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
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
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
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS