N-ship comments not new, says Reischauer

Press, 20 May 1981, Page 9

N-ship comments not new, says Reischauer

NZPA-Reuter Cambridge, Massachusetts Edwin Reischauer,. former United States Ambassador to Japan, 5 said yesterday there was nothing new in his comments that nuclear-armed United States Navy vessels regularly visited Japan, and chided Japanese officials for side-stepping' the issue over the years. “It’s been my feeling that the responsible Japanese Government officials were aware of the-situation,” Mr .Reischauer said.“In Japan this is a very hot political issue so Government officials have been careful, to say very little about it.” Mr Reischauer, now a history professor at Harvard University, has “been; quoted by several Japanese newspapers as saying the two nations agreed to such visits by nuclear-armed . warships in 1960. American officials, citing a policy of refusing to discuss the location of America’s nuclear weapons, -dec? lined comment. Japan’s Constitution .and treaties prohibit the “introduction” of nuclear weapons onto Japanese,territory and 'demand; consultation before the movement of any American forcesin Japan. /But;.Mr Reischauer cited . uieambiguity of the term “introduction”’ and, the equivalent ..Japanese, word “mochikome” as part .of the problem. - Ariierican ■ officials interpreted the -agreement to mean- the United . States would not base or stockpile nuclear weapons soil. .. Japanese' offieials,-.he said, turned aside questiofHhabppt' -nuclear policy by .saying they* trusted the United States to

, keep their part of the bar- » gain. “That made us seem to ■ be the ones not living up to > the agreement.” s' He had talked to the then ■ Foreign Minister, Masayoshi 1 Ohira, to clarify the United s States position. He said Mr I Ohira, who later became r -Prime Minister, remained r vague- on the; .issue when questioned about it by -other i politicians. s Mr Reischauer’s comments s came after the resignation of • the Japanese Foreign Minis- *■ ter, Masayoshi Ito, in; a 7 dispute over Japan’s defence • policy. i . The resignation climaxed a s. split in Japan’s ruling Liberal Democratic Party over ; a coriimunique; that referred I, *to the United StatesI s Japanese relationship as an • “alliance,” prompting criticism in Japan that the Prime r (Mr Zenko Suzuki) i had - expanded . Japan’s de- ■ fence commitments under i Ariierican pressure. Mr Reischauer said he was “quite surprised” by the response to his. comments, I which he said;were not new./ • “Fye spoken about 'this rind i Written about it in the past. I That’s why I find it so i surprising that this has gen-, • erated so much interest.”. - ' The . Japanese reluctance .to take up a more active role j i * in. defence “bewildering”; to the) American public. 1 “They cannot understand Why their ally isn’t more co- - ; operative," he said. i - The • mass circulation.- ; “Mainichi Shimbun” quoted ■ xMr Reischauer as saying that '. „ the Japanese Government ; ‘ “should simptyrecognise this , fact" 'of .huplear-armed Airi- ; erican through • it? watrs and -,yisitirig its 1 ports. - . %,