“A friendship like few others” is how US President Donald Trump described the US-Japan relationship in January, declaring his confidence that “the cherished alliances between our two countries will continue to flourish long into the future.”
Not even half a year later, is the shine already coming off what was heralded as a new “golden age” of ties between the two nations?
Trade talks between the two countries, initially expected to yield a quick agreement, have become a slog with the deadline on Wednesday next week fast approaching. Japan has scrapped a top-level defense meeting it would normally be desperate to attend amid reports of US demands for more defense spending, and distance has opened between Trump and his counterpart, Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba, on the situation in the Middle East.
Illustration: Mountain People
The biggest obstacle is obviously tariffs. The unilateral imposition of duties was something Japan had hoped its unique relationship with the US would help it avoid. When that failed, the consensus view was that Tokyo would secure an agreement rather quickly. Instead, Japan’s tariff talks envoy Ryosei Akazawa has been traipsing back and forth to the US, most recently last weekend, with the two sides still seemingly far apart — not helped by lack of agreement on the US side over what it even wants.
Surprisingly, Japan has dug its heels in, insisting on a full climbdown on auto tariffs and cautioning it would not take a bad deal just to reach a quick one. Domestic media reports suggested an agreement between the two leaders at the G7 in Canada was near, only for Trump to depart early and Ishiba to return home empty-handed.
Compounding this is a growing gap in views on defense. Japan lobbied hard to keep trade and security as two separate issues, but then it canceled the “two-plus-two” security talks between the defense and diplomatic heads, the Financial Times reported, citing Tokyo’s displeasure with a request from the US to further raise its spending on national security.
How much that figure might be is not clear. Japan has denied that the US is looking for higher spending, but in recent weeks reports have suggested Washington is looking for Tokyo to spend anywhere from 3 percent to 5 percent of GDP, with NATO leaders last week agreeing to the higher figure after pressure from Trump.
However, Japan is already struggling to reach its prior 2 percent commitment, much less finance it, and most problematically, Ishiba has long stated his opposition to any numerical target, saying that it is more important to define what the money is spent on. The prime minister also scrapped plans to attend the NATO meeting in The Hague last week.
Less attention has been devoted to the distance growing between the two on Iran. Ishiba was lucky that few noticed his remarks on the day Israel attacked. “The use of military means by Israel cannot be permitted,” he told reporters. “It’s absolutely unacceptable, and we strongly condemn this action.”
The language is the strongest typically used by Japanese leaders to condemn the actions of other nations, more akin to what a prime minister might use if, say, North Korea conducted a nuclear test or launched a missile over Japan.
In a change of direction, just days later at the G7, Japan signed off on a statement that affirmed Israel’s right to defend itself, and condemned Iran as the “principal source of regional instability and terror,” and when the US itself later bombed Iran’s nuclear sites, Ishiba expressed neither opposition nor strong support. The opposition has accused him of double standards.
Do not read too much into all this — it might just be the hallmarks of a disorganized and weak administration, one that might not be long for this world. Or possibly it stems from the strange ambiguity Ishiba himself likes to project, with pinning down his exact positions akin to nailing jelly to a wall.
It might also be the case that the prime minister is happy to drag some of these issues out as long as it is politically convenient. He was quick to dub the imposition of tariffs a “national crisis” — language previously used by Japanese leaders for events such as the 2011 earthquake and tsunami, or the COVID-19 pandemic — an act that has given him cover from his opponents inside and out of the ruling Liberal Democratic Party as his popularity dwindles.
Even without the Trump factor, there have long been questions about where Ishiba, who wants a more equal relationship with Washington, sees his country’s place in the world. Given that he faces crucial Upper House elections later this month, where a bad showing could spell his demise, it might not be worth pondering the question too deeply.
However, his longevity (in relative terms) has already surprised many who expected his ouster by now, and even if he goes, Trump would still be there for the next three years and counting. Will we look back on it as a high point in ties between the two nations? All that glitters is not gold.
Gearoid Reidy is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering Japan and the Koreas. He previously led the breaking news team in North Asia, and was the Tokyo deputy bureau chief. This column reflects the personal views of the author and does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.
Jaw Shaw-kong (趙少康), former chairman of Broadcasting Corp of China and leader of the “blue fighters,” recently announced that he had canned his trip to east Africa, and he would stay in Taiwan for the recall vote on Saturday. He added that he hoped “his friends in the blue camp would follow his lead.” His statement is quite interesting for a few reasons. Jaw had been criticized following media reports that he would be traveling in east Africa during the recall vote. While he decided to stay in Taiwan after drawing a lot of flak, his hesitation says it all: If
When Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) caucus whip Ker Chien-ming (柯建銘) first suggested a mass recall of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators, the Taipei Times called the idea “not only absurd, but also deeply undemocratic” (“Lai’s speech and legislative chaos,” Jan. 6, page 8). In a subsequent editorial (“Recall chaos plays into KMT hands,” Jan. 9, page 8), the paper wrote that his suggestion was not a solution, and that if it failed, it would exacerbate the enmity between the parties and lead to a cascade of revenge recalls. The danger came from having the DPP orchestrate a mass recall. As it transpired,
Elbridge Colby, America’s Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, is the most influential voice on defense strategy in the Second Trump Administration. For insight into his thinking, one could do no better than read his thoughts on the defense of Taiwan which he gathered in a book he wrote in 2021. The Strategy of Denial, is his contemplation of China’s rising hegemony in Asia and on how to deter China from invading Taiwan. Allowing China to absorb Taiwan, he wrote, would open the entire Indo-Pacific region to Chinese preeminence and result in a power transition that would place America’s prosperity
All 24 Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers and suspended Hsinchu Mayor Ann Kao (高虹安), formerly of the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), survived recall elections against them on Saturday, in a massive loss to the unprecedented mass recall movement, as well as to the ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) that backed it. The outcome has surprised many, as most analysts expected that at least a few legislators would be ousted. Over the past few months, dedicated and passionate civic groups gathered more than 1 million signatures to recall KMT lawmakers, an extraordinary achievement that many believed would be enough to remove at
RSS