Japan’s lower house elections were held on Sunday last week. Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba had originally hoped to strike the iron while hot, leveraging the lingering momentum left from his taking office to seize control of Japan’s House of Representatives and secure his unstable administration.
However, things did not go as planned. The ruling alliance between the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) and its longtime partner Komeito suffered a significant defeat — despite their still-existing advantage, they failed to secure a majority of seats. Even if the LDP officially names Ishiba as prime minister in a special parliamentary session set for Nov. 11, he would still be a lame duck prime minister due to the opposition’s majority. If he hopes to secure stability, he would have no choice but to form a coalition government with the opposition.
However, with so many dominating opinions, policy implementation would be challenging.
Additionally, Ishiba’s eradication of dissenting opinions has caused him to lose support from the party’s conservative base. He is left with a rickety foundation, unable to stabilize internal affairs or deal with external threats. Ishiba’s administration carries the baggage from the LDP’s long-term rule and could very well repeat the mistakes of 15 years ago.
The LDP has lost power on two occasions since its establishment, both times paying a heavy price. From 1993 to 1994, then-opposition party leader Morihiro Hosokawa formed an eight-party coalition government, but it was scattered and disorganized — it lasted a mere eight months before he resigned. This was the first time since its establishment that the LDP fell out of power, but it quickly regained control.
Fifteen years later in 2009, the Cabinet of then-Japanese prime minister Taro Aso faced a financial crisis, leading the Democratic Party to gain power. However, the three-party coalition government saw three different prime ministers in three years. Domestic policy stalled and the economy suffered, while trouble arose in foreign relations. Then-Japanese prime minister Yukio Hatoyama’s administration adopted an anti-US, pro-China stance, leading to discord in the US-Japan alliance. China, Russia, North Korea and others used this opportunity to gain power, resulting in unmanageable obstacles.
When Aso faced a financial crisis 15 years ago, Ishiba — a minister at the time — pressured him to resign. Fifteen years later, the tables have turned — Ishiba now finds himself in a political storm, faced with the threat of Aso forcing him to step down.
The Russia-Ukraine war continues, while conflict in the Middle East continues to intensify. With the US preoccupied with its own elections, Japan has once again fallen into political turmoil. Amid this chaos, China, Russia and North Korea each harbor their own hidden agendas and could very well take action.
North Korea dispatched troops to Ukraine, Russian President Vladimir Putin expanded the BRICS summit, and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) has simultaneously increased military operations surrounding Taiwan while making concessions over Beijng’s dispute with India. Xi is attempting to concentrate his efforts on some huge objective.
Where there is smoke, there is fire. Japan’s political situation is unstable. China, Russia and North Korea are ruled by dictators, while the US and Japan face frequent changes in leadership — there exists an inevitable risk of losing direction.
For Taiwan to turn misfortune into blessing with this storm on the horizon, it must remember that a warlike state, however large, will eventually perish. However, even in peace, a country that forgets the art of war is imperiled.
Wang Hui-sheng is chief director of the Kisei Ladies’ and Children’s Hospital in Japan and a founding member of the East Asian Research Institute.
Translated by Kyra Gustavsen
As the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and its People’s Liberation Army (PLA) reach the point of confidence that they can start and win a war to destroy the democratic culture on Taiwan, any future decision to do so may likely be directly affected by the CCP’s ability to promote wars on the Korean Peninsula, in Europe, or, as most recently, on the Indian subcontinent. It stands to reason that the Trump Administration’s success early on May 10 to convince India and Pakistan to deescalate their four-day conventional military conflict, assessed to be close to a nuclear weapons exchange, also served to
The recent aerial clash between Pakistan and India offers a glimpse of how China is narrowing the gap in military airpower with the US. It is a warning not just for Washington, but for Taipei, too. Claims from both sides remain contested, but a broader picture is emerging among experts who track China’s air force and fighter jet development: Beijing’s defense systems are growing increasingly credible. Pakistan said its deployment of Chinese-manufactured J-10C fighters downed multiple Indian aircraft, although New Delhi denies this. There are caveats: Even if Islamabad’s claims are accurate, Beijing’s equipment does not offer a direct comparison
After India’s punitive precision strikes targeting what New Delhi called nine terrorist sites inside Pakistan, reactions poured in from governments around the world. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) issued a statement on May 10, opposing terrorism and expressing concern about the growing tensions between India and Pakistan. The statement noticeably expressed support for the Indian government’s right to maintain its national security and act against terrorists. The ministry said that it “works closely with democratic partners worldwide in staunch opposition to international terrorism” and expressed “firm support for all legitimate and necessary actions taken by the government of India
Minister of National Defense Wellington Koo (顧立雄) has said that the armed forces must reach a high level of combat readiness by 2027. That date was not simply picked out of a hat. It has been bandied around since 2021, and was mentioned most recently by US Senator John Cornyn during a question to US Secretary of State Marco Rubio at a US Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on Tuesday. It first surfaced during a hearing in the US in 2021, when then-US Navy admiral Philip Davidson, who was head of the US Indo-Pacific Command, said: “The threat [of military
RSS