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
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
I have heard people equate the government’s stance on resisting forced unification with China or the conditional reinstatement of the military court system with the rise of the Nazis before World War II. The comparison is absurd. There is no meaningful parallel between the government and Nazi Germany, nor does such a mindset exist within the general public in Taiwan. It is important to remember that the German public bore some responsibility for the horrors of the Holocaust. Post-World War II Germany’s transitional justice efforts were rooted in a national reckoning and introspection. Many Jews were sent to concentration camps not
RSS