Japan’s Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) has always had a tradition of holding its leadership accountable for election defeats. Despite the LDP having already experienced three consecutive losses under the leadership of Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba, Ishiba has insisted on staying in power to resolve the tariff negotiations with the US and Japan.
However, on Wednesday last week, US President Donald Trump unexpectedly announced that a “massive” trade deal with Japan had been reached — including a 15 percent tariff rate — thereby undermining Ishiba’s argument and making his position appear weak and ineffective.
Back in 2007, when former Japanese prime minister Shinzo Abe’s LDP lost the upper house elections and Taro Aso’s approval ratings plummeted after he succeeded Abe, Ishiba was among the first to call on both to take responsibility by stepping down.
If Ishiba insists on clinging to power despite his own abysmal track record, it would not only be difficult to justify his actions, but also harder to quell criticism from within and outside the party.
On Wednesday last week, the Mainichi Shimbun and the Yomiuri Shimbun reported that Ishiba plans to announce his resignation by the end of next month. While Ishiba swiftly denied these reports, the presence of dissent within the LDP is undeniable.
On the same day, hardline nationalist Sanae Takaichi — who led the first round of last year’s LDP leadership election — and Japanese Representative Takayuki Kobayashi each held private meetings with their supporters. Takaichi’s meeting drew attention, as it was attended by former Japanese minister of economy, trade and industry Koichi Hagiuda — a key figure in the party’s Abe faction — and was followed by a closed-door meeting with Aso. While campaigning in Japan’s ancient capital of Nara earlier this month, Takaichi declared her resolve to “stiffen the backbone of the party again,” a statement seen as signaling her intention to run for party leader once more.
The Yomiuri Shimbun named several potential successors to Ishiba, including Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries Shinjiro Koizumi, Chief Cabinet Secretary Yoshimasa Hayashi, former LDP secretary-general Toshimitsu Motegi and former minister of digital transformation Taro Kono.
However, with the ruling coalition between the LDP and its partner Komeito lacking a majority in both houses, the combination of a strong opposition and a weak ruling party means that the next prime minister would face significant constraints in governance. As a result, the administration’s outlook remains uncertain.
For the LDP to rise from the ashes, its next leader must possess three key qualities.
The first is the ability to unify the party and engage with the opposition. Amid growing political polarization and rising conservative sentiment, the ability to unite conservative forces is crucial to the party’s survival.
Takaichi and Kobayashi visited Taiwan in April and last month respectively, demonstrating a keen awareness of security issues — positions that are quite popular among conservatives.
The second is the vision and skills nedded to revitalize Japan’s economy. In the face of weak domestic demand, inflationary pressure and the hollowing out of local industries, the next leader would struggle to maintain public support without a clear and effective plan for economic reform.
The final quality is the ability to rebuild a positive relationship with the US. Since Trump’s return to the White House, the US-Japan relationship has entered a new phase of adjustment. Takaichi, Kobayashi, Koizumi, Motegi and Hayashi all have strong ties with the US, making them better positioned than Ishiba to understand Washington’s interests and respond to new developments.
Ishiba’s slogan, “vultures do not flock together,” reflects his unconventional, independent style. However, lone-wolf figures often struggle to integrate with the broader landscape. Now, with a “post-Ishiba” era on the horizon, the leader who can emerge victorious and guide the LDP out of the fog would determine the next chapter of Japanese politics.
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
Taiwanese pragmatism has long been praised when it comes to addressing Chinese attempts to erase Taiwan from the international stage. “Taipei” and the even more inaccurate and degrading “Chinese Taipei,” imposed titles required to participate in international events, are loathed by Taiwanese. That is why there was huge applause in Taiwan when Japanese public broadcaster NHK referred to the Taiwanese Olympic team as “Taiwan,” instead of “Chinese Taipei” during the opening ceremony of the Tokyo Olympics. What is standard protocol for most nations — calling a national team by the name their country is commonly known by — is impossible for
India is not China, and many of its residents fear it never will be. It is hard to imagine a future in which the subcontinent’s manufacturing dominates the world, its foreign investment shapes nations’ destinies, and the challenge of its economic system forces the West to reshape its own policies and principles. However, that is, apparently, what the US administration fears. Speaking in New Delhi last week, US Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau warned that “we will not make the same mistakes with India that we did with China 20 years ago.” Although he claimed the recently agreed framework
The Office of the US Trade Representative (USTR) on Wednesday last week announced it is launching investigations into 16 US trading partners, including Taiwan, under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 to determine whether they have engaged in unfair trade practices, such as overproduction. A day later, the agency announced a separate Section 301 investigation into 60 economies based on the implementation of measures to prohibit the importation of goods produced with forced labor. Several of Taiwan’s main trading rivals — including China, Japan, South Korea and the EU — also made the US’ investigation list. The announcements come
Taiwan is not invited to the table. It never has been, but this year, with the Philippines holding the ASEAN chair, the question that matters is no longer who gets formally named, it is who becomes structurally indispensable. The “one China” formula continues to do its job. It sets the outer boundary of official diplomatic speech, and no one in the region has a serious interest in openly challenging it. However, beneath the surface, something is thickening. Trade corridors, digital infrastructure, artificial intelligence (AI) cooperation, supply chains, cross-border investment: The connective tissue between Taiwan and ASEAN is quietly and methodically growing
RSS