Since the 1950s, the United States' post-war military presence in the Asia-Pacific or East Asian region has been anchored principally on its bilateral and separate defence alliances with Japan and Australia.

The architectural anchorages have not changed even though the Cold War in Asia was transformed from bi-polarity to tri-polarity in the 1970s and the Soviet Union has been defunct since 1991.

However, according to recent reports, Japan and Australia have agreed to conclude a bilateral defence treaty next month which will allow their troops to be 'trained' in one another's territory.

The move has certainly put China on the alert. It has always been sensitive to signs of enlargement of Japan's military activities as well as attempts of encirclement and containment by the United States and its allies, especially Japan.

Australian Foreign Minister Alexander Downer has reportedly assured China that it has nothing to fear although the latter's official response has yet to be made public.

To explore the strategic background and implications of the bilateral pact, malaysiakini spoke to Professor Lee Poh Ping. He is a senior fellow of the Institute of Malaysian and International Studies of Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia and president of the Malaysian Association of Japanese Studies.

Japan's defence minister Fumio Kyuma has repeatedly criticised the US war on Iraq as being "absurd" and "immature" although Japan initially supported it by contributing troops. Why? Is it because Japan now wants to distance itself from the US which is widely perceived to have failed in Iraq?

No. I do not think Japan wants to distance itself from the US. It has become ever more dependent on the US because it needs US help to deal with the North Korean problem. Also, its relations with China are not very good. Despite some recent conciliatory steps, the Japanese administration still sees China as a long-term problem, if not a threat. It will in no way move away from the US until it can get on well with China or until it can go alone, a very unlikely possibility under the present circumstances.

But dependence on US does not mean you have to suspend your intelligence. It is manifestly evident to anyone who has any understanding of the Middle East that US policy there is a disaster. I suspect Kyuma is only saying the obvious (and his sentiments are probably shared by many of his colleagues) if in a somewhat undiplomatic way.

Although the US has also criticised Kyuma's undiplomatic remarks, it has not succeeded in stopping the latter for repeating his criticism. Why has the been unable to silence him? Is there a crack in the US-Japan alliance?

I think if the US really puts pressure, Kyuma will stop his criticism. The US has not really done so as it is fully preoccupied in Iraq and will not want to have trouble with one of its strongest allies and supporters of its adventure in Iraq. If needs be, the US will do it.

Japan and Australia are to sign a ground-breaking defence treaty which allows troops to be 'trained' in one another's territory. Given the existing Japan-US and Australia-US defence pacts, why is there a need for a separate treaty between Japan and Australia? What is the purpose or target?

Many Japanese, particularly the conservative ones, have this idea of some kind of an arc of democratic states surrounding China. These states include Australia, India, South Korea and perhaps Taiwan.

These Japanese believe all these states share common democratic values as opposed to an undemocratic communist China. The US will not be unhappy with such an idea.

One can see two problems. Firstly, what common values, one may ask, bind India to Japan? Both are culturally very different and both have been democratic states for more than 50 years. Yet for many of these 50 years, they have been on different sides of the Cold War. This suggests that you need something stronger to firm an alliance than just being democratic states.

Secondly, China is not going to sit still if the Japanese seriously go ahead with this strategy. As one of Japan's senior LDP politicians, Koichi Kato, pointed out, such a strategy was nave because it underestimated China's ability to counter this by cultivating its own links with India and even Australia.

Is the Japan-Australia defence pact a signal that they share serious doubts about US military capacity or commitment in the Asia-Pacific as the result of the substantial diversion of resources and energy to the 'war against terror', especially in the Middle East?

There is no doubt that many Australians and Japanese believe the US is not committing itself in the Asia-Pacific region to the fullest extent possible because of the Iraq war. Possibly the bilateral defence pact is a direct result of this, but it could also be an initial step of Japan to build the arc of democratic states round China.

Another school of thought opines that the bilateral pact is going to be concluded as a scheme of geographical sharing of burden and with the prior knowledge and blessing of the US which is seen to be increasingly bogged down in Iraq and the larger Middle East region. What is your assessment?

Very possible.

What reactions would the Japan-Australia pact cause in the US, China, South Korea, Russia, India and Europe?

The US will probably be supportive and China not too happy. The rest will wait and see.

What would be the implications and repercussions for Southeast Asia, particularly Malaysia and Singapore?

Malaysia, Singapore, Australia, New Zealand and the UK have the Five Power Defence Arrangements which oblige them to consult each other as to what to do in the event of an attack. I doubt Japan will be drawn in, even if it has a bilateral agreement with Australia.