Japan's Ishiba to Face Crunch Meeting of LDP Lawmakers Monday
The gathering, scheduled to start around 3:30 p.m. local time, will give those in the party who seek a change at the top an opportunity to directly challenge Ishiba over his leadership.
On Sunday, Ishiba again signalled he intends to stay in office even after the ruling coalition lost its majority in the upper house of parliament in an election earlier this month.
'I intend to devote myself to the people and the future of the country,' Ishiba said in an interview with national broadcaster NHK. He added he wanted to ensure the successful implementation of the recently announced US-Japan trade deal.
New opinion polls show support for Ishiba's administration remains low, although surveys also suggest the public sees few good alternatives to the current prime minister. Polls in the Mainichi and Asahi newspapers published on Sunday both showed approval ratings of 29% for Ishiba's government.
The Asahi poll also found that 41% of respondents thought Ishiba should stand down, while 47% thought that wasn't necessary. The same survey showed that 81% of respondents thought the LDP's defeat was due to partywide issues rather than the prime minister's leadership.
Ishiba has also found support on social media and in small public gatherings outside the prime minister's office from members of the public calling for him to stay on.
Nonetheless, party members have been calling for someone to take responsibility for the July 20 election setback, which substantially weakened Ishiba's position. For the first time since 1955, a leader from the storied Japanese party now has to govern the country without a majority in either of the legislative bodies.
Former foreign minister Toshimitsu Motegi called for a leadership change within the LDP on his YouTube channel over the weekend. The party needs a 'fresh start with a new leader,' he said.
While pressure mounted on Ishiba last week, the premier got good news in the form of a surprise trade deal with the US that carried relatively favorable terms for Japan, including the lowering of across-the-board tariffs to 15% from 25%. The deal doesn't appear to have given Ishiba a significant boost in popularity.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
3 hours ago
- First Post
Israel mulls Gaza annexation, military rule after failed ceasefire talks
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is expected to decide on renewed military action in Gaza after the collapse of ceasefire negotiations with Hamas. As diplomatic channels falter, Israeli leaders are weighing options ranging from expanded military operations to annexation, even as internal divisions deepen and hostages remain in captivity. read more Israeli troops deploy with their tanks near the border fence with the Gaza Strip on August 1, 2025. AFP Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is set to meet with his security cabinet this week to decide the country's next steps in Gaza, following the collapse of indirect ceasefire talks with Hamas. A senior Israeli official suggested that renewed military action remains a likely option. During a visit to Israel last Saturday, US Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff said he was working closely with the Israeli government to devise a strategy for ending the conflict. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Despite international pressure, Israeli leaders have floated plans to escalate the military campaign in Gaza and potentially annex parts of the war-torn enclave. The failed negotiations in Doha were aimed at advancing a US-backed proposal for a 60-day ceasefire, during which humanitarian aid would enter Gaza and Hamas would release half of the hostages in exchange for Palestinian prisoners held in Israeli jails. Following Netanyahu's meeting with Witkoff last Thursday, a senior Israeli official stated that 'an understanding was emerging between Washington and Israel' of the need to transition from a truce to a comprehensive agreement that would 'release all hostages, disarm Hamas, and demilitarise the Gaza Strip,' one of Israel's key conditions for ending the war. According to a person acquainted with the situation, Israel saw the envoy's visit as 'very significant.' But later on Sunday, the Israeli official signalled that pursuit of a deal would be pointless, threatening more force: 'An understanding is emerging that Hamas is not interested in a deal and therefore the prime minister is pushing to release the hostages while pressing for military defeat. Israel's Channel 12 on Monday cited an official from his office as saying that Netanyahu was inclining towards expanding the offensive and seizing the entire Palestinian enclave. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD 'Strategic clarity' What a 'military defeat' might mean, however, is up for debate within the Israeli leadership. Some Israeli officials have suggested that Israel might declare it was annexing parts of Gaza as a means to pressure the militant group. Others, like Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich and National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir want to see Israel impose military rule in Gaza before annexing it and re-establishing the Jewish settlements Israel evicted 20 years ago. The Israeli military, which has pushed back at such ideas throughout the war, was expected on Tuesday to present alternatives that include extending into areas of Gaza where it has not yet operated, according to two defence officials. While some in the political leadership are pushing for expanding the offensive, the military is concerned that doing so will endanger the 20 hostages who are still alive, the officials said. Israeli Army Radio reported on Monday that military chief Eyal Zamir has become increasingly frustrated with what he describes as a lack of strategic clarity by the political leadership, concerned about being dragged into a war of attrition with Hamas militants. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD A spokesperson for the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) declined to comment on the report but said that the military has plans in store. 'We have different ways to fight the terror organization, and that's what the army does,' Lieutenant Colonel Nadav Shoshani said. On Tuesday, Qatar and Egypt endorsed a declaration by France and Saudi Arabia outlining steps toward a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, which included a call on Hamas to hand over its arms to the Western-backed Palestinian Authority. Hamas has repeatedly said it won't lay down arms. But it has told mediators it was willing to quit governance in Gaza for a non-partisan ruling body, according to three Hamas officials. It insists that the post-war Gaza arrangement must be agreed upon among the Palestinians themselves and not dictated by foreign powers. Israel's Foreign Minister Gideon Saar suggested on Monday that the gaps were still too wide to bridge. 'We would like to have all our hostages back. We would like to see the end of this war. We always prefer to get there by diplomatic means, if possible. But of course, the big question is, what will be the conditions for the end of the war?' he told journalists in Jerusalem. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
United News of India
4 hours ago
- United News of India
SC issues notice on challenge to section 9 of Citizenship Act over automatic termination of Indian citizenship
New Delhi, Aug 4 (UNI) The Supreme Court today issued notice on a plea challenging the constitutional validity of Section 9 of the Citizenship Act, 1955, which provides for the automatic termination of Indian citizenship upon the voluntary acquisition of foreign citizenship. A Bench comprising Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi tagged the matter with a pending case, Dr Radhika Thappeta v. Union of India, which raises a similar issue concerning revocation of Overseas Citizenship of India (OCI) status. The Court also issued notice on an interim application filed by the petitioner seeking protection from being required to renounce Indian citizenship in order to acquire foreign citizenship, while the constitutional challenge to Section 9 is under consideration. The petition was filed by Sanjay Gundlagutta Reddy, a US-based Economics professor of Indian origin, who, despite living in New York for several years, continues to identify as an Indian citizen. He argues that Section 9(1) is arbitrary, disproportionate, and violates fundamental constitutional rights, particularly the right to equality and personal liberty. During the hearing, Justice Surya Kant initially questioned the petitioner's counsel Advocate Warisha Farasat, asking, 'You are an eminent person. But what grievance is there…if you are so keen for Indian citizenship, you surrender the foreign citizenship and get the Indian one?' However, after hearing her submissions including reference to a previous case where the Supreme Court had granted interim relief on similar grounds the Bench agreed to issue notice and listed the matter for hearing after two weeks. Key arguments in the Petition are that Section 9 imposes a 'Hobson's choice' on Indians abroad, either acquire foreign citizenship and lose Indian nationality or retain Indian citizenship at great personal and professional cost. It fails to consider the global mobility and dual loyalty of Indian-origin individuals who maintain cultural and emotional ties with India The provision does not offer any discretionary or adjudicatory mechanism, resulting in automatic cessation of citizenship. The petitioner highlights that non-citizens globally face precarious legal status, with risks of deportation and limited access to rights. The petition, filed through Advocate-on-Record Yashwant Singh, seeks a reconsideration of India's citizenship framework to better align with contemporary realities of global Indian diaspora. The outcome of this case could have far-reaching implications for Indian-origin individuals across the world, particularly in how India defines and regulates its citizenship laws in a globalized era. UNI SNG RN
New Indian Express
4 hours ago
- New Indian Express
Cold War camaraderie: Why US refuses to take Pak to task
It was in 1991 that India-US relations began to acquire a strategic shape. With the Cold War concluded and the Soviet Union reduced to a diminished Russia, the US found itself in an unfamiliar role—as a lone superpower with global responsibilities. It recognised the dangers of complacency in victory and quickly began pivoting from its Atlantic preoccupations to the Asia Pacific, anticipating a new set of challengers. The growing rise of China, while facilitated in earlier decades by the US itself, had begun to look less like an opportunity and more like a coming storm. India, geographically positioned next to China, democratically stable and increasingly open to global markets, became a natural component of this new architecture—a potential US partner. Yet, for much of its early strategic phase, the India-US relationship remained cautiously transactional. Military-to-military ties grew at a measured pace, beginning with the Malabar exercises in 1992. Somehow, the trust deficit remained a Cold War legacy. The 1998 Pokhran nuclear tests were a shock to Washington and created an immediate rift. But this proved temporary. President George W Bush's outreach, culminating in the landmark civil nuclear deal, and external affairs minister Pranab Mukherjee's 2005 speech at RAND Corporation marked a turning point. India, at that point, became a more serious US partner. The devil in the relationship remained Pakistan. The US equivocation on Pakistan's role in cross-border terrorism has been one of the most vexing elements of this evolving relationship. Despite overwhelming evidence of Pakistan's nurturing of terror networks, Washington has not held Islamabad to account. It has always had the leverage—economic, diplomatic and military—but rarely used it. The oft-cited reason is strategic: an overstated fear of pushing Pakistan further into China's embrace. In reality, it is also an emotional and historical inertia rooted in the Cold War, SEATO, CENTO and years of military camaraderie.
