Voices for Japan Program. This is an annual event that Japan Program house to inviteth strategic thinkers in japan we often dont get to listen to washington. This year, honor to have the leaders. They have been my mentors come to respect them deeply. They taught me some things over the years the ten or 15 years i have been on the. Very happy they greet to come to washington and talk to us this morning. You all have a bio in the program at your seat. So i will save you the introduction. But for a quickly to my left, is general in the to him is an admirable in the far and as a lieutenant. Obviously all retired, but there from the three services toreti demonstrate the importance of a joint operation. We will listen to what they have in mind about the posture. Before start on late in introducing myself. Im a director of Japan Program simpson. N. This annual event could not happen without sponsors and supporters of the Japan Program so i would 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 corporation will grow over the years. A couple of announcements before we start the program. We start first some of you picked up this headset, if you havent done so when you need one theres some outside the room. Channel two is english and channel ten is japanese. Is the speakers will speak in japanese so youll most of you will probably need a headset. So, if you havent done so please do so at the time will im stretching my time making these announcements. You also notice that there is a no card or pen or pencil in your scene to conduct the q a session. I only did this for this event. As you listen to the speaker and questions for poppa please read them down. Staff will go through the aisle to collect the card and give them to me. Give the i will try to consolidate similar questions grouped together so you more time for questions for the speakers. Finally, the headset they just picked up, when you leave the room please leave it in your seat. We will get charged for any los equipment. The centerpieces are expensive so please help us. This is how were going to do first half an hour 45 minutes i will have a couple questions and ask your responses. After i go through the questions will open the floor to your questions and feedback. With that, will start with the question. The first question to each one of you, since the Prime Minister came into the office he promotee the concept of contribution for peace. He push the peace and security legislation and under his watch japanese government hadpanese g reinterpreted the constitutional interpretation of whether japan can exercise the right of the defense or not. So from outside, particularly here in washington looks to us like their great changes that are happening. On the legal foundations and policy orientations. In the way of how japan engages with the International Community in the area of internationalatia security. And how does that look to you . To feel that japan should reorient in a different way from what it has been doing in the last seven years . The way it engages in the world . Ill start from the general and then go down the aisle. Morning before a answer the question there two things i like to say on behalf of myself andtw my colleagues. First basically there has been to many disasters near japan, the john mccain a fixed euro had accidents close to our country. As a result, 17 sailors perished. They are wonderful contribution has helped to maintain peace in our region and help to bolster National Security. I would like to once again expect extend my thanks to the United States and for the lives that were lost. Thats the first thing i would say. The second is, some have been supporting us for a number of years in japan as a whole. Its wonderful we had the opportunity to spend time with you today. We are graduates of the academyy and we have had long relationship with and simpson has played a large contribution to allowing us to have direct talks and exchanges of views. I would like to express myor thanks is for is the question we just asked, my thought is that the Prime Minister has helped change and to have a peaceful thntribution. And the forces feel like our constitution is something that of course we need to protect something that we can do but it is important for us to pursue it weve had new interpretation of our constitution to change our stance as far as those that we can do, we need to do more to support the United States, so we can do things there were not able to do up until now becauseb of the space of the contribution. Further, japan with its articlee nine of the constitution was not allowed to use force. Some people misunderstand and think we will be using force but thats not the case. The constitution hasnt changed. We will not use force outside of japan. So there hasnt been much ancient our constitution and room for operation. The people wonder why theres so much discussion in japan. What i can tell you is that the public sentiment are still not mature. We dont how does that we should act. How we should be on the international stage. And what should we do to maintain peace. Should we do something outsideld japan to maintain global peace . Think the change in security legislation will allow us to play a larger role up until now. Some of the median japan wants to try to the people in thinking that there will be a change in our constitution, it will be a dangerous path, but thats not the case. We have not had really an adult conversation in japan about this. Weve had some steps were as a result of the abbe administration. I think that something i wouldld like you to understand. Is for as im concerned, im the National Fellow of the navy. And up until now ive been in a position where had to keep from criticizing the United States come up and have a high am academic, i do have more leeway to express myself fully. As for is the question that was asked about Japans NationalSecurity Policy and mother does change should not, i think the and the Coalition Partners have looked at those and changed but if you look from a different angle, what you can see is its not change drastically. Just during the Democratic Party of japan the government there wasnt much progress in termsth several legislation, relating to National Security. Basically what is happened iss theres been change such that were able to apply our security legislation policy in a different way. With three years over the Democratic Party of japans role theres a number of things that happen and i dont think they were able to respond effectively to different things. One thing i can point to is the fact that the government released the captain of the chinese fishing vessel that landed an accident near land. The other thing is that you screw japan earthquake the nuclear impact. This b so, this basically set the stage for a change in government. How is it japan will change . Is stance on security issues. One thing is if you look at the diamond its easy to understand the guideline published in 1978 for the first time. It was a roadmap for the guidelines for cooperated with United States under alliance. In and seven this was revised in 1994 theres the First Nuclear crisis in the korean peninsula. There was a discussion about what it is we should do to support the United States in the was of a contingency around us. The guideline was revised with that in mind. In 2005 another revision of the. In 2015 this was revised after the earthquake and tidal wave. So there was 90 about not just a crisis in our environment around us is what we can do to respond to domestic issues. This led to discussion of more joint planning. F from here out, how was it that japan should be involved in its National Security and what a policies should pursue . One thing we need to do is continue to apply our policies as we have in the past. One thing i can say is in 2015 the revision of the guideline, think that will revise and north korea and 2000 rather thats in the future japan and north korea might have missiles in might have nuclear weapons. To ha that thinking to not exist when the guidelines were revise. Theres a question about whether the most recent revision is in line with the times are not. I think its something we will need to think about. Ing to i think there are three points to consider in the regard. The first the forward to floyd forces of the United States, can the United States and japan have interoperable planning or not . With north korean missile, we need to have a 24 hour operation that will allow us to respond to the crisis that might come from the peninsula. We need to look at what we can do to cooperate more in the three party type situation with south korea. So what we can do together not only with usjapan but usjapan and north korea. The other thing is there is a limit to what the floyd forces of the United States can do to make and also south korea those countries should Work Together by the source of the United States and how we maintain the presents. I think cooperation is needed. As i mentioned around the korean peninsula, needs to be reinforced. From the perspective it is japan must reinforce and so i think its very important to be deployed. Thirdly, in order to reduce u. S. Burden japanese engagement in the region would need to look at our game. Curre the burden which is currently with United States in order to reduce the we should take more initiative in order to contribute to the peace of then. Region. Theres a good possibility. Er i think we should discuss this with u. S. Forces to have a better coordination between japan and United States. I think that would be a good way thr japan to engage in thehe region. Thank you. Ive been for two years in washington, d. C. Was in d. C. And for two years i was involvei in the project to think about the Foreign Policy and from different think tanks of washington, d. C. Was invited to attend the symposium. I mostly turned down. I returned to japan and that i got invitation so course i cannot turn down that request. Thank you for this wonderful opportunity to before answering the question. Briefly like to talk about the United States and how the alliance between the two countries should work. In 1954 the Defense Agency was established. The force in 1950 the one year before the korean war started with the police force in the two years before the maritimeed. Started. Seventythree years ago 1954 the forces, 63 years . No, after that there is development of spf. But if i may summarize briefly during the cold war era in a 1989 the collapse of the berlin were clubs. After the there is the u. S. Courses in order to keep their persons including logistical specifically the maritime and air. When the Ground Forces in order to focus on the Northern Area the presence increase. Also both maritime in the air is surveillance that is increase. Together with the u. S. Members we have been fighting together. And after the terror and also for other measures the american bases in japan we have been protecting those spaces together. And there has been some sign of changes in their come to the point where we really need to adjust our roles. In 2015 the security legislation was formulated. During peacetime. O what w i think we all incorporated into what we can do in the peacetime. Emergency contingency order to play the roles and theres more things to be done. We have come to the point where we think about those points more seriously. Thank you. I think thats a good segue. We talked about how japan how responded and adjusted to thee changes. Resulted in the internal changes. That you laid out. And that context, as a general pointed out, if they are trying to rethink about how to posture themselves to respond to such changes, what kind of defense posture should they force and look for, looking over the next ten to 15 years . Thank you very much. That w is a changing environment. The order to ensure the concept four years ago as the government there is a cabinet decision that the National DefenseProgram Guideline for the next ten years. When we think about the changi changing, north korea, china, and russia are important factors to take into consideration. Eight years ago north korea was the crisis there. China is the crisis in the near future. Ar russia was the crisis, this interpretation eight years ago. Over the last for five years there has been some change in our perception. In the north korea this is exactly what they needed. A i thn in china the threat for the near future. And russia, unless you watch closely you will be very dangerous. I think it changes the perception of the crisis. For years ago in order to respond to the change or the tha crisis they integrated it defense posture. In other words, the southwestern islands which was a vacuum that is, the south of to taiwan,iw and the china called it the first island chain from oak now to that Southwest Islands that is the first island chain. And there is 2500 the fourth were deployed in the area coming to taiwan. There was a vacuum of the forces when this region. First that vacuum when you consider trying to over the 50 years china has been building up their strength and you can see the south china sea. Without creating the vacuum or the force we really have to build up our structure. 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 but is in order to keep the status quo what do we need to do is that what japan needs . And as far as maritime selfdefense i would say that we want to have to do tines of kinds of deterrence in these two kinds allow us to maintain. Also with india in order to maintain the status quo to have sufficient forces. And third from the u. S. Japan alignment selfdefense forces must door their part. People think that there are two types one is tactical one a strategic also has a Nuclear Deterrent and to maintain deterrence with conventional weapons so to do that japan needs to strengthen the forces and also needs to maintain and strengthen its deterrence through denial. I and as was said earlier about north korea in the change of situation there so what can we do . Strengthen our cooperation with United States in our region. Is t sova reactive verses proactive deterrent so open to all now and thats is this something has happened to have the ability to respond. In with that Antisubmarine Warfare and and to be reactive but the proactive defense with that graze the operation and that gravestone also to have situation already is and also to gain the advantagein if hostilities were to break out. So that is something that we need to enhance. Translator i will talk about u. S. Air defenses the u. S. Air force 1947 we only had a airforce since 1954 and the Imperial Army did have components that is the first time to have an air thrce in japan. 1945 it was the end of World War Two in the end of the air force. We only had that for a short period of time. So 35 years since the air force was set up so to have an organization we need to keep in mind that so whatki sort of rolled should they have . Basically, it is to support operations on the ground. There are many different discussions about this and ideas, perhaps the air forcece should be more independent with their own when the or operations. Ed durin and this was tried during the persian gulf war. To get so that does give a Historical Perspective because the we are of using perspective what the airforce should do. Selfdef and the air selfdefense forces what do we need to do . As far as the southwest asian islands to enhance our deterrence the selfdefense forces especially that deterrent defect with that idea to have Strategic Nuclear weapons is not something were considering now but we are charged with protecting the country so how is it we can with conventional weapons . So this is what is really affecting me. If they can start collecting the cards if they are ready to go please wave to these two people. To figure out what type of defense posture is appropriate. To provide the National Defence. But what are the challenges that use the internal or external . And for the of first question i will flip the order and we have had our thinking then the tactics than the technology but we have learned a lot c from the United States in regard but we have to build up our forces there and from here are now often off the day and that has pulled it out. Yes, yes it has in even the stuff that we need to think about. But in those abstract terms unfortunately