First, by serving five years in office as country's prime minister, Koizumi has become the third longest-serving prime minister in post-war Japan. Only Eisaku Sato and Shigeru Yoshida held the office for longer period. Moreover, by winning the September re-election as prime minister at a Diet voting by 340 votes, he became the third most popular leader since the main ruling Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) was formed in 1955. In this metric his position is behind only to Shigeru Yoshida and Tetsu Katayama. No doubt, Koizumi's achievement is significant, both in terms of longevity in office and in generating support for himself and for the party. The party support was reflected in the outcome of the last general election in September 2005, in which the LDP under his leadership swept to an overwhelming victory. Yet, political analysts in Japan are still not sure if history will rank him alongside Sato and Yoshida as one of post war Japan's great prime ministers.

In the last week of April Koizumi's reign reached a full five-year period. He had already made it clear that he has no intention to continue holding the office beyond the date of expiry of his term in September. Party regulations followed by the LDP limit the tenure of the party leader to a maximum five-year period, and since the leader of the party automatically assumes the post of the prime minister, it is now almost certain that in September Japan will witness the emergence of a new leader at the helm of the government.

The media in Japan are now actively involved in evaluating the period of Koizumi to find out if he really ranks among the great. There are, for sure, a number of obstacles in comparing Koizumi with those whom the Japanese would like to consider greats. Under Yoshida, for example, Japan regained independence after its defeat in the war, while Okinawa was returned to Japan under Sato. Both achievements are seen in Japan as significant milestones in country's modern history. Compare to those far reaching achievements of international significance, Koizumi's success may be considered limited in steering the country to the path of economic recovery. That too created lot of controversy, as the road to recovery needed sacrifice that many in Japan was not willing to pay for.

In fact, a recent opinion poll conducted by Asahi Shimbun shows that 18 percent in Japan believe that their lives have improved from five years ago, while 42 percent feel they are now worse off. The economic reform that Koizumi was all along so enthusiastic to implement did help Japanese economy to see the light at the end of the tunnel. But the price was a widening gap between those who could rip the benefit off the reform and those who were left behind. Unfortunately for Koizumi, that those who find themselves as being left behind by far outnumber those who think the initiatives of the present administration was helpful in improving their situation.

In helping the economy coming out of a prolonged period of sluggishness marked by a continuous slowdown and deflation, Koizumi in times had to face strong opposition within his own party as well. As a result, the uphill task of getting the Japanese economy in the right track again was not an easy sailing and on several occasions he had to resort to policies that risked the party to split and break up into a number of different entities. But his populist stance eventually helped him to win over his enemies and carry out the policies that he and his advisors considered good for the country. In fact, the main reason for Koizumi's high popularity can partially be attributed to his strong standing within his own party to implement reforms that he considered vital for Japan's economic survival. As the economy at the end was able to shake off the so-called lost decade of extremely slow performance and began showing signs of recovery, his popularity rose further. But one particular field where he failed to make any gain is Japan's foreign policy.

No doubt, Koizumi has further stabilised Japan's relations with the United States by following a policy in line with the Bush administration. To please Washington, he even took the bold and unpopular decision to deploy Japan's self defence forces troops to Iraq, though to many it might look funny that the Japanese troops stationed in Iraq are in need of protection from other participants of the "coalition of the willing."

It also shouldn't be forgotten that he even took a courageous step to improve relationship with North Korea by visiting the country twice. Though the initiative backfired later and mutual trust and understanding between the two countries are now in all time low, he was the first Japanese leader to make an official visit to Pyongyang in search of a peaceful solution to the problems between the two neighbours. How a sincere effort could quickly turn that much sour is no doubt a matter of in-depth analysis. But he at least could bring back to Japan some of the victims of North Korean abduction and their families. The whole episode later fell in the hands of nationalist enthusiasts and who turned it into a convenient tool for hate propaganda. Koizumi's striking foreign policy failure, however, is not in relation to his North Korea policy, but it is for making a complete mess of Japan's diplomatic relations with China and South Korea.

Tokyo's Yasukuni Shrine might by now be regarded as a living symbol of how a country can easily be dragged into the treacherous path of narrow self-interest. When religious rituals get mixed up with foreign policy, the end result can never be expected to be something grand. The annual visit to the shrine by Japan's political leaders is more a religious ritual than anything else. They go there to pray for the salvation of the souls of those who they consider had given their lives for the safety of Japan.

This might outwardly be seen a very innocent act, nothing to do with disturbing or causing irritation of others. But if among the dead, whose salvation of souls the politicians seek, are also the souls of those who are not only blamed, but also found guilty of war crimes in territories beyond Japan, the act might easily flare growing sense of uneasiness among those who fell victims to such war crimes. This is the easy equation surrounding the Yasukuni controversy that is drifting Japan further apart from her closest neighbours.

It is not to say the reactions of Beijing and Seoul are blameless acts of innocent victims trying to correct a gross mistake of their neighbours. The motives behind their overtly expressive reactions are more to appease their own people and win over support domestically. But at the same time, it would be wrong to forget that Koizumi, by his annual visits to the controversial shrine, had overturned what some of his predecessors could achieve in healing the wounds of the past.

It is, therefore, too early to come to a hasty conclusion about which of Koizumi's legacies would eventually be remembered in the long run -- a prime minister who helped the country out of economic recession, or a leader who tried to sail the tide of growing nationalism by carefully cultivating hostility towards neighbours.

Monzurul Huq is a columnist of The Daily Star.