CARNEGIE ENDOWMENT FOR INTERNATIONAL PEACE ASIA IN THE COMING YEARS: A JAPANESE PERSPECTIVE WELCOME AND MODERATOR: DOUGLAS PAAL, VICE PRESIDENT FOR STUDIES, CARNEGIE ENDOWMENT SPEAKER: ICHIRO FUJISAKI, JAPANESE AMBASSADOR TO U.S. WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 17, 2008 Transcript by Federal News Service Washington, D.C.
DOUGLAS PAAL: Good morning, everyone. Welcome to the Carnegie Endowment. My name is Doug Paal. I m vice president for studies here at Carnegie and we re privileged this morning to welcome you to share some of the thoughts of Ambassador Ichiro Fujisaki on Japan, Asia and the United States this morning. You have biographies of Ambassador Fujisaki on your chair, so I will not go into the detailed background. I think the important thing to note is that he s an old friend. He knows us well here in Washington. He has returned here as ambassador after a distinguished tour as leading the political section in the 1990s, where he managed to convince me in our frequent meetings during that time that he could absorb tremendous amounts of information from the Washington scene and distill it with incredible clarity and precision for the benefit of his government back home. He has been giving a series of speeches here in the Washington area at most of the think tanks. So today s event is one should be seen as one in a series of his opportunities to express his views. Most recently, he s been speaking mostly about the economic and financial crisis and the implications of that. But today he s going to talk about Asia more broadly. And for someone with my background and interests, and I think for many of you in the room who know him or at least know a great deal about him, I think this will be an interesting topic. He s also agreed to take questions at the end of the session. We have a nice intimate group here, so I think that should be a productive session. May I remind you to turn off your cell phones and other kinds of PDAs. Our sound system here is very sensitive to Bluetooth and things like that. And so you may find your question unheard or your neighbor s question unheard later on if your phones are still on. With that brief secretarial note, let me offer the podium to Ambassador Ichiro Fujisaki. (Applause.) AMBASSADOR ICHIRO FUJISAKI: Thank you. Thank you very much. I hope there s coffee in the back of the room, so please take very strong coffee first thing in the morning, so that you would not go dozing. It s going to be not too short. I usually give it in 10, 15 minutes, but this is about twice as long or maybe a little more and I have to go through many issues and it s a little detailed, but please bear with me. I make it long; it s not to avoid questions, but I just wanted to I just have something to say. I think all the people in the world think that their region is special, unique. Asians are no exception. Asians think their region is very special because of three reasons mainly: one, diversity: languages, race, especially the diversity in GDP per capita and there s no regional organization Pan-Asian regional organization like in America or Africa or in Europe; two, because there s the emergence of two big countries, China and India, which has about a quarter of the population of the world; three, because of the still existence of countries, of course, the degree varies, but very influential socialist countries, several of them in that region, which you don t find in other regions. And in Asia, the situation is complicated and we are now facing issues like in any other region the global challenges; for example, economic crisis, climate change, proliferation weapons of mass destruction and terrorism. And these against the background of this complicated situation in Asia, in order to cope with this is a little bit more difficult than in other regions, I think, but that
gives an opportunity to solidify the unity as well, we think. And I would like to tell you how we look at these issues from a Japanese point of view and the Japanese endeavor as well, and then to talk about Japan s place in Asia. Economy, first. The IMF has been predicting that all the countries, the major countries would go down several percent point in 2009 in their GDP. People say that this has started from the United States. This is right, but also we have to learn that the growth that we have seen has started from United States, all the countries were exporting, investing into this country and their growth was drawn from this country as well. So we can not just only blame the leverage issue, securities as in of mortgages and I think what is simple is we have to jointly with to put the economy U.S. economy, world economy on the right track. That is the Japanese belief. There are some countries leaders of some countries who thinks that, taking this opportunity, let s change the dollar s key currency role or totally change international financial organization. That is not our view. We think that is not what we have to be discussing. In November 2008 this about a month ago, we had a summit of 20 countries here in Washington. And there, Prime Minister Aso of Japan stated very clearly that we support dollar s key currency role and international financial institutions have to be fortified. With that philosophy, he has extended emergency economic package of $100 billion. That was the only proposal offered that any of those 20 countries made concretely I would underline that in that summit. And so Japan has been supporting this U.S. role and we would like to continue to do that. Second, I talked about finance on trade issues. WTO has negotiations did not produce a necessary progress. As an ambassador who was in Geneva till six months ago, I would hesitate to say, but I have to say that this was not totally inconceivable. And now I think what is most important is that all countries try to resist temptation to introduce any restrictive measures, new ones, or try to fortify it, or we have to really live up to our commitment of WTO or FTAs. That is the key thing. We should not go down the slippery slope. At least, we ve all political will to commit to stand still and then go on from there is what we are really I think, necessary. And on development issues this is also economic. It s not easy, but all the countries major countries have to live up to their commitment already made on ODA with the fiscal situation clinging on, it s not easy for European countries, American countries, Japan to do so. But this crisis should not affect really growth of developing countries and I think those political will is all the more necessary. Now, I would like to go into Asia specifically and try to see what our relations with Asian countries are, starting from ASEAN. If you can see this is a trade figure, we are almost close, but we are number one in the world on trade with very close, second and third is U.S. and the EU, but we are number one, still, with trade with ASEAN. And this is true with ODA Official Development Assistance. This is Japan s place in ODA in the five years from 2002 to 2006, and FDI. So you can see that we are have been number one country in all trade, ODA, and FDI with ASEAN countries. ASEAN has been a source of stability and Japan has been engaging in strategic partnership dialogue with ASEAN since 1978 so it s already 30 years the first dialogue country. And we
have been engaging in Mekong River development which helped to integrate Laos, Cambodia, Vietnam into ASEAN as well. This is our relations with ASEAN. China. Japan s ODA with China is number one, and our relations is very strong. China, I think, has a great opportunity and problem as well. It s not easy for a Chinese leader, as they say, to really have a quarter population, world population hating them and so when China opened up 30 years ago, they had to select areas of development, they had to be choosy. And all the frustrations had been able to be managed because overall growth was there. Now, some people are predicting that that growth rate may go down to 7 percent or lower as well. We don t know the exact figure. This is a very serious situation that China s GDP per capita is still in the range of $2,000. I think it s very necessary for all of us to help China s development and for their stability. Our relations with China has been improving rapidly recently. This year, in May, Hu Jintao President Hu Jintao has been to Japan first time in 10 years and that was the first time of a Chinese president has visited Japan in 10 years, and this December we had trilateral which I will come to later of agreed Japan and China in Fukuoka, Japan. And in June this year, China and Japan was able to resolve longstanding issue of development joint development East China Sea gas field. These things are now happening, I think no, no, no, no, of course, we have lots of problems, but all in all we are in a very good situation. However, there are basic issues regarding China. Examples: relations of government and currency, yuan, military buildup, human rights issue, international property rights issue. These are big issues remaining, have to be addressed by China themselves and have to be watched by international community. And I think Mrs. Clinton, secretary of state-designate, is quite right when she said Japan and China share a common interest in seeing, ensuring that China would be peaceful, prosperous, responsible partner in the region and in the world. I think that notion is completely shared by Japan. India. Manmohan Singh, the prime minister, has visited Japan recently and confirmed that we are going to have a strategic partnership with Japan. India has been the biggest recipient of Japanese ODA for five years. And can you see the Southwest Asian chart? This is the ODA to Southwest Asia. That is including Pakistan, Sri Lanka, and all the countries, and we are number two to U.K. here. Our trade with India increased in 2007 by 22 percent and foreign direct investment doubled. So our relations with major countries, ASEAN, China, India is quite close and we do not want really to see them go down the slippery slope. So that is why we have been really existing our effort and one thing we have been doing is to have an economic stimulus package. In August, Japanese government came up with an economic package of $120 billion. In October, we have come up with economic package of $270 billion. In December, we have come up with an economic stimulus package of third one as $230 billion. Those $270 billion and $230 billion second and third one those budgets that is needed for them has been to be enacted and we ll be discussing this next year. But government has already come up with a plan and it was announced. That is one thing. Second is fortification of regional economic mechanism and these are which I ll touch upon later for example, Chiang Mai Initiative, of currency swapping, the other is what was
proposed in November meeting, regional credit rating agency, and these are things that we have been trying to introduce to fortify economic mechanism in Asia as well. So much for economy; now I would move on to environment. As regards environment, Asian countries position differ from developed countries, developing countries, and there are difference of positions in developing countries within developing countries as well. In G-8 Toyako this August, G-8 came up with the proposal of trying to aim at 50-50; that is, 50 percent reduction by 2050. Indonesia, Korea supported this idea. China, India said first developed countries have to show us the initiative and they said the long-term commitment of 2050, developed countries should do 80 to 95 percent. As for midterm objective of 2020, developed countries should do 25 to 40 percent. What is important is that we should not repeat Kyoto. In Kyoto, we didn t have United States nor important developing countries. If you re going to come up with a post-kyoto, we have to have all of them. Japan is ready to do, of course, more than developing countries. I think that s a duty. However, we have to aim at practical objective as well. I will show you where we are on energy conservation. This is energy required to produce $1 of GDP. If Japan needed one unit, U.S., EU needs twice energy; Russia, 17 times; China, nine times; India, eight times. As a result, CO 2 emission in the world, U.S. which represents about 25 percent of the world GDP, emission is about 20 percent. China, which is about 4 percent of the world GDP a little bit more than 4 percent but is 20 percent. Japan, which is 8 percent of world GDP, is down at 4 percent. So you can see that Japan is contributing in the world more by emission in CO 2 and we are doing already this from that as well. There s a limit of reduction, but I think we are very much encouraged by President-elect Obama s statement and I think what he has been aiming is both ambitious and practical and I think Japan and the United States can work hand-inhand. Weapons of mass destruction proliferation. Japan has been advocating ultimate abolition of nuclear weapons. We have been putting resolution in UNGA for 10 years. But President-elect Obama has been saying that non-nuclear to aim at non-nuclear world, I think, is in line with our philosophy. It s important, of course, not to undermine deterrence, but that is, of course, needless to say. But it is, I think, important for nuclear-possessing countries to aim at non-nuclear world. Here, I think we can work hand-in-hand and we hope that United States would participate in CTBT, Complete Test Ban Treaty, as soon as possible. I would just touch upon two countries, Iran and North Korea. Iran, I think we have to continue to use have maximum use of United Nations because we have to involve China and Russia in dealing with Iran. Without that, we will make a very important significant leeway. Japan will be a part of UNGA from next year. So we will be looking forward to working with United States in that regard. DPRK. Six-Party Talks should continue to play an important role. That is our conviction. And we were encouraged by President-elect Obama s statement that when on October 11 th when United States government has decided to de-list North Korea from terrorist country list, presidentelect said if North should not at least with the robust verification, energy cooperation needs to be suspended. There should be reintroduction of restriction and consideration of new restriction. We have to aim at complete and verifiable non-nuclear North Korea. And also he said that includes
nuclear and I m sorry uranium enrichment and he said also the abduction of Japanese and other nationals issue has to be addressed. North Korea was unfortunately not forthcoming in the last meeting, but we hope that they will read that statement if they are thinking of wait-and-see attitude. Also, in that statement, it was said that dramatic improvement of coordination between United States and its allies like Japan and ROK is necessary. We look forward to that as well. Terrorism. Japan has been steadfastly supporting fight against terrorism. Five days ago in Japan, Japanese Diet has passed a law to continue refueling of ships engaged in OEF in Indian Sea Indian Ocean. So we ll be engaging in this until January 2010. We ve been depending on Middle East oil, so the peace in that region is so important for our national security. We think Afghan, Pakistan, Iraq, Middle East all these issues have to be discussed not in piecemeal way, but comprehensive manner in midterm with a midterm point of view between Japan and the United States and, if necessary, other countries as well. We have been keeping extending assistance to war-torn countries. If we take the example of Iraq and Afghanistan, you will see this figure. We ve been number two country in extending assistance to Iraq reconstruction; number three next to U.S., U.K. as regards Afghanistan. This is only reconstruction and it s not military, but just wanted to share that. Also, we are engaging in fight against terrorism from the point of regional cooperation. We have extended coast guard ships to Indonesia and fortifying capacity-building in that region for fight against terrorism. Now, from here, I m going to a little bit psychology issue, because I ve given too much of economic figures. But again, psychology, I have to use some figures as well. It s not too diplomatic maybe to refer and criticize other countries leaders, but I will do that. (Laughter.) But let s be assured, it s not going to be President Bush or President Clinton or whatever. It s German Chancellor Helmut Schmidt has repeatedly said, sadly, Japan doesn t have friend in the region. I don t know why he says that, but I think I understand that because I see no media people here, so I can say this Japanese media but sometimes our media people like to listen to criticism from foreign leaders about our country and so these leaders think that, oh, I have to live up to that expectation and they repeat it. I think I will show the chart of what this is done by Japanese government, so you have to be a little mindful, but they asked around if you think Japan is a trustworthy and friendly country around ASEAN six countries. This is the figure. This is if you can see the countries, about 90 percent of people think Japan is friendly or trustworthy, and although this is done by the government of Japan, I think if it s 90 percent, this tells you something, that we are not as unpopular as some leaders think. Also, it s exemplified by the fact that Japan has been returned to U.N. Security Council 10 times in last 30 years; India has been returned six times; Germany, four times. But of course it s not a beauty contest, but if we didn t have support, if our philosophy didn t have support, I don t think we had been returned that many times. This year again, in the U.N. today, we were able to win by getting 158 supports against those countries for Iran, 32 votes. Some people also say that Japan has not been facing history, past history issue. And I think this is not true too. If you have followed all the statements of Japanese leaders, deep remorse,
apology regards to World War II has been expressed time and again. One of the great examples is Murayama Prime Minister Murayama s statement 12 years ago. But we don t think we can be complacent about our relations with Asia. So I would just spell out three points what we have to be focusing on: one is to build up institutions in Asia; secondly is relations with the United States; third is human exchange. As for institution-building, this has been intensified after Asian financial crisis in 1997 because we became more interdependent because there has arisen issues like financial crisis, the environment issue that not only one country can solve and there has to be cooperation. ASEAN plus Three three is Japan, China, and ROK, Korea has started from 97 on every year meeting in this summit level. And from 2005, we have invited in Australia, New Zealand, and India and made the East Asian Community, the summit of those 16 countries. As for economic partnership arrangements, Japan was one of the very late one to pick it up. The Japanese government was a firm believer in WTO and did not want to start FTA, but NAFTA, the North American Free Trade Agreement of Canada, Mexico and the United States, induced change. In 1990, there were only 30 FTAs. Now we have more than 300. Why? Because NAFTA really cracked the situation open. And the Japanese government still condoned WTO, but Japanese business was not satisfied so we started negotiations with ASEAN countries and now we concluded several of them: Singapore, 2002; and in 05 we concluded with Malaysia; 06 with Philippines, 07 with Thailand, 07 with Indonesia, 07 with Brunei; and this year, in 2008, we concluded with comprehensive ASEAN, ASEAN 10 as well. And we are now negotiating with India, Korea, and Australia. So the networking has been evolving rapidly. Trilateral relations Japan, China, and ROK. We recently had the first independent summit and agreed that this should be continued every year, and next year China will be a host. In this year, we ve discussed finance issues, environment, North Korea, and other issues of interest to the three countries in Fukuoka, Japan, and most importantly, we agreed to fortify what I said this Chiang Mai Initiative, the swap of currency. We increased the amount limit of exchanging currency, Japan- Korea, China-Korea to 30 billion level and we have been extending these efforts in the region. What I want to stress here is that Japan has no intention of excluding countries like the United States. On the contrary, we need the United States. So if it going to be institution-building, we think the United States should be there. But dialogues, of course you have many dialogues with other countries. We have dialogs. But please do not think that we trying to set up something that is outside to put the United States outside here. That is not our interest. I think in that context, we have to utilize APEC a little more. APEC Japan will be hosting in 2010, U.S. will be hosting 2011. We have to use them a little bit more strategically. Second, on U.S. military presence, I think there s a silent majority support in Asia towards U.S. presence. Silent because I think it s not necessary to make sounds because most of the troops are in Japan and Korea. Korea it s because of North Korea. Japan, for Japan, but these troops are sometimes utilized elsewhere as well, and they don t think the other Asian countries would like to bear cost, so not offend other countries, so there is silent but I think there is silent majority support.
Here there is an assertion by a renowned professor of Harvard, Joe Nye, that the U.S. military presence is like oxygen indispensable. I think he s right in one sense. In one sense, I don t agree. It is indispensable. We need U.S. presence because there s still a country like DPRK, we see Chinese build-up, and there s a lot of uncertainties, so we need U.S. presence. But the difference with oxygen is that you don t feel, you don t smell, you don t see oxygen. Military presence is not so. So you have to be always sensitive, mindful about the sensitivity of local communities. The U.S. forces have been very sensitive to that, the Japanese government has been so. That is the reason that in 2006, they have agreed realignment of U.S. troops in Okinawa, 8,000 of them, to Guam, and we are working on this. This is very important to continue such realignment. If it s not oxygen, how do I see it? I think what an Asian country is expecting on the United States is something like giving assurance, predictability. Assurance is about democracy, values. Sometimes Japan and the United States have different ways of démarche, but I think aim is the same, we share the same value, and we need that value to remain freedom of speech as well. All in all, I think maybe this is oversimplification, but Asians are not that unhappy with the status quo. They don t want some country in the region to change that. And we want the United States to be a stabilizer; if I may say, anchor all. If the ship starts to drift or to move away, pushed away by someone on the ship, then if there s a good anchor to be put into the water, not to rock the boat or prevent that rock from drifting. That is exactly what I think a lot of Asians are expecting on United States. Maybe that is asking too much, but that is my feeling. Lastly, human exchanges. Human exchanges are very important and we are fortifying that. At youngsters level, Japan proposed last year that every year, we are inviting in 6,000 people from East Asia and this is just one example. We will be fortifying those young people s exchange. Thank you very much for bearing with me for such a long and detailed discussion. I just want to lastly emphasize that we re now at watershed in Asia the economic crisis, emerging economies, DPRK s attitude towards nuclear, the very precarious situation in Southwest Asia. It s a very historic moment too. We continue to count on U.S. engagement and Japan will be ready to work with the United States. I thank you very much. (Applause.) MR. PAAL: Well, before we take some questions, I want to thank Ambassador Fujisaki for doing the kind of work that doesn t get done very often which is to go through the important aspects of relationships which people in government have to wrestle with on a daily basis but which often are not the hot topics of public conversation. One of the structural things that s happened in Washington s awareness of Asia is the rise of China has absorbed the media as the media themselves are losing assets and shrinking; hence, we get more reporters in Beijing and Shanghai than we have in Tokyo, Seoul, or other places. And so, today, I think, Mr. Ambassador, you have given us a chance to do some remedial reading on the situation in the region as seen from Tokyo. That s very beneficial. You ve also passed the most recent test of a successful speaker because everyone has kept their shoes on and we re about to (laughter) embark on a question-and-answer period. So please, I see a question in the back.
Q: (Off mike.) One is about Central Asia (off mike) of republics of the former Soviet Union regarding the (off mike) energy (off mike) China, Japan (off mike). What is your view (off mike.) The Russian media would phrase it as no chance of (off mike). What is your expectation for (off mike). AMB. FUJISAKI: Thank you very much for very good questions. You made two points. I ll take one by one. One about the Central Asia; this is a very important area. These republics I have visited several of them myself and discussed with energy people and foreign office people as well. We would like to fortify our relations and we have regular dialogues as well. We think it is very strategically important and we attach a lot of importance. I m sorry I left out. Second, about Russia-Japan summit and Russia-Japan relations, I think if I may say, the ball is of course in any diplomacy on you cannot say the ball is only in your court. However, I would like to stress, if the ball is big enough, I think most of the part is in the court of Russia. The key issue here is territorial issue, as you know, and we would like really to have a positive response so that we could really move on, and that is a sincere, earnest desire on the part of Japan. However, I don t know. I have not been informed of the Russian reporting, but the reporting I m getting is that there was a very good, cordial discussion, and I am not as pessimistic as Russian newspaper as you have referred to is reporting. I hope that Russia would come along. MR. PAAL: Bob, why don t you go ahead? Q: Bob Hathaway, Woodrow Wilson Center. Let me echo Doug s confidence in your very comprehensive statement (off mike). I have a question about Pakistan. You briefly mentioned our common interests dealing with terrorism, even more briefly talked about the need for the U.S. (off mike) to talk about Pakistan (off mike). I wanted to ask, could you share with us what sorts of bilateral (off mike) between the U.S. and Japan (off mike). And a little bit more broadly, is it feasible to talk about a (off mike) approach to Pakistan, approach (off mike). If so, how do you actually go about fashioning such a (off mike)? AMB. FUJISAKI: Thank you very much. As for Pakistan, Afghanistan is a very important region. We compare notes and discuss very regularly between Japan and United States in the States, as well as in Washington, as well as in Tokyo. Now, how do we come up with international fora? We have already a meeting of Pakistan s countries surrounding Pakistan meeting and supporters meeting. However, if you are talking about something new to discuss more strategically about, I think that is something we have to come up and think about. And Japan and U.S. I think there s a merit in thinking about how we come up with those ideas. At this moment, I don t think a concrete idea has evolved yet. MR. PAAL: The second row, back there. Q: Is it not working? MR. PAAL: Just go ahead and don t wait for the microphone.
Q: Libo Liu, Voice of America. At an event yesterday, the U.S. assistant secretary for East Asia, Christopher Hill, acknowledged the Six-Party Talks has so far not produced desirable results (off mike). However, he said the Six-Party Talks had helped nations in Asia to increase dialogue and communication. And he gave an example the secretary said, when Japan and China were not talking to each other, they were still participating in the Six-Party Talks. So my question to you, Ambassador, is that in your view have the Six-Party Talks helped strengthening bilateral relationships between China and Japan? Thank you. AMB. FUJISAKI: Thank you very much. There may have been some side effects as you have just referred, but I think the main value or significance of Six-Party Talks should be weighed how much progress, how much solidarity, how much has been discussed and concluded vis-à-vis the DPRK and because if you start saying about bilateral relations, there could be sometimes up and downs in any bilateral relations and I don t think that Six-Party Talks per se has helped Japan-China relations. Japan-China relations I think had been dramatically changed when prime ministers of Japan started to go to China and then, as I said, Chinese president and prime minister has gone. And although we have problems, like the food security issue, there are issues like these always. And I do not say that always feelings of most countries people are excellent, but still I think with this strategic importance the relations per se has been on the right track for several years already. MR. PAAL: Joe Grimes? Microphones are working again. Q: Joe Grimes, I ve had long experience in Japan, although I m retired now. One think you talked about was that the people in Asia are generally happy with the status quo. Now, one thing about the status quo is that it always changes. Remember, there was an issue we used to talk about Japan on the trade issues back in the 80s. You take a look at China that you d mentioned. China has quite a bit of development, but they are going through kind of a rough patch, but in time it s going to be relatively stronger than it has been in the past. Japan s got to have some concern about this. You talked about psychology. How concerned is Japan about the rise of China and to what extent do you develop your policies and your procedures and everything around making sure that China remains friendly and tied into the rest of Asia? Somebody used the other day an example I can t remember quite the analogy about NATO was to keep the Russians out, the Americans in, and the Germans down (inaudible) China and Japan, certainly Japan has quite an interest in making sure that China stays tied and that Japan continues to have if not the major voice, at least a pretty dominant voice of Asia. AMB. FUJISAKI: Thank you very much. I clearly understood your points. When I said status quo, it doesn t mean that everything should be same because, for example, DPRK issue has to be solved. Abduction issue has to be solved. The de-nuclear North Korea DPRK has to be realized and verified. So there are issues. Economic crisis has to be solved. When I said about strategic status quo, that was referring to overall strategic balance and I think we do not, as I said, want to see that one or two countries in the region totally changing that balance. And from that, as I said, we think a lot of Asians if they are vocal or not has been supporting U.S. presence. And I think that has not changed.
As for China s emergence, as I said, we think if it develops in a healthy way, I think that is to the opportunity to all of us. For example, Japanese economy has been benefiting a lot from trade with China. And China has been the number one trading company trading partner. However, as I said, there are concerns about China s military buildup, which has continued more than 15 percent for 20 years. And that is a concern to us as well. So from that as well, as I said, United States and international community always have to be watching. Thank you. MR. PAAL: A question way in the back. Q: Hi, Kevin Slaydon (ph), the Carnegie Endowment. Thank you for coming, Ambassador Fujisaki. After the Asian financial crisis in the 90s, the idea of an Asian monetary fund was proposed and that kind of died and then it s gotten new life in light of the economic crisis. I was wondering what Japan thought about the potential of this. And I know there s a meeting in May between 13 countries and what do you think the prospects are for it? AMB. FUJISAKI: As for the coming meeting, I cannot really predict anything, but after 97 financial crisis, we thought it would be little too difficult to depend totally on International Monetary Fund alone, and that was the reason that currency swapping has been introduced what I said about Chiang Mai Initiative. That is a currency swapping. So if they needed some currency, they would bring your currency and ask you to swap it and you have a limit and we have been expanding that. So that is one thing that we have introduced, but that is not outside of IMF. That is with the cooperation with IMF. And IMF facilities has been, as you have seen, the conditionality is, if I may say, eased in last years to try to make it more usable. And I think we have learned a lot from the 97 experience and we are trying to improve amend the tools we have. MR. PAAL: In the interest of time, I have two questions, one in the back row and then one in the second row, please. Q: Jerry Hyman at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. I thank you for your very comprehensive review of the region. I wonder if I could ask you to elaborate a bit more on China, which as you China, as you point out, is the second largest economy in the region and growing. I wonder if you could you mentioned in your earlier answer that it s important for China to be growing and participating in a, quote, healthy way, I think is the word you used. I wonder if you could tell us what you think the challenges for us are in trying to escort China, so to speak, into a healthy relationship. What role in particular do you think Japan could play and what role do you think the U.S. could play? What advice would you give to administration in trying to meet those future challenges? AMB. FUJISAKI: China is a country with a long history and very matured country. However, I think what a lot of other people would like to see is transparency, predictability. And in order to give those transparency, predictability, one of the best tools we have is international organizations. If you abide by to norms of international organizations, you would have to do you have to clear some criteria. And I think United States has been quite effective in using WTO, IPR sorry WIPO, World Intellectual Property Right Organization, World Trade Organization. And I think maybe more than that, we have to be looking at trying to use those tools effectively because China is becoming member to all these international organizations. If they want to be the good member and I think they are striving to do so they will live up to that and we all the existing members have to see to it that this will happen.
Q: Ambassador Fujisaki, thank you for your presentation this morning. Thank you, Mr. Paal, for having the ambassador here. I m Charles Hoke. I ve had the pleasure of hearing you on two other occasions. First, I believe it was on the 31 st of October at the American Enterprise Institute and on December 2 nd at the Library of Congress. I appreciate all three of your presentations. AMB. FUJISAKI: It s not easy for same people (inaudible). (Laughter.) Q: I find that you do not waffle. I would like to know, in light of your remarks this time concerning the U.S. military presence and Japan s satisfaction with that presence and your remarks concerning realignment of forces in Okinawa and the fact that a quiet military presence I believe I m quoting you correctly is really basically what the other quiet participants in Asia look forward to. How can we be a good to use your words stabilizer? How can we best stabilize with our military presence in Asia? Thank you. AMB. FUJISAKI: Thank you very much. I think United States is a big power, the largest power, elephant in the room. If so, every step has to be carefully measured because people will try to follow or try to whatever carefully watching. So that notion I think is most important. And I think in many negotiations or whatever if U.S. moves, I think sometimes other countries have to move twice as fast because if the big thing is moving in that direction. So if that notion is shared, I think the move will be very measured, careful ones and I think that is exactly what is expected of a stabilizer. MR. PAAL: Before I take the next question, I d just comment. I ve not heard the elephantin-the-room metaphor before. I think it brings up some things that are difficult to contemplate, but I do think you ve made a very important point. When we re contemplating the arrival of a new administration, the seriousness with which they address these security questions in their early days and as they continue should bear in mind that each step does have an outsized impact often not appreciated in this country. I don t have an anticipation that that s going to be a problem with the incoming administration. Nonetheless, I think it s a useful reminder. Dave Fitzgerald had a question in the second row. Q: Thank you Mr. Ambassador. Dave Fitzgerald, private consultant. I was wondering if you could speak a little bit more about the relationship with South Korea, the Republic of Korea, particularly in the area of maritime security. At the recent Trilateral Summit in Fukuoka, was that touched on in that context? Is there prospects for an expansion of that relationship between South Korean and Japanese forces? Thank you. AMB. FUJISAKI: I m sorry. I haven t really followed that maritime cooperation between the two countries. Very frankly, I do not have the necessary information to provide with you. MR. PAAL: We have one final question in the back of the room on the left side.
Q: I am a visitor. Thank you very much. My name s (inaudible) visiting fellow with the Center for Strategic International Studies. Yesterday I was in the other event, got to listen to the Ambassador Hill summarize about the Six-Party Talk AMB. FUJISAKI: Looks like all people are going around Hill Q: Okay, so yesterday I was in the other event, got the chance to listen to the Ambassador Hill. He summarized the Six-Party Talk. He just got back from China. And just wondering your perspective for the Six-Party Talk the Japan s sort of role played in the Six-Party Talks. Thanks. AMB. FUJISAKI: I think Six-Party Talks is very important and I would not lose importance. All the countries involved is there, so it is my conviction that we should not change this formula. Now, it is unfortunate that DPRK was not as forthcoming as was hoped, but what I think was agreed was that all these heads of delegation would go back to the capital, report to their heads of state, and then assess the situation. That is exactly what they are doing now. So I think after their assessment is made, we ll come up with how we go with the next steps. I think we should my view is that we should continue on to press along the line that we have been doing because these issues of denuclearization of DPRK is very important not only to Japan, but to all the surrounding countries and also it could be proliferated, so it s not only surrounding countries, but other in other areas as well. Abduction issue is a humanitarian issue, human rights issue. If people would forego with such humanitarian issue, how could a country be deemed as a country respecting human rights? So I think we get the understanding of all the countries and we ve been getting support from this country, which we appreciate very much. MR. PAAL: Thank you very much, Mr. Ambassador, for excellent remarks and for a very generous willingness to take a wide range of questions. I want to ask everyone to join me in expressing our appreciation. (Applause.) Thank you for sharing your foreign policy views with our group. There s a lot of interest. (END)