Font size: 
One concern of Japanese politicians following Obama's landslide victory is that the Democratic Party has few policymakers with strong connections to Japan, unlike the Republican Party, which includes a number of prominent figures considered pro-Japan. These include former Secretary of State Colin Powell, former Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage and Michael Green, who holds the Japan Chair at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a major Washington think tank.
"Obama has already established a policy committee to discuss political measures with Japan, sending signals toward Japan, but it is difficult to find lawmakers who know Japan well among the Democrats," said Masaru Nishikawa, a researcher on U.S. politics at the Japan Institute of International Affairs.
However, most Japanese analysts agree that the change of the U.S. president’s party affiliation will not bring major changes in the Japan-U.S. alliance.
"The alliance between Japan and the United States is well established and will not change under the new administration," said Naoyuki Agawa, former minister for public affairs at the Japanese Embassy in Washington, D.C., and now a professor at Keio University in Tokyo.
Agawa predicts that the United States may ask Japan for help in resolving the financial meltdown, as this is the top U.S. priority. "For the United States, whose economy has reached a serious stage, the most reliable countries are economic giants,” he said. “One such country is Japan."
During his campaign for the presidency, Obama pledged to withdraw combat troops from Iraq within 16 months and transfer some of them to Afghanistan to bolster forces battling Taliban and al-Qaida militants. The United States is highly likely to call on Japan for support in this task.
"Like the U.S.-British alliance, the next administration will deal with the alliance between Japan and the United States as a matter of course, and ask a continuation of Japanese Self-Defense Force's fuel supply activity in the Indian Ocean or troop deployment to Afghanistan," said Masashi Nishihara, director of the Research Institute for Peace and Security in Tokyo.
"The Republican Party, which has understood Japan's domestic affairs compassionately, has not made uncompromising demands on Japan,” said Nishihara. “But the Democrats may not be as considerate of Japan, which has severe controls on its troops under our pacifist Constitution."
In June this year, the Japanese government dispatched a team of 10 people from the Cabinet Office, Foreign Ministry and Defense Ministry to investigate the possibility of Japanese troops conducting rescue operations for injured soldiers in Afghanistan, after the Bush administration asked if Japan could deploy transport aircraft or large helicopters for this purpose. But Japan finally dropped the plan because its troops might be required to return fire against insurgents, thus violating Japan’s constitutional ban on using force.
If the Obama administration were to request such a deployment, Japan would be forced to make a tough decision.
"Even under the current Constitution, the transport of commodities can be carried out by Japan's Air Self-Defense Force in specific circumstances," Nishihara said. He believes that the deployment of Japanese troops to Afghanistan would bolster ties with the United States.
Agawa also emphasized the importance of strengthening the alliance through contributing to international operations. "Japan should not disappoint the United States with regard to its major headaches, its economic problems and the Afghanistan war." He said Japan should change its passive mindset and be proactive in offering advice and assistance.
On the other hand, the issue of North Korea may complicate Japan-U.S. relations, as the two countries’ interests diverge on this issue.
Early last month the United States removed North Korea from its terrorism blacklist. Obama, who favors direct communication with adversarial countries, voiced support for the decision. The U.S. move and Obama’s support for it disappointed Japan, which has been calling on the United States to pressure Pyongyang to account for Japanese citizens it abducted decades ago.
While the United States is adopting a conciliatory approach, Japan is holding firm to its hard-line stance under the strain of the emotional abduction issue and the threat of a nuclear attack from North Korea. Tokyo extended its economic sanctions against North Korea for another six months in August this year, citing the country's lack of progress on the abduction issue.
The sanctions, including a ban on North Korean-flagged ships entering Japanese ports and any imports from the country, were originally imposed in October 2006 after North Korea conducted a nuclear test.
"We will see how the Democrats, which have been sensitive about human rights issues, criticize the abuse of human rights in North Korea. There is a possibility they will decide to carry forward the diplomatic normalization negotiations with the country, which benefits the U.S., rather than criticizing the issues," Nishihara said.
Many Japanese researchers eye the U.S.-North Korean bilateral talks on nuclear disarmament with suspicion, fearing they may give silent approval to Pyongyang’s continued possession of nuclear weapons, behind the scenes.
"The new administration may have a tiny expectation that it can dismantle the bombs if it continues the negotiations, but almost give up," Nishihara said.
"Since the United States has acknowledged India's nuclear bombs by signing the atomic energy agreement with India early last month, it cannot strongly oppose if North Korea insists the United States should approve their possession," he said. He predicted that the agreement with India will put the Obama administration at a disadvantage in the future.
