This is the annual event the Stimson Center hosts. To listen to here in washington. This year i am extremely honored to have these leaders. Have been my mentors and i respect them deeply. They have taught me 70 things over the years and that time that i have known them. Im very happy that they agreed to come to washington and talk to us this morning. You all have a bio, their detailed bio in the program in your seat. I will save you from a lengthy introduction. Very quickly to my immediate left is general transport next to him is admiral and lieutenant general. They are all retired but demonstrate the importance of a joint operations on the forces. We will listen to what they have in mind about japans defense posture. Before we start i am late in introducing myself. I yuki tatsumi. I am the Japan Program director. This could not have happened without a lot of the sponsors and supporters of the Japan Program. I would very much like to thank all of the Japan Program supporters at this location. You can see the list of supporters at the back of the brochure. Hopefully, this supportive circle of corporation will grow over the years. A couple of administrative announcements before we start the program. First of all, it youll, some of you have picked up a transition headset. If you have not done so if you need one, there rent a side of the room. Channel 2 is english and channel 10 is japanese. Obviously, the speakers will speak in japanese so you will probably need, most of you will probably need a headset and channel number two. If you have not done so, please do so at this time while i am stretching my time making these announcements. And you also noticed that you will see a note card and a pen or pencil in your seat to conduct the q a session more efficiently. I usually do this only for this event but as you look at the speakers, if a question pops up in your head please write them down. Staff will go through the aisles to collect the card from you and give them to me. Then i will try to consolidate the similar questions working together so that we have more time for questions to the speakers. Finally, there is a headset they just picked up when you leave this room, please leave it in your seat. We will get charged for any lost equipment. It is very important. They are expensive so please help us. This is how we are going to do, first half hour or 45 minutes i will post them with a couple of questions and asked responses. After i go through those questions we are open at the floor to your questions and their feedback. With that, i will go ahead and start with the first question. The first question to each one of you, since the Prime Minister came into the office he promoted the concept of corrective contribution to peace. He also pursued the peace and security legislation under his watch. The japanese government had reinterpreted the constitutional interpretation of the japan can exercise the right of collective defense or not. From outside, particularly here in washington, it looks to us like that there are great changes that are happening. On the legal foundations, and policy orientation and how it japan engages with the International Community in the area of International Security in particular. And how does that look to you . Do you feel that japan should reorient in a very different way from that it has been doing so in the last seven years . The way that it engages with the world and in the realm of Security Policy . Ill start with you general and then i will go down the aisle. Good morning everyone. Before i answer this question, there are two things that i would like to say on behalf of myself and my colleagues. The first is that recently there has been to marine disasters near japan for john mccain in the fitzgerald had accidents close to our country. And as a result, 17 sailors perished. And every i would like to express my condolences. Their wonderful contribution has helped to maintain peace in our region and has also helped to bolster our National Security. So i would like to once again, express my thanks to the United States for its work and also to express my condolences for these irreplaceable lives that were lost. That is the first thing i want to say. The second is, the country have been supporting us for a number of years. And so it is wonderful that we have the opportunity to spend time with you today, the three of us are graduates of the National Defense academy and we have had long relationship with ms. Yuki tatsumi. And the center played a large contribution in allowing us to have a direct talk and exchanges of views and i would like to once again, express my thanks to ms. Yuki tatsumi for everything she has done. As far as the question that we were just asked, my thought is that the leadership of the Prime Minister has really helped to change our posture through legal measures and the idea of a peaceful contribution, proactive contribution to peace. Those of us who have served in the forces feel that our constitution is something that of course, we need to protect. And it is something of what we can do but it is important for us to pursue proactive contribution to peace and also like we have had a new interpretation of our constitution allows us to change our stance and what it is that we can do. In other words it has been a change in security, legislation. Further, as far as what we can do, we have been able as a result of some changes brought about the administration to do more to support the United States. So we are able to do things that we were not able to do until now because of the checks placed by the contribution. Further, japan with article 9 of the constitution was not allowed to use force and some people misunderstand and think that we know will be using force but that is not the case. The constitution has not changed. We will not use force outside of japan. There is no change in our stance. So there hasnt been much change in the constitution in the room for operation but some people also think why is it that there is so much discussion in japan and what i can tell you is that our Public Sentiments are still not completely mature i think. We do not know exactly how it is that we should act. How it is that we should be on the international stage. And what it is that we should do to maintain peace. Should we do something outside of japan to try to maintain global peace . I think that we change, the change in legislation has allowed us now to play a larger role then we could up until now. The media in japan wants to try to lead people in thinking that there will be a change in our constitution but it will be a dangerous path from here on. But that is not the case. We have not had really an adult conversation in japan yet about this. So i think that we have had a couple of steps forward as a result of the administration and i think that it is one thing i would like to have you understand. As for, i am concerned i am a fellow of the navy and up until now i have been in a position where i have had to keep from criticizing the United States but now i am an academic i have a way to express myself fully. As far as the question that was asked about a 10 National Security policies where this is changed or not. I think that the and the Coalition Partners have, it looks as though they had changed their stance but if you look at the different angle, what you can see is that things have not changed drastically. It is just that during the Democratic Party, there was not much progress in terms of our legislation relating to a National Security. Basically i think what has happened is that there has been a little bit of a change such that we are able to apply our security legislation, policies in a different way. With three years over the Democratic Party and japans rule there are a number of Different Things that happened that i do not think that the dpj was allowed to respond to. The first that the government releases the captain of a chinese fishing vessel that caused an accident near our lands. The other thing is the east, great japan earthquake and the Nuclear Incident at fukushima. I do not think the government responded effectively. And so, this basically set the stage for a change in government. How is it that japan will change its stance on Security Issues . One thing, if you look at the guidelines, it is easy to understand the guideline itself was published in 1978. And it set out to be a roadmap to guidelines cooperating with the United States under the alliance and in 1997 this was revised and then it was up until 1994 there was the First Nuclear crisis in the Korean Peninsula and so there was a discussion about what it is that we should do to support the United States in the case of a contingency or a crisis around us. So the guideline was revised with that in mind. In 2005, there was another revision of the guideline and in 2015 rather, it was revised after the earthquake and tidal wave after fukushima. So there was an idea about not just crisis and our environment around us but also what we can do to respond to domestic issues. This led to a discussion of joint, more joint planning. From here on out, how is it that japan should be involved in its National Security and what sort of policies should it pursue . One thing i think that we need to do is to continue to apply our policies as we have in the past. One thing i can say is that in 2015 the revision of the guideline i think that will probably walk the resides this is whats happening in north Korea Possible in the future, japan or north korea might have missiles, might be able to have Nuclear Weapons. That sort of thinking did not exist when the guidelines were revised. And so, there is a question of whether the revision, the most recent revision still is and align with the times are not. And so i think that this is something that we are going to need to think about. I think there are three points to consider in this regard. The first is the Forward Deployed forces of the United States. Can the United States and japan have interoperable planning or not . And can they fight interactively. And with north korean missiles, we need to have a 24 hour operations that will allow us to respond to any crisis that might emanate from the Korean Peninsula and we need to look at what we can do to cooperate more in a three party type of situation with south korea. What it is that we can do together with not only as japan but also us, japan and korea. Another thing i should talk about is that there is a limit to what Forward Deployed forces of the United States can do. Those countries should Work Together. How we maintain a presence in western pacific at the incorporation is really needed in that regard. As aforementioned, around the Korean Peninsula longterm, the posture needs to be pushed from that perspective. It is of course japan must enforce this so i think it is very important to be deployed. And third, in order to reduce us burden, japanese engagement in the region, we need to revise our posture once again. The burden which is currently owned by the United States in order to reduce that, we should take more initiative in order to contribute to the peace and stability of the region. There is a good possibility. I think we should discuss this, the us forces in order to have a better coordination between japan and United States. I think that would be the new way for japans engagement in this region. Thank you very much for this opportunity. Up for two years in washington d. C. I was a Research Fellow in dc. And for two years i was involved in the purchase to think about Foreign Policy and from different i was invited to attend a symposium and i mostly turned down and i returned to japan and then i got temptation from the sun and i could not tell not request them. And for me before answering her question, very briefly i would like to talk about some forces and the United States and how the alliance each of the two countries should work. In 1954 the agency was established. And in 1950 the one year before the korean war, it was, it started as a result of the police force and two years before the american started. But the selfDefense Forces of 73 years ago in 1954, 63 years ago . No, it was started after that, there is a Good Development but if i may summarize briefly, during the cold war era, and in 1989, there was a collapse of the berlin wall, even after that there were Deployment Forces in order to keep their presence including logistical activities making a great effort. In order to put emphasis in other areas. And both maritime and the air, surveillance activities have decreased. Together with the us members, we had been fighting together. I would like to emphasize that. And after the terror and also for other american bases in japan. We have been protecting those bases together. We already explained by two speakers, there has been some sign of changes. We really need to adjust our roles. The security legislation, during peace time i think we all incorporated into what we can do during the peace time and that legislation. Emergency or contingency order for playing the roles more appropriately there are more things to be done. So we have come to the point where we really think about those points more seriously. Thank you. I think that is a great segue into the second question i have for all of you. We talked about how japan had responded and adjusted to the changes in International Security environment. Which resulted in the internal changes that you all laid out. In that context, as i just said, and as lt. Gen. Masayuki hironaka pointed out, we need to really rethink about how to posture themselves to respond to such changes. What they kind of defense posture should be, the next 10, 15 or 20 years. I will start again from you general and go down perhaps. Thank you very much. The everchanging environment that was mentioned, in order to show the concept together. Four years of the government, there was a cabinet decision for the National DefenseProgram Guideline here that is a program for the next 10 years. When we think about the changing environment, north korea, china and russia are very important factors to take into consideration. Seven or eight years ago, we thought that north korea was the crisis there. And that china is the crisis in the near future. Russia was the crisis in the distant future. That was our interpretation seven or eight years ago. But after the last four or five years i think there has been some change in our perception. And north korea, this is exactly imminent threat. And the china i think the threat for the near future and russia, watch closely for it will be very dangerous. I think those are the changes of perception about the crisis. And four years ago under those circumstances, in order to respond to the change of the crisis, the integrated the posture. So in other words, the southwestern islands which was the vacuum that is from the south to taiwan and the china quoted the first island change from okinawa to the southwestern islands and the taiwan in philippines. That is the first island chain. And the distance in this region, there deployed in the area coming to taiwan. There is no other force. So there was a vacuum of the forces. In this region and first that vacuum historically when you consider china over the 50 or 100 years, china has been building up their strength and you can see in the china seas. We really have to go the belcourt structure for the concept from 4 to 5 years. The vacuum area of the southwestern islands, they decided to build up and strengthen the power. And there are three things. The first is we have when there is any emergency or contingency here, new force will be injected and the force will be injected in order to eliminate the vacuum in the southwestern area in order to strengthen the deterrent. So those are the two ways to increase the deterrence. And the third stage, some island is taken. We have to retake it. So the new force for that purpose is created. So those are the phases in order to avoid and fill the gap of the vacuum of the southwestern islands in order to build up the defense peers of that program started four years ago and where in the fourth year so we are still in the this program has been underway steadily. In japan we are attempting to maintain this. There are those in the neighborhood trying to change the status quo. But in order to keep the status quo, what is it that we need to do . The maritime selfDefense Forces are thinking about what japan needs to be able to do in order to maintain it. As far as the maritime selfdefense concern i would like to say that we want to have two kinds of deterrence. One is deterred by punishment and the other is by denial. And these two kinds of deterrence would allow us to maintain the status quo. Another thing is that india and the in order to maintain the status quo here we need to have sufficient forces. The third is to have a strong Usjapan Alliance and we, the sel