After the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks in the United States, two things crossed the mind of Shotaro Yachi of the Foreign Ministry: Japan must join the international community in condemning the acts, and must do everything possible to help the anticipated U.S. military response.

As head of the Foreign Policy Bureau, Yachi was one of the key figures in drawing up Japan's overall response to the attacks, with the centerpiece being a new law allowing the Self-Defense Forces to be dispatched overseas -- in this case to provide logistic support for the U.S.-led campaign against the al-Qaeda terrorist network.

"From the beginning, I felt that Japan's contribution must be a visible one," Yachi said. "We needed SDF troops or ships appearing on television screens so that it would have a much bigger impact than any amount of money."

Like Yachi, many Japanese policymakers had bitter memories of the 1991 Persian Gulf War, in which Japan's $13 billion contribution was criticized as "too little, too late" by some in the U.S. The funds arrived only after a lengthy and failed effort by Japan to send SDF personnel to provide noncombatant support to the multinational force fighting Iraq.

"By sending SDF troops, Japan gave the impression that it was different this time," Yachi said. "We received more praise than expected from Washington."

As the first anniversary of the terrorist attacks draws near, analysts and politicians alike believe the Japanese-U.S. alliance is at a new high, thanks to renewed political support from its ally and actions that demonstrate Japan's commitment.

The passage of the antiterrorism bill in October marked a historic change in Japan's postwar security policy under the war-renouncing Constitution and has paved the way for the government to send military forces overseas for war operations for the first time since the war.

Takashi Inoguchi, professor of international relations at the University of Tokyo, said public opinion about the SDF's role has changed considerably over the last decade, following a series of security crises in East Asia, including an escalation of naval tensions in the Taiwan Strait in the mid-1990s and North Korea firing what was believed to have been a ballistic missile over Japan in 1998.

"Japan's allergy against taking up an international security role has been eased," Inoguchi said. "People recognized that guarding against security threats was necessary, and the events of Sept. 11 confirmed that the Japan-U.S. alliance was important to doing that."

Coming up short

Inoguchi observed, however, that Washington does not regard Japan's contribution as something special, unlike the Anglo-American alliance, since Japan's security role is still very limited in comparison with many other countries that have extended support for the U.S. war on terrorism.

Japan was not on the list of 26 countries that the U.S. Department of Defense named in February as contributing to the war on terrorism. The Pentagon added Japan on the list only after receiving protests from Tokyo.

"Frankly speaking, the U.S. does not count on Japan in military maneuvers," Inoguchi said. "But the important point is that Japan is out there when everybody else is doing something."

Kenichi Ito, president of the Japan Forum on International Relations and a professor at Aoyama Gakuin University, praised Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi for his quick response to the terrorist attacks, but added that Japan's actions were not as dramatic as those of other countries, including Russia, Pakistan and China.

Russia, for example, made a dramatic policy shift by allowing U.S. forces to enter Central Asia, including its former republics of Uzbekistan and Tajikistan.

And Pakistan, one of the few countries that recognized the Taliban regime in Afghanistan, chose to support the U.S. in toppling it.

"Of course, their policy shifts are made in their own national interests, but it does take strong leadership to do that," Ito said. "Japan's reaction, in comparison, was not so outstanding."

Ito argued that Japan should have sent a destroyer with the Aegis air defense system if it wanted to make a stronger impact on the fight against terrorism.

"I believe that Washington wanted Japan to dispatch the Aegis ship as proof of the bilateral alliance," he said.

The Aegis, an advanced radar system, can detect missiles, submarines and other targets in a much wider range than other destroyers and can shoot down several missiles simultaneously.

Washington hinted that it wanted a Maritime Self-Defense Force Aegis ship in the Indian Ocean. If the U.S. could get Japanese radar information relayed to U.S. Aegis ships, it could send its own Aegis ships elsewhere.

Yachi of the Foreign Ministry said that even though sending such a high-capacity vessel was not absolutely necessary for the MDSF's refueling mission, it would have had a "symbolic meaning" for the bilateral alliance, as Japan is the only country aside from the United States that owns an Aegis destroyer.

The Aegis ship became a focal point of debate when the government made the actual plan to dispatch MSDF vessels. In the end, none was sent, due to opposition from politicians, including those from the ruling bloc.

Some lawmakers argued that use of a data link between Japanese and U.S. Aegis ships could amount to collective defense, which the government says is banned under the Constitution.

The government, apparently aware of the potential controversy, avoided getting into an in-depth discussion of why an Aegis ship might be necessary for a refueling operation.

"The Defense Agency could not explain why Japan needs to send an Aegis ship," said Eisei Ito, a Democratic Party of Japan lawmaker involved in foreign and security policy.

"We have to make a judgment on whether the Aegis ship is really necessary for the fueling operations in the Indian Ocean. If the Defense Agency wants to send an Aegis just because it is the best one they've got, that is a dangerous idea," he said.

Iraq attack

Nearly one year after Sept. 11, Japan is again confronted with the question how far it should go in its security cooperation with the U.S.

When U.S. Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage visited Tokyo for a security dialogue in late August, the biggest concern for Japanese policymakers was whether the U.S. would attack Iraq.

Without requesting that Japan take specific measures to aid such an operation, Armitage made it clear that the U.S. is keeping the attack option open and that Washington expects "a fair amount of international support" once it decides to go ahead.

"It is not clear how much Iraq is actually supporting terrorists, as the U.S. claims," said Fumio Kyuma of the Liberal Democratic Party, who headed the ruling camp in the special Diet committee dealing with the antiterrorism law.

"Sept. 11 was a case where there was clear evidence that al-Qaeda masterminded the attacks," said Kyuma, a former Defense Agency chief. "But Japan does not have to, and should not, send the SDF to support U.S. military action on Iraq just because Washington claims Iraq is a dangerous country that is producing weapons of mass destruction."

As Kyuma says, both the ruling and opposition camps agree that any military action against Iraq must be sanctioned by the United Nations before Japan can lend any support. U.S. President George W. Bush's administration has ruled out being bound by this prerequisite.

Lawmakers also claim that the special antiterrorism law cannot be applied to Iraq, as the legislation was specifically crafted to deal with the aftermath of Sept. 11.

Japan's relatively cozy relations with Arab states, based upon its heavy dependence on oil, also make it difficult to completely side with the U.S. in attacking Iraq.

"The United States may think its own justice is the world's justice, but we don't have to follow the U.S. all the time," Kyuma said. "We need to say that we have a different Middle East policy."

The level of international support for the U.S. has apparently weakened compared with a year ago, as evidenced by the reluctance of European countries to back a strike on Iraq.

Professor Ito of Aoyama Gakuin warned that the Bush administration's emphasis on international cooperation in dealing with terrorism immediately after Sept. 11 soon gave way to a unilateral penchant, as seen in its stance on Palestinian issues and the decision to walk out on the International Criminal Court.

The U.S. could well drive itself into international isolation by attacking Iraq, he said.

"Behind Iraq, there is an Arab bloc and Palestinians whose hatred toward America is surging. An attack on Iraq may ultimately threaten America's position as the world's single hegemonic power," Ito said.

"Japan, in dealing with the Iraqi case, needs to make a balanced judgment on how much U.S. action is justifiable and what are the consequences of lending support if the U.S. crosses the line."

At the moment, the government says the most important thing is to pressure Iraq into accepting U.N. inspections so it can be determined whether the country is developing weapons of mass destruction.

At the same time, however, policymakers have quietly begun looking into ways to help rebuild Iraq in the event the regime led by President Saddam Hussein is toppled.

"Even if we do not participate in the military action, we cannot just sit and do nothing," Yachi said. "Japan can help refugees in countries around Iraq and help with the reconstruction."