“Mr Japan” finally has his trade deal, after three months of talks. It looks like it will be his final act.
After a third successive blow from the Japanese electorate, Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba blinked in trade talks with the US. He spent months seeking a complete removal of the levies that US President Donald Trump held over the country, including those already imposed on cars.
“We will never accept tariffs, especially on autos,” Ishiba said in May, declaring the issue his red line.
Illustration: Mountain People
With vehicles long the main source of Trump’s ire — perhaps understandably, given that they account for more than three-quarters of the trade deficit — getting the president to back down was always going to be a tough ask, especially considering Japan’s lack of leverage.
However, after Sunday’s hammering in the upper house election, which has left the prime minister with a minority in both houses of parliament and arguably the worst electoral record of any Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) leader in history, Ishiba has seemingly accepted his fate. That is why he agreed to the deal that would include 15 percent tariffs across the board, including on cars.
With this last piece of business concluded, local media indicated that less than one year into his term, Ishiba would soon announce his resignation. The prime minister has subsequently denied the reports, which were made by multiple independent outlets.
Trade envoy and close aide Ryosei Akazawa painted a positive picture. It was “mission completed” in the tariff talks, he cheerfully wrote on social media, pointing to a picture hung in the White House of Ishiba and Trump speaking at the G7 meeting in Canada. He also denied any link between the agreement and the election results.
Certainly, markets were pleased, with automakers surging after being freed from months of uncertainty. Toyota Motor Corp rose by the most in nearly 40 years; the TOPIX headed for an all-time high.
Perhaps it is as good a deal as Japan could expect. As with all these agreements, the devil is in the details: It still puts a 15 percent levy across the board on imports. While that is less than the 25 percent tariff that was threatened, and most importantly less than the 25 percent already imposed on auto imports in May, it would still be damaging for exporters. There is an odd promise of US$550 billion in investment in the US, and a more logical agreement for Japan to buy more US rice. The part about Japan opening “to trade including cars and trucks” is confusing, given that there are no barriers currently in place.
However, perhaps Ishiba has done what he should have in the beginning, and simply told Trump what he wants to hear — knowing it would not, indeed cannot, be delivered.
The agreement also removes the last piece of leverage the prime minister had left — the “national crisis” he said must be prioritized ahead of infighting. That has been enough to keep the target off his back, until now. After Sunday’s results, it is clear he cannot be allowed to do any more harm.
In just 10 months, his weak leadership has resulted in an unstable political landscape that threatens to damage Japan for years. Conservative voters have deserted the LDP in droves — and headed to some disturbingly populist places. The landscape is so fractured that there is also not a viable opposition to take over, meaning the forecast is for parliamentary gridlock.
That is why the LDP needs to win voters back. With the trade deal about to be done, Ishiba should leave as soon as possible. Many conservatives are eyeing the anniversary of the end of World War II next month, fearing he would further alienate right-leaning voters by undoing the groundbreaking statement by late former Japanese prime minister Shinzo Abe on the 70th anniversary a decade ago.
It is not Ishiba’s fault that relations with the US have been so tarnished. That blame lies with Trump. By removing the uncertainty around tariffs, he would finally have done some good for the country, but he would leave Japan in a weaker position than when he took office — and in search of direction once again.
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.
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has long been expansionist and contemptuous of international law. Under Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平), the CCP regime has become more despotic, coercive and punitive. As part of its strategy to annex Taiwan, Beijing has sought to erase the island democracy’s international identity by bribing countries to sever diplomatic ties with Taipei. One by one, China has peeled away Taiwan’s remaining diplomatic partners, leaving just 12 countries (mostly small developing states) and the Vatican recognizing Taiwan as a sovereign nation. Taiwan’s formal international space has shrunk dramatically. Yet even as Beijing has scored diplomatic successes, its overreach
In her article in Foreign Affairs, “A Perfect Storm for Taiwan in 2026?,” Yun Sun (孫韻), director of the China program at the Stimson Center in Washington, said that the US has grown indifferent to Taiwan, contending that, since it has long been the fear of US intervention — and the Chinese People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) inability to prevail against US forces — that has deterred China from using force against Taiwan, this perceived indifference from the US could lead China to conclude that a window of opportunity for a Taiwan invasion has opened this year. Most notably, she observes that
For Taiwan, the ongoing US and Israeli strikes on Iranian targets are a warning signal: When a major power stretches the boundaries of self-defense, smaller states feel the tremors first. Taiwan’s security rests on two pillars: US deterrence and the credibility of international law. The first deters coercion from China. The second legitimizes Taiwan’s place in the international community. One is material. The other is moral. Both are indispensable. Under the UN Charter, force is lawful only in response to an armed attack or with UN Security Council authorization. Even pre-emptive self-defense — long debated — requires a demonstrably imminent
Since being re-elected, US President Donald Trump has consistently taken concrete action to counter China and to safeguard the interests of the US and other democratic nations. The attacks on Iran, the earlier capture of deposed of Venezuelan president Nicolas Maduro and efforts to remove Chinese influence from the Panama Canal all demonstrate that, as tensions with Beijing intensify, Washington has adopted a hardline stance aimed at weakening its power. Iran and Venezuela are important allies and major oil suppliers of China, and the US has effectively decapitated both. The US has continuously strengthened its military presence in the Philippines. Japanese Prime
RSS