Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba was supposed to be a fresh face. He could quickly end up being a forgotten one.
Weeks into his role and mere days out from a general election, red-alert signals are sounding in Tokyo’s corridors of power.
After his surprise victory in last month’s leadership race for the ruling Liberal Democratic Party (LDP), Ishiba has spectacularly failed to achieve even the “new manager bounce” in public opinion polls that generally accompanies a change at the top. His Cabinet has been greeted with the lowest support figures of any new prime minister this century. More respondents to a Jiji poll said they disapproved of the prime minister than supported him.
Worse still, the roll of the dice to call a hasty snap election now looks like it might backfire. News front pages warn of a potential trouncing at the ballot box on Sunday.
The LDP is likely to lose its majority in the lower house and might also struggle to hold on to power with its long-standing coalition partner Komeito. Not only would that fall below Ishiba’s own definition of victory, it would necessitate expanding the coalition further, leading to more compromise and slowing decisionmaking.
As polling data continue to worsen as election day approaches, the prospect of an LDP loss — and a subsequent change in government for the first time in more than a decade — still seems quite distant, but is no longer unthinkable.
It was not supposed to be like this. The whole point of last month’s ruling-party election was to find a leader who could reinvigorate the LDP after the slush-fund scandal that brought its support to historic lows. Despite his limited support within the party, Ishiba has long been seen as popular with the public, a glad-handing man of the people, regularly topping surveys as the most suitable choice for the next chief.
Instead, as I had long suspected, it seems that Ishiba’s popularity has more to do with who he is not. In effective opposition within the ruling party, frequently at loggerheads with former Japanese prime minister Shinzo Abe, he represented change and a blank slate onto which Abe opponents could project their political desires. Now that he is in the big seat, people are having to look closer at what he actually stands for.
So far, that has been uninspiring at best. At a time of scandal, the prime minister is clean, but that is not good enough. Like other incumbent parties across the world this year, he is dealing with some issues not of his own making, notably inflation.
However, he is already flip-flopping, backing away from support for everything from an “Asian NATO” and Bank of Japan rate hikes, to greater representation for women in government and support for same-sex marriage.
In the absence of his own alternatives, Ishiba has unwisely inherited many of the domestic slogans and policies of his predecessor, former Japanese prime minister Fumio Kishida.
His fudge on lawmakers implicated in the funding scandal — withdrawing the whip while hinting they might be accepted back into the party if they win re-election — has not gone down well with a public that wants offenders punished. In overplaying his hand in the early days of his administration, turning his back on Japanese Representative and former prime minister Taro Aso and the former Abe faction most heavily implicated in the scandal, he has alienated many conservatives and painted a target on his back.
Aso has reportedly told Japanese Representative Sanae Takaichi, who Ishiba defeated in last month’s race, to be ready for another challenge.
Say what you will of Takaichi, but there is little questioning where she stands and would quickly tilt the country rightward.
The prime minister has failed to quell the feeling around the country of a public that wants to give the LDP a bloody nose. Already, people are searching for the right historical comparison. Is it former Japanese prime minister Yoshiro Mori, who took over in unexpected circumstances in 2000 and oversaw a trouncing that ultimately resulted in his time in office lasting just a year? Or Aso himself, who led the party to electoral disaster in 2009 and ushered in a change of government?
With an upper-house election next summer, a poor night for Ishiba could quickly see him become a lame duck; a bad showing could be even worse. In that scenario, perhaps the correct comparison might predate the LDP itself: Prince Naruhiko Higashikuni, the first post-World War II prime minister of Japan, who served just 54 days in office.
Of course, it might not come to that. Polling, in Japan as elsewhere, has often proved unreliable, and the anti-LDP sentiment might not materialize on Sunday. While the newly elected head of the largest opposition party, Japanese Representative Yoshihiko Noda, is likely to enjoy a large increase in seats, Ishiba is lucky that Noda does not represent much of a break with the past either.
He is still remembered as the last prime minister of the disastrous Democratic Party of Japan and will struggle to energize the electorate to show up on voting day (the ruling coalition tends to benefit from a lower turnout).
The sudden dissolution of parliament also gave Noda no chance to coordinate a strategic alliance with other parties and means the anti-LDP vote will be split in many districts.
The two leaders sound and even look quite alike and indeed were both members of the short-lived New Frontier Party in the mid-1990s.
However, even assuming he somehow engineers a better-than-expected showing on Sunday, Ishiba will need more than luck if he is to survive.
Gearoid Reidy is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering Japan, and South and North Korea. He previously led the breaking news team in North Asia and was the Tokyo deputy bureau chief. This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.
A return to power for former US president Donald Trump would pose grave risks to Taiwan’s security, autonomy and the broader stability of the Indo-Pacific region. The stakes have never been higher as China aggressively escalates its pressure on Taiwan, deploying economic, military and psychological tactics aimed at subjugating the nation under Beijing’s control. The US has long acted as Taiwan’s foremost security partner, a bulwark against Chinese expansionism in the region. However, a second Trump presidency could upend decades of US commitments, introducing unpredictability that could embolden Beijing and severely compromise Taiwan’s position. While president, Trump’s foreign policy reflected a transactional
There appears to be a growing view among leaders and leading thinkers in Taiwan that their words and actions have no influence over how China approaches cross-Strait relations. According to this logic, China’s actions toward Taiwan are guided by China’s unwavering ambition to assert control over Taiwan. Many also believe Beijing’s approach is influenced by China’s domestic politics. As the thinking goes, former President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) made a good faith effort to demonstrate her moderation on cross-Strait issues throughout her tenure. During her 2016 inaugural address, Tsai sent several constructive signals, including by acknowledging the historical fact of interactions and
HSBC Holdings successfully fought off a breakup campaign by disgruntled Asian investors in recent years. Now, it has announced a restructuring along almost the same east-west lines. The obvious question is why? It says it is designed to create a simpler, more efficient and dynamic company. However, it looks a lot like the bank is also facing up to the political reality of the growing schism between the US and China. A new structure would not dissolve HSBC’s geopolitical challenges, but it could give the bank better options to respond quickly if things worsen. HSBC spent 2022 battling to convince shareholders of
China’s “Joint Sword-2024B” military exercises around Taiwan last week have sparked concerns in Taipei and allied capitals that Beijing’s risk tolerance is increasing, and rather than prioritizing efforts toward “peaceful unification,” it is ramping up efforts to bring about unification by force, whether that be a military quarantine, blockade or full-scale invasion. Catherine Lila Chou (周怡齡) and Mark Harrison are right in their recent book Revolutionary Taiwan: Making Nationhood in a Changing World Order that the nature of Beijing’s one-party political system, in which the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is always right, means Taiwanese identity is explained away as being the
RSS