[Weekly Compilation of Presidential Documents Volume 33, Number 18 (Monday, May 5, 1997)]
[Pages 587-599]
[Online from the Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

<R04>
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.

[[Page 588]]

    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 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

[[Page 589]]

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 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 that happened today. The court said that the FDA cannot 
restrict tobacco advertising, which is the 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 expressed 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].

[[Page 590]]

    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 
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 Agreement

    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

[[Page 591]]

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

[[Page 592]]

    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----
    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.

[[Page 593]]

    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 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,

[[Page 594]]

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 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.

[[Page 595]]

    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 Clinton'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 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

[[Page 596]]

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.
    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

[[Page 597]]

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 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

[[Page 598]]

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 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

[[Page 599]]

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. Prime Minister Hashimoto also referred to the Special Action 
Committee on Okinawa (SACO). This item was not received in time for 
publication in the appropriate issue.