We also know for sure that debate over calling a wrong step right is also nothing new as there is no shortage of such examples in our past history. Yet we join the debate and try to prove how correct our respective positions are. The debate that Japan is now involved in, which is if the whole Iraq is a combat zone or just part of it, is another example of looking for an answer to that widely discussed matter of which came first -- the egg or the chicken. For Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi, however, the outcome of the ongoing debate is vital, as he is poised to extend the deployment of Japanese troops in Iraq for another one year period with the expiry of the current deadline on December 14.

The Japanese prime minister is in an all out effort to convince his critics that the part of Iraq where Japanese soldiers are stationed is in fact situated out of the conflict zone and hence their stay in the country does not violate Japan's constitutional provisions that put a rigid ban on sending Japanese military personnel to a combat zone anywhere outside country's territorial boundaries. Moreover, under the special law enacted by the Diet last year to facilitate the deployment of Japanese troops to Iraq, country's self-defence forces can only be sent to non-combat zones.

Public opinion in Japan is not supportive of Japanese military presence in Iraq, where, as many in Japan believe, a great tragedy has been unfolded due to utter irrational and irresponsible behaviour of the US president and some of his allies. Opposition groups in Japan are now trying hard to take full advantage of the prevailing public mood to block any move by the government to prolong Japan's military involvement in a conflict turning increasingly bloody and savage. But Koizumi is determined to overcome such obstacles as he now feels a renewed obligation to stand by the side of his trusted friend George W. Bush, who despite winning the election is rapidly becoming more and more isolated in international politics. Koizumi was among the handful of international leaders who openly expressed support to Bush before the US presidential election.

In a desperate attempt to silence his opponents over Iraq issue, Koizumi in times resorts to logic that sounds more like a schoolboy repeating word by word certain paragraphs that he had memorized from the textbook without understanding what in reality has been said in the text. In a recent parliamentary debate, for example, the leader of the opposition Democratic Party of Japan (DPJ), Katsuya Okada, asked Koizumi to define what he wanted to mean by the word 'non-combat zone'. Koizumi's reply was very straightforward, just as if he was uttering exactly what has been written in the textbook definition: "The area where the self-defence forces are operating is a non-combat zone. This is the basic point of the law." As a result, we can assume that the prime minister of Japan thinks anywhere in the world where country's self-defence forces are deployed automatically turns into a non-combat area, no matter if bloody war and confrontation might still be going on within its vicinity.

A year ago when Japan was getting ready to send troops to Iraq, Koizumi spoke of the requirements of the Japan-US security alliance and argued that it was necessary to join the US-led coalition in Iraq, as answering Washington's expectation would fortify Japan against the threat from North Korea. A year later he has shifted his focus from the narrow Japan-US alliance and now calling for the need to proceed with international cooperation and the Japan-US alliance.

It's true there have been no casualties among the Japanese troops since the self-defence forces units were deployed in the southern Iraqi city of Samawah. There have been several mortar attacks in and around the area, but with little damage. This, however, doesn't guarantee Japan's 100 percent safety in a country where the existing social orders has been systematically broken down to a level when nothing accounts for as normal behaviour. The message that the government is trying to convey to the people is that, Japanese military presence in Iraq is essential for the rebuilding of a country destroyed and crippled after years of misrule and wars. But Japanese people are not convinced enough if sending troops is the right way to help Iraq overcome difficulties. According to a number of recent opinion polls, more than 60 percent oppose extending self-defence forces mission. The results indicate that the public is uncertain if Iraq can really be reconstructed under the current circumstances.

But the Koizumi administration seems to be convinced that what the majority in Japan is thinking runs contrary to the reality. The administration also prefers to cite the other figure that show more than 80 percent of residents in Samawah area support the dispatch of Japanese troops. A survey conducted jointly by Asahi Shimbun and an Iraqi newspaper found that the local residents are mostly in favour of Japanese presence as it also brings valuable economic assistance and also creates jobs for the local community. Encouraged by this and some other findings, Koizumi recently indicated that the Iraq mission of Japan's self-defence forces was almost a done deal.

Sources close to the government are now saying that approving a new basic plan to extend the dispatch, possibly for another year, would most likely come around the second week of December, after the current Diet session.

But some predict that the situation in Samawah is expected to become more unstable next March when the Dutch military is slated to pull out. Presently the Dutch has been in charge of security in the region. It is not clear yet who would replace the Dutch to perform security responsibilities. Japan is surely eyeing for that too, as the government is also planning to shift to security duties those members of the Japanese unit who are presently assigned to non-security responsibilities like ensuring water supply for the people of Samawah.

So, who cares about Fallujah as long as people of Samawah remain happy and content with the presence of Japanese soldiers? May be the two cities no longer belongs to the same country.