Why do Japanese media such as the Asahi Shimbun, Nikkei, NHK, and TV Tokyo continue reporting with deference to China? Through Keisuke Udagawa’s essay, this article examines the Japan-China Press Exchange Agreement, the distortion of Japan-China reporting, the influence of the Chinese Embassy, and the loss of independence in Japanese media.

May 3, 2020
It is not so difficult to find people who go in and out of the Chinese Embassy in the lobbies or conference rooms of television stations in Roppongi, newspaper companies in Tsukiji, or broadcasting stations in Shibuya.
I am sending out again the chapter I published on December 13, 2018, under the title, “Chinese people are everywhere, so you never know where the connection to ‘Moto-Azabu’ may be.”
That is because it tells us why newspapers such as the Asahi Shimbun and Nikkei, and news programs of media such as NHK, continue reporting with deference to China.

The following is from a painstaking essay by journalist Keisuke Udagawa, published in the monthly magazine WiLL under the title, “The ‘Japan-China Reporting Agreement’ That Still Binds Newspapers and Television: Because Japanese People Are Foolishly Serious, They Are Still Bound by It. Throw Away Such a Piece of Paper!”

Why do they attack Trump?
The American midterm elections seem to have produced a satisfactory result for President Trump.
Japanese media reporting is making a great fuss, as if the fact that the Republicans lost a majority in the House of Representatives means that President Trump’s policies have begun to decline.
However, during President Obama’s time, the Democrats did not hold a majority in both houses, and for that reason the United States could not pass a budget, and state-run facilities were temporarily closed.
Compared with that, the fact that the Republican Party is the ruling party in the Senate can be evaluated as producing a more stable politics than during President Obama’s time.
Nevertheless, there is absolutely no sign that “Trump bashing” will disappear from the world of reporting.
It would be understandable if this were the American media, but it is a somewhat strange situation when the Japanese media also report in this way.
“Well, just between us, if we report in a way that supports Trump, we get scolded from above.”
So says a director at a certain television station that does not have a very good reputation among conservatives.
This was when we were talking over drinks about why the midterm election results were not being reported neutrally.
“Why?”
“Well, apparently a complaint comes from ‘Moto-Azabu’ saying that it violates the agreement.”
“The Chinese Embassy?”
The director put his index finger to his lips, gesturing for me not to speak aloud.
Then he suddenly brought his face close to mine and said, “What would happen if you said that so loudly and someone heard you? I would be fired immediately.”
“Who would hear it?”
“Chinese people are everywhere, so you never know where the connection to ‘Moto-Azabu’ may be.”
The director said this in a low voice, looking quite annoyed, and then hurriedly changed the subject.
But what exactly is this “violation of the agreement”?
The keyword that solves the mystery is the “Japan-China Press Exchange Agreement.”

＊This is a painstaking work that reveals the reason why Japanese television stations such as TV Tokyo, especially its female anchor, the Nikkei Shimbun, and NHK continue to observe this agreement and continue reporting one hundred percent with deference to China, that is, the CCP＊

The Japan-China Press Exchange Agreement.
Its official name is the “Exchange of Notes Concerning the Exchange of Journalists Between the Governments of Japan and China,” and it was concluded in 1972 between Hiroshi Hashimoto, counselor at the Japanese Embassy in China, and Wang Zhen, deputy director of the Information Department of the Chinese Foreign Ministry.
It is somewhat complicated, but the original document was the “Memorandum Concerning the Exchange of Newspaper Journalists Between Japan and China,” which had been exchanged before the normalization of diplomatic relations between Japan and China.
However, because it expired with the conclusion of the Japan-China Trade Agreement, it was concluded again on the same day with the same content.
However, the fact that it is an “official document” or “memorandum” means that it is neither a formal agreement between the two countries nor a treaty.
Naturally, it is only an informal arrangement that was not ratified by the Diet.
Yet, for some reason, the Japanese mass media have not only failed to free themselves from the spell of this agreement, but have been completely controlled by it.
This agreement began when, in 1962, the “Memorandum on Japan-China Comprehensive Trade” was exchanged with China, with which Japan had no diplomatic relations, and economic exchange was given priority.
For the purpose of reporting on this economic activity, in 1964 matters concerning the exchange of newspaper journalists between Japan and China and the mutual establishment of trade liaison offices were decided.
The representatives on the Japanese side were Tatsunosuke Takasaki, who was conducting trade at the time, and Kenzo Matsumura, a member of the House of Representatives.
Kenzo Matsumura was a person who concurrently served as Minister of Health and Welfare and Minister of Education in the Higashikuni Cabinet, and was a heavyweight of the “dovish faction,” having formed a faction within the Liberal Democratic Party with Takeo Miki.
After the resignation of the Ikeda Cabinet, he opposed the LDP hawks at every turn, including recommending Ichiro Kono, and his secretaries Seiichi Tagawa and Yohei Kono later founded the New Liberal Club.
Furthermore, that Yohei Kono later issued the “Kono Statement,” which has caused serious obstacles to today’s Japan-China relations.
The contents of this agreement have been revised several times.
Among them is the 1968 “Communiqué of the Japan-China Memorandum Trade Talks,” in which rather serious matters were discussed.
It may be a little difficult to understand, but I will list the main points here.

・Promoting friendly relations between Japan and China is beneficial to peace in Asia and the world.
・The obstacles existing in Sino-Japanese relations were brought about by American imperialism and the anti-China policy promoted by the Japanese authorities, and the Japanese side deeply understands this and will make further efforts to eliminate such obstacles and promote the normalization of Japan-China relations.
・Both Japan and China agree to uphold the three principles of “not adopting an anti-China policy,” “not participating in a conspiracy to create two Chinas,” and “not obstructing the restoration of normal relations between China and Japan,” as well as the three political principles and the principle that politics and economics are inseparable.

The “three principles” here are the official view presented in 1958 to Tadataka Sata, a Socialist Party member of the House of Councillors who visited China, by Liao Chengzhi, standing committee member, on behalf of Premier Zhou Enlai and Foreign Minister Chen Yi.
They are principles that China has brought up on every possible occasion thereafter.
The reason for this complicated relationship can be said to lie in the fact that, toward China before reform and opening, trade was pressed for the sole pursuit of private profit, regardless of the politics of Japan as a whole or the international situation.
For that reason, this trade was even called “LT Trade,” taking the initials of Liao Chengzhi and Tatsunosuke Takasaki, who began the agreement.

The sacrifice paid for the “statements.”
Japan, as a country, has sacrificed something important, such as politics and ideology, because it has given too much priority to the economy of a small number of people.
This agreement, too, was accepted without much awareness, as if trade had been taken hostage.
However, the Japanese side agreed to various things, including an anti-American policy, the inseparability of politics and economics, and One China.
Moreover, it is unmanageable because it took the form of a former minister of the Liberal Democratic Party adding another layer to principles decided by a Socialist Party lawmaker.
The spirit of this agreement remains intact in the “Kono Statement” and the “Murayama Statement.”
It is precisely a form in which the LDP dovish faction and the Socialist Party of the time worked together, watched China’s face, and completely ignored what was important for Japan.
To repeat, neither this agreement, nor the Kono Statement, nor the Murayama Statement was an expression of Japan’s will through formal procedures.
They are not treaties, nor were they ratified by the Diet.
Now, the explanation of this press exchange agreement has become lengthy.
However, if one says that an arrangement from more than half a century ago still controls the Japanese mass media, quite a few people may find it surprising.
Yet the actual scene is the conversation at the beginning.
It is not so difficult to find people who go in and out of the Chinese Embassy in the lobbies or conference rooms of television stations in Roppongi, newspaper companies in Tsukiji, or broadcasting stations in Shibuya.
Naturally, regarding China, they report mainly on the announcements of the Chinese Communist Party government.
They do not verify the content.
Nor do they compare it with the claims of other countries and clarify the true intention behind China’s announcements.
Even when the content is recognized as completely different from facts and international common sense, they report it as it is and think nothing of it.
Will this not become a situation in which the independence of reporting disappears?
Of course, there are not a few Japanese people who already understand this.
It is no exaggeration to say that the internet is full of criticism of the mass media, which report while worrying about China’s intentions.
However, the situation is becoming one that cannot be dismissed as merely a domestic problem.
To be continued.