VZCZCXRO7665
PP RUEHFK RUEHKSO RUEHNAG RUEHNH
DE RUEHKO #2697/01 3282336
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
P 242336Z NOV 09
FM AMEMBASSY TOKYO
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 7729
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 9902
RUEHFK/AMCONSUL FUKUOKA 7553
RUEHOK/AMCONSUL OSAKA KOBE 1364
RUEHNAG/AMCONSUL NAGOYA 4717
RUEHKSO/AMCONSUL SAPPORO 8061
RUEHBJ/AMEMBASSY BEIJING 1964
RUEHUL/AMEMBASSY SEOUL 8638
RUCNDT/USMISSION USUN NEW YORK 8096

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 15 TOKYO 002697 
 
SIPDIS 
 
DEPT FOR E, P, EB, EAP/J, EAP/P, EAP/PD, PA; 
WHITE HOUSE/NSC/NEC; JUSTICE FOR STU CHEMTOB IN ANTI-TRUST DIVISION; 
TREASURY/OASIA/IMI/JAPAN; DEPT PASS USTR/PUBLIC AFFAIRS OFFICE; 
SECDEF FOR JCS-J-5/JAPAN, 
DASD/ISA/EAPR/JAPAN; DEPT PASS ELECTRONICALLY TO USDA 
FAS/ITP FOR SCHROETER; PACOM HONOLULU FOR PUBLIC DIPLOMACY ADVISOR; 
CINCPAC FLT/PA/ COMNAVFORJAPAN/PA. 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: OIIP KMDR KPAO PGOV PINR ECON ELAB JA
 
SUBJECT:  DAILY SUMMARY OF JAPANESE PRESS 11/24/09 
 
INDEX: 
 
(1) Poll on Hatoyama cabinet, political parties (Mainichi) 
 
(2) Hatoyama's miscalculation over Futenma issue; was Pandora's Box 
opened? (Nikkei) 
 
(3) Column: Abduction and nuclear issues: Is Japan's strategy 
adequate? (Mainichi) 
 
(4) Column: Hatoyama's and Okada's view of America (Mainichi) 
 
(5) Avoid being at mercy of community concept and making 
misjudgments (Sankei) 
 
(6) Candidates' positions on Futenma relocation two months ahead of 
Nago mayoral race that may affect the outcome of relocation issue 
(Ryukyu Shimpo) 
 
(7) Heads of local governments in Okinawa react coolly to foreign 
minister's idea of integrating Futenma base into Kadena Air Base 
(Mainichi) 
 
(8) Editorial: Foreign Minister Okada must give up new base and 
Futenma relocation in Okinawa (Akahata) 
 
(9) Japan-U.S. Cultural Exchange Center opens at U.S. Yokosuka Base 
(Asahi) 
 
(10) SDP finds itself on horns of dilemma (Yomiuri) 
 
(11) Removal of children: Children's rights should be discussed 
first (Asahi) 
 
ARTICLES: 
 
(1) Poll on Hatoyama cabinet, political parties 
 
MAINICHI (Page 5) (Full) 
November 24, 2009, 2009 
 
Questions & Answers 
(T = total; P = previous; M = male; F = female) 
 
Q: Do you support the Hatoyama cabinet? 
 
 T P M F 
Yes 64 (72) 67 61 
No 21 (17) 18 23 
Not interested 15 (10) 14 15 
 
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 4 
(1) 4 3 
Because something can be expected of the prime minister's leadership 
4 (4) 3 6 
Because something can be expected of the prime minister's policies 
11 (16) 12 11 
Because the nature of politics is likely to change 78 (78) 80 77 
 
 
TOKYO 00002697  002 OF 015 
 
 
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 4 
(8) 1 (6) 
Because nothing can be expected of the prime minister's leadership 
16 (12) 14 18 
Because nothing can be expected of the prime minister's policies 48 
(57) 47 49 
Because the nature of politics is unlikely to change 30 (21) 35 26 
 
Q: Which political party do you support? 
 
 T P M F 
Democratic Party of Japan (DPJ or Minshuto) 39 (40) 43 35 
Liberal Democratic Party (LDP or Jiminto) 15 (14) 15 14 
New Komeito (NK) 3 (4) 3 4 
Japanese Communist Party (JCP) 3 (4) 3 2 
Social Democratic Party (SDP or Shaminto) 1 (1) 1 1 
People's New Party (PNP or Kokumin Shinto) 1 (0) 1 1 
Your Party (YP or Minna no To) 2 (2) 2 1 
Reform Club (RC or Kaikaku Kurabu) 0  0 0 
New Party Nippon (NPN or Shinto Nippon) 0 (0) 0 0 
Other political parties 0 (1) 0 0 
None 33 (32) 30 36 
 
Q: The Hatoyama cabinet intends to prioritize the policy measures 
the DPJ pledged in its manifesto in compiling the budget for next 
fiscal year. Pick the response that is closest to your opinion. 
 
 T P M F 
The Hatoyama cabinet should prioritize the manifesto 24  22 26 
The Hatoyama cabinet should not stick to the manifesto 69  71 66 
 
Q: The Government Revitalization Unit of the Hatoyama cabinet is now 
screening budget requests from all ministries and agencies for next 
fiscal year to determine whether to abolish or reduce funding for 
them. Do you approve of this budget screening? 
 
 T P M F 
Yes 74  76 72 
No 17  16 19 
 
Q: The Hatoyama cabinet has appointed Mr. Jiro Saito, who was 
administrative finance vice minister, as Japan Post's new president. 
Do you approve of this appointment? 
 
 T P M F 
Yes 28  29 26 
No 57  58 57 
 
Q: On the issue of relocating the U.S. Marine Corps' Futenma Air 
Station in Okinawa Prefecture to the Henoko area of Nago City in the 
same prefecture, Prime Minister Hatoyama expressed his opinion that 
Futenma airfield should be moved out of Okinawa Prefecture or Japan 
in his campaign for this summer's election for the House of 
Representatives. What do you think the prime minister should do? 
 
 T P M F 
Negotiate with the U.S. to move Futenma airfield out of Okinawa 
Prefecture or Japan 50  44 54 
Look for another relocation site in Okinawa Prefecture 17  16 18 
 
TOKYO 00002697  003 OF 015 
 
 
Accept the current plan to relocate Futenma airfield to Henoko 22 
31 15 
 
Q: The DPJ and the New Komeito are considering presenting a bill to 
the Diet allowing foreign nationals with permanent resident status 
to vote in local elections. Do you approve of this suffrage 
legislation? 
 
 T P M F 
Yes 59  58 59 
No 31  34 29 
 
Q: Prime Minister Hatoyama's fund-managing body has falsified its 
political fund reports. Do you place priority on this problem when 
you rate the Hatoyama cabinet? 
 
 T P M F 
Yes 41  36 45 
No 48  55 43 
 
(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 Oct. 
17-18. 
 
Polling methodology: The survey was conducted Nov. 21-22 over the 
telephone across the nation on a computer-aided random digit 
sampling (RDS) basis. A total of 1,581 households with one or more 
eligible voters were sampled. Answers were obtained from 1,066 
persons (67 PERCENT ). 
 
(2) Hatoyama's miscalculation over Futenma issue; was Pandora's Box 
opened? 
 
NIKKEI (Page 5) (Excerpts) 
November 23, 2009 
 
By Yasuhiro Tase, guest columnist 
 
Beginning with the invasion of Ryukyu (the old name for Okinawa) by 
the Shimazu clan of Satsuma, Okinawa has undergone hardships in 
succession, such as the battle of Okinawa and the control by the 
U.S. At present, more than 70 PERCENT  of the total area of U.S. 
military facilities in Japan is concentrated in Okinawa. Okinawan 
people wonder why only Okinawa has to be sacrificed. Meanwhile, 
Yamatonchu (main islanders) understand their feelings but have been 
seized by a sense of helplessness. I have an unforgettable memory 
that reminds me of the existence of a difference in both sides' 
feelings. In a speech in Okinawa in the year before the Okinawa 
Summit in 2000, loud boos came from the audience when I made this 
remark: 
 
"I feel somewhat embarrassed by the slogan of the Okinawa Summit. 
The slogan is 'let's direct the eyes of the world toward Okinawa and 
the attention of Okinawa toward the world,' but the upcoming summit 
is not held for the sake of Okinawa but for Japan, and the venue 
happens to be Okinawa." 
 
When the Okinawa issue, particularly, the base issue is involved, 
the government's commitment to the Japan-U.S. alliance -- the 
cornerstone of Japan's foreign policy -- and public feelings in 
Okinawa conflict sharply. Due to this conflict, the issue of 
 
TOKYO 00002697  004 OF 015 
 
 
relocating the U.S. Marine Corps' Futenma Air Station has become 
very serious. In addition, the change of government and the 
continuation of foreign policy have made the issue complicated. 
 
Prior to U.S. President Barack Obama's first visit to Japan, the 
U.S. government appears to have made careful arrangements so as not 
to give the Japanese people the impression that the U.S. was 
highhanded. On the Futenma issue, in particular, the U.S. only 
called for a swift conclusion. Despite such consideration on the 
U.S. side, there reportedly was the following exchange of views, as 
disclosed by Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama in the e-mail magazine of 
his cabinet: 
 
Prime Minister Hatoyama presented President Obama with one blue 
rose, a variety developed by Japan, in hopes of conveying the 
message that the impossible can be accomplished. In return, the 
President presented the first edition of Profiles in Courage, 
written by former President John F. Kennedy, to Hatoyama. When 
considering the meaning of these two presents in connection with the 
Futenma issue, we think these presents must carry heavy weight. 
 
Afterward, the two leaders reportedly exchanged these words: 
 
Hatoyama: "I want you to trust me." 
 
Obama: "Of course, I trust you." 
 
Through this conversation, I assume President Obama believed that 
the Futenma facility will be moved to the waters off the Henoko 
district as per the agreement between Japan and the U.S. If Hatoyama 
had a different idea in mind, he should not have said, "Trust me." 
But Hatoyama said the next day: "I do not regard the existing 
Japan-U.S. agreement as a precondition." He might have sent a wrong 
message to the President. 
 
He might have opened Pandora's Box of Greek mythology. Anyhow, 
Hatoyama wavers in his opinions. Although high public support for 
his administration has covered the inconsistency, he seems to be 
more inconsistent in his claims than former Prime Minister Taro Aso, 
who was criticized for a lack of consistency in his remarks. I 
wonder whether the Democratic Party of Japan (DPJ) made a wrong 
conjecture on the Futenma issue. 
 
In the U.S., its policy toward Iraq has changed as a result of the 
Democratic Party taking over the reins of government from the 
Republican Party. Focusing on this, the DPJ might have anticipated 
that the U.S. would understand the new government's review of the 
foreign policies taken by its predecessors. Prime Minister Hatoyama 
seems to have judged it possible to make requests directly to the 
President. Foreign Minister Katsuya Okada also tried to make 
arrangements to go to Washington in hopes of reaching an agreement 
with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on his proposal for 
integrating the Futenma facility into Kadena Air Base. 
 
Hatoyama made a mistake from the beginning. In the House of 
Representatives election campaign he pledged to move the Futenma 
facilities outside the prefecture, but he had no specific 
alternative site in mind. He considered foreign policy from the 
position of standing against the Liberal Democratic Party, in the 
same way as dealing with domestic issues, such as the attempt to 
halt a dam-construction project. 
 
 
TOKYO 00002697  005 OF 015 
 
 
"People in Okinawa have harbored greater expectations through the 
election campaign," Hatoyama said as if he were not involved in the 
Futenma issue: He might be finding it difficult to suggest the 
implementation of the initial coastal relocation plan because of 
growing expectations among people in Okinawa for moving the facility 
out of the prefecture. 
 
Hatoyama has complicated the Futenma issue to the point of 
destabilizing the Japan-U.S. alliance. I cannot figure out his 
motives. With no prospects for a resolution in sight, time is 
passing. 
 
(3) Column: Abduction and nuclear issues: Is Japan's strategy 
adequate? 
 
SANKEI (Page 5) (Full) 
November 24, 2009 
 
Hiroshi Fuse, commentary writer 
 
Looking back on U.S. President Barack Obama's tour of Asia, 
something in his speech in Tokyo on Nov. 14 bothers me. The 
President said that the normalization of North Korea's relations 
with its neighbors can only come if families of the Japanese 
abductees receive a "full accounting." It is quite understandable 
that he received a big round of applause for this. 
 
However, the Japanese translation of this passage is a bit 
questionable. Yomiuri Shimbun rendered this as "disclosure of all 
information to the families," while Asahi Shimbun's translation was 
"full disclosure of their whereabouts." While all the newspapers 
seem to have worked very hard, what will eventually go down in 
history are the two English words "full accounting." 
 
Personally, I think this English expression is a bit weak and 
ambiguous. One of the top political officials of the Ministry of 
Defense from the Democratic Party of Japan also expressed the same 
concern on TV. While we have no intention to find fault with the 
President's statement, what happens if North Korea argues 
arbitrarily that it has already given a "full accounting"? That 
there would be no doubts about this on the Japanese side should have 
been the test of the speech writer's caliber. 
 
I hope I am just worrying too much. However, there are two reasons 
for my anxiety. First, U.S. researchers and people close to the 
government have recently stopped talking positively about the 
outlook for resolving North Korea's nuclear issue. 
 
As evidenced by the removal of North Korea from the list of state 
sponsors of terrorism, the U.S. does not necessarily link the 
abductions to terrorism. And what if it has also lost confidence on 
resolving the nuclear issue? Is the phrase "full accounting" only 
meant as lip service to placate Japan amid the dim prospects? Or is 
it using this phrase to lower the hurdle on the abductions 
surreptitiously? Careful analysis is needed on this question. 
 
Second, at the Japan-South Korea editors' seminar in Seoul sponsored 
by the Japan Newspaper Publishers and Editors Association and other 
groups, I asked the South Koreans about their fear of North Korea's 
nuclear weapons. A South Korean journalist who used to be a 
correspondent in Tokyo retorted that if Japan attaches importance to 
the threat of nuclear weapons, "why do the Japanese media report so 
 
TOKYO 00002697  006 OF 015 
 
 
extensively on the abduction issue?" 
 
Whether the reporting is "extensive" or not is a matter of opinion, 
but it seems that in South Korea, where nearly 500 of its citizens 
have been abducted, the dominant view is that this issue should be 
resolved through behind-the-scenes negotiations rather than at the 
Six-Party Talks. Regardless of the Japanese government's efforts on 
the abduction issue beneath the surface, it appears that the South 
Korean media's opinion of Japan's stance is not flattering. 
 
This lack of common purpose among Japan, the U.S. and South Korea on 
the nuclear issue, as well as the abduction issue, bothers me. In 
this situation, can any progress be made even if the Six-Party Talks 
resume? Japan should not be satisfied with President Obama's Tokyo 
speech alone; it should reexamine its strategy for resolving both 
issues. 
 
(4) Column: Hatoyama's and Okada's view of America 
 
MAINICHI (Page 2) (Full) 
November 21, 2009 
 
Takao Iwami 
 
Former Prime Minister Kiichi Miyazawa, who was involved in the most 
important negotiations between Japan and the United States in the 
postwar period, first stepped foot on American soil in the summer 
¶1939. 
 
He was a 19-year-old University of Tokyo student participating in a 
conference of students from both countries. The voyage by ship took 
him two weeks each way, and the conference took place at the 
University of Southern California in Los Angeles. The bilateral 
relationship was beginning to deteriorate at that time, but the 
American participants kept saying: 
 
"What Japan is saying is most reasonable. The U.S. is also at 
fault." 
 
This came as a great shock to Miyazawa. 
 
He later said: "America is such a great nation. I thought that we 
had no chance of winning if we fought these people." 
 
Half a century later, during the Gulf War (1991), what was the view 
of Miyazawa, an expert on America, of the Japan-U.S. relationship? 
 
Miyazawa wrote: 
 
"Today, 50 years after Pearl Harbor, while both Japan and the U.S. 
claim that the bilateral relationship is most important, many 
Americans think that Japan is more threatening than the Soviet Union 
(the USSR disintegrated soon afterwards)." (Sengo Seiji no Shogen 
(Testimony on Postwar Politics), Yomiuri Shimbun Publishing) 
 
Do Americans still think that Japan is threatening? Japan's view of 
its relations with the U.S. has been in flux since the change of 
administration this year. 
 
The U.S. is suspicious of the Democratic Party of Japan (DPJ) 
administration under Hatoyama, which advocates a "close and equal 
Japan-U.S. relationship." What is meant by "equal"? The issue of the 
 
TOKYO 00002697  007 OF 015 
 
 
relocation of the U.S. forces' Futenma Air Station has become a 
litmus test. 
 
The statements of Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama and Foreign Minister 
Katsuya Okada on the relocation issue often differ, and the two have 
often been in discord. Their views of the United States intrigue 
me. 
 
As in the case of Miyazawa, the impression of the first visit to the 
U.S. is significant. Both Hatoyama and Okada studied in the U.S. 
 
Hatoyama went to Stanford University after graduating from the 
University of Tokyo. He graduated from Stanford with a doctorate in 
¶1976. He became a politician 10 years later, and the political 
figure he respects most is President John F. Kennedy. 
 
However, Hatoyama has a harsh view of the U.S. In 2002, when he 
first became DPJ president, he remarked at an interview: 
 
"The politicians of the ruling party (Liberal Democratic Party) have 
given up on drawing a conclusion against the wishes of the U.S. from 
the very beginning. They are unable to raise the issue of the bases 
in Okinawa or the issue of the Status of Forces Agreement. 
 
"Therefore, the only solution is a change of administration. I think 
the rebuilding of the Japan-U.S. relationship is the most necessary 
structural reform. 
 
"The U.S. is evading discussions on contingencies. We no longer have 
a deep relationship in which Japan is guaranteed assistance under 
the bilateral security treaty." 
 
He advocated a review of the Japan-U.S. security treaty. 
 
On the other hand, Okada was a visiting researcher at Harvard 
University's Center for International Affairs for one year from 
1985, 10 years after Hatoyama went to America. He was sent by the 
former Ministry of International Trade and Industry (now the 
Ministry of Economy, Trade, and Industry). 
 
At Harvard, he witnessed Ronald Reagan's leadership of America as a 
strong president. When the spaceship Challenger exploded right after 
takeoff, killing the seven astronauts onboard in January 1986, it is 
said that Okada was moved by the solidarity of the American people 
and their trust in the president. 
 
He wrote in his book published last year, "Seiken Kotai - Ko no Kuni 
wo Kaeru (Change of Administration - The Transformation of This 
Country)" (Kodansha): 
 
"I realized the great potential of politics in America. At the same 
time, I was disheartened by Japanese politics, which was plagued by 
scandals and revolved around factional struggles. 
 
"I strongly felt that something must be done about Japan's politics. 
I returned home having made a choice that I had never thought I 
would make before I went to America." 
 
For Okada, America is the country that instilled in him the dream to 
become a politician. 
 
It appears that Hatoyama's view of the past Japan-U.S. relationship 
 
TOKYO 00002697  008 OF 015 
 
 
is one of "subservience" while Okada views America as a political 
model. Such a difference in their perceptions of America has had a 
subtle influence on the negotiations on Futenma relocation. 
 
What would be Miyazawa's verdict if he were alive? 
 
(5) Avoid being at mercy of community concept and making 
misjudgments 
 
SANKEI (Page 7) (Excerpts) 
November 19, 2009 
 
Takenori Inoki, Director General, International Research Center for 
Japanese Studies 
 
In late October, I attended the second international conference of 
the Japanese Studies Association in Southeast Asia, held in Hanoi, 
Vietnam. It was a two-day forum for humanities and social science 
scholars on Japan from ASEAN countries to make presentations and 
conduct panel discussions. The conference was truly international 
with participants coming from even Australia, the United States, 
Britain, and China. 
 
Needless to say, Japan needs good scholars on other countries. By 
the same token, for the future of Japan, it is essential to have a 
large number of good scholars on Japan in the world, especially in 
Asia. In that context, academic exchanges among scholars can be 
described as the foundation of "good diplomacy.' 
 
At this conference, many participants reported that it is essential 
to assess Japan from a historical angle in an Asian context rather 
than to confine Japanese studies on Japan in Japan - an idea that is 
becoming the norm in the study of history. Nevertheless, "assessing 
something from a historical angle" does not mean to find fault with 
the past or dwell on the past. It must be based on the correct 
understanding of the present toward the future. This conference also 
reminded of Marc Bloch's words, "Misunderstanding of the present is 
the inevitable consequence of ignorance of the past," which was 
cited by my respected friend, Matao Miyamoto. 
 
Rough road to the EU 
 
There have been many comments on the concept of an East Asian 
Community by lawmakers and media outlets. But they have rarely 
discussed what it takes to realize this concept, such as the need to 
have the correct understanding of history, what efforts must be 
made, and in what time span. 
 
Many are hoping to see Japan become a member of the envisaged 
community in the region someday. But it is also necessary to recall 
the rocky path that led to the European Union (EU). The history of 
nearly 1,200 years from the Frankish King Charlemagne to the EU 
Treaty in Maastricht shows that the road leading up to the European 
Community was not smooth. 
 
East Asian countries do not share the same basic values, and there 
is a lack of mutual understanding even in the academic area. It is 
too risky for such countries to jump at the East Asian Community 
concept that will restrict national sovereignty. The problem 
associated with the East Asian Community concept is that it is a 
movement to apply restrictions to the use of violence by states, 
i.e., wars, as a means of settling international conflicts. The 
 
TOKYO 00002697  009 OF 015 
 
 
concept involves complicated factors. 
 
There was the beginning of the "nation-state" and there will be an 
end to it. The question is when the end will come. For realizing the 
concept, it is lawmakers' important duty to keep working with the 
spirit of "endurance and accumulation." But they must avoid being at 
the mercy of the idea and misjudging reality as a result. 
 
I keenly felt at the conference in Vietnam that it is our important 
duty to avoid adhering to Japan's narrow regional interests and its 
traditions -- an act of folly that would force Japan into isolation 
-- and to explore Japan's future position from a broad perspective, 
including the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC). 
 
(6) Candidates' positions on Futenma relocation two months ahead of 
Nago mayoral race that may affect the outcome of relocation issue 
 
RYUKYU SHIMPO (Page 2) (Abridged) 
November 24, 2009 
 
Nago - Only two months is left before the Nago mayoral election on 
Jan. 24. This election is likely to be a one-on-one contest between 
the ruling and opposition parties represented by incumbent mayor 
Yoshikazu Shimabukuro, 63, who is running for a second term, and new 
candidate Susumu Inamine, 64, a former chief of the city's education 
board. The acceptance of the relocation of the U.S. forces' Futenma 
Air Station to Nago is the main point of contention, and the outcome 
of the election may affect the Japan-U.S. negotiations on this 
issue. The citizens are also very interested in the candidates' 
strategies for revitalizing the local communities and how they 
propose to revive the sluggish economy and employment situation. 
 
With regard to the Futenma issue, Shimabukuro reached basic 
agreement with the Tokyo government on the plan to relocate Futenma 
to the coastal area of Camp Schwab in 2006 under the Liberal 
Democratic Party-New Komeito administration. However, amid the 
indecision of the Hatoyama administration dominated by the 
Democratic Party of Japan on this issue, Shimabukuro held a news 
conference on Nov. 12 in which he indicated: "I would welcome an 
alternative plan if the government would come up with one promptly." 
He emphasized that Nago did not ask to host the Futenma replacement 
facility. 
 
Shimabukuro also asserted that "the debate has been exhausted over 
three past elections," expressing his resentment at making this 
issue the point of contention in the mayoral race again. At his 
meeting with Foreign Minister Katsuya Okada on Nov. 15, he asked 
that there be no more division among the citizens of Nago and that 
the government take the responsibility to reach a conclusion at an 
early date. 
 
Inamine had limited himself at first to demanding a review of the 
existing relocation plan on the grounds that "there are problems 
with this plan because the process through which the plan came about 
lacked transparency." However, on Nov. 6, after a support group 
consisting mostly of reformist city assembly members was formed, he 
said: "I will not allow the building of a new military base in 
Henoko and Oura Bay," taking one step further to advocate relocation 
out of Okinawa or out of Japan. 
 
With Inamine coming out to oppose relocation to Henoko, Yasushi 
Higa, who had planned to run in the election, has agreed to withdraw 
 
TOKYO 00002697  010 OF 015 
 
 
his candidacy. He signed a memorandum with Inamine on basic policies 
on Nov. 18. This avoided a division in the opposition camp in the 
election, and Inamine is now the common candidate for "striving to 
build a new Nago City" and revitalizing the city administration. 
 
(7) Heads of local governments in Okinawa react coolly to foreign 
minister's idea of integrating Futenma base into Kadena Air Base 
 
MAINICHI (Page 2) (Full) 
November 17, 2009 
 
Teruhisa Mimori, Yoshichika Imoto 
 
Foreign Minister Katsuya Okada visited Okinawa for the first time 
since assuming his post, in connection with the pending issue of 
relocating the U.S. Marine Corps' Futenma Air Station (in Ginowan 
City, Okinawa Prefecture). Judging that that it would be difficult 
to relocate the Futenma base outside the prefecture, which Prime 
Minister Yukio Hatoyama advocated during the campaign for the latest 
House of Representatives election, Okada is now looking into the 
possibility of integrating the Futenma base into the U.S. Kadena Air 
Base (in the town of Kadena). This has become his mantra. The heads 
of local governments concerned gave the cold shoulder to Okada, 
however. As a result, the gap in views between Okada and Okinawa 
became evident. Meanwhile, Hatoyama has taken a stance of spending 
more time to reach a conclusion, while placing importance on his 
party's campaign pledge to move the Futenma base out of Okinawa. 
Disarray is growing in the Hatoyama government. 
 
In a meeting held at the Kadena Town Hall on the morning of Nov. 17, 
Kadena Mayor Tokujitsu Miyagi told Okada that many aircraft 
accidents had occurred at the Kadena Air Base. Okada explained that 
the Futenma-Kadena merger plan "is one of the options (under 
consideration)." 
 
"It is not a problem of emotions," said Miyagi. "These accidents 
actually occurred. I can't accept the merger option." He reacted 
strongly to the merger idea, which could transfer the danger of 
Futenma to the Kadena Air Base, where many accidents have occurred. 
 
"How about the existing measures to ease the burden?" Miyagi asked 
Okada, who said the idea was "based on the precondition of reducing 
the burden on Kadena Town." The 1996 agreement on measures to reduce 
noise have not been observed and the noise level has instead 
increased even with the relocation of training activities of F-15 
fighters based at the Kadena Air Base. "The government said many 
times that it would ease the burden, but it has not been reduced," 
said Okinawa Mayor Mitsuko Toumon, who was also attending the 
session. She said, "Not considering the base issue Okinawa's 
problem, all Japanese people should think about it." 
 
Miyagi told reporters after the meeting: "I judge that the merger 
plan is off the table," because Okada said that a conclusion should 
be reached within the year, remarking that the easing of Kadena's 
burden is the premise (for Futenma relocation). Miyagi said, "I am 
considering possible obstruction tactics" in case action is taken 
for the Futenma-Kadena merger plan. He played up his strong 
determination to oppose the merger plan. 
 
Okada held an informal meeting the previous day with the 
representatives of the prefectural assembly groups, excluding the 
one comprised of members belonging to the opposition Liberal 
 
TOKYO 00002697  011 OF 015 
 
 
Democratic Party (LDP). During the meeting, one assembly member 
asked Okada to look into the possibility of relocating Futenma out 
of Okinawa, and another member stressed that the land reclamation of 
Henoko Bay would be a typical example of useless public works 
projects. Pointing out that the Futenma relocation and the transfer 
of U.S. Marines to Guam is a package, Okada said, "If we start from 
scratch looking for an appropriate relocation site, the process will 
grind to a halt. We are being forced to make a tough decision," 
implying a direction toward relocation within Okinawa. The DPJ 
Okinawa Chapter's policy chief Tadashi Uesato said, "We will support 
the government by trusting Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama, not 
Foreign Minister Okada." 
 
(8) Editorial: Foreign Minister Okada must give up new base and 
Futenma relocation in Okinawa 
 
AKAHATA (Page 2) (Full) 
November 18, 2009 
 
Foreign Minister Katsuya Okada made his first official visit to 
Okinawa Prefecture. During his visit there, Foreign Minister Okada 
reiterated that he would like to reach a conclusion within the year 
on the issue of constructing a new U.S. military base (as an 
alternative for the U.S. Marine Corps' Futenma Air Station) and the 
issue of integrating the heliport functions of Futenma airfield into 
the Kadena base in the prefecture. On the other hand, Foreign 
Minister Okada said he "didn't promise to relocate Futenma airfield 
outside Japan or Okinawa Prefecture." He also said, "I can't say we 
have only to close down (the Futenma base)." These remarks brought 
about a local backlash in the prefecture. 
 
Okinawa Prefecture's local residents do not want a new base 
constructed in the prefecture, nor do they want the Futenma base 
relocated within the prefecture. Based on this fact, Foreign 
Minister Okada should negotiate with the United States. Prime 
Minister Yukio Hatoyama said, "I will take the wishes of people in 
Okinawa Prefecture most seriously." Foreign Minister Okada's 
attitude, as long as he does not change it, will remain inconsistent 
with what Prime Minister Hatoyama said. 
 
Futenma relocation within Okinawa unfeasible 
 
Last weekend, Prime Minister Hatoyama met with U.S. President Obama. 
On that occasion, the two leaders agreed to set up a ministerial 
working group to consult on the Futenma base issue. President Obama 
said he did so to carry out an "agreement" to build a new base. 
Prime Minister Hatoyama said, "I think the agreement is important, 
but if that's going to decide everything, we don't have to discuss 
anything." The question is whether or not to reach a conclusion 
within the year. In this regard, Foreign Minister Okada also said, 
"It means that the working group will do so before the year is out 
if possible, and it also implies something else." 
 
Foreign Minister Okada is a Japanese member of the working group, as 
is Defense Minister Toshimi Kitazawa. His reiterated remarks running 
counter to the prime minister's explanation raises a question about 
the Hatoyama government's basic stance on the matter. 
 
In Okinawa Mr. Okada said that moving the Futenma base out of Japan 
or Okinawa Prefecture is a "very narrow path." However, the local 
population of Okinawa Prefecture desires the Futenma base to be 
removed. This is a "narrow path," but the base can be moved 
 
TOKYO 00002697  012 OF 015 
 
 
elsewhere in Okinawa Prefecture. This is what he means to say. If 
that is the case, we must say he does not see the realities. Such an 
attitude is tantamount to trampling the local people's wishes under 
foot. 
 
The Futenma base occupies a vast expanse of land in a densely 
populated area of Ginowan city. It is clear that the base must be 
removed without a moment's delay for the safety and daily lives of 
local residents. Mr. Okada is sticking to his idea of integrating 
the Futenma base's heliport functions into the Kadena base. This 
base merger will only exacerbate the suffering of the local people 
from, among other things, the roar of fighter jets that is serious 
even now. Obviously, his proposal of such a base integration is 
unwelcome to local residents. In point of fact, Okinawa Prefecture's 
base-hosting communities are opposed to moving the Futenma base 
within the prefecture. They have not allowed government contractors 
to drive piles anywhere in their municipalities since the government 
unveiled its plan 13 years ago to build a new base. 
 
What is required of the Japanese government is to negotiate with the 
United States so as to remove the Futenma base as Okinawa 
Prefecture's local residents demand. That is the responsibility of 
Mr. Okada as foreign minister. 
 
Far from negotiating with the United States for removing the Futenma 
base, Mr. Okada said the ruling Democratic Party of Japan did not 
pledge the Futenma relocation outside Japan or Okinawa Prefecture in 
its manifesto. That is an outrageous 'so-what' attitude. It is DPJ 
President Hatoyama who promised in the election campaign to move the 
Futenma base out of Japan or Okinawa Prefecture. At the time, Mr. 
Okada was DPJ secretary general. During the campaign, he did not 
raise an objection to the DPJ president's remarks. Now he says it is 
not a public pledge. That is extremely outrageous. 
 
Japan should quit kowtowing to U.S. 
 
After his Okinawa visit, Mr. Okada held a press conference, where he 
said the government will negotiate with the United States on the 
basis of what came out of the former government's negotiations with 
the U.S. government. At the same time, he also said, "If the 
agreement is called off, the transfer of Marines (from Okinawa to 
Guam) and the return of the (Futenma) base will also be called off." 
This remark is serious. U.S. Secretary of Defense Gates recently 
came to Japan. On that occasion, he used exactly the same expression 
and urged Japan to accept the construction of a new base. It was too 
coercive and inconsiderate of him to say such a thing. 
 
Japan will now have to make a fundamental changeover from the policy 
of kowtowing to the United States, which lasted into the previous 
coalition government of the Liberal Democratic Party and the New 
Komeito. Prime Minister Hatoyama and Foreign Minister Okada are at a 
moment of truth in their foreign policy. 
 
(9) Japan-U.S. Cultural Exchange Center opens at U.S. Yokosuka Base 
 
ASAHI (Kanagawa edition) (Page 31) (Full) 
November 19, 2009 
 
A Japan-U.S. Cultural Exchange Center opened on Nov. 18 at the U.S. 
Yokosuka Naval Base, in Yokosuka City. Yokosuka residents can visit 
the center freely. The opening of such a center is a prime challenge 
for U.S. bases in Japan. The center is intended to deepen mutual 
 
TOKYO 00002697  013 OF 015 
 
 
understanding between the Japanese and Americans through activities 
held there. 
 
The center is located on the first floor of the three-story building 
on the left side of the main entrance of the base. The center was 
established in a remodeled room 50 square meters in area. The center 
has a model of the destroyer used in the film Last Operations Under 
the Orion, and a movie screen showing images of exchanges between 
the base and Japan. 
 
Yokosuka residents and tourists will be allowed to visit only the 
center without a base pass. The U.S. side will hold regular events 
and offer free English conversation classes in the center. The 
center can be reserved by the public. 
 
The center's first events, to be held on Nov. 20, are a talk on the 
American holiday of Thanksgiving for Japanese one o'clock and an 
origami class for Americans from 2:30. The center is open from 
Monday through Thursday from 1:00 to 06:00 p.m. It is only open on 
Friday by reservation. 
 
(10) SDP finds itself on horns of dilemma 
 
YOMIURI (Page 4) (Full) 
November 24, 2009 
 
In connection with the relocation of U.S. Marine Corps Air Station 
Futenma (Ginowan City) in Okinawa Prefecture, some members of the 
Social Democratic Party (SDP), which has strongly insisted that the 
Futenma base be relocated outside the prefecture or even out of 
Japan, have begun voicing the hard-line argument that there will be 
no choice for the party to withdraw from the coalition government if 
Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama tries to solve the relocation issue by 
accepting the existing relocation plan. As it stands, the SDP 
leadership is now facing difficulties in dealing with the issue. 
 
Appearing on a Tokyo Broadcasting System (TBS) program on Nov. 21, 
SDP head Mizuho Fukushima, currently state minister for consumer 
affairs, strongly opposed the existing plan to relocate the Futenma 
heliport functions to the coastal area of Camp Schwab, by saying: 
"This is not the relocation of Marines, but a new military base at 
sea. I don't think that building a new base will ease the burden on 
the people of Okinawa." Also at an informal cabinet meeting on Nov. 
20, Fukushima cited the names of specific relocation sites, saying, 
"How about relocating the Futenma base to Guam or Iwo Jima?" She 
urged the cabinet to make a decision on the issue. Worried about 
possible criticism that there is discord in the cabinet, Fukushima 
had refrained from voicing different opinions from other cabinet 
members up until now. However, she appears to have judged that this 
is a crucial juncture considering the present situation in which the 
U.S. government is calling for an early implementation of the 
existing relocation plan at a ministerial-level working group on the 
Futenma issue comprising foreign and defense officials of Japan and 
the United States, which was launched on Nov. 17. 
 
Fukushima intends to ask Hatoyama to hold a meeting of the cabinet 
committee on basic policy matters, which handles the Futenma issue. 
She will also work upon the Democratic Party of Japan (DPJ) to set 
up a consultative organ of the three ruling parties. SDP Secretary 
General Yasumasa Shigeno and Sadao Fuchigami, a deputy party head, 
are scheduled to visit Okinawa at the end of this month. 
 
 
TOKYO 00002697  014 OF 015 
 
 
There is growing alarm in the SDP that the party will lose its 
political presence if the Futenma issue is resolved without changing 
the existing plan. In their national convention in September, many 
SDP local organizations took a cautious stance toward joining the 
coalition government, with one member saying, "The SDP will be 
brought over to the DPJ's side." 
 
In the August House of Representatives election, the SDP won only 
three single-seat constituencies. One of the three constituencies 
the SDP won was the Okinawa No. 2 district, which includes Ginowan 
City. Lower House member Kantoku Teruya, who represents this 
district, told people close to him: "It is time to make a tough 
decision. There will be no future for the SDP if it presents a 
weak-kneed response." 
 
There is a growing view in the SDP that if the party leaves the 
ruling coalition, it will be able to retain its supporters. On the 
other hand, some other members think that the party will be caught 
in its own trap if it talks casually about withdrawing from the 
coalition, and that priority should be placed on bringing results of 
the participation in the government. Because the SDP will employ a 
strategy of increasing its number of Diet seats in the House of 
Councillors election next summer in cooperation with the DPJ, the 
party leadership is now facing a dilemma. 
 
(11) Removal of children: Children's rights should be discussed 
first 
 
ASAHI (Page 17) (Full) 
November 20, 2009 
 
Mikiko Otani, attorney 
 
An American husband (of a Japanese woman) was arrested in September 
in Fukuoka Prefecture for allegedly trying to take away their two 
children whom the woman had brought back from the U.S. Because of 
this incident, cases in which one of the parents in a broken 
international marriage return home with a child (without the consent 
of) the other are drawing attention. Japan is being criticized by 
Europe and the U.S. because it has not yet ratified the Hague 
Convention. The media often report this issue as a diplomatic one. 
However, it should be discussed from the perspective of children's 
rights. 
 
The Hague Convention, adopted in 1980, stipulates that if the parent 
of a child taken away by the other seeks the child's return, the 
other country is obliged to return the child to his or her country 
of residence. Eighty-one countries, mainly European countries and 
the U.S., have ratified the Convention. The Convention on the Rights 
of the Child protects children's right to see and visit their 
divorced or separated mother or father. Signatory countries, 
including Japan, are obliged to protect children from being removed 
from either of their parents. For that reason, the UN Committee on 
the Rights of the Child in 2004 urged Japan to ratify the Hague 
Convention. 
 
According to a survey conducted in Britain, children whose relations 
with their parents were cut off suddenly and unilaterally feel a 
sense of mistrust in the parent who took them away. These children 
are suffering a serious impact from their removal--- they find it 
difficult to blend into a new life due to a language barrier. In 
Europe and the U.S., there are cases in which a law court did not 
 
TOKYO 00002697  015 OF 015 
 
 
allow a child (of broken international marriage or separated 
couples) to return to Japan, because Japan has not yet ratified the 
Hague Convention. There are also cases in which a child who has been 
taken away to a foreign country cannot see the other parent in 
Japan. In order to spare children from suffering, a realistic 
approach is to explore ways to settle this issue, while working 
together with other countries. 
 
As is often pointed out, violence and domestic violence are behind 
the cross-border removal of children. In reality, since there are 
many cases in which Japanese wives take away their child from their 
European or American husbands, there is deep-rooted opposition in 
Japan to ratifying the Hague Convention for reason of protecting 
Japanese women and their children. 
 
It is necessary to examine more specifically who will protect 
women's rights in the event of Japan's ratifying the Convention. 
Even in signatory countries, there are cases in which law courts did 
not order the return of a child when his or her mother removed the 
child from a situation of domestic violence. This should be of 
reference when considering whether Japan should sign the Convention 
or not. Nowadays international marriages, divorces and cross-border 
residence of family members are common. How to coordinate the rights 
of children, parents and women in the event of their parents' 
separation or divorce is a challenge for all countries. 
 
Japan should immediately ratify the Hague Convention and, while 
learning from other countries' practices and experiences, establish 
a domestic law. Viewing the Hague Convention from the perspective of 
the best interests of children will encourage the 193 countries and 
regions that have signed the Convention of the Rights of the Child 
to tackle the issue. I would like to point out that it is essential 
for the U.S., which is spearheading the promotion of the 
ratification of the Hague Convention, to fall in step with the 
world, by ratifying the Convention of the Rights of the Child. 
 
ROOS