Japan's foreign policy is in a mess: Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi's visit in August to Yasukuni Shrine has cast a shadow on relations with China and the Republic of Korea (South Korea) and on Tokyo's diplomacy as a whole.

Continuing revelations of corruption in the Foreign Ministry also are damaging the prestige and efficacy of the most important executive instrument of the nation's diplomacy. The gaffes and awkward handling of personnel by Foreign Minister Makiko Tanaka add insult to injury rather than help solve the deep-rooted problems in her ministry.

Wouldn't it be better if Tanaka left now rather than waited for the crisis to deepen? Some people, especially in the media and those within the Liberal Democratic Party, are calling for Tanaka's dismissal. But would this solve the problem? I argue it would not solve the first two problems, which are the most far-reaching.

Before his visit to Yasukuni Shrine, Koizumi gave the impression he did not care about harming relations with China and South Korea, saying he would address problems that arise after his visit. His visit to the controversial site, which enshrines Japan's war dead, including convicted war criminals, and his insensitive remark (apart from all the domestic issues involved) have created a massive problem that can be solved only by extensive diplomatic work and concessions from Japan. Seoul and Beijing have demanded as much by asking Tokyo to improve the atmosphere before summit meetings can take place.

Meantime, the efficacy of Japan's diplomacy in Asia and its ambition to promote a more active and visible diplomacy-let alone pursue leadership ambitions-has suffered a severe setback. America also is angry because high hopes of Japan becoming a more active foreign- and defense-policy player in Asia have been dashed.

With her high profile, good public support rating and close links with Koizumi, Tanaka could be an asset in the battle to undo this diplomatic damage. Memories in Beijing of the role played by Tanaka's father in the improvement of Japan-China relations in 1972 are another feather in her cap. Chinese support will soon deteriorate if Tanaka is seen as unable to deliver, and she has strained her links with Koizumi and the LDP.

Koizumi needs Tanaka and her popularity with the public to win the next Lower House election, but further gaffes in domestic or foreign policy will turn her from an asset to an intolerable liability. She still has an opportunity to make good use of her position, however, by re-establishing relations with Asia.

The corruption in Tanaka's ministry is not her doing but is an endemic phenomenon of most Japanese bureaucracies, encouraged by opportunities-namely lax management and control-and the overbearing need of a society for social intercourse, reliance on personal favors and ``clubiness.''

The growing number of young diplomats leaving the service after a few years indicates the rising intolerance for many old, established ways, such as working for and/or covering up for the whims of superiors, rather than operating within reasonable working practices to achieve Japan's national interests on the basis of rationally established goals.

Tanaka's high popularity and independence makes her an ideal candidate to change this situation, and she could appeal successfully to a general and prevalent popular dissatisfaction with these old bureaucratic ways.

Tanaka has shown her determination in disclosing the unsavory dealings of some of her staff and supporting the cut in secret diplomatic funds that have been the source of the scandals. Firing senior personnel who are directly or indirectly tainted by these scandals is further proof of her resoluteness.

But while change must be radical, it also must be carried out sensitively. There is no point in enhancing the current general bureaucracy-bashing wave. Bureaucracy is not inherently bad.

It has developed serious faults because of a lack of political oversight by politicians elected by citizens who wanted more from their candidates than was good for the country as a whole.

Reform also has to be carried out by winning over the most promising and key senior bureaucrats, not by alienating all Foreign Ministry staff.

The third problem is entirely of Tanaka's making and casts doubts on whether she can contribute to solving other problems.

Tanaka has a reputation for being inconsistent, emotional and bad at handling staff. Showing the human face of diplomacy can be an asset in handling foreign nations, and having a woman head the Foreign Ministry of such a male-dominated society is particularly impressive. But it is counterproductive if it confirms latent prejudices about women being unstable and emotional.

I am sure Tanaka is aware of these problems, but it is unclear whether she has the strength to overcome her own weaknesses as well as those left for her by others.

I argue the current situation warrants giving her another chance, because she is the ideal person to strongly address diplomatic and corruption problems and because Koizumi will only part with her if she becomes an intolerable liability.

The author is a professor at Newcastle University in England and specializes in Japanese foreign and security policies.