“I do not think the method of secondary sanctions, which implies extraterritorial application of American rules, is fair,” Ambassador Tamaki Tsukada said in an exclusive interview with IRNA.
He argued that each company should be able to decide and choose which country to do business with and it should not be dictated by any third party or government.
“That is the general principle, of course, and from that perspective, I personally am not in favor of the method of secondary sanctions,” he added.
The following is the full transcript of the interview:
Mr. Ambassador, thank you very much for accepting our request for the interview. Your presence in Iran coincides with the 100 years of relations between the two countries. During your one-year stay in Iran, you have had enormous meetings with Iranian officials. What is the current state of Iran-Japan relations and what obstacles exist in the development of the relations between the two countries?
The 100th anniversary of our relationship will arrive in almost 3 years and we are working hard to make this year, 2029 a very big year. I would characterize the current Japan-Iran relationship as very warm and trusting relationship. Although both sides know very well that the current level of economic relationship does not match the potential of the relationship that we deserve but I would still consider this a very stable and promising relationship, given the very strong affection that the people of both countries have towards each other and also the various exchanges that we maintain at all levels including cultural, academic, scientific and all the non-economic areas. I think this is important. We enjoy a sustainable and enduring relationship. No animosity, no negative memories exist between our two countries. Both countries have very high respect for each other. We acknowledge the long civilizational context that we have enjoyed over the past millennia.
There are good memories between Iranian families about Japan, including the TV series about Lady Oshin. When they hear about Japan, the first thing that comes to their mind is that character. Also, there are many Japanese goods that Iranians have used during years. When they want to speak about good quality, they would speak about Japanese goods. But as you mentioned the economic cooperation between the two countries is not as much as it should be. What is the obstacle and how can that be solved?
The biggest reason for that is that Iran is now under international sanctions. Especially the secondary sanctions which the United States is imposing on third countries including Japan, is a huge obstacle. This means that if a Japanese company entered into a business relationship with its Iranian counterpart there is a risk of that company being punished or penalized by the US. Of course, private companies as economic actors need to make money and keeping their bottom line is important for them. Therefore, naturally they would try to avoid risk. As you know, Japanese companies have huge business stake in the American market and other markets all over the world and they conduct their business mainly in US dollars. Government of Japan cannot dictate or force Japanese companies to do something which will not be in their business interest.
Even if you do, they're not able to do transaction with Iranian companies because of the sanctions. It's not something that the Japanese government decides. It’s something that’s somehow impossible to do. Do you see it fair for a third-party country to get involved in the relations of another two countries, for example if Iran and Japan are willing to trade but another country decides for them not to trade with each other, is that fair?
I do not think the method of secondary sanction is fair which implies extraterritorial application of American rules. Each company has its own right to decide and choose which country to do business with and it should not be dictated by any third party or government. That is the general principle of course, and from that perspective, I personally am not in favor of the method of secondary sanctions.
Ok, thank you very much for your answer. Recently several countries have been named as meditators between Iran and United States, one of these countries is Japan. Are you aware of any activities that the Japanese government or even the embassy has been involved in that issue?
I would refrain from commenting on any internal discussion that we have with the Iranian government. I can say that we have very high-level contacts on a regular basis with our counterparts in the Iranian government. But as far as your question is concerned, I have nothing to comment about. We enjoy a very high level of trust from the Iranian government and we are privileged to enjoy that status. I am very fortunate to have that foundation to serve as Ambassador in Iran.
Many believe that the relations between Iran and Japan highly depends on what the United States think about this relation. Is that realistic, and how effective is the US decision on expansion of relations between the two countries and which areas would it affect?
The way you fashion the question is not conducive to how I would like to describe the relationship Japan enjoys with Iran. I would like to stress again that we have a very high level of trust in each other and on that basis we conduct various consultations and meetings at all levels; recently our Deputy foreign minister visited Tehran for the 32nd political consultations with his counterpart Dr Takhteravanchi. I haven't counted the numbers myself but I'm pretty sure that Iran is one of the top countries that Japan has bilateral deputy foreign ministerial level political dialogues with which counts so many numbers of consultations in the past. We also have regular dialogues at the director-general level on non-proliferation and disarmament. We are also planning to hold our next human rights dialogue. We also have regular consultations on consular, economic cooperation and cultural affairs. I think Japan is one of the few countries which Iran maintains such extensive degree of Government-to-Government consultations, so I think that is one manifestation of the depth of the relationship we enjoy.
There is a big list of things that you have done in the past year that you came to Iran; one of them is the meeting with the vice president of the environmental organization of Iran about several lakes in Iran, and there is a fund that Japan has offered Iran, 690 million Yen for this matter. What is this project and why Japan is doing this?
This is a joint project between Iran, Japan and the United Nations UNDP and FAO to resuscitate Lake Urmia. Because of climate change and other reasons, the water level of Lake Urmia has been declining over the decades and we wanted to support the Iranian efforts to reverse this trend. This cooperation started almost a decade ago in 2014 and the documents that I signed last month is the extension of this decade-long cooperation that we have with Iran, with the participation of international organizations. The basic idea is to continue what we are doing now, which is to analyse why the water level is declining and to provide a solution to that question. We have already identified a number of reasons. One is the over-pumping of the water by the surrounding community for agricultural purposes. Of course, there are many other reasons but the key was the overuse of water. So how should we address this? There are many ways, for example by introducing more efficient irrigation or to encourage the people to move away from the traditional to a more modern method of irrigation or even to move away from agriculture altogether and to consider other means of income.
But the question is, why is Japan doing this and why is it interested to get involved in such project?
Because water resource management is a cross-border issue, it is an international question and therefore it is in the interest of Japan to be actively involved in this question. Water scarcity occurs in many places across the globe and we have a huge stock of experience that we can share with other countries on water resource management. If we can apply our success model in Iran to other countries it would contribute to the recovery of the global balance.
In your meetings with Iranian officials there was also talks about the air pollution in Iran. In what areas are you going to help the Iranians in the air pollution, for example the pollution in Tehran, is that one of the issues?
It is an ongoing cooperation. We started this from 2018 and our development agency JICA has been sending Japanese experts. We have also signed a contract to deliver equipment and machines to analyze and measure the air pollution to provide the prescription. However, in recent years, unfortunately we have been confronting sabotage from the Iranian government to move forward. This is not only unfortunate but a surprise for us that JICA, which has been a non-political agency and has been doing so much good to Iran has been denied access to its counterparts. Due to inability of JICA to obtain access to the relevant authorities we cannot properly move forward to address the air pollution needs. We hope that the process will be unblocked as soon as possible so that our corporation can resume.
And you have no idea what the reason is.
No, we have no idea.
You also had a meeting with the Minister of Agriculture. What decisions took place in that meeting and what are the cooperation between the two countries that can take place?
The meeting with the agricultural minister Mr. Gholam Reza Nouri Ghezeljeh was very positive and very forward-leaning and we very much look forward to follow up what we have discussed in there. Especially the list of projects we have been discussing with the agricultural minister to advance the Iranian agriculture industry. For the past several years we have been sending Japanese experts to Iran to do the groundwork for this project, but again these project proposals have been suspended by the government authorities. We are requesting the agriculture ministry to find a way out. Development of the water basin along the river Sefid Roud is a project that was adopted several years ago but this is also not advancing for the same reason. We would like to find a breakthrough as soon as possible.
Mitsutoshi Kajikawa, Deputy Minister of Finance for International Affairs from Japan—and head of its delegation at FATF—has announced during a meeting with officials from Iran’s High Council for Combating Money Laundering that Japan intends to assist in normalizing considerations regarding Islamic Republic of Iran within FATF processes. What actions have been taken or are planned concerning this matter?
Japan is willing to serve as a bridge between Iran and the other countries of the FATF group. I think that is what Mr Kajikawa did in his recent engagement with his Iranian counterparts in FATF. However, as Mr Kajikawa stressed, the first order of the matter is for Iran to continue to work on ratifying the two important international instruments; one is the Palermo Convention on international organized crime, and the other is the Convention to Suppress Financing of Terrorism.
Does Iran finance terrorist groups and who defines what group is the terrorist group?
That is the job of FATF to determine. FATF has a very intrusive mutual inspection and reporting system and I think member countries are obliged to provide information and be transparent about its own activities in this area. The conclusion of the FATF so far is that Iran is not cooperating sufficiently. We hope that there will be more positive assessment coming out of the group. Iran should provide all the information that is required and be more transparent.
Some people say that cooperating with FATF and accepting it means that you are giving all the information about your financial activities to other countries, that it can be misused and used against Iran. What do you think?
Member countries provide their own information to the extent that they feel necessary or sufficient for the purpose of the activity of FATF. Of course it's up to the country to decide to what extent you provide information but it's up to the group, not the individual country, to judge whether the information provided is meaningful or not.
The thing that happened with giving inspections to the IAEA, was at the end of the day there were many Iranian scientists assassinated because of the information Iran gave, so the same thing can happen with the financial issue, don't you agree?
You mean there will be another assassination?
Giving out all the information about your financial issues, it can be used against Iran. It’s not only the matter of financing some groups that some countries might consider as terrorist groups that we don’t see as terrorist groups. But even if we are financing those groups, they would use it against Iran at the end of the day. So, it won’t be logical for Iran to give out all the information for its activities. If you're cooperating with another country and they're not happy with that, they would go and block that or they would use it against Iran. Is that logic?
Well I don't think it's a question of whether it is logical or not. It's a question of trust. FATF or IAEA are systems that depend on the goodwill and trust of member countries. How far you co-operate with that system, how much information you provide will translate into confidence given to you by other member parties. Unless that trust is given, cooperation will collapse and I think international organizations in general operates on that basis. Unless this fundamental principle of trust is respected by member countries no organization can function properly because there is no enforcing mechanism like the domestic police force or judiciary which can enforce decisions. Enforcement of international laws ultimately rely on voluntary cooperation of countries and whether that will work or not will depend on level of trust that countries give to that system. If you trust the system you provide information; if not, you don’t.
You cannot trade with other countries so, indirectly you're under pressure.
But what we are suggesting is that somebody has to make the first step to make this a virtual cycle. If you can show even a little bit of additional goodwill or information, the opposite will appreciate it and might lower the level of skepticism and if you continue this cycle step by step it could ultimately lead to a more co-operative relationship. It may take time and a bit of patience. I do not want to be boastful of Japan's record; but Japan is considered as one of the most trustworthy member of the IAEA in terms of nuclear safeguard compliance. We have been giving full transparency and information to the IAEA. Japan’s triple-A trust is earned through such efforts.
The reports of the IAEA shows that there is no unclear activity of Iran’s nuclear program. Also the US intelligence reports also show the same thing. But again when the head of the IAEA goes to the press conference he says different things about Iran’s nuclear activities. Also the leaders of some western countries, specifically United States, say totally different thing about Iran’s nuclear activities other than the reports that are on the table. So, don't you think that this is not about being clear on this inspections but it's mostly political?
There are objective criteria which a country has to comply with in terms of reporting and transparency. There are targets and standards that Iran is required to meet. Successive IAEA reports indicate that there are certain objective standards or criteria that Iran fails to comply with. As far as we understand, these are purely technical, not political, standards or criteria.
The reports are very clear but when the head of the IAEA talks with the media, he says totally different things. It’s like what happened with the meeting with Donald Trump with Netanyahu; Donald Trump came to the media and said that we want to negotiate with Iran, but one hour before that, he signed the heaviest sanctions on Iran. So, nobody reads the fact sheet but they listen to what the media provides. It's exactly the same thing happening with the nuclear inspections. People don't read like technical nuclear reports but they get affected by what the media gives them. As I said I think the western approach to Iran’s nuclear program is mostly political.
The messaging that come out to the public may sound political depending on the listener, but the discussion within the IAEA is technical and it is important to keep these issues at the technical level because nuclear safeguard issue is after all are all about technicalities, such as the amount or percentage of Uranium enrichment or number of centrifuges, or specialist inspectors to be allowed in the premises etc. Japan on our part has been meeting all the technical standards that is required as member of the NPT and the additional protocol. Let's not get bogged down with the issue of whether the approach is political or not. We should not obfuscate the matter by conflating technical issues with political issues.
Japan has spent a lot of money in military spending among world countries. What is the reason for this much spending in the military? They also have signed so many contracts between different countries, Japan is the first Asian country signing security contract with EU, why is all this spending on the military?
First let me set the record straight on Japanese military spending. The current Japanese military expenditure as a percentage of GDP is roughly around 1.2-1.3%. If you compare that to other countries, for example Russia, which perhaps has the largest figure amongst the big nations, Russia stands roughly at 5.8% of GDP. USA roughly 3.3%, UK 2.5%, Republic of Korea 2.8%, Israel 5%, Saudi Arabia 7% and so on. If you look at the size of military expenditure as a proportion to the size of the economy you will get a better picture of the context. By the way, Iran spends roughly 2% of its GDP. China roughly 1.7%. This may sound small but given the size of its economy this is still huge in absolute terms. It's 6 times more than Japan’s. China’s military expenditure has expanded 39 times over the past 30 years. It is important to follow both the absolute level or size and the trend to understand the nature or direction the country is moving towards in terms of military spending. And if you look at the security environment surrounding Japan there are many challenges, if not threat. Japan in the past 80 years since the end of the second world war we have been light in military spending which allowed resources to be diverted to economic development. In recent time, we are striving to become more self-reliant in terms of our capacity to defend ourselves. We have the US Japan security treaty mechanism which allows the US military to be based in Japan. We consider this alliance as a pillar that guarantees peace and stability in the Indo-Pacific region. You mentioned our new cooperation, the new direction that we are exploring with the European Union. It is not really a military pact or security Alliance or anything of that nature; it is more a cooperative mechanism to expand our ties in maritime security and space-cyber security to combat hybrid threats including what is called Foreign Information, Manipulation & Interference. These are the areas where we will expand our corporation with the European Union and people are increasingly aware that security cannot be divided along the geographical line. We have recently seen North Korean troops being sent to the Ukrainian front. There is no security question that could be discussed in isolation. We think that there needs to be more awareness among European countries about security issues in the Indo-Pacific region. And vice versa Japan will be more engaged and involved in security issues in Europe and the Euro-Atlantic region.
There are some voices coming out of Japan regarding inquiring nuclear weapon. Taro Kono—the Japanese Digital Minister—stated that some individuals may propose establishing an independent nuclear deterrent due to changes within U.S government policy which could lead them towards seeking nuclear weapons capabilities themselves; how serious is this perspective currently regarded within Japan? There are a lot of worries about trump coming back to the White House. Japan is very dependent on security and defense issues on US. Why is Japan worried about its security after Trump coming to the white house? And would Japan really look for nuclear weapons if it sees that United States is not supporting it's allies as much as is used to anymore?
First of all, your quote of Minister Kono, this was from an interview given before the inauguration of the Trump presidency. So he was purely speculating and expressing his view about the importance of having a firm idea of what US position will be on question of extended nuclear deterrence. Secondly, one needs to take his comment in its totality not just a part of it. This was a kind of rhetorical question which he posed to the audience which is “if there is no assurance of US extended deterrence it will breed suspicion among the public that the US nuclear deterrence is not reliable”. So this was a hypothetical question, not a determination or affirmation of a position. Additionally, he states that he does not believe that Japan becoming a nuclear country is realistic for many reasons. First, this may lead to other countries in the region to opt for nuclear possession which will create instability which we do not want to see. Second, if Japan becomes a nuclear weapons and withdraw from NPT, it will be difficult to ensure importation of nuclear fuel for power generation. After the Fukushima accident there was a pause in nuclear power generation but we are planning to restart in the near future. So altogether it is not realistic to assume that Japan is pursuing nuclear weapons.
I understand many people are worried in Japan about Trump coming back because he's not very reliable, as he showed through what he did with the Persian Gulf countries. So they decided to somehow change their policies. I see the same worry in the Japanese and also many other countries. Why are there lot of worries in Japan? Is President Trump not reliable?
It’s not only Japan. The entire world is not sure what President Trump is up to. There are lots of surprises every day. But I wouldn’t characterize that as not reliable; rather, he is unpredictable and that is what makes people worry. But as far as Japan-US relationship, as an institution, is concerned, I think the latest meeting between Prime Minister Ishiba and President Trump was reassuring. It was very successful. There was a strong commitment from the United States to engagement in the Indo-Pacific region including the commitment to support Japan in its defense of Senkaku Islands and a strong embrace of the vision of Free and Open Indo Pacific. Ishiba promised to invest in the US and Trump welcomed it. There was an understanding to resolve, in a constructive manner, the dispute over the acquisition of US Steel by Japan Steel. This will be an investment, not an acquisition. The biggest take away of the meeting was that there was a positive appreciation of each other's role and value to advance our common ideals and interests.
IRNA