There are many “common” phrases used in the world of international politics that we use often put probably don’t fully understand — One of these for me is the term, “Japan passing.” According to the Economist, this phrase has two meanings: (1) that world’s second biggest economy was being passed by in a fast-changing world, and (2) that Japan can no longer even be taken seriously. Although it probably originated from then president Clinton’s nine-day visit to China in 1998 during which he did not visit Japan. Some say that the idea began to take root as early as 1971 when Nixon normalized relations with China. Importantly, the term most often seems to means Japan’s fear of being seen as irrelevant when compared to China.

After the Clinton years when people such as Richard Armitage (US Deputy Secretary of State from 2001-05) and Michael Green (Senior Director for Asian affairs at the NSC from 2004-05) came to power in Washington the concern of “Japan passing” receded from the minds of many Japanese politicians. The nomination of Obama and the return of the Democrats to power has rekindled the idea that America may again tilt more toward China. (Random Obama fact: He likes bulgogi and kimchi).

Interestingly, the fear in Japan of being passed (or ignored) doesn’t only apply to relations with the United States. In addition to the ongoing Australia-Japan disputes over whaling, current prime minister of Australia Kevin Rudd’s “widely celebrated Sinophile credentials” have also contributed to concerns that Australia will lean more toward China at the expense of relations with Japan.

So are Japan’s concerns about being “passed” (by the United States, Australia, or other bodies such as the UNSC) unfounded or warranted? Even if many of Obama’s advisers indeed turn out to be from the Clinton era, I think it’s unrealistic that Japan will cease to be an important US ally in Asia.