David C Hulme talks to Ambassador Nobutake Odano
Nobutake Odano was ambassador extraordinary and plenipotentiary at the Mission of Japan to the European Union from mid-2008 until May 2011. A career diplomat, his past assignments in Tokyo include that of ambassador in charge of the African Development Conference, and chief of protocol and managing director of the Japan International Cooperation Agency. He has held overseas posts in Myanmar, Australia and the Republic of Korea, as well as in London and Bonn. He is currently ambassador in charge of inspection at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Tokyo, as well as Asia Europe Foundation (ASEF) governor for Japan.
What is your current role in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs?
I have two hats. One is inspector-general. My job is to inspect how Japanese embassies or consulates general overseas work properly in their host countries to support Japanese citizens, promote diplomacy and help Japanese corporate entities.
There are more than 200 overseas Japanese embassies, missions and consulates general, so I frequently have to go out of Japan for three or four weeks. We have about 15 staff here [at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs], but other sections of the ministry, such as accounting or personnel, work closely with us.
It is not a one-way command structure, though. Recently I visited western African countries. Some of them are hardship posts. The officers and staff need support, such as generators, improved security measures, proper rotation and moral support.
Also, if an embassy wants to improve or expand its activities, we are in the field and we listen to their suggestions.
My second hat is that of ASEF [see www.asef.org] governor for Japan. I like the idea of creating shared experience for learning and dialogue, and exchanging culture and students, so as to forge mutual understanding between the two communities.
What stands out among your experiences as ambassador to the EU?
I want to emphasise that Japan and the EU can benefit each other. For example, while I was in Brussels, there was the issue of piracy off the coast of Somalia. Remember that the European economic zone is the world’s largest, accounting for about 26% of global economic power. Japan accounts for around 9%, and Asia in general is very vibrant, so trade routes between the two areas are vital. As for shipping, it is between the Gulf of Aden, the mouth to the Suez Canal and the Indian Ocean where pirates operate, and they have expanded their activities into the Indian Ocean. I visited the EU Parliament to exchange ideas with members of the Security and Defence Subcommittee of the Foreign Affairs Committee about that.
Now, Japan deploys two frigates with helicopters, plus two fixed-wing reconnaissance aircraft, working together with Operation Atalanta of the European Union. Tankers and container ships need safe passage. Frigates escort them, and Japanese aircraft can provide vital information. There are several instances of such information enabling cargo ships to avoid piracy. This is just one example of how Japan and the EU can benefit from each other and make the world a better place.
I also promoted academic exchanges. Brussels has many policy research centres and think tanks. The Kobe University Brussels European Centre [office opened in September 2010] is the first of its kind in Brussels, and through it Kobe University can expand their network in Europe.
Exchange of young people is vital, and we [also] need to collaborate on research and development. Both societies face rapid ageing and fewer children. We need to increase our competitive edges, for example, through investment in R&D.
What were the main challenges of your job in Brussels?
One was to promote the understanding of genuine partnership between Japan and the EU. Europeans notice the spectacular emergence of China and other Asian countries, but Japan shares fundamental values with the European community, including freedom of speech, freedom of the press, democracy, human rights and a free-market economy.
Likewise in Japan, businesses tend to pay more attention to immediately profitable areas, such as China, and not many are aware that the EU is the largest economic area in the world – bigger than the US in terms of population and economy. It’s a kind of mutual benign neglect, which I tried my best to rectify. Easier said than done.
What else was accomplished during your posting?
There were several tangible outcomes, due to the gradual trend of mutual recognition in political and business circles. A good example is the idea of an economic partnership agreement or free trade agreement. This signifies the idea of shared common values. If such an agreement is concluded, then people in Japan will be much more aware of the EU. It will be businesspeople first, but then more tourists, students, scholars and so on. At the same time, I am quite sure that European business will rediscover Japan and make more investments in Japan, and so increase employment opportunities. Other examples are mutual recognition of the AEO [Authorised Economic Operator], and cooperation on food safety. After all, more than 3,000 Japanese companies operate in the EU area, creating about 400,000 jobs. They are good corporate citizens with CSR activities and bring tax revenues to local communities.
How does the Brussels posting differ from being posted to a single country?
There are several Japanese missions overseas, for example to the United Nations in New York, the WTO and other international organisations in Geneva, and UNESCO in Paris. In those cases Japan is a member, and ambassadors in those posts have a voice backed by a voting right.
However in the case of the EU, I had no voting rights. I had to reach out, build relationships, persuade and motivate people to pay more attention to Japan, and to widen and deepen relations. In that sense, my function was quite different.
In the case of bilateral relations, the ambassador has common interests with his counterparts in the host country to promote. In the case of the EU, first, EU members have so much to do among themselves, and they tend to decide themselves and then expect non-members like Japan to go along. My stay in Brussels coincided with a transition period. The Lisbon Treaty came into force, a so-called EU president was chosen, and the European External Action Service [EEAS] was instituted. That is equivalent to a foreign ministry.
There are mainly four groups of actors in the EU. They are the member countries, the Council [representing the governments], the European Commission, and the European Parliament. It is a very complicated decision-making process, and I dealt with EU commissioners, eurocrats, diplomats from member states, and more than 700 members of the parliament. Depending upon the issue, I discussed with commission officials [trade is a good example], and I collaborated with my fellow ambassadors in Berlin, Copenhagen, London, Paris, Madrid and other capitals to explain the Japanese position. When Japan was preparing to launch the idea of an economic partnership agreement, some three years ago, I spoke to senior officials of the European Commission. Then, with or without my suggestion, my fellow ambassadors in other European capitals spoke to their host governments. In addition, I encouraged the Keidanren and other economic organisations in Japan to speak to their European counterparts. The EBC also played an important role. So, basically, there were three layers of discussion: in Brussels, in EU member countries and among business communities. My work usually involved that type of double-track or triple-track dialogue.
How would you describe the state of EU-Japan relations?
It is getting better, but there are some areas we need to be careful about. Number one is the state of the Japanese and EU economies: stagnation, financial crisis, rapid appreciation of the yen against the euro, etc. People may look inward, and we need to be wary of protectionism. We need to move forward, and Japan wants the EU to lower tariff rates.
Also, governments may cut expenses. In such areas as education and scientific research, we have to be careful not to undermine past collaborative achievements.
Dialogue and collaboration in the political area have expanded. In addition to the anti-piracy operations, there are a border control project in Tajikistan for customs training and drug control, and development cooperation in Africa to name but a few.
In the first five months of 2011 when I was in Brussels, on two occasions at least Japan has subscribed for a substantial portion of the EFSF [European Financial Stability Facility] bond issue, because the stability of the euro is very important for the world economy. [The euro is estimated at a quarter of the foreign reserves worldwide.] Japan is a responsible player in the world. We need to think in terms of the Japan-EU partnership in the world.
What is the outlook for an economic integration agreement?
I am now not involved in the process, so I can just make general observations. At the summit meeting in May of 2011, there was agreement that invigorated the process. The European Commission is now preparing to seek a mandate from the member governments, and if that is given then a formal negotiation process can start, based on the current scoping exercise.
There has been one step forward. Two years ago, there was reluctance expressed in some [industry] sectors of EU member countries, but what we heard at the most recent summit means that there is a mood in the EU to seek a proper, appropriate agreement with Japan at an early stage. So I feel comfortable that my successor, Ambassador [Kojiro] Shiojiri and his team, and negotiators in Tokyo will continue to work toward the start of negotiations, and that once they start the process will be quite short.
Is there a sense of urgency?
Against the background of stagnation and financial crisis, Japan and the EU need perseverant recovery, more trade and investment. They are for mutual benefit and a better future.
The European economy certainly needs some impetus. Psychologically speaking, they need new markets. Japan is a big market, and if it is opened up, then European companies can see new opportunities. Please remember that Japan is the best showcase for increasingly affluent Asian consumers. Then, if this agreement eases the European market, there will be more Japanese investment there.
What is the mood on the Japanese side?
First, the prime minister [Yoshihiko Noda] has pledged to promote the opening up of Japan.
Debate on the TPP [Trans-Pacific Partnership] is another example. Japan is well aware that it is an ageing society, which means it must improve its competitive edge. A partnership with the EU is a step toward doing that.
The second consideration is reconstruction following the disastrous earthquake, tsunami and nuclear-power-plant incident. Japan needs effective reconstruction efforts, combined with new investment, new business opportunities and new ideas. So, there is also a political commitment on the Japanese side.
In the future, we cannot stay on the level of acting out of self-interest. We need to think about mutual benefit through cooperation because major issues such as the economy, the environment, resources and energy supplies will affect us all.