As you may understand from this table, of course except for some limited cases under war, the order at sea in the 21st century is maintained by the coast guard independently in accordance with UNCLOS without the involvement of the navy.

　

 I think this fact might be due to the different characteristics of the two organs. Although there can be some overlaps, the navy pursues military action on the basis of the advanced technology while the function of the coast guard is the enforcement of laws subject to the principles of human rights. Taking account of the fact that their functions have been specialized and differentiated from each other, they are required to perform their respective missions, especially under the current situation of developing an international law and a law regime for the sea.

　

 Let me give you some examples of JCG's performance which has not caused any international criticisms or any doubts that JCG or the Government of Japan has military intentions: transportation of emergency relief goods to "Nakhodka" by JCG patrol vessel "ECHIGO"; the successful transportation of the heavily burned Russian kid from Sakhalin Island to the hospital in Hokkaido, and the settlement of the riots onboard the "EB Carrier" and "PESCA MAR". I am not allowed to go into detail due to the limited time. Another good example is "YASHIMA", a JCG ship that is doing anti-piracy patrol in closer cooperation with related countries on the high seas around the Malacca areas and the vicinities.

 There is also the example that JCG's jet-airplane flies JCG representatives to neighboring countries to attend international conferences. The patrol vessels from both Japan Coast Guard and Korean National Maritime Police Agency cooperate in patrol and visit each other's ports under the Japan-Korea Cooperative Patrol Campaign. And JCG's biggest patrol ship "SHIKISHIMA" has escorted cargo vessel "AKATSUKIMARU" to transport plutonium.

　

 Moreover, JCG Academy's training vessel "KOJIMA" has taken annual training cruises around the world, however, JCG has never been criticized or been doubted that it is taking military actions. These examples and facts are the symbol of the nature of peaceful maritime police organization.

　

 The merit of the coast guard, which is a safety device against the extension of international disputes, should be acknowledged. It is necessary to have the internationally acceptable level of awareness of 'border'. It is obvious or natural that the conflicts of national interests at border areas can lead to a dispute no matter where the conflicts occur, on land or at sea. We have to admit that border invasion and incidents such as suspicious vessel are nothing uncommon.

　

 If a state does nothing to these serious infringements on its sovereignty, it can be in danger. Although according to the circumstances, it may become necessary to shoot such suspicious vessels, the risk of full-scale war could increase if military is frequently involved in dealing with such disputes.

　

 It is preferable that such incidents are dealt with by the coast guard which also has the function to guard the border. I think that after the situation comes under control, to sit at the negotiating table and discuss remedial measures is an internationally accepted rule. There are some exceptional cases, indeed.

　

 From the perspective that I have mentioned so far, coast guard is a safety device preventing the disputes about border and territorial sea from escalating into a full-scale war and coast guard is considered to be an entity that is the outcome of the human's wisdom. The value of existence of JCG is high for Japan, which is an ocean state.

　

 Police power can protect lives and property without posing threats as military power to the neighboring countries. Moreover, it can be said that coast guard is required to have the potential to protect lives and properties not only for national interests but also for all human beings regardless of nationalities. Police power, which was lost during the cold war, has come back on stage to replace the military power, which was considered something essential during the cold war.

　

 It is the global trend that coast guard, not navy carries out law enforcement function at sea, and maritime safety and maintenance of maritime order must be conducted by coast guard, which is regulated and restricted by law and as such leads to have a possibility to solve any maritime disputes basically, peacefully and administratively. Therefore, it must be stated that there is the case for the existence of coast guard.

　

 Mr. Tadao Iida stated in his writing titled "Maritime Police Theory" (1961, Seizando Publication) that the theory advocated by A.T. Mahan is still alive in nature despite of change of times, however, the nature of the maintenance of maritime order after the World War II is cooperation among nations under the Territory Convention and High-sea Convention, and this is what sea powers should do in peacetime. And Mr. Sam Batemann, in his thesis titled "Coast Guard: For Regional Order and Security" (Asia Pacific Issue, no. 65, JAN 2003) expressed almost the same view. I also would like to highlight that Mr. Kazuhisa Ogawa, a military commentator, described the same gist in his book titled "Can Japan protect its border?"

　

 The Proliferation Security Initiative (PSI) proposed by US President Bush during his stay in Poland in May 2003, is to examine the cooperation with PSI signatory parties in terms of measures against proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and other related substances that pose great threat to the peace and stability of the international society as a whole. Eleven countries such as Australia, France, Italy, Germany, Japan, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Spain, U.K. and US are the participants of the Initiative. The following were adopted in the conference afterwards:

 In line with it, the first Joint Proliferation Exercise named "Pacific Protector" on September 12-13, 2003 based on PSI was carried out at the Coral Sea off Australia. Warships, coast guard ships and air crafts from four countries such as Japan, US, Australia and France participated in the exercise. Other seven PSI parties also participated as observers. The patrol ship "SHIKISHIMA" was dispatched from Japan. The assumption was that warships and air craft pursue in cooperation a Japanese flagged suspicious vessel, and "SHIKISHIMA" and USCG visit and inspect the vessel. Besides "SHIKISHIMA" and its helicopters, 12-person special unit from Japan, a customs ship, a patrol air craft and two warships from Australia, USCG law enforcement team and an aegis warship from US and a naval patrol air craft from France and additionally a cargo ship from US as a suspected vessel were present at the exercise. Japan Government decided Japan Coast Guard to participate with three premises that the nature of the PSI is the activity in peacetime within the regime of current international/national law, and the activity is not the military one but includes law enforcement activity, and the target is not any specific country. Three persons from Japan Maritime Self- Defense Force participated in the exercise as observers.

　

 This exercise should be affirmatively construed that joint exercise, in cooperation with respective agency such as Navy, Coast Guard and Customs etc. related to maintenance of maritime order, was a suggestion that cooperation and collaboration are most effective and practical measures to ensure ocean security in 21st century.

　

 Up to now, I am not in the place to give any clear suggestions because I am not confident about my ideas of ocean security. However, collaboration, cooperation, partnership and mutual understanding should constitute the keywords for a suggestion related to ocean security. Also important are clear purpose of the cooperation and collaboration and that the cooperation should be possible within the international law enforcement regime. The partial role responsibility of respective regions and close communication for the establishment of the system of cooperative partnership are important as well. Moreover, the cooperation in legal system, equipment, education etc. is also critical and essential for the enhancement of the ability of coast guards of countries concerned. Communication is highlighted because information exchange and information sharing are very important. The report of "Protect the Ocean 2002" deemed that this conference proceeded with the common recognition that the ocean cannot be protected without multi-lateral cooperation whether the duty is carried out by Navy or by Coast Guard. I apologize for my vague discussion, however, I believe that further discussions will produce feasibility, so our discussion should be deepened aiming at a suggestion of possible practical measures. For this purpose, I would like to have your critical comments on this matter.