining to Japanese parents 
who have taken their children away from their country of residence 
illegally after the failure of their international marriages are 
becoming an international issue. There have been over 110 such cases 
in the U.S., the UK, Canada, and other countries. There have even 
been extreme criticisms that Japan is a country that "encourages" 
the abduction of children. 
 
There has also been an incident in which an American ex-husband was 
arrested for trying to reclaim his children forcibly from his 
ex-wife who returned with them to Japan. 
 
The background behind this issue is the different rules governing 
the handling of children in international divorces. Under the Hague 
 
TOKYO 00002417  015 OF 015 
 
 
Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Abduction of 
Children, which has 81 signatories, when children are taken away to 
another country, they should basically be brought back to their 
country of residence, and parties to the convention are obliged to 
cooperate in returning them. 
 
Japan and Russia are the only G-8 nations that are not signatories 
to the Convention, and numerous disputes have arisen between 
signatory and non-signatory countries. 
 
International pressure continues to rise, with U.S. Ambassador to 
Japan John Roos and ambassadors of other Western countries asking 
the justice minister to sign the Convention on Oct. 16. Foreign 
Minister Katsuya Okada has stated in a news conference that: "We 
would like to consider this positively. However, there is also the 
question of how the public will react to this." 
 
How should disputes regarding parental rights and custody after a 
divorce be settled between countries with different cultures and 
legal systems? The argument that the Hague Convention should be 
observed as a common rule is persuasive. Under the present 
situation, when children are taken away from Japan to a foreign 
country, the only way to get them back is through independent 
efforts. The number of Japanese marrying internationally is 
increasing steadily, exceeding 40,000 cases annually. It is not 
realistic to avoid signing the Convention any longer. 
 
On the other hand, there are also numerous issues that need to be 
resolved. 
 
Right now, problems with the Western countries mostly involve cases 
where the mother is Japanese. Many of them have fled to Japan 
complaining of domestic violence by their ex-husbands. How to help 
mothers and children driven into a difficult situation in a foreign 
country is a serious question. 
 
There is also a gap between the Western countries and Japan in terms 
of laws and customs. In the U.S. and other countries, there are 
strict regulations on the parents' rights of visitation after a 
divorce, while there are no such provisions in Japan's civil code. 
"Joint parental rights," under which both parents each have parental 
rights are not allowed in Japan. The tendency is to give preference 
to the mother in determining custody. It is also very rare for the 
courts to be involved with the compulsory handover of children. 
Japan's joining the Hague Convention under the present condition 
will give rise to serious contradictions. 
 
It must be remembered that the basic principle is that the welfare 
of the children should be given top priority. How can their right to 
continue to maintain their bonds with both parents after a divorce 
be respected? This is an issue that has long been neglected in 
general, not only in the case of international marriages. 
 
It is time to give some serious thought to the happiness of children 
who are faced with the divorce of their parents, not only in Japan, 
but also in foreign countries. 
 
ROOS