To view articles in English only, click HERE. 日本語投稿のみを表示するにはここをクリック。点击此处观看中文稿件한국어 투고 Follow Twitter ツイッターは@PeacePhilosophy and Facebook ★投稿内に断り書きがない限り、当サイトの記事の転載は許可が必要です。このブログの右サイドバーにある Contact Us フォームで連絡ください。Re-posting from this blog requires permission unless otherwise specified. Please use the Contact Us form in the right side-bar to contact us.

Thursday, December 24, 2009

Clinton did NOT call in Japan's Ambassador Fujisaki. クリントンが藤崎大使を呼びだしたとういのは間違い。

Again, from the daily press briefing by U.S. Department of State Assistant Secretary Phillip Crowley, it is clear that U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton did NOT call in the Japanese Ambassador Fujisaki, as much of the Japanese media reported. Fujisaki came to see Clinton instead. アメリカ国務省は多くのメディアが報道しているような「クリントンが藤崎駐米大使を異例にも呼びだした」という事実はなかったと表明している。

http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/dpb/2009/dec/133952.htm

See the conversation between Crowley and Reporter, cited in green below.
クローリー国務次官補の記者会見(下記に緑で引用)を見て欲しい。

Phillip Crowley denied the report and said Fujisaki is the one who came to see Clinton. Anybody who has any sense about things would know that somebody like Clinton, who just had a conversation directly with Hatoyama in Copenhagen, has no reason to call in a Japanese bureaucrat to discuss this issue. She has better things to do with her time. クローリーによると、藤崎大使自身がクリントンに会いに来たのだという。コペンハーゲンで鳩山首相と直接会話したばかりのクリントン氏がどうしてわざわざ日本の官僚を呼びだす理由があるのか。クリントン氏はそこまで暇ではない。

The US repeatedly has expressed their understanding for Japan's need for more time.
We should not get fooled by the media frenzy over the Futenma Air Station relocation issue and their negative campaign against Hatoyama Administration.  米国は日本がもっと時間が必要だということに対する理解を繰り返し表明している。市民は、普天間問題についてのメディアの鳩山政権に対するネガティブキャンペーンにだまされてはいけない。

Satoko Norimatsu 乗松聡子

Here is from the press conference.

QUESTION: Do you have any readout of the Secretary’s meetings yesterday with the Japanese ambassador? I had heard she called him in to talk about Futenma.


MR. CROWLEY: The – I think the Japanese ambassador came by to see both Assistant Secretary Kurt Campbell, stopped by to see Secretary Clinton. During the course of the meeting, the ambassador gave us an indication that they needed more time to work through issues related to the basing agreement. We continue to believe that the current plan provides the best way forward, but we’ll continue our discussions with Japan on this issue.


QUESTION: You said that – “stopped by.” You wouldn’t describe him as being called in on a --


MR. CROWLEY: All right, let me --


QUESTION: -- day when the government was being closed and --


MR. CROWLEY: He was – I think – my – I mean, he – I don’t think he was called in. I think actually he came to see us.


Yes.


QUESTION: There were some reports in the Japanese press that the Secretary perhaps took issue with some comments that the prime minister had made in Copenhagen. He said something like she showed understanding, or basic understanding over the Futenma issue. Can you confirm?


MR. CROWLEY: I was with the Secretary in Copenhagen, and she had an encounter with the prime minister in the hallway as they were both moving to meetings. I think they also interacted during the course of a dinner there hosted by the Queen of Denmark. I don’t know, very specifically, what the nature of their discussions were. Obviously, this remains important to us and we will continue to work with the Japanese Government on these issues.


We continue to think that the realignment plan that currently exists is the best way in reducing the burden on Okinawa and – but maintaining our ability to defend Japan and to maintain security in the region. I think the message that Japan gave to us yesterday was just it’s going to take a little more time.


QUESTION: Thank you.


QUESTION: One more on Japan.


MR. CROWLEY: All right. We have some – we’re – go ahead.


QUESTION: Can I ask on North Korea? Has the U.S. suggested North Korea setting the liaison office in Pyongyang or diplomatic office? Has the U.S. suggested North Korea setting a diplomatic office in Pyongyang?


MR. CROWLEY: You had a briefing last week by Steve Bosworth. I’m not aware that this issue came up.


QUESTION: And one more question on North Korea.


MR. CROWLEY: Sure.


QUESTION: We know that U.S. has been in close consultation with South Korea and other countries to find a way to resume the Six-Party Talk. And South Korean official said today in Seoul that it’s very important to resume the Six-Party Talk before February. And if we fail to do that, the Six-Party Talk could be dead. So is – that timeframe is why you were talking with other countries to resume the talk? Is that the timeframe discussed now?


MR. CROWLEY: There have been a number of times where people declared the Six-Party process dead before. I think those claims of mortality have been premature. As Ambassador Bosworth told you last week, our message to North Korea during his recent visit to Pyongyang was very clear. We want to see North Korea return to the Six-Party process. We thought we had a constructive meeting, but we obviously await a formal indication from North Korea as to what it’s prepared to do.


QUESTION: But you haven’t gotten that indication yet from North Korea?


MR. CROWLEY: No.


QUESTION: Can I go to (inaudible)?


QUESTION: (Inaudible.) How do you make sure that the commitments made by these countries – four countries plus U.S.A. are adhered to?


MR. CROWLEY: I’m glad you asked that question. I mean, one of the significant issues when the Secretary arrived on Thursday morning and worked through these issues during the day on Thursday and the President on Friday was, in fact, to make sure that there was a significant verification aspect to the accord. And we think, at the end of the day, through some very intensive dialogue by the President and the Secretary with world leaders, that what emerged from Copenhagen, in fact, have – has the kind of transparency and mechanism so that, in fact, we can have access to data with – not in an intrusive way, but just so we’ll have sufficient transparency and access to data so that everyone can fairly evaluate whether countries are living up to their agreements.


QUESTION: Thank you.


QUESTION: There was a document discovered yesterday in Japan that seems to confirm a U.S. and Japanese agreement over nuclear weapons to be stationed in Japan, a secret pact. Are you aware of this document’s existence and --


MR. CROWLEY: I’ll take the question.


QUESTION: Okay.


QUESTION: (Inaudible.) P.J., I’m sorry. (Inaudible) question on Futenma. Do you think (inaudible) makes the decision on Futenma issue for the proper timeline for the U.S.?


MR. CROWLEY: As we’ve said many times, the Japanese have told us as late as yesterday that they need some additional time to work through these issues, and we will continue our discussions with them.


QUESTION: And also, (inaudible) the U.S.-Japan relationship?


MR. CROWLEY: I mean, Japan has a new government in place. We understand that transitions can be difficult. We’ve just gone through one of our own. Now, we will continue to work with Japan. And obviously, we have concerns potentially about the impact that this will have on the timeline for implementation of the existing plan, but we will continue to work very closely with Japan to help resolve the questions that it has.


Thank you.

No comments:

Post a Comment