VZCZCXRO8732
PP RUEHFK RUEHKSO RUEHNAG RUEHNH
DE RUEHKO #0094/01 0150802
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
P 150802Z JAN 10
FM AMEMBASSY TOKYO
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 8743
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 0681
RUEHFK/AMCONSUL FUKUOKA 8343
RUEHOK/AMCONSUL OSAKA KOBE 2156
RUEHNAG/AMCONSUL NAGOYA 5432
RUEHKSO/AMCONSUL SAPPORO 8836
RUEHBJ/AMEMBASSY BEIJING 2668
RUEHUL/AMEMBASSY SEOUL 9332
RUCNDT/USMISSION USUN NEW YORK 8754

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 10 TOKYO 000094 
 
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 01/15/10 
 
INDEX: 
 
(1) Withdrawal from refueling mission in Indian Ocean today to make 
sharing of terrorism information difficult (Mainichi) 
 
(2) Editorial: End of refueling mission in Indian Ocean - foolish 
decision that will undermine national interests (Sankei) 
 
(3) Editorial: Come up with alternative manpower contributions to 
replace MSDF refueling mission (Yomiuri) 
 
(4) Editorial: Government is urged to resume refueling mission in 
Indian Ocean (Nikkei) 
 
(5) Editorial: Japan-U.S. foreign ministerial talks - Solving 
Futenma relocation issue by May is now public pledge (Mainichi) 
 
(6) At minimum, Japanese, U.S. foreign ministers sought to stabilize 
bilateral relations (Nikkei) 
 
(7) Current situation must be correctly perceived before deepening 
Japan-U.S. security relations (Mainichi) 
 
(8) Land Minister Maehara says DPJ's Ozawa should give explanation 
on his fund organization's land deal scandal; finance, justice 
ministers also comment (Sankei) 
 
ARTICLES: 
 
(1) Withdrawal from refueling mission in Indian Ocean today to make 
sharing of terrorism information difficult 
 
MAINICHI (Page 2) (Slightly abridged) 
January 15, 2010 
 
Tetsuya Hioka, Yasushi Sengoku 
 
The Maritime Self-Defense Force (MSDF) will withdraw from its 
refueling mission in the Indian Ocean on Jan. 15 and put an end to 
operations that were part of the "war against terrorism" which 
continued for about eight years. While this mission has been 
referred to cynically as a "free gas station at sea," it has also 
demonstrated to a certain extent the presence of Japan, which is 
striving to make international contributions not only in cash, but 
also by providing personnel contributions. There are concerns that 
the termination of this operation may impact Japan's national 
interest. 
 
A former MSDF chief of staff points out that as a result of the 
withdrawal from the Indian Ocean, Japan "will have less access to 
information on terrorism, and this is a great loss for its national 
interests." 
 
The Ministry of Defense (MOD) has sent liaison officers to 
coordinate with the navies of other countries for the refueling 
mission in the Indian Ocean and the anti-piracy operations in waters 
off Somalia in East Africa to Tampa, Florida, where the U.S. Middle 
East Command responsible for the Middle East area is located, and to 
Bahrain, where the headquarters of the multinational task force is 
located. Japan has thus been able to share terrorism-related 
information in the world with more than a dozen fellow countries 
participating in the war against terrorism, as well as Afghanistan, 
 
TOKYO 00000094  002 OF 010 
 
 
Iraq and other countries. 
 
However, with the withdrawal, some of the liaison officers will have 
to be sent home. There is persistent concern in the MOD that "there 
might be a sharp decline in information critical for Japan's 
security." 
 
The anti-terrorism operations in Afghanistan started after the 9/11 
terrorist attacks in the United States. 
 
For the Self-Defense Forces (SDF), whose activities are strictly 
constrained, the refueling mission has very little risk of being 
embroiled in active combat, but is highly appreciated 
internationally. It is a "low risk, high return" international 
contribution, according to a senior MSDF officer. 
 
On the other hand, the duration of the mission, including the travel 
time to and from the site of operation, lasts from four to five 
months. Some MSDF members have been sent on this mission seven 
times, and it has indeed been a great burden on the MSDF. While the 
total cost of fuel for military vessels was about 24.4 billion yen 
(as of October 2009), the frequency of refueling operations has been 
dwindling, sometimes taking place only once a month. A MOD official 
says: "If you think of the cost-effectiveness..." 
 
Ruling parties mulling alternative international contributions 
 
Under the previous Liberal Democratic Party (LDP)-New Komeito 
administration, the Democratic Party of Japan (DPJ) had opposed the 
refueling mission in the Indian Ocean for procedural reasons, 
asserting that it did not have the prior approval of the Diet. 
However, it was not negative about the refueling mission per se, so 
the reason it gives for the withdrawal is "diminishing needs." The 
DPJ declared in its manifesto (campaign pledges) that Japan will 
"participate in UN peacekeeping operations and other activities and 
play a role in building peace." Many DPJ Diet members are positive 
about deploying the SDF under the framework of a UN resolution. 
 
On the other hand, the DPJ's coalition partner Social Democratic 
Party (SDP) regards the refueling mission as "rear support for armed 
attacks (by the U.S. forces and others)" and openly demands the 
MSDF's withdrawal. This party asserts that international 
contribution should be limited to nonmilitary areas and continues to 
take a cautious attitude on sending the SDF overseas. 
 
Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama has decided on the withdrawal under 
such a situation in the ruling coalition. Giving priority to 
maintaining the coalition, he has decided to provide civilian aid 
totaling 5 billion dollars in five years as alternative assistance 
for Afghanistan in place of the refueling mission. 
 
Former Defense Minister Shigeru Ishiba, who was involved with the 
refueling mission under the LDP-New Komeito administration, stated 
in a speech in Tokyo on Jan. 9: "We were in the final stage of 
coordination to send CH-47 helicopters or C-130 transport planes 
(for the transport of supplies) in Afghanistan under the Yasuo 
Fukuda cabinet," revealing that in addition to the refueling 
mission, Japan was about to deploy the Ground and Air Self-Defense 
Forces in Afghanistan. 
 
A senior MOD official says, "Even with the withdrawal, manpower 
contribution in Afghanistan will not be terminated." The process to 
 
TOKYO 00000094  003 OF 010 
 
 
look for ways to use the SDF will continue, taking into account the 
SDP's reaction. 
 
(2) Editorial: End of refueling mission in Indian Ocean - foolish 
decision that will undermine national interests 
 
SANKEI (Page 2) (Full) 
January 15, 2010 
 
The Maritime Self-Defense Force's refueling mission in the Indian 
Ocean, which lasted for about eight years with one interruption 
since December 2001, ends today. 
 
The termination of the MSDF's refueling operation means that Japan 
is giving up on the war on terror. Japan will also no longer be 
securing the safety of an essential sea-lane for Japan. It goes 
without saying that the Japanese government's decision not to take 
part in the international community's anti-terrorism operations will 
undermine national interests and that this is a foolish decision. 
 
A new package of aid measures to Afghanistan, which the government 
drew up last November, symbolizes that foolishness. The government 
has decided to extend up to 5 billion dollars (approximately 450 
billion yen) over five years as assistance for basic human needs, 
including paying the salaries of Afghan police officers, costs for 
vocational training to former Taliban soldiers, and support for 
agriculture. 
 
The government will provide 90 billion yen annually in grants, but 
the aid might become handouts to the Karzai government, which has 
failed to eliminate corruption. However, the government has not yet 
disclosed the details of its aid measures. Is it possible to provide 
civilian assistance in Afghanistan, where the public security 
situation has deteriorated? 
 
The MSDF refueling mission cost only about 7 billion yen in 2008. 
 
From the beginning, the government excluded personnel contributions 
by the Self-Defense Forces (SDF) from the new aid package. It has no 
intention to share the costs and risks with the international 
community in the war on terror. It will be difficult to obtain high 
marks from the international community for the new aid package. It 
might instead draw criticism as checkbook diplomacy. 
 
Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama has not come up with any alternative 
support plans comparable to the refueling mission. When the 
Democratic Party of Japan (DPJ) was headed by Ichiro Ozawa, it 
asserted that the refueling mission is unconstitutional and proposed 
that Japan participate in the International Security Assistance 
Force in Afghanistan (ISAF). However, the DPJ held very few 
discussions on the specifics of this idea. The Afghan assistance 
bill that the DPJ submitted to the Diet lacked feasibility because 
it was premised on a cease-fire agreement or a stabilized public 
security situation. 
 
The termination of the refueling mission will make it more difficult 
to obtain information on the Indian Ocean region, which Japan has 
been securing through the refueling operation. The Japan-U.S. 
alliance has been undermined. We want the prime minister to consider 
what will be lost as a result, and then start looking into a 
permanent law on the overseas dispatch of the SDF. 
 
 
TOKYO 00000094  004 OF 010 
 
 
Meanwhile, MSDF personnel, who have put their highly specialized 
skills to use in steadily carrying out the refueling mission in the 
Indian Ocean under the scorching sun, have been highly praised and 
earned the confidence of the international community. We wish to 
express our profound esteem and deepest appreciation for their 
efforts. 
 
(3) Editorial: Come up with alternative manpower contributions to 
replace MSDF refueling mission 
 
YOMIURI (Page 3) (Full) 
January 15, 2010 
 
The war on terror by the international community will continue into 
the future over a long period of time. Japan should now seriously 
consider how to continue its commitment to the joint operation. 
 
The Maritime Self-Defense Force's (MSDF) refueling mission in the 
Indian Ocean, which lasted for more than eight years, is set to end 
today, when the antiterrorism special measures law endorsing the 
operation expires. That is extremely regrettable. 
 
The MSDF refueling operation started following the 2001 terrorist 
attacks on the U.S. For Japan, the mission was a new international 
peace operation that required a new legal framework different from 
that for conventional UN peacekeeping operations. There was a high 
hurdle for Japan to clear to launch the mission both legally and 
operationally. 
 
With no casualties caused among MSDF troops engaged in the refueling 
mission, the operation won a high appreciation in the international 
community and was of great significance for Japan's security 
policy. 
 
The refueling operation also contributed to ensuring the safety of 
the vital sea lanes between Japan and the Middle East. In addition, 
Japan has been able to access information about international 
terrorism, with the MSDF enhancing its presence there and working 
with the naval forces of other countries on stage. 
 
The annual cost for the refueling operation was no more than 5 to 7 
billion yen. Even in the Democratic Party of Japan (DPJ), some point 
out that the mission is far more cost-effective than the financial 
aid of 5 billion dollars, or approximately 460 billion yen, which 
the government has promised to provide to Afghanistan over five 
years. 
 
Why is it necessary to put an end to this significant operation? The 
government has yet to explain why. 
 
Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama has said: "The operation has not had 
sufficient significance in recent years;" and "there should be other 
ways for Japan to make contributions." But the refueling operation 
is a maritime interdiction operation watching out for the movement 
of terrorists and the trafficking of weapons and drugs. It is not 
direct assistance for Afghanistan. 
 
When the DPJ was an opposition party, it claimed the refueling 
mission was unconstitutional. If the party decided to end the 
mission only in light of its compatibility with the campaign pledge, 
Japan's national interests will be significantly undermined. 
 
 
TOKYO 00000094  005 OF 010 
 
 
The war on terror is directly linked to the peace and security of 
Japan. The terrorist attacks on the U.S. killed 24 Japanese 
nationals. Terrorists could target Japan in the future. 
 
It is true that refueling U.S. naval ships has contributed to 
strengthening the Japan-U.S. alliance, but the mission was initially 
intended for Japan to fulfill its responsibility as a member of the 
international community. 
 
In Afghanistan, military troops from more than 40 countries have 
engaged in the task of maintaining security and helping reconstruct 
that country under difficult conditions, without flinching from the 
fact that they have sustained more than 1,500 casualties. Japan also 
should share the risk with these countries and offer personnel 
contributions. 
 
Even if we extend only financial aid while staying in a safe place, 
we will not be respected, although we might receive thanks. The 
Hatoyama administration, which has been saying "the government will 
not simply extend" the refueling mission, is urged to come up with 
specific alternative support measures. 
 
(4) Editorial: Government is urged to resume refueling mission in 
Indian Ocean 
 
NIKKEI (Page 2) (Full) 
January 15, 2010 
 
The Maritime Self-Defense Force's (MSDF) refueling operations in the 
Indian Ocean will end on Jan. 15 due to the expiration of the 
special measures law for refueling assistance that has been serving 
as the basis for the MSDF mission. Foreign Minister Katusya Okada 
has been persistently saying that the government "will not simply 
extend" the refueling mission, instead of "will not extend" it. If 
we are to believe his statement, it is time for the Hatoyama 
administration to consider resuming the operation again, now that 
the law has expired. 
 
The Sept.11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the US became the catalyst 
for the U.S. to launch the refueling mission in the Indian Ocean. 
The operation has been continuing for almost eight years from 2001 
through today, although there was a time when the MSDF pulled out of 
the operation due to the expiration of the law. 
 
It is most fortunate that the MSDF is able to end its mission 
without being involved in conflicts or sustaining any casualties. We 
would like to pay our respects to the MSDF personnel who have been 
engaging in the dangerous operations amid extreme heat. 
 
We have been calling for the continuation of the refueling 
operations. The battle in Afghanistan is an effort based on 
international cooperation and Japan's mission has been highly 
praised in the international community. 
 
Members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) have been 
suffering the loss of many soldiers in battles in Afghanistan. The 
refueling operation is an effective activity, which Japan can engage 
in within the limitations of the Japanese Constitution. 
 
Plainly speaking, pulling out of the mission can be taken as 
withdrawing from international cooperation efforts. However, since 
the Hatoyama administration decided in November 2009 to provide 
 
TOKYO 00000094  006 OF 010 
 
 
civilian aid worth 5 billion dollars to Afghanistan over five years, 
it has stopped discussing the refueling mission issue. It appeared 
to be simply waiting for the law to expire. 
 
To some extent, it is understandable that the DPJ, when it was an 
opposition party, opposed the Iraq War, based on the reasoning of 
domestic politics. Now that it has actually taken the reins of 
government, it should be possible for it to consider the issue from 
a different perspective. As a matter of fact, that is exactly what 
it did on the provisional gas tax issue. Unfortunately, however, the 
Hatoyama administration is showing no signs of giving such 
consideration to this issue. 
 
Although U.S. President Obama was opposed to the Iraq War during the 
presidential election campaign, he visited Iraq as the supreme 
commander of the national military forces. Secretary of State 
Clinton also visited Iraq. However, none of the members of the 
Hatoyama administration, whether it be the prime minister, the 
foreign minister or the defense minister, visited the site of the 
refueling operation. We would like the government to put an end to 
its current failure to think logically and start looking into 
resumption of the operation. 
 
(5) Editorial: Japan-U.S. foreign ministerial talks - Solving 
Futenma relocation issue by May is now public pledge 
 
MAINICHI (Page 5) (Full) 
January 14, 2010 
 
Foreign Minister Katsuya Okada agreed with U.S. Secretary of State 
Hillary Clinton in their meeting in Hawaii to begin 
government-to-government talks on deepening the bilateral alliance 
on the occasion of the 50th anniversary of the revision of the 
Japan-U.S. Security Treaty. Okada then informed Clinton of the 
Japanese government's policy of reaching a decision by May on the 
relocation of U.S. Marine Corps Air Station Futenma. 
 
As a result, the Japanese government has pledged to the U.S. 
government that it will make a decision on the Futenma relocation 
issue by May. This means that the Hatoyama administration has sealed 
off its escape route of saying that the Futenma relocation was 
agreed on by the Liberal Democratic Party-government. In order to 
promote talks on the bilateral alliance, the Hatoyama government 
should keep its pledge to resolve the issue by May. "The Japan-U.S. 
alliance is the cornerstone of Japan's foreign policy," said Prime 
Minister Yukio Hatoyama. U.S. President Barack Obama stated: "(The 
U.S.-Japan alliance) is a cornerstone not only of the two countries 
but also for the stability and prosperity of the Asia-Pacific 
region." The two leaders confirmed the importance of the bilateral 
alliance just two months ago. 
 
However, bilateral relations have become strained. When the Japanese 
government decided to give up on its policy of reaching a conclusion 
by the end of 2009, Okada said, "There could be a serious loss of 
mutual trust in the relationship between Japan and the United 
States. The Japan-U.S. alliance is now being shaken." It is unusual 
for an incumbent foreign minister to point out that the bilateral 
alliance is being shaken. The U.S. government has had similar 
concerns, with Assistant Secretary of State Kurt Campbell saying, 
"If the stalemate over the Futenma issue continues for a long period 
of time, the credibility of the bilateral alliance will be lost." 
 
 
TOKYO 00000094  007 OF 010 
 
 
There is little doubt that a sense of alarm in both governments 
prompted them to hold the foreign ministerial meeting this time 
around. Okada and Clinton also agreed to hold a meeting of the 
Japan-U.S. Security Consultative Committee (2-plus-2) during the 
first half of the year, and to release a statement by the foreign 
and defense ministers of the two countries on the occasion of the 
anniversary of the revision of the security treaty (on Jan. 19). One 
aspect of the agreement is that it will prevent any further damage 
to the bilateral alliance. This action by the two nations can be 
taken as a "mature" response. 
 
In connection with the talks on deepening the bilateral alliance, 
Okada brought up the idea of forming an accord to replace the 1996 
Japan-U.S. security joint declaration. The aim of the 1996 
declaration was to maintain security in the Asia-Pacific region and 
to reduce Japan's burden of U.S. bases. If Okada is hoping to 
designate the latest talks as replacing the 1996 declaration, he 
will have to put an end to the discord in the government. On the 
Futenma issue, Hatoyama said: "The ruling parties will not make a 
decision that ignores the U.S.'s views." However, the committee 
consisting of members of the government, the Social Democratic Party 
(SDP), and the People's New Party (PNP) has been looking for 
alternative relocation sites in place of the existing plan to 
relocate Futenma to the coastal area of Camp Schwab. However, 
Clinton told Okada that the existing plan is the best option. 
Efforts by both Tokyo and Washington will be required to bridge the 
gap between them. 
 
(6) At minimum, Japanese, U.S. foreign ministers sought to stabilize 
bilateral relations 
 
NIKKEI (Page 2) (Full) 
January 14, 2010 
 
During their recent talks, Foreign Minister Katsuya Okada and 
Department of State Hillary Clinton searched for ways to stabilize 
bilateral relations at the very least. They each expressed their 
views on the Futenma airfield relocation issue, and at the end of 
the talks they were still far apart. However, they agreed to launch 
talks to deepen the alliance. That was probably a diplomatically 
wise decision in order to prevent the bilateral relations from being 
undermined any further. 
 
Concerning the Futenma issue, the Japanese side's basic policy is to 
reach a conclusion in May. However, since moves in the ruling 
parties are complicated, the development of the matter is nowhere in 
sight. The U.S. side stands firm on its position that the existing 
Japan-U.S. alliance is the best way forward. Since no progress was 
expected from the talks, they did not try to reach a settlement. 
 
This is reminiscent of the first bilateral summit between Prime 
Minister Yukio Hatoyama and President Obama in New York in September 
¶2009. At that meeting, too, the two top leaders orchestrated a 
diplomatic success by only discussing issues for which it was 
considered possible for both sides to reach agreement, while 
avoiding issues, such as the refueling operation in the Indian Ocean 
or the Futenma issue, over which confrontation was expected. 
 
As a result, the pending issues were effectively put off. Since 
then, Japan-U.S. relations have made no headway at all. On the 
contrary, based on the process leading up to the foreign ministerial 
meeting, what happened was just the opposite. Vice Foreign Minister 
 
TOKYO 00000094  008 OF 010 
 
 
Mitoji Yabunaka visited the U.S. before Clinton's departure and the 
meeting between Okada and Clinton was materialized in the form of 
Okada meeting up with her in Hawaii on her way to Oceania. This is 
unusual. 
 
The U.S. agreed to Japan's request to hold a meeting. Clinton 
appears to have indicated the stance that the Japan-U.S. alliance 
transcends such individual issues as the Futenma relocation issue. 
It is naive for the Japanese side to view this position as a 
diplomatic achievement. 
 
This is obvious when the situation is considered with the two 
countries' positions reversed. What if the leader of the other side 
said, "Trust me," and yet it failed to take any action to back up 
its words? It would be only natural for this side to be 
disappointed. Japan and the U.S., however, have controlled 
themselves, realizing that if they continue to lock horns, they will 
be hurt on an international level. The outcome of this situation was 
the recent foreign ministerial meeting. 
 
The current Japan-U.S. relationship is in a state that requires 
damage control measures to be taken. This sort of situation does not 
normally happen between allies. The situation will change completely 
if the thorn (the Futenma issue) in the alliance is removed, as 
Parliamentary Defense Secretary Akihisa Nagashima put it. 
 
Prime Minister Hatoyama is responsible for pulling out this thorn, 
as he is the one who pushed it deep down inside. 
 
(7) Current situation must be correctly perceived before deepening 
Japan-U.S. security relations 
 
MAINICHI (Page 10) (Full) 
January 15, 2010 
 
Yukio Okamoto, President, Okamoto Associates Inc. 
 
The Japan-U.S. relationship can be strained with just one wrong 
move. The United States has accepted the relocation of Futenma Air 
Station for the sake of local residents on the condition Japan 
provide an alternative facility. But the local residents are saying 
that they will not accept the Futenma relocation plan unless the 
airfield is moved outside Okinawa. In other words, the relocation of 
the facility is a Japanese domestic issue. It is lamentable that 
Tokyo is at loggerheads with Washington because Prime Minister Yukio 
Hatoyama made the comment "trust me" to President Barack Obama. The 
two sides must come to their senses. For now, nothing can come from 
a pledge to deepen security relations. 
 
The U.S. Seventh Fleet is home-ported at Yokosuka. That Japan can 
only lightly arm itself has been made possible by the United States' 
determination to continue to deploy to Japan warships and aircraft 
worth trillions of yen, and 50,000 troops with their 40,000 
dependents. Major powers spend nearly 2 PERCENT  of their GDP on 
defense on average, while Japan spends half that much. All together 
the Ground, Maritime, and Air Self-Defense Forces total 230,000 
personnel. Both Thailand and Myanmar (Burma) have larger militaries. 
Thanks to the U.S. nuclear deterrent, Japan does not have to arm 
itself with nuclear weapons despite the fact that it is surrounded 
by nuclear states. The U.S. deterrent also enables the Japanese to 
engage in a frivolous debate on prohibiting such terms as 
"military," "tank, "and "bomber." 
 
TOKYO 00000094  009 OF 010 
 
 
 
The Japan-U.S. security arrangements do not constitute a special 
privilege "allowing the United States to station its troops in 
Japan." The arrangements are necessary for Japan's security. Some 
are saying that the United States must keep its promise to defend 
Japan and at the same time withdraw its Marines. If Japan asked, the 
United States would probably withdraw its Marines from Okinawa to 
Guam. The United States will not be exposed to threats as a result. 
The United States withdrew from the Philippines in 1992 after that 
country requested a hike in base fees. Since then China has taken an 
aggressive approach to the Spratly Islands near the Philippines. The 
Philippines are no longer a match for China. 
 
The call for moving Futenma Air Station out of Japan might end up 
sending a message that Japan is no longer in need of security 
arrangements with the United States. That could encourage Japan's 
neighbors to intensify their activities free from anxiety. In 1992 
China included the Senkaku Islands in its territory, along with the 
Spratly Islands and the Paracel Islands. Japan is the sole country 
in the world that has border disputes with all of its neighbors: 
Russia, China, South Korea, North Korea, and Taiwan. Against that 
background how can anyone argue that weakening the Japan-U.S. 
security arrangements would not be cause for alarm? 
 
Security relations can be deepened only after those points are 
recognized. But that will not be easy. At present, over 40 countries 
deploy troops in Afghanistan. Those countries have not withdrawn 
from Afghanistan even though they have lost dozens of troops in 
battle. But the Japanese have not accepted the idea that 
international contribution entails a considerable number of 
casualties. Should Japan resort to money? If it does, Japan will be 
asked for a huge amount of money. But given its tight financial 
situation, it will be difficult for Japan to make further financial 
contributions. If Japan finds it difficult to make contributions in 
money or manpower, the country will have only a few options. The 
bottom line is to reduce the burden on the United States by 
strengthening Japan's own defense capabilities, maintain close 
defense cooperation, and then engage in international cooperation in 
a peaceful manner. China has sent more than 2,000 personnel to 
conduct UN peacekeeping operations, but Japan less than 40. If Japan 
boldly increases the number to 1,000, the international community is 
certain to look at Japan in a different light. 
 
(8) Land Minister Maehara says DPJ's Ozawa should give explanation 
on his fund organization's land deal scandal; finance, justice 
ministers also comment 
 
SANKEI ONLINE (Full) 
13:10, January 15, 2010 
 
At a news conference held after the cabinet meeting on Jan. 15, 
Minister of Land, Infrastructure, Transport, and Tourism Seiji 
Maehara commented on the problem regarding a land purchase made by 
Democratic Party of Japan (DPJ) Secretary General Ichiro Ozawa's 
fund management organization. He said: "The people are watching if 
the media reports are true. It is important for a politician to 
answer clearly questions regarding suspected wrongdoings 
personally," demanding that Ozawa take the responsibility of giving 
an explanation. 
 
Maehara also stressed that: "The passing of large sums of money into 
the hands of politicians in relation with public work projects 
 
TOKYO 00000094  010 OF 010 
 
 
amounts to receiving a kickback from tax money. This is 
unacceptable. If the reports are not true, it is important to 
fulfill the responsibility of giving an explanation." 
 
Meanwhile, Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister Naoto Kan 
admitted that this affair may have "some" impact on Diet 
deliberations. Justice Minister Keiko Chiba said: "The cabinet 
should unite as one and work harder (so that this affair will not 
affect the Diet)." 
 
ZUMWALT