    [Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States: William J. Clinton (1997, Book I)]
    [April 25, 1997]
    [Pages 483-494]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office www.gpo.gov]

    The President's News Conference With Prime Minister Ryutaro Hashimoto of
    Japan
    April 25, 1997

        President Clinton. Good afternoon. Before we begin the discussion of
    my meetings with the Prime Minister, let me say that I have just come
    from signing the instrument of ratification to the Chemical Weapons
    Convention, along with the Vice President and the Secretary of State and
    others who worked very hard for it.
        Last night's strong bipartisan vote in the Senate will keep our
    soldiers and our citizens safer, and it will send a clear signal that
    Americans of both parties are united in their resolve to maintain the
    leadership of our Nation into the next century.
        It is very appropriate that the vote took place last night when I
    was visiting with the Prime Minister and that the signing took place a
    moment ago while Prime Minister Hashimoto was here, because Japan set a
    very strong example for the world by ratifying this treaty more than a
    year ago.
        I am particularly pleased on this historic day to welcome the Prime
    Minister to Washington. Over the last 2 years, Ryu and I have met many
    times. We've built a good friendship that reflects the shared values and
    interests of the world's two strongest democracies and leading
    economies. Today's discussions were no exception. The Prime Minister and
    I continued our work to make sure that our partnership meets the
    challenges of the new century.
        Our security alliance remains the cornerstone of peace and stability
    in the Asia-Pacific region. Building on the joint declaration we signed
    in Japan last April, we are strengthening our cooperation while reducing
    the burden of our bases on the Japanese people. Today we reviewed recent
    progress in consolidating some of our bases in Okinawa in ways that
    reflect our continuing sensitivity to their effect on the lives of the
    Okinawan people. I particularly appreciate the strong leadership and
    support for our alliance the Prime Minister showed in passing
    legislation to enable our forces to continue using these important
    facilities.
        We also discussed regional security, including our joint interest in
    promoting peace and stability on the Korean Peninsula. The United States
    and Japan are united in urging North Korea to accept the standing offer
    for four-party peace talks. I want to thank the Prime Minister for
    Japan's role in the Korean Energy Development Organization that has
    helped to keep North Korea's dangerous nuclear program frozen.
        The Prime Minister and I agreed on the critical importance of
    cooperative relations with China. We also agreed on the need for the
    international community to stand firmly behind the progress of democracy
    in Cambodia.
        We both recognize the importance of keeping our economic
    relationship moving in the right direction. Over the last 4 years we've
    worked hard to open markets and achieve a better balance in our trade
    and investment ties. I told Prime Minister Hashimoto we need to build on
    this success to create new opportunities in key sectors for both the
    workers of our country and broad benefits for the consumers of Japan. We
    both want to promote strong domestic demand-led growth in Japan and to
    avoid a significant increase in Japan's external surplus. These are
    essential to sustaining the progress that has been made.
        I welcome the Prime Minister's commitment to restructuring Japan's
    economy, including his support of far-reaching deregulation. An
    ambitious reform program should bring economic benefits to Japan and
    improve market access for American and other foreign firms. To this end,
    we have agreed to intensify talks on deregulation under our framework
    agreement.
        Among the global issues we discussed were preparations for this
    June's Summit of the Eight in Denver and how we can work together to
    strengthen reform in the United Nations. Tomorrow the Vice President and
    the Prime Minister will discuss our common agenda to fight disease,
    protect the environment, and meet other important common challenges.
        Finally, let me say I had the opportunity to thank the Prime
    Minister for Japan's efforts to bring our young people closer together.
    The new Fulbright Memorial Fund will send 5,000 American high school
    teachers and administrators to Japan over the next 5 years. We welcome
    the Prime Minister's initiatives to send high school students from
    Okinawa to study in the

    [[Page 484]]

    United States and will increase our funding for American students to do
    the same there. These ties of friendship reflect the shared values that
    underpin our vital alliance.
        If you will permit me to quote a haiku poem:

        Old friends standing tall--
        Spring sunlight on their shoulders
        Makes them move as one.

        Moving as one in this time of challenge and change, that's what
    Prime Minister Hashimoto and I are committed to see the United States
    and Japan do.
        Mr. Prime Minister, welcome.
        Prime Minister Hashimoto. Well, I am pleased to be able to make this
    official visit to Washington, DC, and to have had a thorough exchange of
    views with President Clinton.
        Last night the President invited me for drinks, and we had an
    enjoyable evening at the White House. There I conveyed to him my
    sympathies for the damage caused by the flood in the Midwest. I also was
    able to express joint pleasure at the approval of the Chemical Weapons
    Convention by the Senate.
        I had 3 hours of frank discussion with Bill, as friends and as
    leaders of the two countries. I believe we have the following four
    points as the main themes.
        The first theme is the security relationship, which is the
    foundation of a Japan-U.S. friendship and alliance. We fully agreed that
    we must further enhance the security relationship and based on the
    Japan-U.S. Joint Declaration on Security issued last April. I explained
    to President Clinton the efforts my administration has been making on
    issues concerning Okinawa and its top priority task to secure a solid
    basis for the stable security relationship. President Clinton made it
    clear that he will continue to be sensitive to and cooperative on issues
    concerning Okinawa, including the steady implementation of the SACO
    final report.
        With regard to the review of the guidelines for Japan-U.S. defense
    cooperation, we'll intensify this joint task as we head towards this
    fall. I'd also like to ensure full transparency, both at home and
    abroad, of the review process. We also reaffirmed our commitment in the
    joint declaration that in response to changes which may arise on the
    international security environment, we'll continue to consult closely on
    defense policies and military postures, including the U.S. force
    structure in Japan which will best meet the requirements of the two
    Governments.
        The second theme is the economic relationship. I gave to the
    President updates on the reforms now being undertaken in Japan by the
    Government and political parties in unison, especially on structural
    reforms, including the fiscal reform and consolidation, deregulation,
    and financial system reform.
        I must say that these reforms do have great relevance to maintaining
    and enhancing the good bilateral economic relationship we enjoy today.
    The President welcomed my commitment to restructuring Japan's economy,
    including far-reaching deregulation. We both support the common
    objective of avoiding a significant increase in Japan's external surplus
    by promoting strong domestic demand-led growth in Japan. Furthermore, we
    have decided to have the officials of the two Governments start
    discussions on how we could enhance the Japan-U.S. dialog on
    deregulation under our framework.
        The third theme is furtherance of peace and prosperity in the Asia-
    Pacific region under Japan-U.S. cooperation and joint leadership. In
    this context, the President and I agreed on the special significance of
    establishing constructive, cooperative relations with China. We
    reaffirmed that Japan, the United States, and the Republic of Korea will
    continue to deal with issues concerning the Korean Peninsula, including
    early realization of the four-party talks and promotion of the
    activities by the Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organization, or
    KEDO, under tripartite coordination.
        On Cambodia, there was concurrence of views that the international
    community needs to send out a political message for the stability of
    Cambodia under consolidation of democracy. I have dispatched Mr. Komura,
    the State Secretary for Foreign Affairs, to Cambodia to fulfill this
    task.
        The last and the fourth theme is Japan-U.S. cooperation on global
    issues. It was reconfirmed in our meeting that we will further
    coordinate our policies on such wide-ranging issues as the Denver
    summit, antiterrorism and anticrime measures, United Nations reforms,
    cooperation with Russia, and the Middle East peace process.
        I'd like to note here that the seizure of the Japanese Ambassador's
    residence in Peru recently came to an end, with the three unfortunate
    casualties, yet with a vast majority of the hostages freed without
    serious injuries. Today

    [[Page 485]]

    our two nations renewed their resolves and resolved to condemn and fight
    terrorism without succumbing to it, hand in hand with the international
    community.
        I would also like to welcome the approval of the Chemical Weapons
    Convention in the Senate yesterday, as I mentioned at the outset. And I
    certainly welcome the fact that this document was also ratified today.
        The President and I agreed to strengthen our efforts to promote
    common agenda towards the 21st century. I proposed to vigorously promote
    environmental education, and I'm happy to have President Clinton's
    agreement. As the President mentioned just now, it gave the two of us
    much delight that people-to-people exchanges between Japan and the
    United States have been steadily widening, as exemplified by the teacher
    exchange through the Fulbright Memorial Program and the high school
    student exchange between Okinawa Prefecture and the United States.
        There is no other bilateral relationship in the world that has any
    semblance to the Japan-U.S. relationship in the present and fundamental
    importance. In closing, I would like to reiterate my determination to
    further enhance the Japan-U.S. relationship for the benefit of not only
    the two peoples but also for the Asia-Pacific region and the world as a
    whole, on the solid basis of my close cooperation with President
    Clinton.
        Thank you very much.
        President Clinton. What we will do is, I will call on an American
    journalist, and then the Prime Minister will call on a Japanese
    journalist. And we'll begin with Mr. Fournier [Ron Fournier, Associated
    Press].

    Tobacco Regulation Ruling

        Q. Let me ask you a couple questions about an important domestic
    development today. The court said that the FDA cannot restrict tobacco
    advertising, which is a cornerstone of your crackdown against teenage
    smoking. Other than an appeal, is there any other recourse? For example,
    regulating advertising--[inaudible]--would the White House be less
    likely to push forward--[inaudible].
        President Clinton. Well, first of all, this is, on balance, a great
    victory for the fight we have been waging for our children's health,
    because the fundamental legal issue was, did the FDA have jurisdiction
    over tobacco companies? And they said yes. And since we believe strongly
    that for young people, access equals addiction, the fact that the yes
    includes the ability of the FDA to deal with access of young people to
    tobacco is a huge victory. And we started out against overwhelming odds,
    a very powerful interest group; no administration had undertaken this
    before. And so I feel a great deal of reassurance today.
        Now, the court also held, as you pointed out, that that statute
    which gave the FDA authority to regulate tobacco and regulate access,
    among other things, did not cover, by its express terms, advertising. So
    we will appeal that part of it. But this is a day that--I know Dr.
    Kessler has already been out celebrating about this. We're very pleased
    by the court's decision, especially coming as it does out of North
    Carolina, and we are determined to proceed on this course. We think it's
    a great victory for us.
        Q. Could the FCC regulate advertising--[inaudible]--slow down your
    push for--[inaudible]?
        President Clinton. I don't know the answer to the FCC question. I
    presume, but I don't really know the answer. I can't--and in terms of
    the settlement, let me say that we have been involved in the settlement,
    the White House has, only in a monitoring capacity. The parties are
    involved in the settlement. And my concern was twofold only: One is to
    protect the integrity of the FDA's efforts and to protect our children,
    and the second was to make sure that the larger public health issues
    were put front and center.
        So I don't have an opinion about that. I don't--I'm not the expert
    here about the intersection of the legal discussions and the protection
    of the public health. But I can tell you that my opinion about any
    proposed settlement, should one ever be agreed to, would be determined
    solely on what I thought was good for kids and good for the public
    health.

    Japan-U.S. Defense Guidelines

        Q. I would like to ask a question of Prime Minister Hashimoto.
    You'll be completing the review process of the Japan-U.S. defense
    guidelines, and I wonder if this will require new contingency
    legislation. In case such new legislations are required for emergency
    cases, what happens to the consistency with the Japanese Constitution?
        Prime Minister Hashimoto. Well, first of all, this review will be
    conducted solely within the confines of the Japanese Constitution, and I

    [[Page 486]]

    would like to make that point clear first. Having said that, let me say
    that we are working very diligently with this review process of the
    guidelines. The purpose of reviewing the guidelines is to consider the
    Japan-U.S. defense cooperation a new era and make that evident to the
    entire world. And also, we are trying to establish smooth cooperation
    and promote cooperation between Japan and the United States vis-a-vis
    various and new and unexpected circumstances that were not considered in
    the past.
        When the review process is completed, what sort of response will be
    needed domestically--what sort of laws might become necessary
    domestically? That is a matter I would not like to make any presumptions
    about. But security is a matter that--or this is a matter that touches
    on the fundamental security of Japan, and we also would like to proceed
    with this review process in a totally transparent manner both at home
    and abroad. And sometime in May, we would like to announce the various
    views that are expressed in the process of the Japan-U.S. joint review
    and the items that are being considered, and by so doing we would like
    to avoid undue concerns on the part of other countries and also avoid
    undue disruptions.
        And should there be any pieces of wisdom that we could take
    advantage of, we certainly would like to receive them. And I sincerely
    hope that it will be conducive to building up strengthened security
    relations between the two countries.

    China-Russia Relations

        Q. Mr. President, Mr. Prime Minister, you both earlier today said
    that the China-Russia agreement should not be worrisome as long as it's
    not directed in any negative way toward its neighbors. I'm wondering,
    given the high profile irritants in the U.S. relations toward both
    Russia and China, how can you be sure what the motivation is behind that
    agreement, and specifically, how can you be sure it isn't directed
    toward either the United States or any of its neighbors?
        President Clinton. Do you want me to go first?
        Well, first of all, let me say, if you look at the map and you look
    at the history of the 20th century, Russia and China have a lot of
    things that they need to deal with between themselves. They have a rich
    history; they have a history of both cooperation and significant
    conflict. And if they have a good cooperative partnership in the future
    that is part of a larger balance of forces working toward security, open
    trade, genuine respect for borders not only of the parties to any
    agreement but of any other parties in the neighborhood, I think that's a
    positive thing.
        If you look at, for example, the extent to which the politics of
    India have been dictated partly by the tensions between Russia and China
    in the past, and how important India is--soon to become the largest
    country in the world, already with the largest middle class in the
    world--and how important our relationships with India will be, and then
    with Pakistan, there is so much of what goes on between Russia and China
    that affects our relations, not only directly but indirectly, that I
    think it's a very positive thing that they're talking and working
    together.
        And again I will say, as long as they are not making an agreement
    that is designed to somehow undermine the security or the prosperity or
    the integrity and freedom of any of their neighbors, I think it is a
    positive thing. And I look forward to having the same sort of
    constructive relations with both parties, and I think that the Prime
    Minister does as well.
        Q. Do you know that's true, or do you----
        President Clinton. No I don't know. But I don't know that it isn't,
    either. I have no reason to believe it's not, and I don't think we
    should approach these things with paranoia. We have no basis on which to
    conclude that there is some negative connotation to the fact that the
    Russians and the Chinese are trying to get along. In the periods when
    they didn't get along, it was more difficult for both of them.
        Prime Minister Hashimoto. Well, a very good, model answer has
    already been provided, so if there is anything that I could add to this
    exemplary response: Well, countries that have adjacent borders between
    those countries, it is better that cooperation and harmony continue,
    rather than confrontation. That will be in the benefit of the human
    society as a whole. Should there be any problems, then of course, the
    two countries concerned should cooperate with each other so that the
    situation or any problem that has arisen will proceed in a better
    direction. That is my view.

    Japan-U.S. Security Relationship and Okinawa

        Q. I'd like to ask this question of both the Prime Minister and
    President.

    [[Page 487]]

        Mr. Prime Minister, you mentioned earlier that--[inaudible]--
    reaffirmation of the joint declaration that you will be cooperating with
    each other with regard to North Korea--[inaudible]. When do you think
    the reduction of U.S. marines stationed in Okinawa will become possible,
    whether that is difficult, and in the shorter term, is it possible to
    relocate U.S. military drills from Okinawa to other parts of Japan as a
    short-term measure to reduce the burden on the Okinawan people?
        Prime Minister Hashimoto. Well, I think I should start off first on
    this point. So following my response, I would like to ask the President
    to supplement.
        First, at the present stage, I believe that the U.S. forces that are
    deployed in the Asia-Pacific, including those stationed in Japan, we
    have no intention of asking for the reduction of these forces. In
    maintaining the stability and safety of the entire region, we very much
    cherish the present commitment that we have, and this is a matter of
    great importance for the President in terms of maintaining security as
    well.
        Now, I need not tell you that there are many spots of instability
    and uncertainties in the Asia-Pacific today. Now, if the U.S. forces in
    the Asia-Pacific, not just stationed in Okinawa, are to be reduced, then
    we'd very much like to, in fact, create an Asia-Pacific region that can
    allow that reduction, discussing that possibility with smiles. And to
    that end, we'd like to cooperate with each other.
        Now, as I have mentioned earlier, there is no doubt that we are
    causing burdens on the Okinawan people, and in order to reduce those
    burdens, we would like to say that the first step is to steadily realize
    the recommendations of the SACO final report. Thanks to all the efforts,
    the live fire drills across the prefectural Route 104 will be relocated.
    And the KC-130 aircraft now will be relocated to Iwakuna Base on Honshu
    Island.
        President Clinton. The only thing that I could add to what the Prime
    Minister has already said is just to reaffirm my strong support for the
    SACO process. The United States is very aware that our presence, while
    it has enhanced the security of our country and Japan and the stability
    of the Asia-Pacific region, has imposed burdens on the people of
    Okinawa. We have been very sensitive to it. Since I have been President,
    I have done what I could to change that. We now have a SACO final report
    and a process underway which will lead to significant changes designed
    to reduce the burden on the people of Okinawa while permitting us to do
    what we need to do together to maintain stability in the region.
        And I'd like to let that process play itself out. I think that you
    will see we are proceeding in good faith, and we will work hard to make
    that process end in a success for the people of Okinawa.
        Wolf [Wolf Blitzer, Cable News Network] and then----

    FBI and Alleged Chinese Efforts To Influence the 1996 Election

        Q. Mr. President, Prime Minister Hashimoto made the case for the
    United States and for Japan to maintain stronger relations with China.
    But now there is apparently some evidence that the FBI has that top
    Chinese officials were trying to influence the U.S. political process.
    The question for you, Prime Minister Hashimoto, would be, if you had
    evidence that China was trying to influence politics in Japan, would
    that affect your relationship with China?
        And to you, Mr. President, are you confident that what the FBI
    briefed members of the Senate Intelligence Committee, that that
    information is being made available to you and to your senior national
    security advisers?
        Prime Minister Hashimoto. Well, I can't say anything about the U.S.-
    related part, but speaking of Japan and China relations, the latter half
    of last year, due to my own mismanagement as well, the Japan-China
    relations since then have been somewhat awkward. But in the run-up to
    the APEC summit meeting on Manila, I had meetings with Mr. Jiang Zemin,
    and we were able to more or less resolve the problem. And the Japanese
    Foreign Minister has visited Beijing since, and most likely I will be
    visiting China later this year, in the fall. And following that, I think
    that Mr. Li Peng, the Chinese Premier, will visit Japan. And we are also
    inviting Mr. Jiang Zemin to visit Japan.
        So through this process we, on both sides--Japan and China--we're
    trying to further improve our bilateral relations.
        What I couldn't quite get from your question was, I think you said,
    are the Chinese leaders attempting to exercise influence on Japanese
    politics? Well----

    [[Page 488]]

        Q. If the Chinese Government, were attempting to influence politics
    in Japan, would that affect your relationship with China?
        Prime Minister Hashimoto. If the Chinese Government, in fact, does
    behave that way and if the Japanese are pliable, then, of course, that
    end result will happen. But I don't think that the Chinese leaders are
    attempting to do that with the Japanese politics. And we certainly have
    no intention of imposing our own views on the Chinese. Well, this year,
    as I said, happens to be the 25th anniversary of normalization of
    diplomatic relations, so it was with this mindset that we would like to
    make this year a fruitful year in terms of Japan-China relations.
        President Clinton. I'd like to answer the questions, if I might, in
    reverse order, and as carefully as I can.
        First of all, I believe that the President and Secretary of State
    and the National Security Adviser should have access to whatever
    information is necessary to conduct the foreign policy and to protect
    the national interest of the country.
        Secondly, especially in light of some of the allegations which have
    been made, I have made it clear that to resolve all questions, I expect
    every piece of information the Justice Department gives me to be shared
    with the Congress. I not only do not object to it, but I expect it to be
    done. That will be reassuring to everybody who's covering other stories,
    and I think it's important.
        Now, in response to your question, I do not know the answer to that
    because I don't know precisely what the briefing was. But my policy is
    clear. And we have received some information from the Justice
    Department. Whether we have received everything they have, I have no way
    of knowing, because I don't know what they got. But whatever--the
    important thing for me, for you to know, and for the American people to
    know is that as long as these questions are out there, I also expect
    anything that I am given to conduct the foreign policy of the country
    should be shared with the Intelligence Committees of the Congress so
    you'll know that it is shared in that way.
        Now, to go to the second point, I have said before, and I will just
    simply reiterate what I have said before: If there was any improper
    attempt to influence the workings of the United States executive or
    legislative branches, obviously that would be a matter of serious
    concern. But I think it is important that we not accuse people of
    something that we don't know for sure that they have done, number one.
        Number two, let's keep in mind--and I would encourage all of you to
    think about this yourselves--think about what you would define as
    improper influence. A lot of our friends in the world, countries with
    whom we are very closely allied, have friends in the United States that
    advocate for the policies of the governments all the time.
        It's true--to take two obvious examples--it's true of Israel; it's
    true of Greece. And it's not--I would not consider that improper. It's
    publicly done. There's nothing secret or covert about it; we know that
    it's done. It's part of the political debate in America, and we don't
    take offense at it.
        So we have to--but if there were some improper attempt to influence
    this Government, would it affect our relations? Of course, it's
    something we'd have to take seriously. But meanwhile, we have very large
    interests in a stable relationship with China and having China be a
    stable force in the Asia-Pacific region, just as Japan does. And so I
    think it is important that we not assume something we do not know and
    act in a way that may not be warranted. We need to get the facts here
    before we do that.

    Japan-U.S. Economic Relations

        Q. In your meeting, I believe you discussed bilateral economic
    relations, and I think you agreed that both would hope there would not
    be any significant increase in Japan's surplus. More specifically, did
    you discuss what measures ought to be taken in order to avoid such a
    significant increase?
        Also, in the coming days, there will be the finance ministers
    meeting of the two countries, and there will be G-7 finance ministers
    meetings, and I think the markets are very much interested about the
    developments on the exchange front. I wonder if you had any discussions
    on that aspect as well.
        Prime Minister Hashimoto. Well, let me first say that what we
    discussed today was that we would not like to see any significant
    increase in Japan's external surplus, and we're not assuming a situation
    where there will be absolutely no increase in Japan's surplus.
        Now, it is true that we discussed this question, and I also tried to
    explain that the Japanese economic situation is not at all like the
    situation

    [[Page 489]]

    that many worry it to be in. In fact, in fiscal '96, its growth rate is
    certain to reach 2.5 percent per annum.
        Of course, the discontinuation of the special tax cut measures at
    the end of last fiscal year would have some negative effects. And yet,
    we would expect a 1.9 percent real economic growth rate for fiscal '97.
    And I also communicated to the President that it is with confidence that
    we expect Japan's economy will grow with the strength of domestic
    demand.
        Of course, strong imbalances are not good, but we've indicated that
    we are concerned about this. And as far as the exchange rate question is
    concerned, we believe that having touched on this matter between
    ourselves, it is more proper to leave the matter to Secretary Rubin and
    Minister Mitsuzuka.

    Budget Agreement

        Q. Mr. President, some of your top advisers clearly believe that
    next week is a crucial one in the budget talks. Some of them have
    suggested that it might be a make-or-break-it week as far as getting a
    balanced budget. Number one, do you share that belief? Number two, if
    so, why? And number three, is there anything that you can hold onto,
    concrete, that says yes, we might get a balanced budget this year?
        President Clinton. Well, first of all, I was heartened by the
    process by which we reached agreement on the chemical weapons treaty
    because it really was a process with a lot of integrity. It was very
    specific, very problem oriented--problem-solving oriented, and it
    resulted, as you know, in getting a majority of both caucuses in the
    Senate to vote for the treaty. And that's an indication of what we can
    do if we put the country first.
        Secondly, as I have said before, we have had some days now of quite
    intense talks between the Republican and Democratic budget leaders of
    the Senate and House. And they have worked, I'm convinced, with us in
    complete good faith. You know what the differences are; they're clear.
    We want a balanced budget that protects what we think are the most
    important values and interests of the country, including investing more
    in education, expanding coverage to children for health care, protecting
    the environment, cleaning up 500 toxic waste dumps, continuing to invest
    in technology and things of that kind. They would favor more cuts in
    those programs and bigger tax cuts. We have differences between us.
        Now, can we bridge the differences? If we proceed just as we did
    with the Chemical Weapons Convention, in the same sort of way, I'm
    convinced we can. Do I favor an early agreement? Yes, I do, if it's a
    good one and if it protects those things that I care about. Do I believe
    that there will be no balanced budget this year if the early agreements
    cannot be realized? No, I don't believe that.
        I think it is so manifestly in the interest of the United States to
    do this--it would be so good for our economy; it would keep interest
    rates down; it would keep job growth going--that we will do it. Just
    that same reason I believed, when we didn't have the votes on the
    Chemical Weapons Convention, eventually we'd find a way to do it because
    it was manifestly in the interests of the United States to do it.
        And we want to keep this long expansion going. We want to keep these
    jobs coming into our country. We want to keep the higher wage jobs being
    created. And if we want to do that, we're going to have to balance this
    budget.
        Now, it would be better to do it earlier rather than later, if both
    sides can agree in good conscience. It will be more difficult to do--
    when you fail, it's harder to kind of pick yourself up and try again.
    But I still believe it will get done sometime this year if we don't get
    it done now. But I favor an early agreement, if possible.

    Korean Peninsula

        Q. Mr. President, the Korean Peninsula is vital to U.S. interest in
    Northeast Asia. What is the U.S. position for establishing a peaceful
    regime on the Korean Peninsula?
        President Clinton. Well, first of all, we had hoped very much that
    the North Koreans would follow up on their agreement in principle to the
    four-party talks and actually come to New York and participate in the
    talks. It was a big disappointment to me when they did not come, because
    I think it is clearly in their interests. And they, I think, are better
    off having agreed to freeze their nuclear program and getting an
    alternative source of energy. And I think they ought to go the next step
    now and resolve all their differences with South Korea in a way that
    will permit the rest of us not only to give food aid and emergency food
    aid because people are terribly hungry but to work with them in
    restructuring their entire economy and helping

    [[Page 490]]

    to make it more functional again and giving a brighter and better future
    to the people of North Korea.
        So from my point of view, both because of the security problems
    inherent in the tension of the two armies facing each other across the
    17th parallel and because of the capacity of North Korea to produce
    missiles and other kinds of mischief and because there are a lot of
    people living in North Korea who are in distress now, I would very much
    like to see these talks resume.
        And the Prime Minister and I talked about it in some detail, and we
    know that our interests would be advantaged if the talks could be
    brought to a successful conclusion. And I would urge the North Koreans
    to reconsider and to enter the talks as soon as possible.
        We'll take one more--[inaudible].

    FDR Memorial

        Q. Mr. President, how strongly do you feel about having the new
    memorial to Franklin Roosevelt give prominent attention to his
    disability? The reason I ask the question is some of the disabled groups
    fear, because of the congressional politics on the issue, the
    legislation going forward now will not contain an ironclad guarantee of
    such a display. If it did not, would that be a violation of your
    commitment to them?
        President Clinton. I can't give you an honest answer to that
    because--I mean, a good answer because I never thought about it in those
    terms before. I never thought about it as a legislative fight or making
    a deal with the groups. As far as I know--I've gotten some letters on
    this--I don't think anyone is coming to see me about it. I just have
    always felt--I'll tell you why I feel this way, that there should be
    constructed at an appropriate time a statue of--a sculpture of President
    Roosevelt in his wheelchair.
        The genius of Roosevelt was that he had a flexible, imaginative mind
    that permitted us to preserve our fundamental values and principles and
    systems under great assault. And he knew that in the time he lived he
    would have had great difficulty getting elected President if people had
    thought of him as a ``polio'' or a ``cripple,'' to use the words that
    were prevalent in the early thirties. And so he went to these enormous
    lengths to construct this deception. You know, he had two strong people
    who would carry him up stairs with his elbows held straight to pretend
    that he was walking up the stairs. And to a movie camera from a
    distance, it looked as if he was. He did all kinds of other things to
    create this deception. Why? Because he knew it was necessary at the
    time. He knew that he had the capacity to be President, and he didn't
    want some artificial perception to keep him from being President.
        However, if he were alive today, my belief is just as strong that he
    would insist on being shown in his wheelchair because he would see all
    the progress we have made in the last 65 years on this issue--more than
    65 years--and he would insist that we keep making progress. He would
    want this to be a living memorial, if you will, that would be part of
    America's thrust into the future, not just a musing on the past. That's
    what I believe.
        And I've read a lot about Roosevelt. Sometimes I feel like I'm
    talking to him instead of Hillary talking to Eleanor. [Laughter] That's
    what I honestly believe. And I know even some of his family members
    differ with me, so I'm very respectful of people who have a different
    opinion than me about this. But I have thought about this a lot, and I
    believe if he were here he would say, ``Look at what we have done. Look
    at how we have changed attitudes toward disabilities. Look at all the
    doors we're trying to open for people with disabilities. For God's sake,
    tell everybody I did this and I was disabled, so that all those disabled
    kids can know they can grow up to be President, too, now, and they don't
    have to hide it like I did.''

    President's Knee Injury

        Q. But didn't you give up your wheelchair too early? [Laughter]
        President Clinton. No. No, actually, Sarah [Sarah McClendon,
    McClendon News Service], I put myself at greater risk giving up the
    wheelchair. The reason I went to Helsinki in the wheelchair is so I
    wouldn't--because I was new on my crutches. But this is better for my
    therapy. And I went to Helsinki--because they didn't want me to go at
    all, and I said I was determined to go, and they said the only safe way
    to go was to go in a wheelchair. But I don't think I did give it up too
    early.
        Q. The White House corridors are so long; you have to walk so far.
        President Clinton. I'm building up my arm strength.
        Let's take one more question. Would you like to take one more
    question, and then I'll take

    [[Page 491]]

    Mr. Donvan [John Donvan, ABC News] and Bill [Bill Plante, CBS News]. Go
    ahead. We're having a good time. [Laughter]

    North Korea

        Q. On food aid, during the flight to Washington, DC, Mr. Prime
    Minister, I think you expressed a view that as Governor of Japan you
    wished to maintain a very careful attitude, cautious attitude. I wonder
    how you explain Japan's position to the President, and I wonder if the
    President understood Japan's position.
        Prime Minister Hashimoto. Yesterday, during the flight, I met with
    the press reporters traveling with me, and I touched on this question.
    We certainly are aware of the situation in North Korea that requires
    humanitarian food aid. At the same time, if we speak of humanitarian
    circumstances, there are certain things we would like the North Koreans
    to do for us. And one of them relates to Japanese nationals, Japanese
    women who got married to North Koreans. And those people who went to
    North Korea have not been able to send letters to Japan, whereas North
    Koreans visiting Japan could always go back and forth between Japan and
    North Korea. These Japanese women who married North Koreans have not
    even been allowed to return to their families for temporary visits. So,
    speaking of humanitarian issues, we would like the North Koreans to
    allow these Japanese women, Japanese wives, to write letters back home
    or pay temporary visits to their families in Japan.
        And also, according to information that we have gleaned, several
    mysterious incidents took place, one after another, in a rather limited
    time period. Some of them junior high school students, or lovers--these
    people suddenly disappeared from Japanese shores. And North Korean spies
    who later have confessed in South Korea, and it is so reported, that
    they have said these people were abducted. So there is a high
    possibility that these Japanese who disappeared from Japanese shore were
    abducted by the North Koreans. And probably, there is no doubt about
    that. And yet, we cannot really determine that is the case. But we have
    to remember that these people have disappeared in a mysterious manner.
        In the process of Japan-North Korea normalization talks, we
    discussed the problem of Nai Unya, who was originally a Japanese. But we
    raised the issue of having the person recognized and returned to Japan.
    As soon as we raised the issue, the talks were discontinued.
        So we understand it is a humanitarian situation in North Korea, but
    likewise, if we are to speak of humanitarian problems, there are
    humanitarian problems in Japan as well. There are, as I said, Japanese
    women who are married to North Koreans, and they surely wish to write to
    their families in Japan. They surely wish to visit their families back
    home. And we hope they, the North Koreans, will give humanitarian
    considerations to these people.
        So these are, in fact, what I explained to President Clinton as
    well.
        President Clinton. Let me say, I personally am very grateful for the
    Prime Minister's support and for Japan's support for the program to end
    the North Korean nuclear efforts, to freeze it and dismantle it, and for
    Japan's generosity in so many areas around the world where Japan spends
    a higher percentage of its income than the United States on humanitarian
    efforts.
        We have devoted a significant amount of money and have pledged more
    to feed the people of North Korea. But the real answer here is, we can--
    the world will find a way to keep the people of North Korea from
    starving and from dealing with malnutrition. But they need to lift the
    burden of a system that is failing them in food and other ways off their
    back, resolve their differences with the South. That will permit them
    the freedom to reconcile the problems they have still with Japan.
        So what I think is so important--again I say, I implore the North
    Koreans to return to the talks. We have set these talks up, these four-
    party talks, with the Chinese, the people who were involved in the
    armistice at the end of the Korean war. We have given them every
    opportunity to come with honor and to be treated with fairness. And it
    is time to bring this long divide to an end, as well as to alleviate the
    misery of so many of their people.
        Get Bill, then John. Go ahead.

    China and Campaign Finance Reform

        Q. Mr. President, following up on your answer about China, you seem
    to be suggesting almost that China's mistake may have been that it
    didn't approach advocacy in the American system in the American way,
    which is to say, by hiring a high-powered lobbying firm here in
    Washington to do its advocacy work rather than possibly trying these
    back channels.

    [[Page 492]]

        And I also wanted to ask about campaign finance reform, and that is,
    how in the world do you expect to persuade very many of the people who
    were elected under the old system to ever give it up? Isn't this kind of
    a chimera?
        President Clinton. Well, let me answer the second question first,
    and then I'll answer the first question.
        I think that the only way I can persuade them to give it up is to
    believe that they--if they're on equal terms with their opponents, to
    have the confidence that since they're already in, if they're serving
    well and doing a good job, they should be able to persuade a majority of
    the people to reelect them. And I would never support any kind of
    campaign reform that did not at least guarantee some sort of equal
    footing to the competitors.
        Now, I know what you're saying. You're saying, once you get in, you
    can normally raise more money than your competitor. But the only way we
    can do it--let me tell you, the only way we can do it, since you have a
    lot of people from rural States who cannot raise what it costs to
    campaign, all of the money, in their own States--we have a lot of people
    from poor congressional districts who can't do that, and then you have
    people who just because--as I said, this is a harder sell for the
    Republicans than the Democrats because they could raise more money, and
    now that they're in the majority in Congress, they can raise a lot more
    money. So let's be fair to them. It's harder for them to buy this than
    it is for us.
        But one reason they ought to do it is, it takes too much of their
    time, and it raises too many questions. And they would get more sleep at
    night; they would have more time to read; they would have more time to
    spend with their families; they would have more time to do the job of
    being in Congress. They could also spend time with people they know who
    have money and influence and not be asked if they were spending it for
    the wrong reasons, and they could actually solicit people's opinion
    without somebody worrying about whether they had actually purchased a
    Congressman's vote on something.
        So, for all these reasons, I think that, besides the fact that it's
    right for America, I think they ought to do it.
        Now, let me answer your first question. I do not know the facts.
    That's the only thing I'm saying. I just don't want to see people tried
    and convicted before we know the facts. I don't know the facts. But I
    didn't just mean having lobbyists. What I mean is, we're comfortable in
    America. If an Irish-American friend of mine from Boston says to me
    before we got involved in the Irish peace talks, ``I think it's time
    that America changed their policy and got involved in this and tried to
    bring peace and harmony in Northern Ireland,'' and that Irish-American
    has direct contacts with people in the Government in the Republic in
    Ireland and people in the Parliament in Northern Ireland, no one thinks
    that it's inappropriate because it's a comfortable, open part of the way
    we are as Americans.
        If a Jewish-American friend of mine happens to also be a friend of
    Prime Minister Netanyahu or Prime Minister Peres--former Prime Minister
    Peres or former Prime Minister Rabin, no one thinks anything is wrong
    with it because it's the way things are. That's the only point I was
    trying to make, that we have a multiethnic society where people have
    different ties, different contacts, different feelings. And some of it
    we're comfortable with because we understand it. Other things we're
    uncomfortable with because it's new and different and jarring. And
    before we accuse people of wrongdoing, we at least need to know what are
    the facts. The only point I'm trying to make, the bottom line and
    significant point I'm trying to make is, I do not know what the facts
    are here, and I do not want to condemn without the evidence.
        Let's take one more from each side. You want to take one more? And
    then John, we'll--and then Karen [Karen Breslau, Newsweek].

    Strength of the Dollar and Trade

        Q. I have a question for President Clinton. I understand that the
    United States is in favor of a strong balance, and at the same time the
    United States doesn't want any kind of increase in U.S. trade deficit
    with Japan. I think that the strong dollar--[inaudible]--Japan's exports
    to the United States, thus, an increase in U.S. trade deficit with
    Japan. Do you want a weaker dollar to help cut--to help prevent U.S.
    trade deficit to Japan from increasing significantly?
        President Clinton. You have asked an excellent question and one to
    which I must give a careful answer; otherwise I will affect the value of
    the dollar, which I don't want to do.
        Here is our position. We do not want a weak dollar simply to improve
    our trade position. We

    [[Page 493]]

    think that would be--that is not our economic policy, to go out and seek
    a weak dollar. We want our dollar to be healthy and strong because we
    have a good, strong economy and good economic policies.
        But neither do we want any other actions to have the effect of
    throwing the exchange rate system out of whack in order to gain undue
    advantage in international trade. So what we would like to see is, and
    what we have campaigned for--what I have personally campaigned around
    the world for 4 years are good, coordinated, balanced economic policies
    among all the strong economies of the world, and a commitment among all
    of us to expand into a global trading system that will give other
    countries the chance to grow wealthier on responsible terms. That is
    what I think is the best policy over the long run.
        John. And then I'll take one from Karen.

    Tobacco Regulations Ruling

        Q. Mr. President, a followup to today's news. You have said, in
    regard to the talks the tobacco companies are involved in for a possible
    global solution, that your goal would be a solution that protects the
    health of children. My question is, does today's news not put the
    tobacco companies more on the run than ever before, at least more on the
    defensive? And does that not in some way weaken their hand in these
    negotiations and make the outcome you're looking for all the more
    likely?
        President Clinton. Well, I certainly hope it makes the outcome I'm
    looking for all the more likely. Of course, just as we intend to appeal
    the advertising portion of the decision in North Carolina, I'm doubtless
    they will appeal the other portion of it. So we've got some time to go,
    and we'll have some other legal steps to go through. But I hope this
    will strengthen the hands of the public health advocates.
        The only point I was trying to make earlier, John, is I simply do
    not know. I'm not the house expert here, and I don't know that we even
    have an expert in-house about where the right balance is in these
    negotiations with the public health at large. We originally began to
    monitor the negotiations with a very limited purpose, to ferociously
    protect what we had fought so hard for to get the FDA to do. But we know
    there is a larger public health interest here. And I hope that today's
    decision enhances the likelihood that the public health of the United
    States can be advanced, not only for children but for our country as a
    whole.
        Let's take one more. We're having a good time, let's do one more.
    [Laughter] Karen, you're next. Otherwise I'll get blasted for having all
    men I called on today--properly blasted, properly blasted.

    Japanese Deregulation

        Q. Mr. President, you mentioned--[inaudible]--are you confident that
    Hashimoto's package of deregulation will be strong enough and timely
    enough to sustain growth in Japan without any kind of help from the
    fiscal side?
        President Clinton. Well, I hope so. He's confident that it will be.
    And you know, he has to make the call. But we had a very good and, I
    thought, pretty sophisticated conversation about it today. I understand
    why Japan also wishes to cut its deficit, increase its savings rate. And
    I understand--we have similar long-term demographic challenges in Japan
    and the United States. You will face them before we will. And I
    understand that. But it's also important to keep our systems open, to
    keep opening them up and to not let the trade balance get out of whack.
    And we're committed to working on it. And I think we'll be reasonably
    successful if we work at it.
        Go ahead.
        Press Secretary Mike McCurry. Last question.
        President Clinton. All right.
        Press Secretary McCurry. The Prime Minister has to go----
        President Clinton. I know.

    Initiative on Race Relations

        Q. Mr. President, your aides have said that in coming weeks you plan
    to announce a major initiative on the state of race relations in this
    country. Why now? And what do you expect a blue ribbon panel or
    commission or task force, whatever you decide, to produce in terms of
    tangible results that will make a difference in people's lives?
        President Clinton. Well, first of all, let me say, I have not yet
    settled on a final form of an initiative. But what I think we need to do
    is to examine the nature of our relations with one another as Americans
    and what America is going to be like in this new century. I think it is
    time for a taking of stock.
        We've been through some huge upheavals over race in America. We
    fought a civil war

    [[Page 494]]

    over slavery and race, and then we had a series of constitutional
    amendments that gave basic citizenship rights to African-Americans. Then
    we had a long civil rights struggle which was marked by steady, explicit
    forbidding of various kinds of discrimination. And then we had the
    Kerner Commission report in '68, which basically said, even if you
    eliminate all these negative things, there are certain affirmative
    things you have to do to get people back to the starting line so they
    can contribute to our society. And then we had 25 years of affirmative
    action which is being rethought now, reassessed, and argued all over
    again.
        But America has changed a great deal during that time. The fastest
    growing minority group now are the Hispanics. There are four school
    districts in this country, including one right across the river here in
    Virginia, that have children from more than 100 different racial and
    ethnic groups in one single school district. And I personally rejoice at
    this. I think this is a huge asset for the United States as we go into
    the 21st century, if we learn how to avoid the racial and ethnic and
    religious pitfalls that are bedeviling the rest of the world today.
        So that's what I want to do. I want to take stock, see where we are,
    and see how we can get into the 21st century as one America, respecting
    our diversity but coming closer together. I think--by the way, I think
    this Summit of Service will have a lot to do with making it better.
        But I'm making the final policy decisions, and I'll have some
    announcement to make before too long.
        Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Prime Minister.

    Note: The President's 142d news conference began at 2:36 p.m. in the
    East Room at the White House. Prime Minister Hashimoto spoke in
    Japanese, and his remarks were translated by an interpreter. During the
    news conference, the following persons were referred to: Vice Minister
    for Political Affairs Komura Nasahiko and Finance Minister Hiroshi
    Mitsuzuka of Japan; and President Jiang Zemin and Premier Li Peng of
    China. The leaders also referred to the Special Action Committee on
    Okinawa (SACO).