In his speech, Kono pointed out the issues of the prevention of conflict as follows: "Japan and Europe should work together seriously in studying how we can cooperate in the field of conflict prevention. Moreover, Japan will make efforts to collaborate with the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe so that more cooperation can be effected between us for the support of democratization, the establishment of independent news media and so on."7
Between Japan and NATO, there have been two frameworks for security consultations―seminar activities among government officials and academics every other year since 1990; and senior official meetings every other year. In September 1991, the then NATO Secretary-General Manfred Worner paid an official visit to Japan. Dr. Solana as the Secretary-General of NATO visited Japan in October 1997.
Since 1996, Japan has had an observer status in the Council of Europe. This enabled Japan to participate in various meetings at an expert level in a comprehensive way: Japan needs to be involved in the law-making activities since the Council of Europe produces influential models of law.
In June 1997, the first-ever Japan-Nordic summit meeting at the highest level was held in Bergen, Norway. Prime Minister Hashimoto joined the five Nordic countries' regular meeting. The second summit meeting between Japan and the Nordic countries took place in Iceland in June 1999.
3. Japan and the Kosovo Crisis and War
In Japan, there had been no regular and systematic reports on the situation in Kosovo until the beginning of the air strikes. Ordinary Japanese people did not have enough knowledge about the background and history of Kosovo and most of them had no idea who Slobodan Milosevic was. Japanese people have never experienced "ethnic cleansing," but they suffered massive air raids and nuclear attacks towards the end of the Pacific War. Most of the major Japanese cities were burnt to the ground and masses of ordinary people lost their homes, just like Dresden in Germany. Thus, pacifism is deeply rooted and public opinion is not in favor of any military solution. This may be called Japan's "obsession with non-use of force."
Japanese liberal intellectuals were shocked by German involvement, and surprised that the European left did not organize massive demonstrations against the NATO campaign. Japanese liberal intellectuals and leftist political parties failed to understand the implication of the humanitarian disaster and the protection of human fights to which the European left attached importance. Most Japanese liberal intellectuals are anti-American. They hold the same view as China and believed that the US was pursuing uni-polar domination. In reality, NATO could not use force without the consensus of the 19 member countries. The decision-making system of NATO is not well-known in Japan.
The UN has been very popular with the Japanese public. The circumvention of the UN shocked them. In terms of the legality of the NATO decision to intervene, it was a thorny issue for Japan because of its legalistic approach and the pro-UN public opinion. Traditionally, the government has been very legalistic since the Cabinet Legislation Bureau has taken a strict literal interpretation of the pacifist Constitution. However, as an ally of the United States, it was necessary to show solidarity. This is why the Japanese government "understood" NATO action, while it did not "support" it.8
