Press Conference

1. Announcements

None.

2. Questions and Answers

Question:
Over the weekend, you visited the prefectures of Okinawa and Yamaguchi and gave an explanation regarding the deployment of the Osprey, and were met with severe objections from the local areas. You said that you were going to take this back to explain to the Prime Minister and the related cabinet members, so how are you going to receive and treat these objections? This is my first question. Then, with regard to said issue, the Host Nation Notification has already been given, and I assume that plans are in progress (for the Osprey) to go to Iwakuni by end of July. With said objections in mind, do you have any thoughts on and/or leeway for further negotiations or coming up with new compromises with the U.S. in the future?

Minister:
During the weekend, I have been giving an explanation on the background regarding the deployment of the Osprey, as well as the Host Nation Notification and the press release that was announced by the U.S. side on the same day -- that I am sure everyone is aware of now -- to the local chief executives and the related members of the legislature in Okinawa and Yamaguchi prefectures, which includes Iwakuni city of course. At the same time, I went there with the intention to receive the candid opinion from the local chief executives and the members of the legislature. As you have mentioned just now, the reactions have been very severe overall, and I have received them with utmost seriousness. In the process, I have promised that "I will take this back to Tokyo, and report this to the Prime Minister and others," so I have explained how I explained things in Okinawa and Yamaguchi Prefectures, and the concerns and opinions I received from these two prefectures to the Chief Cabinet Secretary yesterday and to the Prime Minister today in the cabinet meeting. Since it concerns the details of the cabinet meeting, I won't divulge the detail of the cabinet meeting further, but I did make a formal report to the Prime Minister and the related cabinet members. Regarding this issue, the discussions that had been conducted between Japan and the U.S. have not been explained in detail to everyone so far. However, as it was mentioned in certain press reports, as well as in the Host Nation Notification, the CH-46 helicopters that the 1st Marine Aircraft Wing of the U.S. Marine Corps (USMC) stationed in Japan possesses have been used over many years, and 40 or 50 years have passed since they were deployed to the unit. Therefore, by replacing these with a new aircraft model known as the Osprey, it would upgrade the air transport capability, as well as the humanitarian restoration support and disaster relief capabilities of the USMC. We feel that this, in turn, will contribute towards upgrading the capabilities of the USMC and as a result will work towards maintaining the overall peace and stability in the Asia-pacific region. In spite of this, as you may already know, it was involved in an accident this year in both Morocco and Florida. Although the accident investigations on both cases are currently being conducted, in light of said two accidents the Japanese government and the related cabinet members have been debating for some time on the whether it is truly appropriate for this to be deployed to the USMC according to schedule. In addition, various discussions and exchange of opinions have been held between Japan and the U.S. during this time on what would be the best way possible to deploy this and at the same time alleviate the concerns that the people in the local areas would have on this while ensuring its safety. This is something that was discussed not only within the Japanese government, but between Japan and the U.S. as well. As explained beforehand, the U.S. has a strong desire to deploy the Osprey in order to upgrade the capabilities of the USMC, which will work towards maintaining the peace and stability of this region as well as upgrading its deterrence capabilities, and have repeatedly advocated its strong insistence to progress with the deployment of the Osprey according to schedule. However, we have repeatedly insisted that it is not simply acceptable for the deployment to progress according to schedule under the condition where the investigation results for the two accidents have not been fully disclosed and our people are feeling concerned or are harboring reservations about this, and both sides have been conducting some serious arguments over this issue. As you may already know, since the commencement of the mass-production of the Osprey in 2005, the U.S. has been using this not only within its East and West Coasts, but it has been used in Iraq in the Middle East, as well as in Afghanistan and Haiti. The USMC has no plan to deploy them in Europe for now since there are no Marine Air-Ground Task Force in Europe, but they have a strong desire to progress with their master plan to deploy them in Hawaii and Japan in the Asia-pacific region, and both Japan and the U.S. have spent a good deal of time in looking for ways where we are both able to come to a compromise. You may notice if you have read the press release that although it has been given in a form where the U.S. side had unilaterally notified this, up to when releasing this press release, everything had been coordinated with the Japan side, and the details had all been explained to everyone beforehand. The result of the discussions between Japan and the U.S. -- which is given in the press report -- is that the Osprey will be unloaded at Iwakuni, but its flight operation will not be conducted while its flight operation safety is being confirmed. From here, this is going to be of my own assumptions, but I understand that they will be conducting things such as conducting maintenance on the aircraft that has been unloaded, conducting repairs and maintenance, as well as moving the overall system, but its flight operations will not be conducted until the two conditions have been fulfilled. The U.S. isn't taking these two conditions lightly and seriously understands the very grave effect it would have on the Japanese society, which is why they have made efforts to provide Japan with information, which would be considered exceptional under normal rules of procedure. In addition, as it was given in the details of this press release, the U.S. has implemented measures such as postponing all flight operation for the Osprey -- which is being operated globally -- in Iwakuni until said two conditions have been fulfilled. I think that this is a measure that has been implemented in consideration not only for the Japanese government, but also for the concerns and reservations of the people in the local areas. I gave the aforementioned explanation as politely as I could to the people in the local areas, and have received the candid opinions from everyone. Of course, I have received some stern opinions such as "I am against this deployment" or "it is simply unacceptable," "I am against bringing this in the first until its flight safety has been confirmed." This has all been received with sincerity and taken home, and its gist has been candidly mentioned to the related cabinet members, Chief Cabinet Secretary and the Prime Minister. On what we are going to do in the future, all I can say for now is that we can only continue with the process that I have mentioned just now. However, whatever the situation is going to be, we will continue to request to the U.S. side to provide information concerning the accident investigation result to the Japan side at the earliest possible time. That is the general image on what I do know and can explain to everyone.

Question:
Will there be any explanation from the U.S. side on whether the Osprey has actually been shipped out from the mainland, and on what route it is going to take and where it is going make a port call during its arrival to Iwakuni?

Minister:
I definitely think that it had been shipped out after the Host Nation Notification. It goes without saying that when I received the notification from the U.S. side that it was shipped at the end of the previous week, it was when I was making my visit to Okinawa and Yamaguchi, so I heard of it on the spot and I made the confirmation on this after returning to Tokyo. Therefore, I am not aware of the exact month, date or hour when it had been shipped out and I have not received a report on this from the Division in charge of this. I have neither heard of nor received a report on what route it is going to take. This is going to be something within the overall transportation plan of the shipping or freight company that had been entrusted with the job by the U.S. Forces, so I don't think the U.S. government has full knowledge on its details. However, I have heard that the timing of the arrival to Iwakuni is scheduled at around the latter part of this month, but I have not heard of the exact month, date or hour that is going to be.

Question:
Regarding the safety of the Osprey, as you have mentioned beforehand, what we can perceive from the situation where the Osprey is continued to be in operational use, there is a high possibility that the investigation result is going to yield a result where the airframe or mechanisms are safe. So what kind of things for safety will the government of Japan need to confirm in order to give the green light?

Minister:
That depends on what kind of investigation result is going to be provided by the U.S. side. On how the U.S. side is going to evaluate these two accidents, to give my personal assumption, it would be desirable for this to be mentioned in the investigation report. We -- as the ones receiving this -- will also need to confirm flight safety, so even if flight safety has been confirmed by the U.S. side, we are not thinking of accepting everything they say at face value. That is why we have assembled a team for this. We will also scientifically and technically analyze the information that will be delivered to us, and confirm that the details given in the investigations by the U.S. side really does ensure flight safety, and my understanding of this process of reconfirming flight safety is that both sides need to be able to confirm this.

Question:
I think you mentioned in the press conference last Friday that, "the evaluation team is only going to make decisions on technical aspects." On this, you mentioned in the previous press conference something to the effect that, "it is for the Prime Minister's Office and the MOD to decide. Therefore, even if the evaluation team says that it is safe from a technical viewpoint, there is a possibility that the Prime Minister may say something on this." So what's the bottom line?

Minister:
Theoretically, such an outcome may be possible. However, although we have assembled the group of experts, to be honest -- and I don't really think I have to explain this to everyone -- there are no specialists on the Osprey here in Japan. Since nobody here has the qualifications to pilot the Osprey, we have called on people with pilot experience and/or skills and knowledge in related helicopters and aircraft from various fields to come together, and we will listen to their technical opinions, which we will analyze and explain to the people in charge of the politics, and it would depend on how much understanding they would have on this. If they are unable to understand this, we will take it back for the evaluation team to conduct some more detailed analysis, and if it becomes necessary, there is going to be a process where we will request to the U.S. side to provide more detailed technical information on this detailed analysis result. Therefore, I don't think that the result of what we have analyzed is going to be the final decision of the Japanese government. Basically, I don't think that is what I see as being civilian control.

Question:
This is in response to your comments just now, but when you went to Okinawa and Yamaguchi during the weekend, most of the opinions from the local communities were that they wanted something to be done through a political decision rather than about whether it is technically safe, and to make a political decision for revision if the deployment is going to be revised. How do you feel about this?

Minister:
I feel that it included both aspects. Regarding (the context of) the word "political," and I may be repeating what I have mentioned before, we cannot make a decision until we have seen the result of the investigation of the two accidents and the details of the overall investigation result that has been notified to us. Therefore, we have a certain amount of discrepancy in the volume and quality of information that has been provided as there is a time lag between the details of the information for the two accidents that had been delivered to us so far. In any case, we would like to do a thorough analysis of the information on the two accidents that has been provided to us before coming to a decision.

Question:
Governor Nakaima has mentioned, "if there is an accident involving the Osprey in the prefecture, all bases will be shut down" which is a severe way of putting things. In that sense, an accident has already happened, but if it is going to be deployed, what kind of things is the Japanese government doing at the moment with respect to the case where accidents and such occur after it is operated?

Minister:
My understanding of said question is that you are asking about how responsibility is going to be assumed if an accident occurs in Okinawa after it has been deployed. As a Minister of Defense, I don't have all the necessary material to fully answer such hypothetical questions for now.

Question:
Regarding the explanation that was given for this visit in the cabinet meeting, I believe it was given in the course of the cabinet meeting. What was the reaction of the Prime Minister and the attendees to this?

Minister:
The details of the cabinet meeting is not supposed to be made public, so what I have reported has been mentioned just now, and I would like to refrain from mentioning on who gave what opinion for now, although I think it will eventually become apparent.

Question:
Do you plan to hold a meeting with the related cabinet members?

Minister:
On the deployment of the Osprey?

Question:
Yes.

Minister:
With regard to the Osprey, the related Ministers are continually meeting to conduct various consultations and handlings, receive reports on the discussions with the U.S. side, then confirming this and thinking of the next measures to implement. This is something we have been doing up to now, and I think it will be continue to be done on a frequent basis. The related cabinet member meeting does not necessarily involve a strict set of members. Various people may come in depending on the topic and details, but it can be said that this is constantly being held.

Question:
Can we assume that you made the report in the informal cabinet meeting, rather than the cabinet meeting?

Minister:
Yes, in the informal cabinet meeting, or after the cabinet meeting. That is correct.

Question:
Regarding this deployment plan for the Osprey, the Governor of Hiroshima prefecture has also voiced his request for the retraction of the plan. How do you receive this?

Minister:
I have yet to receive what kind of opinion that would be. Do you mean he sent something?

Question:
Yesterday, regarding opposition to deployment, the Governor mentioned that he was "opposed to deployment," and I think he will be sending a written request soon not to conduct deployment.

Minister:
You mean that a written request will be arriving? I see. I would like to give an answer after I have seen this written request.

(End)