[Special Feature] Chancellor Merkel Speaks with Keio students

Good afternoon, everyone. We are honored to welcome Chancellor Angela Merkel of the Federal Republic of Germany. As I'm sure you all know, the Chancellor is the first female chancellor of the Federal Republic of Germany and is currently the longest-serving leader among the heads of the G7 nations. During her tenure, she has led not only Germany but also international politics, including the EU. Germany is currently promoting Industry 4.0, the fourth industrial revolution utilizing advanced technologies such as AI and IoT. Japan, too, is exploring ways for people to live happily in a new society where cyberspace and physical space are integrated, which we call Society 5.0.

The Chancellor, who holds a doctorate in physics, is also a researcher with a deep knowledge of academic research. I encourage all of you, the students of Keio University, to have a frank exchange of opinions with the Chancellor and discuss a future where technology and humanity can live in harmony. I will now turn the floor over to the Chancellor.

It is a great honor to be invited. As our time is limited, let's move straight to the questions you have prepared. I came to this university because I wanted to hear about what you are studying, what you are interested in, and what you want to know. Any question is welcome. Please don't hesitate to ask about politics, life, the world, or anything else.

I am an exchange student from the University of Cologne. How can Japan and Germany work together to face the United States? Amid the changes in Japan-US relations, as well as Germany-US and Europe-US relations, how can we cooperate, especially on trade policy?

Merkel: Although Japan and Germany are geographically distant, we have several things in common. The United States is Germany's ally in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and our security guarantor, and Japan's security also depends heavily on the US. This is another similarity. In other words, even if there are various difficulties regarding trade, our ties with the United States are very strong. Both Japan and Germany have close economic relations with the US, and we are paying close attention to recent trade issues. Japan, like Germany, has had additional tariffs imposed on aluminum and steel and is in a position where it must take countermeasures.

However, what we are particularly focused on right now are the trade negotiations with China. This is because China and the United States are the two major players, and if there is a change in China's movements and consumption slows down even slightly, we immediately feel the impact. In Germany, we feel this fluctuation in the automotive industry, and Japan may also be feeling it in areas like parts supply to Huawei. The economies of Japan and Germany are closely linked to the international situation, which is why both countries are promoting a multilateral trading system.

This summer, Japan will chair the G20, and the reform of the World Trade Organization (WTO) will also be an important agenda item. In this respect as well, Japan and Germany have a great deal in common.

I am a first-year student in the Department of Political Science, Faculty of Law. I have the impression that Germany has very tolerant policies toward minorities, such as people with disabilities, LGBT people, and immigrants. I would be grateful if you could share your thoughts on what the value of tolerance means to you, Chancellor Merkel, and what policies should be implemented for minorities.

Indeed, I believe Germany is a tolerant country. Of course, there are people who are not tolerant, but Germany strives to be a tolerant country. For example, we have long debated how to create the best possible education system for people with disabilities.

It could be described as an ideological debate. Previously, the idea was to have them learn in special schools, but then voices were raised for so-called inclusive education, arguing that children with disabilities should be more accepted into regular classes. This was not a matter of one side being the solution; both paths were necessary, and it became a major controversy. In Germany, each federal state is responsible for school education, so the responses varied from state to state. Some states introduced support classes, while others did not.

Regarding minorities, or homosexuals, there has been extensive debate throughout society, and now marriage for same-sex couples is possible. Here, too, we have sought ways for all people to participate in society as equally as possible. It has been a long road.

Back in the 1970s, if a wife wanted to work, she had to ask her husband for permission. Today, that would be laughable and unimaginable, but things were not the same in the past as they are now.

Regarding child-rearing, there is an example of how introducing a certain system changed people's way of thinking. In Germany, when a parent takes leave after having a child, they receive a so-called "parental allowance" starting from about 60% of their previous salary. The parent with the higher income might apply for and receive this. If both parents apply for it, it is provided for 14 months instead of 12. Two so-called "father's bonus months" are added*1.

As a result of this system's introduction, many more fathers became involved with their babies and came to recognize that "child-rearing is hard work, and mothers are not just sitting at home with nothing to do." This also brought about a change in the overall way of working, because it is not clear whether it will be the wife or the husband who takes time off from the workplace for child-rearing. We have made progress through such processes in society.

(Seeing many Keio students raising their hands) Oh my, this is quite something (laughs). Well then, shall we ask the female student in the third row?

My question is about nuclear power generation. First, Germany was quick to declare a phase-out of nuclear power after the Great East Japan Earthquake. I would like to ask if the subsequent process of decommissioning nuclear power plants is proceeding smoothly. Second, Japan still has over 50 nuclear power plants along its coastline, including those in operation and those shut down. What are your thoughts on the dangers of having nuclear power plants, for example, the threat of attacks from abroad?

Germany decided to withdraw from nuclear energy following the accident at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant. It is scheduled to be completed by the end of 2022, with the last nuclear power plant being shut down in 2022. We had previously considered Japan's nuclear power plants to be very safe, but the fact that such an unimaginable accident beyond human comprehension still occurred is the background to this decision at the time. Thus, we reached the conclusion to phase out nuclear power*2.

However, before that, there was a government in Germany (translator's note: the Schröder government) that had decided to phase out nuclear power around 2022, and then a government (translator's note: the first Merkel government) that reversed that decision and decided to withdraw from nuclear power after a longer period. After the Fukushima accident, we returned to the path we had once started on. Thus, in three to four years from now, Germany will no longer be a country that uses nuclear energy. Each country must make such decisions for itself.

In Japan, it seems that there is not much critical debate about nuclear energy. I have read that there are plans to increase the proportion of nuclear power*3. I am interested to know if there is any debate among you students against it, or if everyone thinks it is acceptable.

Nuclear power plants, in their operation, first involve specific risks, and it is possible to take safety measures against them. But then there is also the problem of nuclear waste, which we must deal with for hundreds of thousands of years. Therefore, final disposal is, of course, a major problem.

I am a student in the Department of Mechanical Engineering, Faculty of Science and Technology. I am interested in the issue of climate change and participated in COP24. I believe that Japanese technology, along with German technology, can greatly contribute to solving the world's climate change problems. However, when I talk to people from the Ministry of the Environment, I feel that policies and public environmental awareness sometimes become barriers, and Japan's wonderful technology is not being fully utilized. How did Germany succeed in elevating environmental policy to a key national agenda and in shaping public opinion for its active promotion?

Within the framework of the Paris Agreement, and before that the Kyoto Protocol, Germany set itself quite ambitious greenhouse gas reduction targets. It will probably be difficult to fully achieve the 2020 target. One of our efforts towards emission reduction was the emissions trading system, which involved setting an emissions cap for the entire industry and then trading emission allowances. The aim was for the price of emission allowances to gradually reduce overall CO2 emissions through the effect of price.

The problem is that while emissions trading is originally a market-based instrument, when an economic crisis like the one in 2008, 2009, and 2010 occurs, economic growth stops, and emission allowances become oversupplied in the market, causing their prices to fall. This means that the incentive completely disappears, and the function originally expected of emission allowance prices is lost. We took measures such as reducing the market circulation of emission allowances, but in the end, we have not been able to achieve the economically effective function we had hoped for.

Looking at the energy sector, Germany covers 35% of its power generation with renewable energy, especially wind and solar, which is now the largest power source, but energy storage is weak. We have biomass, but overall, energy storage is an unresolved issue.

As for current initiatives, for example, a project is underway to send energy from here to Norway via a submarine cable, have it "stored" through hydropower (translator's note: likely referring to pumped-storage hydropower), and in winter or when the wind is weak, receive a supply of 2 million kilowatts of electricity through this cable. Norway will act as our storage battery*4.

Unfortunately, Germany still uses too much lignite, which has a high CO2 content, and we are currently having a major debate about it. The direction is to phase out coal-fired power generation by 2038. However, this will likely require more natural gas than we use now.

There are two other pending issues. One is poorly insulated buildings built decades ago to old standards. In Japan, it would be normal to demolish old buildings and build new ones, so it wouldn't be a major problem as they could be rebuilt to the latest standards.

The other, and our biggest pending issue, is the transportation sector. This is because even if engine fuel efficiency improves, if the number of cars increases, that gain is canceled out. Japan emphasizes hydrogen vehicle technology, but Germany is focusing on electric vehicles, and I think the transition from gasoline and diesel cars will progress significantly in a few years. However, if electricity and hydrogen are produced with coal energy, the transition is meaningless. Producing them with renewable energy is by far the best.

Now, as for other sectors, there is agriculture. Here, we will have to get the cows to learn to eat correctly and refrain from emitting CO2, which will also be a major challenge (laughs)*5.

I must add that while we are trying to make progress in all these areas, each is accompanied by very tough policy debates.

Although no conclusion has been reached and a majority consensus has not been obtained, there is also a discussion about whether we should implement carbon pricing with a uniform price for CO2 on everything. Instead of using different methods each time—sometimes legal regulations, sometimes tax systems, sometimes emission allowances—theoretically, the best solution is to charge money for all CO2 emissions. However, it is difficult for one country to implement this alone; several European countries must tackle it jointly.

I am a graduate student studying political science. Since I am studying political science, there are many things I would like to ask about politics, but I would like to dare to ask about you, Chancellor Merkel. While shouldering the immense responsibility of being Chancellor, what are the things you look forward to, and what is your purpose in life?

There are many enjoyable things. First, meeting one interesting person after another and being newly stimulated each time. Second, solving problems, even if they exist. Some problems take a very long time to solve, but after a while, the efforts to solve them progress, such as completing a tax reform, passing a budget, or developing an "Excellence" program for universities (to support outstanding universities, research institutions, and researchers). In the case of the "Excellence" program, we start by thinking about how to proceed with such a thing, how much budget can be allocated, who will evaluate it, and who will make the decisions. Later, when the program becomes established and I hear that many people are benefiting from it, it makes me happy.

When the European Research Council (ERC) was established in the EU, I believe it was during Germany's EU presidency in 2007, we took great care to make it a true framework of "excellence," that is, a framework to support outstanding research. As is often the case in the EU, if you select scholars by choosing, for example, two from southern Europe and two from northern Europe when selecting four scholars, it ceases to be about "excellence" and has nothing to do with merit. As a solution, we created a system where excellent researchers rigorously evaluate truly excellent research. As a result, receiving an ERC Grant has now become a seal of approval for excellence for those active in academia. It's enjoyable to work on such things.

There are other things that are rewarding but never seem to produce results, no matter how long you work on them. For example, in conflicts like the one between Russia and Ukraine, after long efforts to resolve the situation, you sometimes have to be happy just that the situation did not worsen. But the problem has not been solved. You have to come to terms with such situations as well.

Making laws is also interesting, but even when you think you've made a good one, you might happen to go to your constituency and hear things like, "What kind of law did you make this time?" "It's just bureaucracy," "It doesn't work at all." You get that feedback and then make corrections and improvements.

So, the job of a chancellor is a profession where you never get bored, you can work with many different people, and for me, it is rewarding.

I am a third-year student in the Department of Political Science, Faculty of Law. Recently, there has been news that the United States and China are far ahead in AI development and data collection, while Germany and Japan are lagging behind. I think the competition in AI development between nations is very important, but above all, I believe it is crucial for a country to present a vision of what kind of nation and society it aims to create through the evolution of AI development and technology. I would like to ask what kind of future you, Chancellor Merkel, envision beyond AI development.

To be honest, I don't have a clear vision of what lies beyond an artificial intelligence (AI) society. I think we need to have a sober relationship with artificial intelligence. Everything we do must be for the benefit of humans. In other words, it is important that humans maintain dominance, are aware of what they themselves are doing, and are able to control it. We must be careful to ensure that the developments achieved through the use of artificial intelligence are also ethically sound. Therefore, as a nation, it is necessary to have a perspective on what artificial intelligence can do and to grasp the current situation from an early stage.

There's an interesting saying: "As long as we don't understand what an algorithm is doing, we call it 'artificial intelligence,' and once we understand it, it gets a name." For example, it gets the name "facial recognition." Facial recognition is one of the achievements of artificial intelligence, isn't it? Or "cancer detection" or other health-related achievements. First, it is necessary to demystify artificial intelligence.

Also, instead of being afraid that "artificial intelligence will make humans completely unnecessary," I think we should think of it as "something that helps humans and makes their work easier." As you can see from robots, new jobs are also created, so I don't think there is any need to be anxious.

Again, the most important thing is that it is humans who are in the position to determine the ethical guidelines for the use of artificial intelligence.

That said, there are differences between countries. We will need to consider questions like the following. For example, to what extent am I, as a human being, me? Where do the boundaries of my personality lie? Even if one of my legs becomes a prosthesis, I am still the same person. Even if I have three organ transplants, I am still the same person. Even if I wear a hearing aid, I am still the same person.

But if I have a chip implanted in my brain and the speed and accuracy of my thoughts increase, can I still be called the same person? At what point do I cease to be me? How much can I change and still remain the same person? We will need to address these issues in the future.

One day, humans will be able to read each other's thoughts. For someone who can no longer speak, that would be wonderful.

But suppose everyone here could read everyone else's thoughts. Would we want that? What would it mean for the social process if our thoughts could be read? Human coexistence is based on the fact that we don't know everything about each other. If two people living together as a couple or a family said everything they thought about each other, wouldn't there be a lot of killing? Part of what makes civilization civilized is not saying everything we think. But if our thoughts become understandable or readable through brainwaves or something, it could change the way we live. Humans may not necessarily want to realize everything that is possible just because it is possible. I want to think about this carefully.

This is from when I visited a healthcare startup in China. I am already elderly, and conversely, it may be normal for all of you, but they say you can know when you will get sick and with what probability. But would you want to know everything—every gene analyzed, your health monitored daily, what to eat, what to do, the probability of getting what disease, and how to deal with it? I don't think so.

But in China, quite a lot of people want to know such things. They say that people who receive a "nutrition evaluation certificate" have a higher probability of living longer. I don't know about Japan, but there may be different answers depending on the culture and the people as to whether they want such things or not. In this way, we will be confronted with many new ethical problems.

I am a second-year student in the Department of Political Science, Faculty of Law. My question is about how to deal with China. I think China is making remarkable economic and military development and rise. Especially in the economic field, I think it is having a significant positive effect on the world economy, but in Japan, there are concerns about China's rise, especially in terms of security. Also, in the United States, Vice President Pence and others have made statements to the effect that "the era of being tolerant of China is over." How do you, Chancellor Merkel, think we should face China's development and rise?

China's self-perception is that it has always been the most important country in the world, except for the last 200 years. We think that China has risen, but China does not think so. They believe they are simply returning to the rightful position they once occupied in the year 1400, 800, or year zero.

So, for them, it is nothing special that they are the most important country and the largest power. China sees itself as a global player. This is also reflected in the "Belt and Road" initiative. China is trying to connect with as many countries on earth as possible, but in doing so, it believes that the initiative lies with China.

As Europe, we have explained the need for a reciprocal relationship with China and have shown that we want cooperation on an equal footing. In response, China is in a situation where, while still having a large population in poverty, it is also achieving extremely high results. Well, it's a bit convenient, you could say. While saying, "We are still a developing country and need aid," on the other hand, they are already a competitor or even ahead of us.

By 2020, the food problem in China will be solved, the number of people suffering from poverty will decrease, and most people will be in the middle-income class. As you may know, Chinese university students are very eager to learn, very diligent, highly motivated, and strive hard to advance themselves. That's all well and good, but in cooperation with China, we must proceed with a cautious and fair approach regarding intellectual property rights.

Regarding security, on the issue of 5G internet, the question of whether to allow Huawei to enter the market is now a major debate in Germany. If they are to enter Germany, we need to get an assurance that the company will not hand over all data to the state or allow it to be used, and that the Chinese government will not be able to access all data on all Chinese products. We need to continue discussing this issue with China, and it is also one of the topics of discussion in our talks with the United States*6.

But since China has great ambitions, it will also need to take on more responsibility for building a peaceful world order. China does not yet participate in many UN peacekeeping operations, but it will gradually increase its contribution. As China's power grows and it develops economically, we will be making more and more demands on China in these areas as well.

I am an exchange student from Martin Luther University of Halle-Wittenberg. My question is about what kind of cooperation Japan and Germany can have at the international level beyond economic policy. For example, in the conflict between China and Taiwan or the conflict between North and South Korea, how can Japan and Germany cooperate to play a mediating role?

I think Japan and Germany can cooperate on many things. Yesterday (at the Japan-Germany summit), we confirmed that we will carry out joint development aid in the G5 Sahel countries, namely Niger, Mauritania, and Mali*7. In the first place, I think there is much to learn from Japan's development aid policy. We have agreed to send Germany's minister for development aid to the next Tokyo International Conference on African Development (TICAD) to be held in Japan. Japan has been providing extensive aid mainly in East Africa, while Germany has been doing so mainly in West Africa, so we can exchange information on methods of development aid and so on.

Regarding China, we agree with Japan on the conflict with Japan in the East China Sea. As for the conflict between Japan and South Korea, Germany can only support the requests that Japan is making to South Korea. We are in favor of settling past issues. There are issues that weigh heavily on the history of Japan and South Korea, such as the comfort women issue, but Germany can do no more than share how we have resolved the problems we committed.

On the other hand, we hope that the resolution of the issue of Japanese citizens abducted by North Korea will be successful. We will also always work together with Japan to ensure that the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula is carried out sustainably, and that treaties are not concluded or promises merely heard that presuppose a burden on third parties. The existence of North Korea's nuclear weapons is a direct threat to Japan.

I am pleased that Japan, together with Germany, is committed to the Western Balkans issue*8. Although the distance is great, Japan sees this issue as a geopolitical and strategic challenge to Europe.

We also believe that Germany can support Japan's initiative for a "Free and Open Indo-Pacific." While we cannot provide direct military support, it is a good proposal that will lead to the strengthening of the region, and cooperation will be possible in various forms in the medium to long term.

Japan and Germany also advocate for multilateralism and aim to reform the World Trade Organization (WTO). In the G20 process, Japan has taken up several of the priority items raised by Germany. For example, women's empowerment is a good example. The fact that support for women's employment is being promoted as a policy within Japan is also a background factor. Japan is also working on international health policy, which Germany has been focusing on. The international community's response when the Ebola outbreak occurred was not sufficient, but we have made progress by strengthening the World Health Organization (WHO) to address how to respond when another infectious disease pandemic occurs somewhere in the world. I believe these are all areas where Japan and Germany can cooperate very effectively.

I am an exchange student from South Korea. My biggest issue right now is gender equality. As one of the few female prime ministers and as a woman who has broken the glass ceiling, I would like to ask if there is anything we can do from our position, including systems and welfare, to build a society where gender is equal in the future.

There are many fixed images (about gender differences). Women, when they have an opportunity, tend to think, "Can I do it?" and hesitate to reach out. On the other hand, many men just try it without worrying about whether they can do it or not, and well, you can see the results (laughs). I think women should just give it a try when they have the option. However, when it comes to building a career, when you have children and are in the child-rearing period, there is a tendency for women to feel they have to stay at home, rather than a true division of (household) labor in terms of gender roles. Therefore, to achieve gender equality, including the advancement of women to leadership positions, we must improve the division of roles within the family. It is not something one person can do alone—to be beautiful as a woman, to be a high-achiever at work, to build a career, and at the same time to be a gentle mother and raise children.

In addition to this division of household and child-rearing duties, changes in social mechanisms are also necessary. When you work with many women, you suddenly realize that not everything needs to be done late at night. Party meetings are sometimes held on Saturdays, which should be time spent with children. Not a few women find the environment of political activity unattractive. At least in Germany, there are long, pointless talks, and beer is always involved (translator's note: political meetings in Germany are often held in beer halls), and some things could be sped up. But it has become a habit. If you want to involve women in politics, you may have to change the entire way political activities are conducted.

The same goes for work careers. Today, there are various possibilities, and mobile work is basically possible. Some women working at the Federal Chancellery go home at 4 p.m., but after putting their children to bed, they can work again or do their own things. We need to create flexible systems so that women can balance work and family, and so that it becomes the same for men. On top of that, I want women to seize opportunities with confidence. I have rarely met a woman who tried something and then couldn't manage it.

Also, in fields like natural science research where there is an impression that there are no women at all, you have to specifically look for women to speak at symposiums and so on. The problem is that often, people don't look for women in the first place. If you look, you will find excellent women everywhere.

I am a first-year student in the Department of Political Science, Faculty of Law. My father is Japanese and my mother is Romanian, and the Crimean crisis that occurred a few years ago was a huge shock to me, even though I live in Japan, as a European.

I would like to ask you, Chancellor Merkel, about European security. When you signed the Treaty of Aachen with France last month, I saw on the news your statement that you "want to contribute to the creation of a European army." I would like to ask how Europe as a whole, and Germany, will face threats when Europe is subjected to foreign interference or pressure in the future.

As is already written in the Lisbon Treaty, which is the foundation of the EU, European countries have a duty of mutual assistance*9. For example, when there was a terrible terrorist attack in France, France requested cooperation from all of Europe. So that France could bring its police officers and soldiers back to its own country, Germany dispatched soldiers to Mali to reduce the burden on France, which was in a difficult situation. Similar responses are expected from other European countries*10.

Not all EU member states are NATO members, so in addition to NATO, we have launched what is called structured cooperation in the field of defense policy (translator's note: Permanent Structured Cooperation, also known by its English acronym PESCO) and will design our own weapon systems in the future. Through this, we will build a common European strategic culture. For example, various activities will be carried out in Africa, but since the interests of Europe and the US/Canada are different, it will not be a NATO deployment. After all, Africa is a continent right next to Europe. From Malta, an EU member state, you can see Tunisia on the opposite shore; it's just a stone's throw away. Therefore, we will be holding close consultations on this.

However, for high-level defense issues such as Russia and its military power, we still depend on NATO. The European defense activities we are trying to build are not in opposition to NATO; they are to strengthen NATO and to enable us to act independently when necessary.

I am studying in the Doctoral Programs at the School of Medicine. Recently, there are high expectations for the use of medical AI and big data in the medical field. After graduating from the School of Medicine at this university, I went on to graduate school at Harvard University in the United States and have been engaged in epidemiological research using large-scale cohort data. I think the United States has a very free and open research system, but compared to that, I feel that the perspective of personal information protection in Japan has become a barrier to research and data sharing.

On the other hand, in Germany, while strongly protecting data, under Industry 4.0*11, you have built a wonderful society that is a world leader in data sharing and the spread of IoT. How were you able to achieve a balance between data protection and data sharing?

First, we must distinguish between anonymized and non-anonymized data. For medical sciences, I think anonymized data is extremely important. From it, we can gain completely new insights that far exceed the capabilities of experienced doctors. Skin cancer is probably the most obvious example, but there are many other applications that lead to early detection and better treatment. Germany certainly has a personal information protection system, but we are moving in that direction, especially in medicine. The Scandinavian countries are even more advanced, collecting a lot of data in fields like immunology, thereby gaining valuable knowledge about prevention and other areas.

Regarding personal information, it must naturally be emphasized that the consent of the individual is important. Today, if you use Google or Facebook, these platformers obtain everyone's data, so by using this vast amount of data and personal location information, even anonymized data can be quickly used to identify individuals. It doesn't take much effort to determine whose data it is.

Therefore, we need to be much more conscious of personal information than we are now. You could say we are living in an era similar to when humans moved from the agricultural age to cities over time. In the old rural villages, no one locked their houses. Anyone could peek inside. After moving to the cities, people started using proper locks. In the same way, we now have to set proper passwords. If you use a password like "1234," which is the most common in Germany, or "Hallo," the second most common, anyone can access your important information, right? (laughs).

On the other hand, we must not be anxious about the use of data. Especially in the field of Industry 4.0, everything will exchange data and be digitized, but that in itself should not be a bad thing. However, on the other hand, if you want to ensure strong protection of your own personal information, you will have to put in that much effort. By doing so, you keep various personal medical information and so on in your own hands. There are also advantages to doing so. In other words, in the case of personal electronic medical records, many people worry, "Can't anyone actually access them?" but in reality, there are benefits. The leading example in Europe is Estonia. In Estonia, everything is digitized, and you need a password to view electronic medical records, so you can check later who accessed them. In contrast, if someone in a hospital takes out and reads your paper medical record, you will never know who it was. In this way, digitization also has aspects that strengthen data protection. In any case, every country must strike a balance between the pros and cons.

In addition, the EU General Data Protection Regulation*12, which applies to all European countries, has been introduced. Although it is common to Europe, it seems that each country still handles it slightly differently, and we are currently in a trial-and-error phase. There are also many funny stories. For example, when a political party wants to send a written invitation to a meeting to its members, it can now only be sent to members who have agreed to receive written correspondence. Even if you know the person, you can't send an invitation because their address data would be collected. You have to ask each person for permission to send an invitation, which is very difficult at first. But in the end, this will create a new culture, because the awareness will spread that by using data, you can do things that the person may not want.

Here, I also have expectations for Japan's efforts. In China, all data belongs to the state; in the US, all data belongs to companies. Both are not good. There is a risk of manipulation. Therefore, it is desirable to think about better information protection measures.

I am a third-year student in the Faculty of Economics. I would like to ask the Chancellor about the refugee issue. In Germany, and also in the EU, I believe there are various conflicting opinions regarding the acceptance of refugees. In Japan, although a policy of accepting a certain number of immigrants has begun, the refugee acceptance rate is extremely low, and considering the current situation of refugee acceptance in the EU, I get the impression that the system is not well-established.

In Japan, considering the historical background, I think this may be due to values of stability and pacifism, but if that is a bottleneck for refugee policy, what do you think the Japanese government could consider, such as educational policies?

Extremely diverse phenomena are occurring in Europe. Within the EU, freedom of movement is recognized. Romanians, Bulgarians, or Maltese can go to work in other countries within the region and earn money there. This causes a very large movement of people. When the German economy is doing well, as it is now, 500,000 people come from other EU member states every year. The largest numbers are from Poland, Romania, and Bulgaria. There are also challenges, such as children not being able to speak German and having to learn it. This is immigration, labor immigration, and it presents us with the challenge of social integration.

In addition, Germany accepted people from Turkey as so-called guest workers (Gastarbeiter) in the early 1960s. Now, the third and fourth generations are living in Germany. There are also Italians, Spaniards, and Portuguese, but among them, 3 million people of Turkish origin live in Germany. However, in the case of these people, it is not necessarily clear whether social integration has been more successful. Some people have integrated well, but there are also people who still bring their future wives from the Anatolia region of Turkey, and it cannot be said that integration has progressed as much as expected even after generations.

Also, due to the conflict in the Western Balkans that accompanied the dissolution of Yugoslavia, a very large number of refugees came in the 1990s and also in the 2000s. The situation in the Balkan region did not improve as expected. They came as illegal immigrants or as war refugees. Many returned to their countries after the war ended, but some remained in Germany.

Then we were very strongly affected by the civil war in Syria and the situation in Iraq, namely the terrorism by the Islamic fundamentalist group IS. Here, we also made a mistake. The situation in the refugee camps was basically miserable even five years after the conflict broke out.

Syria's population is 20 million, and half of them are on the move. Half of those are internally displaced, and the other half have fled to Lebanon, Jordan, and Turkey. The living conditions there were very poor, no one gave the refugees proper help, and eventually their savings ran out. It was the human traffickers, the unscrupulous brokers, who saw this situation and acted. They squeezed the last of the people's money and sent them to Europe. The situation proceeded in a chaotic manner. We believed that the refugees should not be made to pay for this, and we accepted many people.

Of course, it was also clear that this could not continue forever. Therefore, the EU concluded an agreement with Turkey and provided funding so that Turkey could give better treatment to the refugees*13.

Through this, we found a legal way forward. That is, if there are refugees who are particularly in need of help, for example, those who need medical treatment, we will provide that support. But this is something to be decided between Turkey and Germany, or between Turkey and Greece, and we must not allow unscrupulous brokers to decide who comes to Europe and who cannot. If we do that, people who should not come will come. People will suffer and die on their journey. We cannot tolerate a situation where human traffickers and unscrupulous brokers control and decide who comes to Europe and who does not.

We must ensure that we have a system where one country supports another, always confirming that it is based on legal procedures. This can be done through refugee agencies such as the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). We must deal resolutely with illegal refugees, although we cannot reduce them to zero. So, for example, we jointly conducted training for the coast guard in Libya. The aim is to give people the impression that even if they get on a broker's boat, they will be returned to Libya, so there is no point in getting on. We ourselves, in cooperation with the UN refugee agency, will decide who to accept and who not to accept.

Even in this situation, Europe, which is made up of various countries, is becoming more open, and employment opportunities are emerging from that. Of course, although the cultures are similar, there are also various differences. For example, there are big differences between Sweden and Portugal or Greece, but in terms of language and culture, there is a wide spectrum in Europe.

Thank you very much. Today, I had initially expected the topics to be centered on technology using AI and IoT, but thanks to your lively questions, we were able to hear very clear and frank opinions from the Chancellor on a variety of issues, from international politics to East Asian affairs and women's advancement in society. There are many students here, including international students. I hope that all of you will be stimulated by the various discussions you had with the Chancellor today, and that you will continue to devote yourselves to your studies and various activities at Keio University, and use this as a valuable resource for a good life. Now, let's give a big round of applause to the Chancellor. (Applause)

I would also like to express my heartfelt thanks. What I hope for from all of you is to see the world with an open mind. There are many exchange students here as well. Language is not something that divides us; please try to learn languages and thereby get to know various cultures. In this way, if we see that mutual understanding among people progresses, the mutual understanding among politicians will also progress.

I wish you all the best for the future. (Applause)

(This dialogue is a translation of a recording of "Herzlich willkommen an der Keiō Universität — Besuch von Bundeskanzlerin Dr. Angela Merkel" [Welcome to Keio University—A Visit from Chancellor Dr. Angela Merkel], which took place on February 5 at the North Hall, Mita Campus, and was edited with the cooperation of the Embassy of the Federal Republic of Germany. The German portions were translated and annotated by Shinichi Sanbe. Please note that changes and corrections have been made as appropriate to ensure readability and factual accuracy for publication.)