VZCZCXRO3160
PP RUEHFK RUEHKSO RUEHNAG RUEHNH
DE RUEHKO #0051/01 0080805
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
P 080805Z JAN 10
FM AMEMBASSY TOKYO
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 8607
INFO RUEKJCS/SECDEF WASHDC PRIORITY
RHEHAAA/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 0569
RUEHFK/AMCONSUL FUKUOKA 8226
RUEHOK/AMCONSUL OSAKA KOBE 2039
RUEHNAG/AMCONSUL NAGOYA 5332
RUEHKSO/AMCONSUL SAPPORO 8724
RUEHBJ/AMEMBASSY BEIJING 2560
RUEHUL/AMEMBASSY SEOUL 9225
RUCNDT/USMISSION USUN NEW YORK 8649

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 09 TOKYO 000051 
 
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 01/08/10 
 
INDEX: 
(1) U.S. to demand "strong support for USFJ" at foreign ministerial 
meeting in Hawaii (Yomiuri) 
 
(2) "Seiron" column: U.S. should be patient with regard to 
strengthening the Japan-U.S. relationship (Sankei) 
 
(3) Editorial: V-shaped runway plan for Futenma relocation: Do not 
create future sources of trouble through deception (Ryukyu Shimpo) 
 
(4) Political Scene: Miscalculation - part 1: Prime minister loses 
"loyal retainer" (Yomiuri) 
 
(5) Sea Shepherd boat collision: Japan may consider applying 
antipiracy law (Mainichi) 
 
(6) Editorial: Japan urged to take resolute measures against illegal 
acts of obstruction to research whaling (Sankei) 
 
(Corrected copy): Hirano denies possibility of visit to Nanjing by 
Hatoyama (Sankei) 
 
ARTICLES: 
 
(1) U.S. to demand "strong support for USFJ" at foreign ministerial 
meeting in Hawaii 
 
YOMIURI (Page 2) (Full) 
Evening, January 8, 2010 
 
Satoshi Ogawa in Washington 
 
U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Kurt Campbell held a news 
conference in Washington on Jan. 7 and announced formally that 
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will meet Foreign Minister 
Katsuya Okada in Hawaii on Jan. 12. 
 
At the meeting, Clinton and Okada will agree to launch talks on 
deepening the bilateral alliance on the occasion of the 50th 
anniversary of the revision of the Japan-U.S. security treaty. 
Campbell also indicated that Clinton will ask the Japanese 
government to provide "strong support" for the U.S. Marines in 
Okinawa and U.S. Forces Japan (USFJ). 
 
Campbell pointed out that "the security alliance is the core of the 
Japan-U.S. relationship." He said: "The U.S. would like the Japanese 
government to provide strong support for robust troops in Okinawa, 
particularly for the presence of the Marines," demanding progress in 
the issue of the relocation of the USFJ's Futenma Air Station. He 
added, "Security issues are important in an Asia characterized by 
complexity and undergoing major changes. The U.S. wants a very clear 
declaration (from the Japanese side) of its intent to continue close 
cooperation with the U.S." He indicated that the U.S. will confirm 
this in the talks on deepening the alliance. 
 
Campbell also stated: "The Japan-U.S. alliance provides the basis 
for economic development in Asia. Today, when the U.S. talks with 
its Asian friends, the first topic that comes up is: 'We want Japan 
and the U.S. to maintain a strong relationship'." He disclosed that 
Asian countries have expressed their concern about the present state 
of the Japan-U.S. relationship to the U.S. directly. 
 
 
TOKYO 00000051  002 OF 009 
 
 
The foreign ministerial meeting is also expected to cover a broad 
range of other issues, including North Korea, China, and climate 
change. 
 
(2) "Seiron" column: U.S. should be patient with regard to 
strengthening the Japan-U.S. relationship 
 
SANKEI (Page 7) (Full) 
January 8, 2010 
 
Hisahiko Okazaki, former ambassador to Thailand 
 
Complete lack of mutual understanding 
 
The relationship of trust between Japan and the United States is in 
the worst state ever. 
 
The U.S. President refused to see the Japanese Prime Minister when 
he asked to meet him to give an explanation. On the other hand, when 
the Prime Minister said he had obtained (the U.S.'s) understanding 
through his conversation with the Secretary of State, the Secretary 
summoned the Japanese ambassador to the U.S. for the sole purpose of 
telling him that she had not indicated her approval. 
 
The "Nixon shock" comes to mind if you look for past examples of 
such a degree of lack of mutual understanding. At their summit 
meeting in 1969, President Richard Nixon made a commitment to return 
Okinawa to Japan, while Prime Minister Eisaku Sato pledged voluntary 
regulation of textile exports to the U.S. The official version of 
this story is that this was a mistranslation of a pledge to "take 
appropriate measures," but what I heard from an insider at that time 
is that a participant in the meeting had been worried, thinking: Is 
it okay to say that much? The remarks made at that meeting were 
indeed strong expressions comparable to Prime Minister Yukio 
Hatoyama's words "trust me" at the summit meeting last autumn. 
 
Subsequently, the U.S. side repeatedly conveyed its demand for the 
fulfillment of the pledge, but the Japanese side simply continued 
with inconclusive negotiations. In 1971, the U.S.-China 
rapprochement took place over the head of Japan, and when the double 
shock of ending the gold standard for the dollar came, an informed 
U.S. source said this was a penalty for Japan's breach of trust. 
 
Prospects for present case uncertain 
 
This came as an extremely serious blow. The ending of the gold 
standard for the dollar brought about the most serious economic 
recession in Japan in the postwar period. In addition, the China 
issue inflicted irreparable damage on the process of Japan-U.S. 
coordination on policy toward Beijing. Japan and the U.S. had been 
solidly united as allies, but this started a situation where the two 
countries share no common policy toward China -- a situation that 
still continues. This has even affected domestic politics in Japan. 
 
At that time, I had a discussion with Ambassador to the U.S. 
Nobuhiko Ushiba in Washington about why this situation came about. 
We realized that there had not been a single Japan-U.S. summit 
meeting since the pledges were made in 1969, except for a brief 
meeting during the UN General Assembly in 1970. Both Ambassador 
Ushiba and I lamented then that if the two leaders had met, Japan 
might have detected signs of a subtle policy change in the U.S. 
government, and the Nixon shock could have been avoided. 
 
TOKYO 00000051  003 OF 009 
 
 
 
However, judging from the present-day Japan-U.S. relationship, the 
U.S. side might have taken the attitude that there was no need to 
hold any summit meeting unless Japan was ready to make a pledge to 
regulate textile exports voluntarily. 
 
With the current level of lack of communication between Japan and 
the U.S., two issues worry me: the economy and policy toward China, 
similar to the situation at the time of the Nixon shock. In 
addition, there is also the question of the U.S. military bases. 
 
I am unable to conceive a scenario for the immediate future, and 
even prospects for the near future are uncertain. Such was also the 
situation in 1970-71. 
 
Drawing an analogy between the situation then and the present 
Japan-U.S. crisis, if the dollar and the Chinese yuan pegged to it 
cause a sharp appreciation of the yen, it will deal a serious blow 
to the Japanese economy, even though such a scenario is still 
unthinkable at present. 
 
The issue of U.S. military bases is even more serious. There are 
still leftist forces in Japan that have been working to weaken the 
Japan-U.S. alliance after the Cold War. If the military solidarity 
between Japan and the U.S. is weakened, they will not be concerned, 
but will instead press for further weakening of the alliance, in the 
name "reducing the burden." This could result in irreparable damage 
to the Japan-U.S. alliance. 
 
It is quite easy to prevent this from happening: the Hatoyama 
administration should fulfill its international commitment. 
 
Time for restoration will come 
 
However, what I would like to appeal for now is patience on the part 
of the United States. 
 
Even if the Futenma relocation issue is not resolved, the status quo 
will continue, meaning the U.S. has nothing to lose. In the 15 years 
since the agreement to return the Futenma base, there has been only 
one accident, which resulted in no casualties. Even if an accident 
did occur, the U.S. side would not be responsible; the Japanese 
side, which has delayed a solution, would be to blame. 
 
The rise of China poses the most serious challenge to the security 
of East Asia in the future, and even to the security of the world. 
No matter what countermeasures are contemplated to deal with China's 
rise, the Japan-U.S. alliance is too valuable an asset to lose. 
 
On the other hand, the Japan-U.S. alliance is slowly approaching its 
ideal shape, although the process has been taking an excruciatingly 
long time. A solution to such issues as the right of collective 
self-defense will be in sight once the next conservative 
administration comes to power. Mr. Hatoyama's proposal for 
constitutional revision drafted when he was in the opposition 
regarded the exercise of the right of collective self-defense not as 
a constitutional issue, but as a matter for the government to 
decide. 
On a subconscious level the people have come to firmly believe in 
giving importance to the Japan-U.S. alliance. The relationship of 
trust between the armed forces and government offices of the two 
countries has never been better. 
 
TOKYO 00000051  004 OF 009 
 
 
 
The U.S. was patient with the Republic of Korea (ROK) during the 
five years of the previous Roh Moo-hyun administration. (South 
Koreans may scold me for such a characterization, for while the 
Hatoyama cabinet terminated the refueling mission in the Indian 
Ocean, the ROK sent troops to Afghanistan). The realists in the ROK, 
who were ostracized at that time, are now back in power, giving 
their support to the U.S.-ROK alliance. 
 
The relationship of trust between Japan and the United States will 
eventually be restored, and the time will come when the alliance 
relationship will be strengthened. Until then, I hope the U.S. side 
will be patient. 
 
(3) Editorial: V-shaped runway plan for Futenma relocation: Do not 
create future sources of trouble through deception 
 
RYUKYU SHIMPO (Page 2) (Slightly abridged) 
January 8, 2010 
 
The government admitted officially for the first time on Jan. 6 that 
the Okinawa Prefectural Government never accepted the current 
"V-shaped runway plan" for the relocation of the Futenma Air Station 
to the Henoko cape in Nago City, which was agreed upon by Japan and 
the U.S. under the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP)-New Komeito 
administration, and which Okinawa supposedly agreed to. 
 
The legitimacy of the existing Henoko relocation plan being promoted 
by the Japanese and U.S. governments has become very questionable. 
 
This is just the tip of the iceberg. It is necessary to conduct a 
thorough examination of the Futenma relocation plan which the 
previous LDP-New Komeito administration had pushed for arbitrarily, 
if only for the sake of building a Japan-U.S. relationship 
unblemished by lies and deception. 
 
The "V-shaped plan" consists of building two additional V-shaped 
runways in the plan to relocate the Futenma base to Henoko in order 
to prevent noise by avoiding residential areas in the flight 
routes. 
 
Nago City reached an agreement with the government on this plan in 
July 2006, but then Governor Keiichi Inamine refused to give his 
approval. 
 
However, the Ministry of Defense and the government claim that "the 
Okinawa government has also indicated its acceptance" (according to 
then Director General Fushiro Nukaga of the Defense Agency) based on 
the "basic confirmation" document exchanged with Okinawa. In 
February 2007, Defense Minister Fumio Kyuma also told the United 
States that, "Fortunately, Okinawa basically agrees (to the plan)." 
 
However, Governor Inamine has consistently denied that Okinawa 
officially agreed to the plan by saying that although he signed the 
"basic confirmation," he "did not agree." 
 
The question boils down to what this "basic confirmation" document 
was supposed to signify. Governor Inamine's perception was that this 
was different from an agreement. On the other hand, the government 
has consistently argued that the basic confirmation on the agreement 
reached between the national government and Nago City was equivalent 
to an "agreement," and therefore, "Okinawa also agreed." 
 
TOKYO 00000051  005 OF 009 
 
 
 
The rejection of the current relocation plan is an important 
question in the relocation issue, which has resulted in an outcry 
that it will bring about the deterioration of the Japan-U.S. 
alliance or the Japan-U.S. relationship. Yet, the government has 
dealt with this issue by leaving the question of the local 
authorities' agreement ambiguous. This is outrageous. 
 
Governor Inamine cannot also avoid being held responsible for 
signing a "basic confirmation" that could be misunderstood as an 
"agreement." 
 
Even if he signed the document in a desperate effort to evade the 
difficult situation of the government's insistent demands for him to 
sign an agreement, this act that ran counter to popular will and was 
later taken advantage of by the government is unforgivable. 
 
 Misunderstanding and deception will only end up causing problems in 
the future and leading to tragedy. This situation has already 
created confusion in the Japan-U.S. relationship. The government 
should stop its deception and the Okinawa Prefectural Government 
should refrain from making statements and taking actions that could 
give rise to misunderstanding. 
 
(4) Political Scene: Miscalculation - part 1: Prime minister loses 
"loyal retainer" 
 
YOMIURI (Page 4) (Excerpts) 
January 8, 2010 
 
Former Finance Minister Hirohisa Fujii conveyed his decision to step 
down to Prime Minister Hatoyama on Jan. 5. With Hatoyama indicating 
his intention to ask him to remain in the post, it appeared that it 
would take time to settle this issue. However, Hatoyama gave up his 
intention to persuade Fujii to stay in office. 
 
Hatoyama on the morning of the 6th told Chief Cabinet Secretary 
Hirano: "If we allow this situation to drag on, a view that the feud 
between the Democratic Party of Japan (DPJ) Secretary General Ozawa 
and Fujii has led to Fujii's resignation would spread. I must act 
promptly." 
 
Hatoyama conveyed this to Hirano on the morning of the 6th and 
started selecting a successor to Fujii. 
 
Fujii was previously one of close aides to Ozawa. They acted 
together since they were Liberal Democratic Party members and 
entered the DPJ in 2003. However, their relations began fraying from 
around the time when Fujii served as secretary general, when Katsuya 
Okawa (now foreign minister) was the leader of the DPJ. Their 
confrontation became decisive when Fujii broached the possibility of 
Ozawa quitting as DPJ leader over the illegal political funds 
donation scandal involving Nishimatsu Construction Co. 
 
Hatoyama by all means wanted to stave off a situation in which 
Fujii's resignation became a serious problem involving the 
influence-wielding Ozawa. 
 
When it became certain that Hatoyama administration would come into 
being, following the landslide victory of the DPJ, Fujii presented a 
plan for a cabinet line-up to Hatoyama. The plan called for Fujii's 
serving as state minister for national policy in charge of overall 
 
TOKYO 00000051  006 OF 009 
 
 
affairs beside the prime minster, while having Okada as finance 
minister and Kan as foreign minister. 
 
However, it was impossible to appoint Fujii, who was at odds with 
Ozawa, to a central role. Hatoyama offered Fujii the finance 
ministerial post. Fujii reluctantly accepted it. 
 
Fujii devoted all his energy to the compilation of the budget. When 
the budget compilation process was reaching the final stage, there 
occurred an incident that hurt his pride. On Dec. 16 Ozawa visited 
the Prime Minister's official residence (Kantei) and submitted the 
party's priority requests to Hatoyama and Fujii. 
 
With a microphone in his hand, Ozawa, while looking at Fujii, made a 
harsh remark, "The budget has not been written at the initiative of 
politicians." Ozawa's decision was to maintain the provisional gas 
tax rate. Fujii had replied in the Diet, "It is only natural to 
scrap the provisional tax rates." Fujii lost his face because of 
this incident. 
 
Fujii, on the evening of the 25th, when the budget was adopted at a 
cabinet meeting, was drinking with senior Finance Ministry 
officials. He repeatedly said to them, "Thank you," while shaking 
hands with them. Some pointed out, "Mr. Fujii perhaps resigned 
because he burned out after the completion of a difficult job." 
 
Ozawa's influence was felt during the process of picking a successor 
to Fujii as well. 
 
Hatoyama at noon of the 6th met with State Minister for National 
Policy Kan (at the time) at the Kantei. Kan said, "It is better to 
decide on a successor to Mr. Fujii today." He proposed promoting 
Vice Finance Minister Yoshihiko Noda. Hatoyama hinted at shifting 
State Minister for Government Revitalization to the finance 
ministerial post. He did not mention Kan's name. However, Hatoyama 
four hours later telephoned Kan and asked him to serve as finance 
minister. Kan accepted the offer. What happened during those four 
hours? 
 
A senior DPJ official close to Ozawa on the evening of the 6th told 
the press corps: "Mr. Kan was the only person to fill the finance 
minister post." This source said Sengoku and Noda are not suitable 
for the post, since they are on bad terms with Ozawa. According to a 
source connected with the DPJ, these views heard in the party were 
conveyed to the Kantei, even before Hatoyama made the decision to 
pick Kan. 
 
Whenever he met Hatoyama, Fujii always said to him, "I will do as 
the prime minister says." Now Hatoyama's loyal retainer is gone. 
Both Foreign Minister Okada and Transport Minister Maehara, who are 
keeping Ozawa at arm's length, have also lost Fujii, who served as a 
shield against Ozawa. 
 
A lawmaker close to Ozawa said with satisfaction on the 7th: "Now 
that Mr. Kan has been installed in the finance minister post, it has 
become impossible for him to map out a policy strategy with an eye 
to his succeeding Hatoyama as prime minister. The Hatoyama-Ozawa 
structure has been further solidified." 
 
(5) Sea Shepherd boat collision: Japan may consider applying 
antipiracy law 
 
 
TOKYO 00000051  007 OF 009 
 
 
MAINICHI (Page 2) (Full) 
January 8, 2010 
 
The collision between a Japanese whaling ship and a protest boat 
operated by the Sea Shepherd anti-whaling group has created 
controversy at home and abroad. At a press conference on Jan. 7, 
Akira Gunji, senior vice minister of the Ministry of Agriculture, 
Forestry and Fisheries, strongly criticized the Sea Shepherd side, 
noting that the anti-whaling group was to blame for the incident. He 
revealed that his ministry has asked countries concerned to 
strengthen controls. He also indicated the possibility of Japan 
looking into applying the antipiracy law in case the protests 
expand. Meanwhile, Australia, at which Sea Shepherd vessels call, 
has been having a hard time coping with the intensifying public 
protests against whaling. 
 
Government lodges complaint with Australia, New Zealand 
 
Referring at a press conference to Sea Shepherd's anti-whaling 
activities, Gunji said: "These are dangerous acts threatening our 
country's shipping and the lives of crew members. We will never 
allow such activities." He clarified that the government had lodged 
a complaint through diplomatic channels to New Zealand, where the 
protest boat is registered, and Australia, where it calls. 
 
Japanese Ambassador Toshihiro Takahashi complained to the New 
Zealand government, noting that "the collision occurred because of 
the protest boat's activities to disrupt the Japanese whaling 
vessel's operations and that Japan cannot allow activities 
threatening the safety of crew members and the ship." 
 
When asked by reporters about views calling for the government to 
designate Sea Shepherd as a pirate organization, Gunji responded by 
saying, "We need to hold discussions with the Foreign Ministry and 
other organizations. If Sea Shepherd continues to threaten the lives 
of crew members and property of Japanese ships, that will constitute 
a situation in which we will have to consult with other agencies." 
 
The antipiracy law was established last June to crack down on 
pirates off Somalia. If the law is applied, the Japan Coast Guard 
and Self-Defense Forces (SDF) will be able to wield administrative 
authority, including the use of weapons even on the high seas. 
According to an informed source, Shigeru Ishiba, former agriculture 
minister, when he was in office, urged application of the law to Sea 
Shepherd, but cautious views in the the government at the time put 
discussion of his proposal on the back burner. 
 
A senior Fisheries Agency official said: "We are desperate for any 
help....I wonder if Japanese patrol vessels and other boats can deal 
with small-sized high-speed power boats." A senior Foreign Ministry 
official as well was negative to the idea, saying, "In view of the 
contents of the law (stipulating that robbing someone of money and 
valuables is piracy), it has been decided that Sea Shepherd is not 
subject to the law." 
 
Australia caught between public opinion and Japan 
 
The governments of Australia and New Zealand announced on Jan. 7 
that they have ordered their own coast guards to investigate the 
collision incident this time around. 
 
The two nations, which both oppose whaling, are near waters where 
 
TOKYO 00000051  008 OF 009 
 
 
research whaling is conducted and have played important roles in 
activities of Sea Shepherd. In particular, Australia has become the 
base for Sea Shepherd's protest vessels. It is noticeable that 
Australian media have released reports based on the Sea Shepherd 
side's assertion that the Japanese ship deliberately rammed its 
boat. 
 
Deputy Prime Minister Julia Gillard said at a press conference 
yesterday, "It was miracle that no one was killed," and mentioned 
again the possibility of Australia taking the research whaling 
problem to the International Court. 
 
During the campaign for the 2007 general election, the Australian 
Labor Party, led by Prime Minister Kevin Rudd, stressed firm 
opposition to research whaling in order to distinguish itself from 
the ruling party. Backed by antiwhaling public opinion, the party 
won the election. Even after the danger of Sea Shepherd's act of 
sabotage has become obvious, it is difficult for the party to make a 
stern response. With a general election taking place this year, the 
Labor Party-led government will likely be forced to make a difficult 
decision, as it is caught between anti-whaling public sentiment, 
which apparently will flare up again, and relations with Japan. 
 
Meanwhile, Sea Shepherd has carried out a publicity strategy of 
playing up the image of being a hero fighting for whales even in the 
teeth of an attack against it by Japan. The antiwhaling group has 
underscored the damage to its protest boat and declared that it will 
continue disrupting Japan's research whaling. It apparently aims to 
collect funding through U.S. and European media. 
 
Citing Australians being included in the protest boat's crew 
members, Sea Shepherd is calling for the deployment of Australian 
naval vessels. While rocking the Australian government by appealing 
to public opinion, it apparently intends to intensify confrontation 
between Japan and anti-whaling countries. 
 
(6) Editorial: Japan urged to take resolute measures against illegal 
acts of obstruction to research whaling 
 
SANKEI (Page 2) (Full) 
January 8, 2010 
 
The Japanese whaling fleet vessel Shonan Maru No.2 and the 
anti-whaling group Sea Shepherd Conservation Society's high-tech 
stealth boat Ady Gil collided in the Southern Ocean. 
 
The Sea Shepherd side has claimed that the Japanese ship suddenly 
collided with the boat when it was not underway. However, the 
anti-whaling group's protest boats have carried out obstructive acts 
repeatedly. In addition to approaching dangerously close to or 
cutting in front of Japanese whaling vessels, the boats have thrown 
bottles containing chemical irritants at the ships and aimed laser 
beams toward the crew that can lead to loss of vision if they are 
directed at the eyes. It is apparent that their persistent 
obstructive acts caused the collision. 
 
They are free to advocate the need to protect the environment and 
call for banning anti-whaling activities. But this incident goes 
beyond the question of whether or not research whaling activities 
should be conducted. Chief Cabinet Secretary Hirofumi Hirano lodged 
a stern complaint with the government of New Zealand, where the Ady 
Gil is registered. Simply lodging a complaint is not enough. Japan 
 
TOKYO 00000051  009 OF 009 
 
 
should hammer out resolute measures to counter violent acts, which 
can be called anti-whaling terrorism. 
 
Why are the activists not arrested on suspicion of forcible 
obstruction of business? Research whaling is a legal activity 
endorsed by the International Whaling Commission (IWC). But the 
anti-whaling group has repeatedly carried out dangerous acts against 
Japanese research vessels, such as ramming the ships with protest 
boats and throwing ropes into their screws. There was even a case in 
which anti-whalers illegally climbed aboard a Japanese ship. 
 
When violent activities by anti-whalers occurred in the past, the 
Japanese government lodged protests with the Netherlands, where some 
of the Sea Shepherd boats are registered, and Australia, where the 
group bases its operations. The government also urged these 
countries to take preventive steps. But these countries, which are 
opposed to whaling, have not developed any effective 
countermeasures. 
 
Anti-whalers' violent activities could become life-threatening to 
the crews. We wonder why Japan has not taken resolute 
countermeasures. 
 
The government takes the view that it is impossible under the 
current relevant laws for Japanese authorities to arrest and capture 
suspects on foreign ships on the open sea. The antipiracy law, which 
was enacted last year, makes it possible to arrest pirates under 
such conditions, but the law does not apply to violent cases 
involving Sea Shepherd based on the view that its members are not 
categorized as pirates. 
 
Taking advantage of Japan's stance of not taking countermeasures, 
the anti-whaling group committed this violent act. Japan should 
emphasize in the international community that anti-whaling terrorism 
is tantamount to piracy. 
 
In sovereign nations, people who conduct illegal activities by using 
force are arrested and punished as a matter of course. A nation that 
cannot do that is not regarded as a sovereign one. 
 
We cannot continue to allow Japanese whaling fleet vessels to 
navigate the seas defenselessly. 
 
(Corrected copy): Hirano denies possibility of visit to Nanjing by 
Hatoyama 
 
SANKEI (Page 5) (Full) 
January 8, 2010 
 
Several news agencies have reported that the Chinese government has 
unofficially proposed a visit to Nanjing by Prime Minister Yukio 
Hatoyama and a tour of Hiroshima by Chinese President Hu Jintao. 
Concerning these reports, Chief Cabinet Secretary Hirofumi Hirano 
said at a press conference yesterday: "I am aware of the reports, 
but I don't believe there is any truth to them." In reference to the 
possibility of Hatoyama visiting Nanjing, he remarked: "At present, 
we are not considering that possibility at all." 
 
ROOS