Former Ambassador to U.S.: Japan Must Prepare for Possible Post-Trump Reversal; Many Negotiation Issues Precede Trump
The Yomiuri Shimbun
Japan Institute of International Affairs President Kenichiro Sasae speaks during an interview with The Yomiuri Shimbun on Thursday in Tokyo.
Kenichiro Sasae, president of the Japan Institute of International Affairs, says Japan must keep hoisting the flag of multilateralism amid the current tariff turmoil and prepare a place for the United States if it decides to return to the established international order.
The following is excerpted from an interview with Sasae conducted by Yomiuri Shimbun Staff Writer Kenta Kamimura.
Many of the issues raised by the administration of U.S. President Donald Trump, such as non-tariff barriers on automobiles exported to Japan and the lack of openness of agricultural markets, are both old and new challenges between the two countries that precede the first Trump administration. The key issue in the current negotiations is not 'how to skillfully deflect America's demands.'
Since the end of World War II, the United States has been at the center of the free trade system and the world order. Domestically, however, two competing views have always existed: an emphasis on free trade or an emphasis on employment. Depending on the administration, the balance of priorities can change.
As the relative power of the United States since the 2000s has declined, the country has become less able to open its markets as generously as before. The Trump administration is operating with this in mind, and its strategic goal of revitalizing U.S. industry, particularly manufacturing, is clear.
The trade imbalance between Japan and the United States in every field has been the subject of negotiations since the 1970s. Washington's basic philosophy has long been that 'the United States has fully opened its market, so Japan should do the same,' and Trump takes the same view.
However, the second Trump administration has weaponized tariffs, using them not only for industrial protection but also to reduce the fiscal deficit. It is unclear whether the formula Japan has adopted based on past negotiations with the United States will be effective this time around, so it is necessary to take a strategic approach while keeping in mind the short-, medium-, and long-term implications.
In the current negotiations, Japan's effort to resolve the automobile tariff issue first is correct. Just as Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba has explained to Trump, it is also important for Japan to continue investing in the United States.
Japan's stance of not taking an antagonistic approach toward Trump is also working in its favor. This is because the United States appears to want to achieve certain results with its ally Japan before dealing with China, which is the main target of its tariff measures. If proposals that are in line with Japan's national interests can be found, Japan should proceed with negotiations without hesitation.
In the long term, it would be wise to keep in mind that a 'Trump-like approach' may persist even after his four-year term ends. This opportunity should be used to consider industrial reforms that Japan should have pursued on its own.
Alongside Europe and Asia, Japan must continue to support multilateralism centered on the United Nations, as well as other global issues that would contribute to its national interests, even if the Trump administration turns its back on them. There may occur another reversal of opinion within the United States. It is Japan's role to prepare a seat for the United States should it decide to return to the established international order someday.
Kenichiro Sasae
Sasae is a graduate of the University of Tokyo's Faculty of Law. He joined the Foreign Ministry in 1974 and served in such roles as director general of the Asia and Oceania Bureau and vice minister. As ambassador to the United States from 2012 to 2018, he was a negotiator with the United States regarding the Trans-Pacific Partnership. Sasae, 73, has been president of the Japan Institute of International Affairs since June 2018.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Nikkei Asia
32 minutes ago
- Nikkei Asia
Trump signs order doubling steel and aluminum tariffs to 50%
WASHINGTON -- U.S. tariffs on steel aluminum and steel are set to double to 50% on Wednesday, a levy the Trump administration says will safeguard the American steel industry from inexpensive imports. On Tuesday evening, U.S. President Donald Trump signed a proclamation for the tariff hike -- up from 25% announced in March -- to take effect on Wednesday at 12:01 a.m. U.S. Eastern time. The U.K. is exempt from the increased levy.
Japan Today
an hour ago
- Japan Today
Europeans concerned U.S. will withdraw support from NATO; Americans should be, too
By John Deni The United States has long played a leadership role in NATO, the most successful military alliance in history. The U.S. and 11 other countries in North America and Europe founded NATO in 1949, following World War II. NATO has since grown its membership to include 32 countries in Europe and North America. But now, European leaders and politicians fear the United States has become a less reliable ally, posing major challenges for Europe and, by implication, NATO. This concern is not unfounded. President Donald Trump has repeatedly spoken of a desire to seize Greenland, which is an autonomous territory of Denmark, a NATO member. He has declared that Canada, another NATO member, should become 'the 51st state.' Trump has also sided with Russia at the United Nations and said that the European Union, the political and economic group uniting 27 European countries, was designed to 'screw' the U.S. Still, Trump – as well as other senior U.S. government officials – has said that the U.S. remains committed to staying in and supporting NATO. For decades, both liberal and conservative American politicians have recognized that the U.S. strengthens its own military and economic interests by being a leader in NATO – and by keeping thousands of U.S. troops based in Europe to underwrite its commitment. Understanding NATO The U.S., Canada and 10 Western European countries formed NATO nearly 80 years ago as a way to help maintain peace and stability in Europe following World War II. NATO helped European and North American countries bind together and defend themselves against the threat once posed by the Soviet Union, a former communist empire that fell in 1991. NATO employs about 2,000 people at its headquarters in Brussels. It does not have its own military troops and relies on its 32 member countries to volunteer their own military forces to conduct operations and other tasks under NATO's leadership. NATO does have its own military command structure, led by an American military officer, and including military officers from other countries. This team plans and executes all NATO military operations. In peacetime, military forces working with NATO conduct training exercises across Eastern Europe and other places to help reassure allies about the strength of the military coalition – and to deter potential aggressors, like Russia. NATO has a relatively small annual budget of around US$3.6 billion. The U.S. and Germany are the largest contributors to this budget, each responsible for funding 16% of NATO's costs each year. Separate from NATO's annual budget, in 2014, NATO members agreed that each participating country should spend the equivalent of 2% of its gross domestic product on their own national defense. Twenty two of NATO's 31 members with military forces were expected that 2% threshold as of April 2025. Although NATO is chiefly a military alliance, it has roots in the mutual economic interests of both the U.S. and Europe. Europe is the United States' most important economic partner. Roughly one-quarter of all U.S. trade is with Europe – more than the U.S. has with Canada, China or Mexico. Over 2.3 million American jobs are directly tied to producing exports that reach European countries that are part of NATO. NATO helps safeguard this mutual economic relationship between the U.S. and Europe. If Russia or another country tries to intimidate, dominate or even invade a European country, this could hurt the American economy. In this way, NATO can be seen as the insurance policy that underwrites the strength and vitality of the American economy. The heart of that insurance policy is Article 5, a mutual defense pledge that member countries agree to when they join NATO. Article 5 says that an armed attack against one NATO member is considered an attack against the entire alliance. If one NATO member is attacked, all other NATO members must help defend the country in question. NATO members have only invoked Article 5 once, following the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks in the U.S., when the alliance deployed aircraft to monitor U.S. skies. A wavering commitment to Article 5 Trump has questioned whether he would enforce Article 5 and help defend a NATO country if it is not paying the required 2% of its gross domestic product. NBC News also reported in April 2025 that the U.S. is likely going to cut 10,000 or more of the nearly 85,000 American troops stationed in Europe. The U.S. might also relinquish its top military leadership position within NATO, according to NBC. Many political analysts expect the U.S. to shift its national security focus away from Europe and toward threats posed by China – specifically, the threat of China invading or attacking Taiwan. At the same time, the Trump administration appears eager to reset relations with Russia. This is despite the Russian military's atrocities committed against Ukrainian military forces and civilians in the war Russia began in 2022, and Russia's intensifying hybrid war against Europeans in the form of covert spy attacks across Europe. This hybrid warfare allegedly includesRussia conducting cyberattacks and sabotage operations across Europe. It also involves Russia allegedly trying to plant incendiary devices on planes headed to North America, among other things. A shifting role in Europe The available evidence indicates that the U.S. is backing away from its role in Europe. At best – from a European security perspective – the U.S. could still defend European allies with the potential threat of its nuclear weapon arsenal. The U.S. has significantly more nuclear weapons than any Western European country, but it is not clear that this is enough to deter Russia without the clear presence of large numbers of American troops in Europe, especially given that Moscow continues to perceive the U.S. as NATO's most important and most powerful member. For this reason, significantly downsizing the number of U.S. troops in Europe, giving up key American military leadership positions in NATO, or backing away from the alliance in other ways appears exceptionally perilous. Such actions could increase Russian aggression across Europe, ultimately threatening not just European security but America's as well. Maintaining America's leadership position in NATO and sustaining its troop levels in Europe helps reinforce the U.S. commitment to defending its most important allies. This is the best way to protect vital U.S. economic interests in Europe today and ensure Washington will have friends to call on in the future. John Deni is Research Professor of Joint, Interagency, Intergovernmental, and Multinational Security Studies, U.S. Army War College. The Conversation is an independent and nonprofit source of news, analysis and commentary from academic experts. External Link © The Conversation
Japan Today
an hour ago
- Japan Today
Trade war cuts global economic growth outlook: OECD
The global economic outlook 'is becoming increasingly challenging' following Trump's tariff blitz, the OCED warns By Ali BEKHTAOUI The OECD slashed its annual global growth forecast on Tuesday, warning that U.S. President Donald Trump's tariffs blitz would stifle the world economy -- hitting the United States especially hard. After 3.3-percent growth last year, the world economy is now expected to expand by a "modest" 2.9 percent in 2025 and 2026, the Paris-based Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development said. In its previous report in March, the OECD had forecast growth of 3.1 percent for 2025 and 3.0 percent for 2026. Since then, Trump has launched a wave of tariffs that has rattled financial markets. "The global outlook is becoming increasingly challenging," said the OECD, an economic policy group of 38 mostly wealthy countries. It said "substantial increases" in trade barriers, tighter financial conditions, weaker business and consumer confidence, and heightened policy uncertainty will all have "marked adverse effects on growth" if they persist. The OECD downgraded its 2025 growth forecast for the United States from 2.2 percent to 1.6 percent. The world's biggest economy is expected to slow further next year to 1.5 percent. Trump, who has insisted that the tariffs would spark a manufacturing revival and restore a U.S. economic "Golden Age", posted on his Truth Social platform before the OECD report's publication: "Because of Tariffs, our Economy is BOOMING!" The OECD holds a ministerial meeting in Paris on Tuesday and Wednesday. U.S. and EU trade negotiators are expected to hold talks on the sidelines of the gathering after Trump threatened to hit the European Union with 50-percent tariffs. The Group of Seven advanced economies is also holding a meeting focused on trade. "For everyone, including the United States, the best option is that countries sit down and get an agreement," OECD chief economist Alvaro Pereira said in an interview with AFP. "Avoiding further trade fragmentation is absolutely key in the next few months and years," Pereira said. Trump imposed in April a baseline tariff of 10 percent on imports from around the world. He unveiled higher tariffs on dozens of countries but has paused them until July to allow time for negotiations. The U.S. president has also imposed 25-percent tariffs on cars and now plans to raise those on steel and aluminium to 50 percent on Wednesday. In the OECD report, Pereira warned that "weakened economic prospects will be felt around the world, with almost no exception". He added that "lower growth and less trade will hit incomes and slow job growth". The outlook "has deteriorated" in the United States after the economy expanded by a robust 2.8 percent last year, the report said. The effective tariff rate on U.S. merchandise imports has gone from two percent in 2024 to 15.4 percent, the highest since 1938, the OECD said. The higher rate and policy uncertainty "will dent household consumption and business investment growth", the report said. The OECD also blamed "high economic policy uncertainty, a significant slowdown in net immigration and a sizeable reduction in the federal workforce". While annual inflation is expected to "moderate" among the Group of 20 economies to 3.6 percent in 2025 and 3.2 percent in 2026, the United States is "an important exception". U.S. inflation is expected to accelerate to just under four percent by the end of the year, two times higher than the Federal Reserve's target for consumer price increases. The OECD slightly reduced its growth forecast for China -- which was hit with triple-digit U.S. tariffs that have been temporarily lowered -- from 4.8 to 4.7 percent this year. Another country with a sizeable downgrade is Japan. The OECD cut the country's growth forecast from 1.1 percent to 0.7 percent. The outlook for the eurozone economy, however, remains intact at one-percent growth. "There is the risk that protectionism and trade policy uncertainty will increase even further and that additional trade barriers might be introduced," Pereira wrote. "According to our simulations, additional tariffs would further reduce global growth prospects and fuel inflation, dampening global growth even more," he said. © 2025 AFP
