JCP Shii expresses firm opposition to military response in dealing with North Korean nuclear issue

Japan Press Service Co., Ltd. is the only news agency providing information of progressive, democratic movements in Japan

JCP Shii expresses firm opposition to military response in dealing with North Korean nuclear issue

Japanese Communist Party Chair Shii Kazuo on an Asahi Newstar satellite TV program aired on October 17 expressed his view on the North Korean nuclear issue as follows:

UNSC resolution calls for peaceful solution via diplomacy
based on UN Charter Article 41

Q: What is the JCP stance on the North Korean nuclear test?

Shii: The JCP issued a statement in strong protest against the test. At the same time, the JCP has been calling on the international community to adhere to the two principles that are the unity of the international community and the quest for a peaceful diplomatic solution.

The United Nations Security Council unanimously adopted a resolution calling for a peaceful and diplomatic solution by nonmilitary measures based on Article 41 of Chapter Seven of the U.N. Charter.

We welcome this resolution and will work for its implementation. The JCP will strongly urge the North Korean government to swiftly accept the UNSC resolution.

Q: Why do you think North Korea resorted to such an uncompromising step?

Shii: I think North Korea believes that possessing nuclear weapons will enhance its security. North Korea has been repeatedly asserting that maintaining a powerful military capability and deterrence constitute the basis of its national security.

However, the reality is that this is a dangerous path for the national security of North Korea.

The problem regarding the North Korean national security is not the lack of a strong military, but a lack of normal and stable relationships with neighboring countries due to its lawless international activities. North Korea must correct this underlying problem.

Q: The UNSC resolution refers to Chapter Seven and Article 41, but Chapter Seven includes military measures based on Article 42. Isn't it fair to say that the UNSC resolution is a product of compromise?

Shii: The resolution states, "taking measures under Article 41" and calls for a diplomatic resolution through "the efforts by all States concerned to intensify their diplomatic efforts, to refrain from any actions that might aggravate tension."

The resolution urges North Korea to come back to the framework for a diplomatic solution by immediately returning to the Six-Party Talks without preconditions. This resolution, therefore, is not a product of a compromise between Article 41 and 42, but firmly based on Article 41.

Invoking Law on Measures to Deal with Situations in Areas
Surrounding Japan runs counter to UNSC resolution

Q: Even under Article 41, economic sanctions include inspections of ships and their cargo.

Shii: Concerning such measures, the resolution uses very restrained wording.

What is indeed grave is that in the wake of the adoption of the resolution, Foreign Minister Aso Taro and other government officials as well as LDP lawmakers began to openly call for invoking the Law on Measures to Deal with Situations in Areas Surrounding Japan.

This law provides a framework enabling the Self-Defense Forces to give military cooperation to the U.S. forces outside of Japan. The law allows the SDF to not only conduct ship inspections but also provide logistic support for U.S. forces carrying out combat actions. Thus, this is a framework of military cooperation.

It is totally wrong to call for this law to be invoked using the UNSC resolution as a pretext.

The resolution calls for a solution of the issue by non-military measures or "measures not involving the use of armed force" as prescribed in Article 41.

Therefore, invoking the Law on Measures to Deal with Situations in Areas Surrounding Japan, which is to provide military cooperation, runs counter to the UNSC resolution. The government must not do this.

The resolution calls for governments to "refrain from any actions that might aggravate tensions." I want to emphasize that Japan must strictly refrain from sending any message that might increase tensions.

Q: North Korea has announced that it will take countermeasures against sanctions.

Shii: All nations must avoid taking measures that run counter to the unanimous resolution calling for a diplomatic and peaceful solution by non-military measures, leading to a dangerous situation through escalation of military confrontation.

What is needed for U.N. member states is to strictly implement the economic sanctions in accordance with the resolution, and make all-out diplomatic efforts to bring about a peaceful settlement.

Q: The U.N. resolution allows member states to conduct cargo inspections.

Shii: Yes it does, but it uses expressions such as "as necessary," "in accordance with their national authorities and legislation," and "consistent with international law." It also states that member states are "called upon," not obligated, to take such actions. Most importantly, the resolution was adopted within the framework of Article 41 of the U.N. Charter that provides for non-military measures.

I believe that it is against this U.N. resolution for Japan to jump into a military cooperation with the U.S. forces, invoke the law to deal with situations in areas surrounding Japan, and enact a new special legislation to take military measures.

Q: The current situation arises after the Six-Party Talks reached an impasse. Do you think the Six-Party Talks will resume?

Shii: Aiming at resuming the Six-Party Talks, the resolution provides the sanctions as a means to achieve this. The resolution regards the sanctions not as its purpose but as the means to motivate North Korea to abandon its nuclear weapons program as well as to bring it back to the diplomatic framework of the Six-Party Talks. Japan as well as the international community should seek such a breakthrough.

In addition to the Six-Party Talks, it is a matter of course that the resolution calls on member states to hold a wide range of bilateral consultations as part of the diplomatic efforts.

"Nuclear armament": outrageous remarks
for politicians of A-bombed nation

Q: In the wake of North Korea's nuclear test, there is an increasing concern over Japan's possible nuclear armament. While Prime Minister Abe Shinzo has stated that Japan will maintain the Three Non-Nuclear Principles, Liberal Democratic Party Policy Research Commission Chair Nakagawa Shoichi said that discussions on this question are necessary.

Shii: Mr. Nakagawa's remark does nothing but encourage discussions on nuclear armament as Japan's future option. It is outrageous and must not be condoned.

His remark has already been reported internationally, causing concerns and criticisms against Japan. He must take this seriously.

Today, the international community is trying to band together to persuade North Korea to abandon its nuclear weapons program. In this situation, Japan's move to discuss its possession of nuclear weapons would certainly undermine severely not only the UNSC resolution but Japan's moral grounds for calling on North Korea to abandon its nuclear weapons program.

As the only atomic bombed nation, Japan must maintain its Three Non-Nuclear Principles and play a major role for the global abolition of all nuclear weapons.

The root cause of the increase in the number of nuclear weapons possessing states lies in the system in which certain nations have been maintaining their nuclear weapons. Therefore, Japan must stand behind initiatives to eliminate all nuclear weapons on the earth.

It is indeed outrageous for the ruling party representative to call for discussions on Japan's nuclear armament in complete disregard of the role Japan should play. As a ruling party of the only A-bombed nation, they deserve censure.
- Akahata, October 18, 2006