VZCZCXRO9017
PP RUEHFK RUEHKSO RUEHNAG RUEHNH
DE RUEHKO #0332/01 0522303
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
P 212303Z FEB 10
FM AMEMBASSY TOKYO
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 9492
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 1236
RUEHFK/AMCONSUL FUKUOKA 8904
RUEHOK/AMCONSUL OSAKA KOBE 2721
RUEHNAG/AMCONSUL NAGOYA 5904
RUEHKSO/AMCONSUL SAPPORO 9390
RUEHBJ/AMEMBASSY BEIJING 3146
RUEHUL/AMEMBASSY SEOUL 9827
RUCNDT/USMISSION USUN NEW YORK 9180

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 10 TOKYO 000332 
 
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 02/19/10 
 
INDEX: 
 
(1) DM Kitazawa positive on Futenma relocation to land area of Camp 
Schwab; other ministers also make comments (Asahi) 
 
(2) Nago municipal assembly fails to pass resolution against current 
Futenma relocation plan (Ryukyu Shimpo) 
 
(3) Survey: 15 governors say Okinawa's base-hosting burden should be 
lessened, but no governors are willing to host bases (Asahi) 
 
(4) Editorial: Confusion over Futenma issue serious (Mainichi) 
 
(5) Interview with U.S.-Japan Foundation President George Packard: 
There had been even more serious crises in Japan-U.S. relations in 
the past (Asahi) 
 
(6) Discussion on "money and politics" scandals gets nowhere in 
Hatoyama's first debate with opposition leaders (Nikkei) 
 
ARTICLES: 
 
(1) DM Kitazawa positive on Futenma relocation to land area of Camp 
Schwab; other ministers also make comments 
 
ASAHI (Page 9) (Full) 
Evening, February 19, 2010 
 
Cabinet ministers gave their comments on the Hatoyama cabinet's 
beginning to study a proposal to relocate the U.S. forces' Futenma 
Air Station (in Ginowan City, Okinawa) to the land area of Camp 
Schwab (in Nago City) at their news conferences held after the 
cabinet meeting on Feb. 19. 
 
Defense Minister Toshimi Kitazawa said: "(The land relocation plan) 
consists of relocation within bases. In the past, when the Sobe 
Communication Facility (in Yomitan Village, Okinawa) was moved to 
Camp Hansen (in Kin Town, Okinawa), there was no serious protest. We 
can learn something from history," indicating a positive attitude. 
He also stated: "If (the Okinawa base issues examination committee 
of the government and the ruling parties studying the relocation 
sites) decides on it, I will consider it seriously." 
 
Minister of Land, Infrastructure, Transport, and Tourism Seiji 
Maehara (concurrently Okinawa affairs minister) gave the following 
comments: "The land proposal had been investigated a long time ago. 
The problem was that the flight route would pass over civilian 
housing. It is a possible option if such issues can be resolved," 
stressing that issues standing in the way of realizing the 
relocation should be tackled one by one. 
 
Meanwhile, Chief Cabinet Secretary Hirofumi Hirano said, "We are 
starting from scratch," while State Minister for Financial Affairs 
and Postal Reform Shizuka Kamei (leader of People's New Party) 
stated: "Now is the time for all of us to contribute our ideas and 
look at the options. This is not a time for each party to say this 
or that," reiterating his oft-repeated position on this issue. 
 
State Minister for Consumer Affairs and Declining Birthrate Mizuho 
Fukushima (leader of Social Democratic Party) questioned the land 
relocation proposal, stressing that "of course, the closure and 
return of the Futenma base is important, but I seriously doubt if 
 
TOKYO 00000332  002 OF 010 
 
 
the construction (of a new base) in Camp Schwab will reduce the 
burden on the Okinawan people." 
 
(2) Nago municipal assembly fails to pass resolution against current 
Futenma relocation plan 
 
RYUKYU SHIMBUN (Page 3) (Abridged) 
February 19, 2010 
 
Yoshihiro Kinjo 
 
Nago - Mayor Susumu Inamine of Nago City, who was elected on a 
platform opposing the relocation of the U.S. forces' Futenma Air 
Station to the city, is having difficulty passing a resolution 
asking (the government) to drop the plan to relocate the Futenma 
base to Henoko, which he has been asking the municipal assembly to 
act on. The ruling parties in Nago had originally planned to submit 
the motion to an ad hoc session of the assembly on Feb. 23, but this 
was met by negative views from the opposition parties, which claim 
that the move is "premature" and that "it is necessary to study 
further the impact of opposition to the relocation plan." Thus, the 
drafting process could not even start, and efforts to pass the 
resolution have hit a snag. 
 
The municipal assembly had also planned to pass a resolution 
demanding the relocation of the Futenma base out of Okinawa or out 
of Japan during its regular session last December. However, 
coordination between the ruling and opposition parties on the draft 
of the resolution failed, resulting in the plan being dropped. 
 
(3) Survey: 15 governors say Okinawa's base-hosting burden should be 
lessened, but no governors are willing to host bases 
 
ASAHI (Page 34) (Abridged) 
February 12, 2010 
 
In connection with the pending issue of relocating the U.S. 
military's Futenma airfield facility from its current location in 
Okinawa Prefecture's central city of Ginowan, the Asahi Shimbun 
conducted a questionnaire survey of the governors of the nation's 46 
prefectures, excluding Okinawa Prefecture, to probe their thoughts 
about the current state of Okinawa Prefecture, which is home to 74 
PERCENT  of all U.S. military facilities in Japan. In the survey, a 
total of 15 governors answered that Okinawa's base-hosting burden 
should be mitigated. However, none of the governors who responded to 
the survey said that they are willing to host a new U.S. military 
base. Furthermore, 29 governors, or more than 60 PERCENT  of the 
surveyed governors, did not answer any questions, maintaining that 
diplomacy and defense are state affairs. 
 
The survey was started on Feb. 1 after Susumu Inamine won the recent 
mayoral election in Okinawa Prefecture's northern coastal city of 
Nago based on his opposition to the planned relocation of Futenma 
airfield to his city. Answers were obtained orally or in written 
form by Feb. 8. 
 
In addition to the 15 governors who insisted on the necessity of 
alleviating Okinawa's base-hosting burden, there were also some 
governors who indicated their understanding of the necessity to do 
so. The governor of Nagasaki Prefecture said, "I'm concerned about 
the heavy presence of (U.S. military) bases concentrated in 
Okinawa." The governor of Ibaraki Prefecture said, "I understand the 
 
TOKYO 00000332  003 OF 010 
 
 
necessity of lightening the burden on Okinawa." The governor of 
Kyoto Prefecture said, "Japan, as a whole, must seriously consider 
this issue." 
 
Asked whether they were willing to host a new base, nine governors 
gave definite negative answers. The governors of Tokyo, Kanagawa 
Prefecture, and Shizuoka Prefecture, where U.S. military facilities 
are already located, answered that it would be difficult for them to 
accept an additional base since their burden is heavy already. In 
the breakdown of reasons given by the governors of prefectures 
hosting no U.S. military bases for their refusal to host a base, the 
governors of Toyama Prefecture, Tottori Prefecture, and Tokushima 
Prefecture said that is because "there is no appropriate place" in 
their prefectures, and the governor of Hyogo Prefecture noted that 
it would not be possible to obtain the local population's 
understanding for hosting a base. The governor of Saitama Prefecture 
gave no answer to the question of whether or not it would be willing 
to accept a new base but instead wrote that if and when there is a 
request from the government, the governor will handle it in a steady 
manner from the standpoint of protecting the security and safety of 
local people. 
 
Okinawa governor: It's not a matter of concern to only one locality 
 
Okinawa Prefecture's Governor Hirokazu Nakaima, in a written comment 
on the results of the questionnaire survey, expressed his 
understanding to a certain extent for the responses of governors, 
saying, "It's difficult for the governor of each prefecture to come 
up with an idea when the government is discussing how to mitigate 
Okinawa's base-hosting burden." He added: "The issue of hosting U.S. 
military bases is not a matter of concern for only one locality like 
Okinawa but is really a national problem from the perspective of how 
to think about our nation's diplomacy and security and the like. I 
would like each governor to take an interest in the problem of bases 
in Okinawa." In reference to the fact that many of the governors did 
not respond to the survey, Nago City's Mayor Inamine commented: 
"We're facing base issues around the clock, so there is a huge 
perception gap." 
 
Prefectures whose governors answered that Okinawa Prefecture's 
burden of hosting U.S. military bases should be lessened: 
 
Hokkaido, Aomori, Miyagi, Tokyo, Kanagawa, Ishikawa, Shizuoka, 
Hyogo, Tottori, Yamaguchi, Kagawa, Ehime, Kochi, Oita, and 
Miyazaki. 
 
Main points from the comments of governors 
 
Hokkaido Gov. Harumi Takahashi: It's necessary to realign and reduce 
the presence of bases in Japan, including Okinawa Prefecture, and 
also necessary to take such steps as expediting the return of base 
land and revising the Japan-U.S. Status of Forces Agreement. 
 
Tokyo Gov. Shintaro Ishihara: There are many bases in Okinawa 
because of its geographic conditions and historic circumstances, and 
the burden on Okinawa should be lightened. 
 
Kanagawa Gov. Shigefumi Matsuzawa: The heavy presence of military 
bases in a specific locality is a big problem. The government should 
take every possible measure to relocate bases, return the land of 
unused bases, and scale back on the functions of bases. 
 
 
TOKYO 00000332  004 OF 010 
 
 
Aichi Gov. Masaaki Kanda: As far as Japan's national security is 
concerned, the people benefit equally from the presence of U.S. 
military bases in Okinawa. The government, of course, and all of us 
in Japan should think of the base issue as our own problem. 
 
Osaka Gov. Tohru Hashimoto: The issue of realigning U.S. forces in 
Japan is a matter under the cabinet's exclusive jurisdiction. But 
when considering Okinawa's history and its difficult situation, I 
wonder if it's all right for us to remain indifferent. 
 
Nagasaki Gov. Genjiro Kaneko: Sasebo City already hosts a U.S. naval 
base. We have yet to hear anything from the government, so I'd like 
to reserve my answer. But I think it would be difficult (to take on 
a further burden), judging from the sensitivity of local people in 
my prefecture, which is an atomic-bombed city. 
 
(4) Editorial: Confusion over Futenma issue serious 
 
MAINICHI (Page 5) (Full) 
February 18, 2010 
 
How long will the confusion in the government over Futenma 
relocation go on? The government committee examining a relocation 
site for the U.S. Marine Corps' Futenma Air Station (in Ginowan 
City, Okinawa Prefecture) has postponed the planned submission of 
proposals for the relocation site of the Futenma base. Chief Cabinet 
Secretary Hirofumi Hirano chairs the committee. Can the Hatoyama 
administration really reach a conclusion by the end of May as Prime 
Minister Yukio Hatoyama has repeatedly said? 
 
In the Social Democratic Party (SDP), one of the ruling Democratic 
Party of Japan's coalition partners, there are calls for moving the 
Futenma base to the U.S. territory of Guam, Tinian in the U.S. 
territory of the Commonwealth of Northern Mariana Islands, or the 
Kyushu region including the Maritime Self-Defense Force's Omura Air 
Base (in Omura City, Nagasaki Prefecture). The People's New Party 
(PNP), the other member of the DPJ-led ruling coalition, intends to 
propose relocation to the inland area of Camp Schwab (in Nago City, 
Okinawa), as well as the integration of Futenma with the U.S. Kadena 
Air Base (in Kadena Town, Okinawa). However, the scheduled 
submission of proposals was suddenly postponed. 
 
The reason for the postponement was apparently that the three 
parties were concerned that disarray in the ruling coalition would 
be questioned by the opposition camp, resulting in a negative impact 
on Diet deliberations on the budget for fiscal 2010. However, this 
reason lacks logic. It had already been assumed that the three 
parties would come up with different proposals in the process of 
narrowing down the options for possible relocation sites. 
 
The ruling coalition also postponed the submission of proposals from 
the end of January to mid-February, so this is the second time they 
have put it off. After consultations in the committee, might 
problems arise as the three ruling-coalition party heads try to 
reach an agreement through discussions? For fear of debate at the 
Diet, they are apparently waiting to submit their proposals until 
the budget clears the House of Representatives. In other words, they 
are just killing time. 
 
The SDP proposed postponing the submission of Futenma relocation 
plans. One of the reasons for the SDP proposing the postponement was 
apparently discord in the party over whether to stipulate in its 
 
TOKYO 00000332  005 OF 010 
 
 
proposal "relocation out of Okinawa," to which strong reactions from 
possible relocation sites are expected. However, since more than one 
and a half months have passed since the examination committee was 
established, it is too late to put it off. Some people believe that 
another reason for the SDP's proposal for the postponement is that 
the SDP is becoming increasingly doubtful and suspicious about 
whether the Kantei and the PNP are trying to reach an agreement on 
the plan to relocate Futenma to the inland area of Camp Schwab. This 
is just political maneuvering in the ruling coalition and lacks 
validity. 
 
An agreement with the U.S. government will be absolutely necessary 
for the conclusion the prime minister has promised. If Futenma is 
moved to somewhere else in Japan, coordination with the relocation 
site will be indispensable. It will be difficult to find a 
relocation site that satisfies both requirements. This is because 
the U.S. government has called for moving Futenma to the Henoko 
district in Nago City as Tokyo and Washington agreed, but the 
Japanese municipalities that have been named as possible relocation 
sites are against hosting the Futenma base. There is little time 
left for the government to make a decision by the end of May, so the 
ruling parties must not waste time. 
 
Meanwhile, Hirano has finally announced his intention to submit the 
DPJ's relocation plan to the examination committee at the request of 
the SDP and PNP. This is only natural. 
 
The government and ruling parties have revealed their faulty 
decision-making process through this series of recent events. We 
have doubts about the political sense of the ruling coalition, which 
has postponed the submission of the parties' relocation proposals. 
This is serious confusion. 
 
(5) Interview with U.S.-Japan Foundation President George Packard: 
There had been even more serious crises in Japan-U.S. relations in 
the past 
 
ASAHI (Page 15) (Full) 
February 17, 2010 
 
Toshihiro Yamanaka in New York 
 
What is the ideal form of the Japan-U.S. relationship, which is 
currently strained over the issue of the relocation of the Futenma 
Air Station? U.S.-Japan Foundation President George Packard, 77, who 
served under former U.S. Ambassador to Japan Edwin Reischauer for 
many years, says: "Compared with the many serious crises faced by 
the Japan-U.S. alliance in the past 50 years, the Futenma issue is 
minor." We interviewed Mr. Packard on his thoughts as we also looked 
for clues from his recent book "Raishawa no Showa Shi (Edwin O. 
Reischauer and the American Discovery of Japan)." 
 
Overreacting to the Futenma issue is undesirable 
 
Q: The Japan-U.S. relationship is in disarray over the Futenma 
issue. 
 
Packard: There has been too much unnecessary controversy over the 
Futenma issue; it has been disproportionate to the actual problem. 
Futenma is nothing compared to the serious crises in the Japan-U.S. 
alliance in the past, such as (the protests against) the security 
treaty in 1960 and the Vietnam War. While this is an urgent issue 
 
TOKYO 00000332  006 OF 010 
 
 
for U.S. Forces Japan (USFJ), it is a minor problem in the overall 
Japan-U.S. alliance. Yet the two governments have made mistakes in 
handling this issue, blowing it up into a big problem. 
 
Q: What went wrong? 
 
Packard: The Obama administration sent Secretary of Defense Robert 
Gates to Tokyo last autumn. That was clearly a mistake. He pressed 
for relocation to waters off Henoko in accordance with the existing 
agreement and demanded immediate relocation. Such high-handed 
behavior is very harmful to the Japan-U.S. alliance. The U.S. 
government should respect the outcome of the Nago mayoral election 
as the popular will expressed in a democratic election. For now, the 
U.S. should patiently wait for Japan to make a decision by May. 
 
Q: What do you think of Japan's response? 
 
Packard: Japanese people outside Okinawa are still unable to grasp 
the problem in its entirety. Japanese on the mainland should engage 
in further discussions on what is to be done about the military 
bases in Okinawa if Japan wants to continue to enjoy prosperity as 
an economic power under the Japan-U.S. security arrangements. Is it 
necessary to have that many bases in Okinawa right now? Who is the 
hypothetical enemy? How is North Korea predicted to behave? What 
about China? The problem will never be solved by simply citing 
alternative relocation sites, whether they are remote islands or 
existing bases; in-depth discussions are necessary. 
 
Q: According to the book you published, Mr. Reischauer was deeply 
involved with Okinawa. "Even after the end of the occupation, the 
U.S. forces regarded the Japanese archipelago as an unsinkable 
aircraft carrier for the containment of the Soviet Union and 
Communist China, and Okinawa was the anchor for this carrier. 
Reischauer single-handedly challenged the U.S. forces that continued 
to rule Okinawa with such a mindset. He even began to persuade 
senior U.S. military officers to return Okinawa." (summarized from 
Raishawa no Showa Shi) If he were the ambassador to Japan today, how 
would he deal with the Futenma issue? 
 
Packard: If he were alive today, he would probably say without 
hesitation: I can understand that U.S. forces need an operational 
base in the Far East, but is it necessary to maintain such huge 
military bases in Japan? This was his longstanding position. After 
he took up his post in Tokyo in 1961, he realized immediately that 
the U.S. Army lieutenant general ruling Okinawa at the time behaved 
like a feudal lord and imposed an abnormal dictatorial regime. He 
was convinced that if the U.S. forces continued to rule with such an 
attitude, Okinawa would unmistakably trigger a crisis that would 
shake the Japan-U.S. relationship. The rape incident by U.S. 
soldiers in 1995 undoubtedly proved that he was right. 
 
Q: At that time what did the ambassador do to prevent the eruption 
of anti-base protests? 
 
Packard: He went to Okinawa even though the U.S. forces did not 
welcome him, built personal relationships with the USFJ commanders, 
and made the Department of Defense soften its demands on Japan. He 
convinced them that changes in USFJ troop deployment required prior 
notification to the Japanese side. This was because he believed that 
a Japan-U.S. alliance that forced Japan into subservience to the 
U.S. would eventually fall apart. 
 
 
TOKYO 00000332  007 OF 010 
 
 
The Japanese should drop the theory of their uniqueness 
 
Q: Your book talks about the inequality Mr. Reischauer felt before 
he became ambassador. "The ambassador's main goal was to eliminate 
racial discrimination and wartime hatred from the Japan-U.S. 
relationship and purge the sense of inequality between the two 
countries. Considering the position of the two countries at that 
time, that was a remarkable idea. Toward that goal, he strove to 
eradicate the occupation force mentality among Americans in Japan." 
What did you mean by occupation force mentality? 
 
Packard: I first came to live in Tokyo in 1956, and I came back in 
¶1963. At that time, the occupation force mentality was quite strong 
not only among American soldiers, but even among expats working for 
U.S. companies and American newspaper reporters. They hired Japanese 
as maids and indulged in luxuries like hotels and golf, which they 
had not experienced in America, thanks to the fixed exchange rate of 
360 yen to the dollar. None of them had any intention to make 
friends with the local people in Japan. I wondered how long this 
inequality would continue. 
 
Q: Perhaps this could not be helped due to the difference in 
military and economic power. 
 
Packard: Both Mr. Reischauer and I felt that this inequality went 
too far. Personally, I think that even today some Americans still 
look at Japan from the standpoint of an occupier. In a way, the 
Japanese still have the mindset of a people under occupation.  When 
Japan talks about its alliance with the U.S., its posture is always 
passive and weak. Why was Japan unable to voice its opposition to 
the Bush administration's invasion of Iraq like France and Germany? 
Why did it send as many as 600 Self-Defense Force troops to support 
Bush's war? 
 
Q: Probably the problem was with the political leadership at that 
time. 
 
Packard: No, I think it was a problem with the Japanese people as a 
whole. It is a fact that there have not been any capable political 
leaders - and I am not only talking about recent prime ministers - 
and there have been no consistent goals in Japan's foreign policy. I 
think Japan is at risk if it does not become a country with a large 
number of leaders in various sectors who can with confidence hold 
discussions in English on the global stage. 
 
Q: You also wrote about the lack of English proficiency in Japan in 
your book: "One of the main regrets of Mr. Reischauer after he 
resigned as ambassador was his plan to send American English 
teachers to every corner of Japan was not implemented owing to the 
opposition of the Japanese government." Did he see that as such a 
serious problem? 
 
Packard: In the books that he wrote after he retired as ambassador, 
he clearly stated that while the Japanese had a high level of 
technical skill in many fields, they were remarkably poor at 
learning foreign languages. Since they lived within the walls of the 
Japanese language, other people were unable to learn about what they 
were thinking. Therefore, it would be impossible for Japan to become 
a world leader. I agree with him completely on this point. We are 
not forcing English on Japan just because it is America's official 
language. We want Japan to use English, the common language of the 
world, as a tool. 
 
TOKYO 00000332  008 OF 010 
 
 
 
Q: Apparently, Mr. Reischauer kept saying the Japanese people should 
begin to graduate from theories of their uniqueness (Nihonjinron). 
 
Packard: Apart from the issue of English, Mr. Reischauer often said 
that the Japanese had to an abnormal degree the misconception that 
their country is unique. The Japanese people were no better or worse 
than any other nationality. Yet, the Japanese were obsessed with the 
preconceived notion that Japan is a unique country. That is why Mr. 
Reischauer wrote that he wished the Japanese would discard theories 
of their uniqueness. 
 
Thoughts on the future of East Asia 
 
Q: Mr. Reischauer was also a scholar of China. 
 
Packard: Originally, he was not a scholar of Japan, but an expert on 
the Tang and Song dynasties. He did not withdraw into the scrutiny 
of ancient documents, but started to voice strong criticism of the 
U.S. government's policy toward China in the 1950s. He urged the 
U.S. government to recognize Communist China as a state at an early 
stage. 
 
Q: How did he look at Japan and China? 
 
Packard: He did not look at the Japan-U.S.-China relationship as a 
triangular relationship in which close relations between any two 
countries would mean the isolation of the other one. He regarded all 
of East Asia as a whole including Japan, China, and South Korea. No 
westerner at that time had such a profound understanding of the 
Chinese cultural sphere. He looked at East Asia from a broad 
perspective and thought about the U.S.'s national interest as an 
American. I think he clearly foresaw the present day 
Japan-U.S.-China relationship. 
 
Q: How will the rise of China today impact the Japan-U.S. 
relationship? 
 
Packard: Closer relations between Japan and China are in the U.S.'s 
interest, and a closer China-U.S. relationship is in Japan's 
interest. This is because drawing China, which has so far been a 
distant country because of its different political regime, closer to 
the side of Japan and the U.S. in various areas, including trade, 
markets, human rights, and intellectual property rights, will have a 
positive effect on both countries. 
 
Q: How will China's rise affect the presence of U.S. military bases 
in Okinawa? 
 
Packard: In the first place, one reason why the U.S. built military 
bases in Okinawa was to defend Taiwan from Communist China. However, 
in reality, China has not launched any armed invasion and Taiwan has 
not rushed to become independent. In the future, if the distance 
between Japan and the U.S. on the one hand and China on the other is 
reduced, and they fall in step on policy toward North Korea, tension 
in the Far East might quickly ease. In that case the USFJ would no 
longer have any need to maintain the present large military bases in 
Okinawa. 
 
Q: The investigation of the experts' panel of the Ministry of 
Foreign Affairs into the secret agreements is in its final stage. 
The secret agreement on the introduction of nuclear weapons, which 
 
TOKYO 00000332  009 OF 010 
 
 
Mr. Reischauer was involved with, will be made public. 
 
Packard: Mr. Reischauer would have been dismayed if he knew that the 
secret agreement he left behind is still treated as secret. He died 
with the belief that the secret agreement between the Japanese and 
U.S. governments on port calls by U.S. vessels carrying nuclear arms 
was no longer secret and was public knowledge. 
 
Q: Your book related that "in April 1963, Reischauer invited Foreign 
Minister Masayoshi Ohira to the embassy in secret. He explained the 
U.S.'s concerns about the Japanese government's posture (of 
responding in the Diet that vessels with nuclear arms on board had 
not entered Japanese ports, which was different from the U.S. side's 
understanding)." 
 
Packard: Shortly before that, Mr. Reischauer had planned to expose 
the introduction of nuclear weapons in Japan since the U.S. forces 
would not have offloaded such weapons each time a U.S. vessel 
entered a Japanese port, and it would have been impossible to do so. 
He thought that keeping the introduction of nuclear arms secret from 
the Japanese people was dangerous. Therefore, he asked permission 
from the State Department to make this public before his meeting 
with Mr. Ohira. However, permission was not granted. The State 
Department was worried about a repeat of the violent anti-U.S. 
protests against the security treaty in 1960. 
 
Q: Mr. Reischauer held a news conference in 1981 and disclosed the 
secret agreement personally. Why did he do that? 
 
Packard: As a historian, he did not want to die with a lie on his 
conscience. He wanted to set the record straight in diplomatic 
history. I arranged that news conference. He was ill and spoke in a 
soft voice, but he tried very hard to articulate his convictions. He 
appeared to be relieved by revealing the truth. He would not have 
expected that the Japanese government would continue to conceal the 
secret agreement even after that. He is probably relieved now that 
20 years after he passed away, history is finally going to be 
rewritten correctly. 
 
(6) Discussion on "money and politics" scandals gets nowhere in 
Hatoyama's first debate with opposition leaders 
 
NIKKEI (Page 2) (Full) 
February 18, 2010 
 
In the first Diet debate, held yesterday, between Prime Minister 
Yukio Hatoyama and opposition leaders since the launch of the 
Hatoyama administration, the largest share of time was devoted to 
"money and politics" scandals. The leaders of the Liberal Democratic 
Party and the New Komeito focused their attack on Hatoyama's alleged 
false donation scandal, while the prime minister merely repeated 
with contrition his previous explanation. The discussion got 
nowhere. 
 
Hatoyama shies away from lenient approach 
 
LDP President Sadakazu Tanigaki started with questioning about 
Hatoyama's funding scandal. Upon saying that tax offices began 
receiving income tax returns on Feb. 16, he criticized Hatoyama, who 
filed revised tax forms and paid a gift tax, saying: "It is a 
tragicomedy for 'the king of tax dodgers in the Heisei era' to ask 
the people to pay taxes." 
 
TOKYO 00000332  010 OF 010 
 
 
 
Usual replies 
 
In response to the criticism, Hatoyama said with a meek look on his 
face: "I feel really sorry." But asked about the funds in question 
from his mother, he gave his pet reply: "I swear by the gods of 
heaven and earth that I did not know" (my mother had provided my 
office with money). On the other hand, Tanigaki quoted a lot of 
expressions that former Finance Minister Kaoru Yosano had used in an 
earlier House of Representatives Budget Committee meeting. Tanigaki 
also stressed that three persons involved in the case, including the 
first of Hatoyama's former state-funded secretary, should be 
summoned as witnesses before the Diet, but he did not obtain a 
pledge from Hatoyama, showing that he failed to follow through. 
 
In the debate, Tanigaki touched on the consumption tax, fiscal, and 
other issues as well, but Hatoyama's replies consisted of nothing 
but criticism of the previous LDP governments. Hatoyama claimed: 
"The previous governments spent too much money wastefully;" and "we 
urged the previous government to work out emergency economic 
measures, but it ignored our advice, so tax revenues decreased." 
After the party head talks, Tanigaki grumbled: "He gushed illogical 
replies." 
 
Meanwhile, Hatoyama went to a Japanese-style pub in Tokyo with 
first-time-elected House of Councillors members last night and told 
them: "I was prepared to answer questions about our policies, but 
such questions were not asked." Regarding the donation scandal, 
Hatoyama said: "I could avoid the issue, but based on the judgment 
if I do so I will be criticized later for having tried to avoid it, 
I responded." 
 
Consideration for New Komeito 
 
Hatoyama, however, responded to questions by New Komeito President 
Natsuo Yamaguchi in a different manner. The prime minister expressed 
for the first time his support for the party's proposal for setting 
up a panel of the ruling and opposition parties tasked with 
discussing a revision of the Political Funds Control Law. Yamaguchi 
welcomed the prime minister's support, remarking: "The people were 
waiting for you to show courage." The prime minister thus indicated 
his consideration for the New Komeito, which for a change could hold 
a casting vote in the political situation depending on the outcome 
of the House of Councillors election this summer. 
 
ROOS