In the continuing story of events catching up to Japanese pacifism, my wife informs me (she's Japanese) that on today's Japanese news, the government was shown explaining to the Japanese people the fact that Japan would "have" to support the US in the case of war with Iraq. It's purely a matter of knowing what side of the slice their bread is buttered on, of course. The Japanese government understands that it needs America's support in the future showdown with North Korea. Here's the story in the Daily Yomiuri Online:

[...]Yukio Okamoto, a critic in the diplomacy field, said, "Though a military attack should be avoided if possible, Japan will have only three choices in the event of an attack. One is to support the United States. The second is to indirectly support Iraq by criticizing the United States for carrying out a military strike. The third is to remain neutral.


"The worst choice would be to stay neutral because this would mean Japan is unable to come up with its own opinion on an issue that could affect the foundation of global security.


"The remaining choice is whether Japan should support the United States, which is trying to eliminate weapons of mass destruction--though in a hasty manner--or if Japan should support Iraq, which has defied the United Nations since 1990.


"The answer is obvious."


Japan, which is limited militarily to a policy of self-defense, should focus on North Korea. While the threat of North Korean nuclear missiles is increasing, the country's alliance with the United States is a lifeline in terms of national security.[...]

Many countries have such strong reliance on the US for help with their own security. It's why so many Americans rankle so badly when we are accused of being warmongers by a largely ungrateful world.


Here are the interesting legal reasons. Too bad they can't actually advocate this point of view before the hostilities commence:

At a Feb. 6 session of the Budget Committee of the House of Representatives, Foreign Minister Yoriko Kawaguchi said, in the view of the government, Resolution 1441 does not by itself legally justify a U.S.-led attack on Iraq. However, the government considers U.S. military operations legitimate because:


-- Resolution 1441 clarified that Iraq has not complied with Resolution 687.


-- The Gulf War truce comes into effect only when Iraq complies fully with Resolution 687.


-- If Iraq is in violation of Resolution 687, the truce is not effective, and the use of force is theoretically possible under Resolution 678.


When U.S. and British forces carried out air strikes against Iraq in 1998, they did so on the basis of Resolutions 678 and 687. Japan supported the strikes, also on the basis of the two resolutions.