Toward Stronger Strategic
Communications
REPORT OF THE ADVISORY PANEL ON
COMMUNICATIONS CONCERNING TERRITORIALINTEGRITY(Translated from the original Japanese)

ADVISORY PANEL ON COMMUNICATIONS CONCERNING TERRITORIAL INTEGRITYJULY 2, 2013

TOWARD STRONGER STRATEGIC COMMUNICATIONSThis report summarizes the discussions of the Advisory Panel on Communications
Concerning Territorial Integrity in the form of recommendations regarding key
issues in the full-fledged strengthening of the government’s public communications
efforts regarding territorial integrity. The members of the Panel strongly hope thatthe report will prompt the stepping up of the government’s strategic
communications activities regarding Japan’s territorial integrity, leading to bothheightened awareness domestically and the development of a national frameworkfor such communications activities to be conducted coherently at home and abroad.
The Panel members shared the recognition that Japan’s positions regarding its
territorial integrity were valid while arguments by the other countries involved in
the situation were groundless. The Panel also recognized that in domestic andoverseas communications activities, it would be effective to emphasize, regarding
the situation surrounding the Senkaku Islands, the fact that change in the status
quo through use of physical force by China is unacceptable, and that it was not
until 1971 that China first voiced its assertion that it had territorial rights to theislands; and, regarding the Takeshima issue, the fact that while the Republic ofKorea seized Takeshima by force, Japan has long sought a peaceful resolution to
the dispute based on international law.
As for domestic and overseas communications activities regarding Japan’s
territorial integrity, Panel members shared a sense of crisis over the lead taken by
the other countries involved in the situation in many communications areas, while
Japan has fallen behind, and that its communications efforts targeted at thirdparty countries have been overwhelmingly insufficient. In order to foster anenvironment favorable to Japan’s positions concerning territorial integrity,
members noted the overriding importance of gaining the understanding ofinternational opinion through effective communications at home and abroad. In
the points raised in the recommendations below, they refer to not only theimportance of raising domestic awareness of but also the need for a full-fledged
strengthening of communications efforts, particularly directed at third-party
countries.
Needless to say, maintaining amicable diplomatic ties with the other countries
involved is extremely important for Japan. Communications activities regarding
Japan’s territorial integrity must be advanced in a cautious and strategic manner,
striking a balance with Japan’s other diplomatic interests, bearing in mind thepossible impact on relations with those countries as a result of enhancing suchactivities. On this point, the Panel reached a consensus, with members noting the1

need to advance a communications strategy that would not narrow Japan’s choices
in diplomatic strategy.
The Advisory Panel on Communications Concerning Territorial Integrity is a councilof experts convened by the Minister in Charge of Territorial Integrity. Given the
recent situation surrounding Japan’s territorial integrity, there is a need to conduct
public communications activities more effectively both at home and overseas, with afull grasp of the assertions of the other countries involved in the situation and theperceptions of third-party countries. The Panel was established to identify andconsider what measures are necessary in the domains of academic research as wellas domestic and overseas communications strategy.
The Panel, comprising experts in foreign and security policy, international relations,international law, historical research, and overseas communications, met on fiveoccasions beginning in April 2013, in the presence of the Minister in Charge ofTerritorial Integrity, for intense discussions on the situation surrounding the
Senkaku Islands as well as the Takeshima issue. This report presents a summary of
those discussions.

2GENERAL STRENGTHENING OF OVERSEAS AND DOMESTICCOMMUNICATIONS REGARDING TERRITORIAL INTEGRITY
1. Overseas communications regarding Japan’s territorial integrity need to be
conducted strategically and in a concentrated manner, using narratives consisting of
topics selected in such a way that makes it easy for members of the public tounderstand Japan’s positions, including in third-party countries.
Communicating the correctness of historical facts to the international community is
obviously of great importance, but there are times when perception takes on a life ofits own and gains greater international currency than fact. A refutation of thelegitimacy of historical claims can be extremely difficult to follow for someone notdirectly involved owing to the complex intertwining of facts. Given that the othercountries involved in the situation are incessantly communicating an array ofarguments based on their own recognition of history, it is of great importance thatJapan emphasize two points: that a change in the status quo through the use offorce—unacceptable in modern international society—was made once and may bemade again, and that Japan’s basic policy is to resolve issues on the basis ofinternational law.
Simply repeating the same official government positions on territorial integrity will
have little impact. Communications on this issue should instead first consider theconcerns of third-party countries, developing arguments that have a direct bearing
on their interests and eliciting their engagement. The other countries involved
frequently fail to remain dispassionate in their communications. Japan should
instead develop cool-headed arguments that embrace the concerns of third-party
countries.
Such arguments should be strategically framed in such ways as to project a positive
image of Japan: a cool-headed country where the rule of law prevails and a peaceloving, future-oriented country with a long track record of contributions to theinternational community.
A strategic approach to communications raises the question of who is doing thecommunicating. The government’s organizational structure should urgently be
developed to bring the policymaking and communications functions together sothey can closely coordinate to develop effective narratives as well as to implement a
coherent communications strategy. In addition to the organizational aspects ofstrategic communications, also crucial will be the development of human resources
to do the communicating. Communication officers—who may also be drawn from3the private sector—should be prepared to serve on a long-term basis, particularly
those assigned the task of strategically advancing overseas communications. One
must not forget that politicians, too, are to play a crucial role in the strategic
communications effort.
2. Communications in English need to be drastically enhanced, targetinginternationally influential third-party countries.
International opinion shaped in English claims a highly influential position in theinternational community. Members of the public in third-party countries where
information is exchanged in English should therefore be considered the main targetsof Japan’s overseas communications activities concerning territorial integrity.
Japan lags far behind the other countries involved in terms of English-language
communications regarding territorial integrity. Web-accessible academic papers in
English on this issue written by Japanese authors are almost nonexistent. Neither are
there English papers online describing the debate being conducted domestically inJapan on international law. Looking only at what is available online, the othercountries involved have an overwhelming lead in English-language papers, and thishas had a great impact on what is being written by scholars in third-party countries.
Japan, too, must provide English-language documents that researchers andjournalists can readily access on the web and quote.
It is important that members of the public in third-party countries gain anunderstanding of Japan’s positions regarding its territorial integrity. This requires
boosting English communications activities in various influential English-speaking
countries.
Existing government documents in English on the subject of territorial integrity are,for the most part, translations from Japanese. One must remember, though, that afaithfully translated text does not always have the same impact as the original.
Ideally, English communications should be developed in English from the outset
and expressed based on the language’s natural logic.
The government must prepare documents in English meeting stringent academic
standards that support the legitimacy of Japan’s positions regarding its territorial
integrity. Another concrete way to strengthen English communications is to support
initiatives by private-sector research institutes and other organizations to build andmaintain online archives of reference materials and papers on topics related toterritorial integrity. To this end, the Japanese government should also consider
4

developing systems to support the translation of Japanese papers and books on thesubject of territorial integrity and the publishing of op-ed articles in foreign
newspapers, as well as to work together with Japan-studies-archives at libraries indomestic and overseas universities in order to enhance the accessibility of academic
papers written in English by Japanese scholars.
While the overseas media represents a vital communications channel, the number ofTokyo-based correspondents has been declining, and there are now fewer stories
written by journalists working in Japan. This trend must be countered in some way,such as by further stepping up communications activities in the United States andEurope.
3. In addition to government efforts, communications regarding territorial integrity
must be pursued in a multilayered manner involving those from outside thegovernment, including academics, think tanks, and foreign researchers.
Looking at how public communications are pursued in other countries shows many
examples where—in addition to foreign policy authorities—think tanks, which are
actually government-affiliated research institutes, and groups of university-based
researchers wage effective communications initiatives to shape public opinion inother countries and win support for one’s own position. There are also cases ofmultilayered communications efforts where governments play a leading role inestablishing research institutes that invite foreign researchers and journalists to takepart in their events and activities.
Japan lacks the setup to map out a public communications strategy and identify
priorities, to gather relevant documents and data, and to present its positions in a
multilayered manner. The government therefore needs to fill the gap by taking theinitiative to develop such a setup. In the light of the fact that experts capable incommunicating abroad are unevenly concentrated in universities, closer
partnerships should be pursued with academia, making effective use of existing
networks of Japanese and foreign researchers.
Other channels the government should pursue that would contribute tomultilayered communications include dispatching Japanese researchers to overseas
think tanks, accepting
foreign specialists as visiting researchers, hosting
international symposia in Japan, and expanding public communications activities
directed at foreign residents in Japan.

5

4. Speaking with “one voice” by adhering to a consistent line of argument would bean effective way of communicating Japan’s positions on territorial integrity to
third-party countries.
Freedom of speech is guaranteed in Japan, unlike in some countries where public
expression is controlled, thus giving rise to a diverse range of opinions. Divergent
views exist even on topics related to territorial integrity, and many such views arefreely expressed.
It must be kept in mind that in the age of globalization, even those views that weredirected at a domestic audience or to the other countries involved in the issue may
quickly be reported in third-party countries, where those utterances can affectpeople’s understanding of or sympathy toward Japan’s positions. There have been
many examples where the failure to communicate Japan’s positions with “one voice”
has had a decisively negative impact. Not a few Japanese utterances have only
served to further the positions of the other countries involved, and some have been
so damaging as to wipe away in one instant all communications efforts made over
the years. At the very least, government officials and cabinet members must speakwith “one voice.” To facilitate this task and to ensure that statements from within
and outside the government are based on an accurate understanding of Japan’s
positions, briefing materials on territorial integrity that are easy to use should be
prepared.
To advance a whole-of-the country public communications initiative, in addition to
government efforts, Japanese citizens residing or otherwise active abroad will also be
important assets. To help head off situations in which they might make commentsthat undermine Japan’s positions in conversations with foreigners, for example, theGovernment of Japan should provide English-language materials that containstraightforward responses. In particular, the government must strive to shareaccurate facts with individuals and organizations that are especially influential.
Promoting dialogue in Japan among people holding divergent positions will also be
important to avoid damaging Japan’s national interests concerning territorial
integrity.
5. Effective overseas communications will require Japan to present positive imagesof itself while calmly setting forth explanations of the facts in brief, easily
understood, and accurate words.
As Japan produces its messages on territorial integrity for third-party countries, the6most important points will be the brevity, ease of understanding, and accuracy of its
explanations, as well as the calmness with which they are presented.
Japan must consider a strategy to correct the mistaken perceptions of itself. One suchmethod could be the use of narratives from an international legal perspective, rooted
in extant international treaties, international jurisprudence, and the like. Here it will
also be important for Japan to stress its positions as a nation that guarantees the
freedom of speech and democratic values.
Since the end of World War II, as a democratic nation that has aimed for peace,
Japan has consistently contributed to regional peace, stability, and prosperity. While
projecting these facts, Japan must show that, when faced with a situation concerning
its territorial integrity, its principles are not to use armed force to achieve resolutions
but to resolve issues in line with international law. Japan must also stress that it has
no intention of using force to change the status quo.
6. The support of Japan’s public opinion will be indispensable to advancegovernment policies regarding territorial integrity, and there is a need to enhancedomestic awareness, including via stronger cooperation with the education sector.
As one basis for public communications initiatives on territorial integrity, it must
naturally be made clear to the outside world that Japanese people share a robust
mindset regarding Japan’s sovereignty, and are determined to see to it that its
territorial integrity is resolutely defended. Toward this end, there is a need fordeeper understanding among the Japanese people regarding territorial integrity.
Domestic efforts to enhance understanding through the education system will be
particularly vital.
For this purpose, however, there is an insufficient supply of teaching and researchmaterials that can accurately explain Japan’s territorial situation. In Shimane
Prefecture, the authorities have produced their own materials on the Takeshima
issue, and are undertaking education in the prefecture’s elementary and junior highschools with these as supplementary learning materials. To share information withpeople within Japan, we need to produce a deeper body of materials that can be put
to use in the classroom. It should also be noted that some of the other nations
involved in the issue have established research resource centers. Japan, too, must
give more thought to ways to provide arenas for active learning on the topics.
In advancing domestic educational activities on the theme of territorial integrity, thegovernment must approach the task with the goal of building up a mature body of7

knowledge that can make dispassionate judgments based on the historical andinternational relations contexts.
7. To press the legitimacy of Japan’s positions more effectively, it is recommended todevelop a framework for more robust survey and research activities, including theactive collection of relevant literature and historical materials.
The other countries involved are carrying out all-out campaigns on territorial
questions, mobilizing their research institutions, universities, foundations and evennonprofit organizations. They are also seeking to bolster their national positions
through historical debate related to situations concerning territories. It is hard to saythat the Government of Japan has provided sufficient counterarguments in this area.
One reason for this is the lack of a robust survey and research framework in Japantasked with collecting historical data, as well as relevant literature and historicalmaterials. It will be important for Japan to put its research institutions, resource
centers, and library archives to use in discovering literature and historical materials
on territorial integrity, translating those into English, and sharing them broadly.
In those countries, there are cases where the authorities have intentionally rejected
requests to view materials in national archives, and information is locked away.
Japan, meanwhile, has taken the opposite route and maintained openness,something that should be stated widely both in Japan and abroad to clarify thedifferences in values and systems between Japan and them.
8. In Japan’s communications activities, it will be effective to use photos, videos,
and other media to appeal to the visual sense. Japan must also redouble its efforts
to ensure that maps and other materials designed for visual consumption are in linewith its positions.
To deliver a message, a single photograph or other visual aid often has greater
impact than a lengthy textual description. Japan must make effective use ofphotographic and other visual content to clarify the legitimacy of its positions.
Following the 2010 collisions between the Chinese fishing trawler and Japan Coast
Guard vessels, the video footage that leaked out became conclusive evidence
showing which side was at fault. The Government of Japan needs to consider
organizing a system that lets it release visual evidence to display the legitimacy ofJapan’s positions when it is urgently needed.
Furthermore, Japan must make continuous and steady efforts to ensure that writingon maps and labels applied to territorial features on the Internet are compatible with
8

Japan’s positions. Further efforts are also required to make sure that maps,
pamphlets, weather reports, and other information within Japan reflect Japan’s
positions.

OVERSEAS AND DOMESTIC COMMUNICATIONS REGARDING THE
SITUATION SURROUNDING THE SENKAKU ISLANDS
9. In its domestic and overseas communications regarding the situation surrounding
the Senkaku Islands, Japan must stress that change in the status quo through use ofphysical force by China is unacceptable. At the same time, Japan must also give fullconsideration to its communications in light of its diplomatic goal of further
developing its mutually beneficial strategic relationship with China.
With respect to the Senkaku Islands, which Japan validly controls, Japan’s position is
one of defending the status quo. Therefore, Japan is in no position of making any
particular fuss over them. China, however, is approaching the islands by threatening
Japan’s territorial integrity through physical means. In crisis conditions like these,
Japan no longer has the option of remaining silent. It is now a matter of vital
importance to communicate the Japanese position to the world in order to deter
these Chinese moves.
In producing its external messages on the Senkaku Islands, Japan must carefully
consider how to communicate these messages to domestic and overseas audiences so
as to achieve two diplomatic goals at once: (1) not allowing China to change thestatus quo regarding Japanese territorial integrity and (2) improving Japan-China
relations without undermining the bilateral relationship as a whole.
The international community has very little knowledge of the way in which China isrepeatedly carrying out actions that could be interpreted as indicating an intention tochange the status quo through use of physical force. This is because it is hard toaccess information in English on China’s dispatch of vessels and aircraft into Japan’s
territorial sea and contiguous zone around the Senkaku Islands in ways that could
be seen as being part of a scheme to bring change to the status quo, and theGovernment of Japan’s efforts to remove these intruders. Easy-to-understandmaterials should be produced in English and shared with the international
community.

910. It will be effective to stress to the international community that it was not until
1971 that China first began making territorial arguments regarding the Senkaku
Islands. It will also be important to disseminate the facts of the situation in the
Chinese language.
For 76 long years after Japan incorporated the Senkaku Islands into Okinawa
Prefecture, China voiced no objection to Japan’s possession of them. It was in 1971
that China stated for the first time ever its own territorial arguments regarding theislands. It is important for Japan to stress that such Chinese territorial arguments are
absolutely extraordinary, with no basis in international law whatsoever, and are
hardly to be taken seriously. In other words, there exists no issue of territorial
sovereignty that needs to be resolved concerning the Senkaku Islands. Therefore,
communicating to the global community the facts of the matter—that China statedno territorial argument until 1971—should be an effective approach. In doing so,
Japan must also work to ensure that third-party countries understand that this is amere statement of facts. Such a statement cannot possibly be an act that heightens
tension.
As a democratic state, Japan guarantees freedom of speech, which makes it harder tospeak with “one voice” to the international community. It will be important tocalmly and evenly present the facts. In connection with the incorrect aspects ofChina’s official positions and arguments, it will also be important to use the Internet
to provide Chinese-language information that can be quoted and further
disseminated. Patient, steady efforts to tell the facts of the situation are certain toprove beneficial in the end.

OVERSEAS AND DOMESTIC COMMUNICATIONS REGARDING THE
TAKESHIMA ISSUE
11. With respect to the Takeshima issue, Japan must deliver appropriate messages
on its position over the long term while also keeping in mind the larger picture ofbilateral relations with the Republic of Korea. To this end, educational efforts toraise public awareness in Japan will be of utmost importance.
The Takeshima issue has become a symbol of Korean nationalism, and it is expectedthat Japan will need to continuously make needed objections to the situation for aconsiderable length of time. While paying heed to the larger picture of Japan-Korean
relations as a whole, Japan must carry out appropriate educational activities related
to domestic public opinion in order to communicate Japanese views on theTakeshima issue over the long term.
10

Deeper understanding of the Takeshima issue has been achieved in Shimane
Prefecture; there is now a need to elevate recognition of the issue on a nationwide
scale. Enhancing domestic communications on Takeshima will be an important partof forming a coherent national viewpoint on territorial matters. To measure domestic
recognition of the issue, it will be necessary to gauge the present state of publicawareness via opinion polls and other means and then to work together withclassroom educators and advance educational efforts in Japan.
12. With respect to the Takeshima issue, Japan should communicate the facts that
the Republic of Korea took Takeshima by force in the 1950s and is illegally
occupying the islands to this day. It should also be stressed that the Government ofJapan has responded to this by pursuing resolution through peaceful means inaccordance with international law, including referral of the dispute to theInternational Court of Justice.
Takeshima had long been recognized by the international community as a part ofJapanese territory when it was taken by force by the Republic of Korea. The
Republic of Korea unilaterally defined the “Syngman Rhee Line” on the high seas in
1952, including the islands within its scope. It subsequently dispatched a Coast
Guard battalion to be stationed on Takeshima in 1954. In the course of taking theislands by force, the Koreans seized Japanese fishing vessels and took numerous
Japanese fishermen prisoner, as well as using physical force such as gunfire against
Japanese vessels, including Japan Coast Guard patrols. Korea’s actions since 1954
represent an illegal occupation of Japanese territory with no basis in internationallaw. In response to these Korean actions, Japan has never opted to use force toresolve the situation, which would be contrary to justice, but has taken the opposite
tack, tenaciously pursuing peaceful means to argue against the injustice. This should
be an effective point for gaining the support of third-party countries.
Japan has also stressed its territorial rights to Takeshima in line with internationallaw and has repeatedly pressed for a fair, transparent resolution to the situation at
the International Court of Justice. The Republic of Korea, however, has rejected these
proposals, without providing any reasons why they should be rejected. Japan shouldseek to prompt international questioning of the Korean refusal to refer the matter tothe International Court of Justice and even to explain why it would not submit thematter to the court.

11Members of the Advisory Panel on Communications
Concerning Territorial Integrity

Chair:
Masashi Nishihara

President, Research Institute for Peace and Security

Members:
Naoyuki Agawa

Professor, Keio University

Hisayoshi Ina

Foreign Policy Columnist, Nihon Keizai Shimbun

Akira Kotera

Professor, University of Tokyo

Yasuhiro Matsuda

Professor, University of Tokyo

Kunihiko Miyake

Visiting Professor, Ritsumeikan University

Tetsuya Nakano

Professor, Kansai University

Jun Osawa

Senior Research Fellow,
Institute for International Policy Studies

Masao Shimojo

Professor, Takushoku University

Susumu Takai

Director, Center for Island Studies,
Ocean Policy Research Foundation

12

Meetings of the Advisory Panel on Communications
Concerning Territorial Integrity
First meeting (April 23, 2013)• General discussion on communications concerning territorial integrity
Second meeting (May 13, 2013)• Discussion on communications (including their content) concerning thesituation surrounding the Senkaku Islands
Third meeting (May 28, 2013)• Discussion on communications (including their content) concerning theTakeshima issue
Fourth meeting (June 10, 2013)• Discussion on methods of communications concerning territorial integrity
Fifth meeting (June 25, 2013)• Discussion on compilation of the Advisory Panel report13