The U.S. policy on North Korea is unlikely to differ much from now after this week's midterm elections because the issue sits low on Washington's priority list and there is little difference between the rival parties on how to deal with the communist regime, analysts said Sunday.
   
Tuesday's elections are expected to be a watershed in U.S.
President Barack Obama's second term in office amid widespread views that the Republicans are expected to take control of not only the House of Representatives, but also the Senate amid Obama's low popularity.
   
A Republican-controlled Congress would significantly weaken Obama's hand in pushing for his legislative agenda in his final two years in office. That has spurred views that he could put a greater focus on external issues, rather than domestic issues, to carve out a legacy.
   
Still, analysts say Obama is unlikely to pay more attention to North Korea issues.
   
"It is doubtful that Obama would focus on U.S.-North Korea relations as one of his legacy accomplishments," said Denny Roy, senior fellow at the East-West Center. Among foreign policy issues, he said, North Korea is also "a low priority, and off the radar screen for most Americans."
   
"North Korea is also too risky to make a foreign policy showcase. The Obama team has been burned by North Korea before, which only brings them criticism from conservative opponents as being weak or naive," the analyst said.
   
After a series of unsuccessful attempts to engage with North Korea, the Obama administration has taken a hard line on Pyongyang, refusing to unconditionally reopen negotiations and demanding that the North first take concrete steps demonstrating its denuclearization commitments.
   
Moreover, the U.S. has far more pressing foreign policy issues to handle, such as the fight against the militant group Islamic State, efforts to stop the spread of the Ebola virus, persisting Israel-Palestine tensions and the situation in Ukraine.
   
"Given that U.S. policy toward North Korea has been benign neglect, I would suspect that would not change. The administration would have very little latitude to adjust its foreign policy toward the peninsula," said Ken Gause, a senior researcher at CNA Corp.
   
"If Obama becomes a lame duck, he might be willing to tweak his North Korea policy, but could not go very far," he said.
   
Gause also said that North Korea is not an attractive case for building a legacy on.
   
"I would suspect that Obama would look elsewhere for his legacy-building with regard to foreign policy. In any case, the Middle East will continue to dominate his attention," the expert said.
   
Gause also said that whoever takes control of Congress means little to the U.S. policy on North Korea because there is little difference between the Republicans and the Democrats on how to deal with the communist nation.
   
"There are a few voices in both Democratic and Republican camps that are calling for more engagement, but they are in the minority.
As long as the Middle East dominates the U.S. foreign policy attention, I don't expect to see much change," he said.
   
David Straub, associated director for the Korean Studies Program at Stanford University, also said that even if the Republicans gain full control of Congress, it won't have a major effect on the Obama administration's foreign policy.
   
That's because even if the Republicans take control of the Senate, the Democrats can still veto efforts by the Republicans as the Senate voting rules do not respect majority rule. In addition, the Republicans are unlikely to take many actions contrary to Obama because if they take the wrong actions, it would erode their chances in the 2016 presidential vote, the professor said.
   
Straub added that American presidents tend to focus more on foreign policy in the last few years of their second term in office, but chances are slim that Obama will make any significant change to his North Korea policy.
   
"If North Korea is not even willing to seriously negotiate giving up nuclear weapons, then resuming six-party talks would be much worse than useless," he said. "In terms of American politics, returning to six-party talks given North Korea's current position would be extremely damaging to the president and his party."
   
Douglas Paal, vice president for studies at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, also said that Obama will have little choice but to focus more on foreign policy if his Democratic Party suffers a bruising defeat in the upcoming election.
   
One possible outcome of that is a more serious focus on completing negotiations to forge a regional free trade agreement, known as the Trans Pacific Partnership or TPP, though Republican willingness to cooperate will have to be won, Paal said.
   
"Regarding the Korean Peninsula, I would expect at least as tough and skeptical approach as now prevails," he said. "I see no signs of a desire or support from elsewhere for a lowering of the bar on talks with North Korea. The voices in favor of that are few and unpersuasive."
   
Roy, the East-West Center fellow, also said that TPP is one of the areas where change is possible in Obama's Asia policy. The new Congress could be more willing to give Obama "fast-track" trade promotion authority to increase chances of success for TPP talks, he said. (Yonhap)