logo
Ishiba laments lack of understanding with Trump

Ishiba laments lack of understanding with Trump

Gulf Today7 hours ago

Tim Kelly,
Reuters
Japanese premier Shigeru Ishiba's bid to get US President Donald Trump to relax tariffs imperiling his country's economy and his political future fell flat this week, underlining the gulf between the allies as more levies are set to kick in. Ishiba travelled to the G7 summit in Canada hoping a direct appeal might get talks back on track after Japanese negotiators struggled to secure respite on a 25% tariff imposed on imported cars, according to two officials with knowledge of the matter. While the sun beamed down as Ishiba and Trump reclined in lounge chairs in the foothills of the Canadian Rockies, Monday's brief encounter did little to alter the grim forecast for Japanese industry girding for broader 24% levies due on July 9.
The lack of progress could knock confidence in Ishiba's diplomacy just as he prepares to contest a dicey upper house election next month that some political analysts say could result in his ouster.
"Despite our persistent efforts to find common ground through serious discussions, yesterday's meeting with President Trump confirmed that we still have discrepancies in our understanding," Ishiba told reporters on Tuesday before his departure from Canada. Trump earlier told reporters aboard Air Force One that "there was a chance of a deal" but appeared in little mood to cede ground. "Ultimately you have to understand we're just going to send a letter saying this is what you're going to pay otherwise you don't have to do business with us," he said.
The most pressing issue for Japan has been the impact of Trump's tariffs on its auto sector, which employs nearly one in 10 of the country's workers and accounts for a fifth of exports.
Japan's overall exports fell in May for the first time in eight months, piling pressure on its fragile economy, the world's fourth largest.
Toyota Motor Corp, Japan's leading car company, has already flagged that tariffs have likely sliced off 180 billion yen ($1.2 billion) from its profit in April and May alone. Honda has said it expects a 650 billion yen ($4.5 billion) hit to its earnings this year from tariffs in the U.S. and elsewhere, while Mazda Motor declined to issue a full-year profit forecast, citing uncertainty due to tariffs.
Publicly, Ishiba's government has said it aims to win total exemption from Trump's auto tariffs, but behind the scenes its negotiators had been trying to convince Washington to knock them down to around 10%, the sources said, requesting anonymity due to the sensitivity of the matter.
Trump's trade deal with Britain, where he agreed to allow a quota of cars to be subject to a lower 10% levy has provided somewhat of a template, although Japan is a far larger exporter of cars to the United States.
In exchange for relief on the autos sector, Tokyo had pledged to step up purchases of US gas and other items to rebalance a trade deficit that has long irked Trump.
But just days before Ishiba was due to arrive in Kananaskis, Canada for the G7 summit, it became clear to Japan's negotiators that Washington was unwilling to budge, said one of the sources.
Ishiba likely miscalculated by raising expectation of an agreement with Trump, said Kenji Minemura, a senior researcher at the Canon Institute for Global Studies.
He will now have put a trade deal aside and focus on convincing Trump to extend the pause on the broader reciprocal levies, a senior lawmaker close to the premier said. Otherwise, Ishiba faces the prospect of contesting elections next month with the full force of Trump's tariffs in effect. The combined tariffs could shave nearly 1% off Japan's gross domestic product, Mizuho Research & Technologies has estimated.
"The fact that nothing was agreed at the summit could raise doubts about the diplomatic skills of the Ishiba administration," said Hiroshi Shiratori, professor of contemporary political analysis at Hosei University.
His ruling coalition may struggle to hold on to its majority in the upper house vote, a repeat of the result in the more powerful lower house election in October, which could potentially trigger his ouster, political analysts say.
Even if the LDP limps on in minority rule, there is around a 70% chance the party would replace its leader, said Michael Cucek, a political science professor at Temple University in Tokyo.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

As Trump weighs bombing Iran's Fordow, 'mission creep' lurks behind US attack
As Trump weighs bombing Iran's Fordow, 'mission creep' lurks behind US attack

Middle East Eye

time3 hours ago

  • Middle East Eye

As Trump weighs bombing Iran's Fordow, 'mission creep' lurks behind US attack

US President Donald Trump believes he is only weighing military strikes on Iran's Fordow nuclear plant, but the history of Middle East "mission creep" lurks behind his deliberations. Mission creep is when a military campaign's objectives start to shift and devolve into a longer, unforeseen commitment, and has often characterised US military adventures around the world. "If the US does join the war in Iran - and right now I think it won't - it will go in planning only to do some limited bombing. But as we all know, once you're in a war, there can be a lot of surprises. It is much easier to get into a war than to get out of one,' Tom E Ricks, the author of Fiasco: The American Military Adventure in Iraq, told Middle East Eye. On Thursday evening, The Wall Street Journal reported that Trump approved a US attack plan on Iran but is waiting to see if he can get Iran to renounce its nuclear programme. The New York Times also followed that with a report saying Iran was willing to accept Trump's offer to meet. But history shows that the US may struggle to stop at Fordow, even if Trump wants to. His deliberation on whether to attack Iran is being compared to the 2003 decision to invade Iraq, but that might be a false comparison. New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters The story of the US's involvement in Iraq is one of incremental involvement. In 1991, the US implemented a no-fly zone to protect Iraq's Kurdish minority. Then, in 1998, the US and UK launched widespread strikes on Iraq on the grounds that Saddam Hussein failed to allow weapons inspectors access to his country. The decision to invade fully came in 2003 after the US falsely claimed the country had weapons of mass destruction and was linked to Osama bin Laden's al-Qaeda militant group. Even then, experts say there are key differences from now. Although Israel lobbied the US for many years to invade Iraq, that war was US-led. US joins 'Israel-led war' Now, Trump is on the cusp of joining Israel in what is the zenith of its long campaign to rewrite the balance of power in the Middle East since the Hamas-led attack on 7 October 2023. That attack set off a region-wide war with Israeli ground troops occupying the Gaza Strip. Israel degraded Hezbollah in Lebanon and has repeatedly launched strikes in Syria, both while Bashar al-Assad's government was in power there and after his overthrow in December 2024. 'Iraq was a US war,' Paul Salem, a senior fellow at the Middle East Institute, told MEE. 'What we have seen since 7 October [2023] is something different; Israeli-led and designed wars with Israeli objectives and the US coming along.' If Trump does launch strikes on Iran, he will do so under justifications that echo 2003, but it's still not an apples-to-apples comparison. Then, the US falsely claimed that Iraq's Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction, including nuclear weapons. But there are key differences now. 'What makes this precipice of intervention unique is that the US was engaged in direct negotiations with Iran,' Fawaz Gerges, author of What Really Went Wrong: The West and the Failure of Democracy in the Middle East, told MEE. 'What makes this precipice of intervention unique is that the US was engaged in direct negotiations with Iran' - Fawaz Gerges, academic and author Indeed, just before the Israeli attack, Iran and the US were set to meet in Oman for the sixth round of nuclear talks aimed at curbing Iran's nuclear programme. And the reality is that this agreement would just be a follow-up deal to the nuclear deal that Iran and the US signed during President Barack Obama's tenure, which Trump unilaterally exited from during his first tenure. However, in 2003, Hussein ultimately rejected requests for inspectors to enter Iraq. The Bush administration then used false intelligence to justify its attack. Trump's own director of national intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, said in March that Iran was not seeking to build a nuclear weapon. Trump disregarded her assessment. 'I don't care what she said,' Trump said on Tuesday about the assessment. 'I think they were very close to having a weapon.' As of Thursday, Trump was still vacillating between striking Iran and appearing to use Israel's pummelling of the Islamic Republic as a negotiating card to achieve what he says his aim is - Iran renouncing all enrichment of uranium. "I may do it. I may not do it. I mean, nobody knows what I'm going to do," Trump said in the Oval Office. He earlier called for Iran's 'unconditional surrender'. Arab officials whose countries have been trying to mediate between Iran and the US told MEE earlier that they believe Trump is more likely than not to order US strikes on Iran. The expected target of American strikes is Fordow, the Iranian enrichment facility buried half a kilometre underground. Israel needs the US's 30,000-pound Massive Ordnance Penetrator bombs and B-2 aircraft to have a chance at destroying the plant through conventional strikes. Mission creep The US has conducted limited bombing campaigns elsewhere in the Middle East, but has rarely avoided being drawn into a deeper commitment. One example where it did so was 1986 in Libya, when the Reagan administration bombed Muammar Gaddafi's regime in retaliation for the bombing of a disco in West Berlin that killed two US service members. Ethan Chorin, a former US diplomat and author, said the closest parallel to today is the Obama administration's 2011 decision to lead a Nato bombing campaign on Libya during the Arab Spring. 'Initially, US intervention in Libya was ostensibly to protect civilians in Benghazi,' Chorin said, author of Exit the Colonel: The Hidden History of the Libyan Revolution. But Chorin said the comparisons stop there. 'Libya was seen as a 'safer bet' for intervention during the Arab Spring. No one thinks Iran is marginal. There is a big difference. But the concern about mission creep is there.' Diego Garcia: The Indian Ocean base the US can use to target Iran Read More » 'Assume you destroy Fordow and have an agitated regime that is still in power. What lessons will they (the regime) have learned?' he added. The Trump administration has not stated that its goal is regime change in Iran, but Trump didn't rule it out, saying on Truth Social that the US knows where he is but has decided not to take him out, "at least not for now". But Israel has made no secret that a positive outcome for them of the attacks on Iran's senior chain of command, energy infrastructure and military capabilities could collapse the government. 'It could certainly be the result, because Iran is very weak,' Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told Fox News on Monday. 'The decision to act, to rise up, at this time, is the decision of the Iranian people.' If Trump does enter the war with Israel, suggesting its goals are regime change, it would be a major pivot for a US president who visited the Gulf in May and excoriated 'interventionists' and 'nation-builders'. Libya, a predominantly Sunni Muslim country of just seven million people, is a bad comparison. The spark for the protests against Gaddafi was organic, coming as part of the wider Arab Spring movement. It then descended into a civil war, fuelled in part by Gulf states backing rival militias. Even Iraq, where the US carried out De-Ba'athification after ousting Hussein's secular government, does not compare to Iran, Gerges told MEE. 'There is a delusion of raw power here,' he told MEE. 'The objectives have changed, but here the goal seems to be to destroy as much as possible in the military infrastructure and see if, as a side effect, you bring about regime change or just chaos.'

Trump promised not to go to war. His most ardent supporters want him to keep his word
Trump promised not to go to war. His most ardent supporters want him to keep his word

Middle East Eye

time4 hours ago

  • Middle East Eye

Trump promised not to go to war. His most ardent supporters want him to keep his word

"This war isn't about Iran's nuclear weapons for Israel, it is about one thing: regime change. Hear me now: this is not going to stop at some bombing campaigns around Iran's nuclear programme. That's just the appetiser, not the entree... Does America really want to be Israel's dance partner to this siren song?" If those words sound like they came from a progressive, Bernie Sanders-aligned, anti-imperial voice, they did not. Those are the words of former congressman, Matt Gaetz, one of the most loyal supporters of US President Donald Trump and his Make America Great Again (MAGA) movement since its inception. Gaetz - since resigning from the House of Representatives after a slew of ethics violations - now has his own show on the far-right TV channel One America Network. "When you call someone a modern-day Hitler, it is a permission structure to kill them," Gaetz went on to say after playing a clip of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu telling ABC News that Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is a "modern-day Hitler". New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters Gaetz then went on to interview his former colleague, Georgia Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene, another vocal and often controversial "America Firster". "Matt, I see it just as you do, and you laid that out so well," she said. "We've watched for decades propaganda news. I'll call out Fox News and The New York Post. They're known to be the neocon[servative] network news... the American people have been brainwashed into believing that America has to engage in these foreign wars in order for us to survive. And it's absolutely not true." Greene has been urging the Trump administration to stay out of Israel's attacks on Iran since they began last Friday. On Wednesday, The Wall Street Journal reported that Trump told senior aides he had approved plans to attack Iran but had not yet given the final order to carry them out. A new paradigm? The questions and posture that challenge the American establishment's penchant for war have not, in recent memory, been as organised, as targeted, or as influential as the voices of MAGA's most well-known cast of characters. Take Tucker Carlson, the former Fox News pundit, who appeared on Steve Bannon's War Room show on YouTube earlier this week. Bannon himself is a former White House strategist from Trump's first term in office, and remains one of the most influential people in the MAGA circuit. "I grew up in a world that espoused violence. That's what the US government does," Carlson told Bannon. "If you think - and I said this to an Israeli official - if you think I'm anti-Israel, man, you have lost the plot," he said of the anti-war stance he's adopted. "Let's have a rational conversation about what our aims are here. And maybe you can convince me that we need to support a regime change war in Iran. Tell me how that plays out in a country of 90 million people. Have you thought it through? Do you even care? And the answer is no," Carlson said. State Department pushes 'peace' narrative as Trump threatens Iran Read More » "You may have a plan for regime change, it's fine, but you got to bring the American people on," Bannon agreed. As of Wednesday, that clip had some 7,000 views. Carlson then interviewed Bannon on his show on YouTube, and the one-hour and 18-minute conversation generated one million views in less than 24 hours. Bannon outlined the three pillars on which he says Trump was elected: "Stop the forever wars, seal the border and deport the illegal aliens - the illegal invaders - and redo the commercial relationships in the world around trade deals." Reneging on one of them would potentially undo the others, Bannon said, with a stark warning. "I'm a big supporter of Israel, yes. And I'm telling people, hey, if we get sucked into this war - which inexorably looks like it's going to happen on the combat side - it's... going to thwart what we're doing with the most important thing, which is the deportation of the illegal alien invaders that are here. If we don't do that, we don't have a country," he said of Trump's plan to deport at least one million undocumented immigrants every year, as well as foreigners who may have civil or criminal violations. Bannon also cautioned that joining and expanding the war on Iran could mean "the end of Israel, because of the way these decisions have been made". Carlson, expressing remorse for supporting the invasion of Iraq in 2003, said optics and public opinion should be critical to guiding the White House's decisions. "[Abraham] Lincoln told us, what you need is popular opinion to have your back. And we don't do enough about educating the American people on what reality is," he said. Much like the allegation that Iraq had a weapon of mass destruction, Bannon said Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, who was handpicked by Trump, confirmed to lawmakers in a public hearing in March that Iran was not assessed to be close to building a nuclear bomb. "They don't have a programme. They haven't had a programme," Bannon emphasised. Trump takes on his base In a new interview with Texas Senator and longtime war hawk Ted Cruz, posted on Wednesday on YouTube, Carlson repeatedly challenged him on Iran's population, its makeup, and precisely how the Bible says that Christians must support Israel (which Cruz cites as his reasoning). "I was taught from the Bible, those who bless Israel will be blessed, and those who curse Israel will be cursed. And from my perspective, I want to be on the blessing side of things," Cruz, a Republican who did not support Trump until he became president in 2017, told Carlson on his show. Carlson asked him where in the Bible it said that, and Cruz said he doesn't remember. "You don't have context for it. You don't know where in the Bible it is, but that's like your theology? I'm confused. What does that even mean... We are commanded, as Christians, to support the government of Israel?" "We are commanded to support Israel," Cruz responded, as the two continuously cut each other off. "God is talking about the nation of Israel." "Is that the current borders, the current leadership?" Carlson asked. US Senator Ted Cruz faces backlash for not knowing basic facts about Iran Read More » "Yes, nations exists, and he's discussing a nation," Cruz said. The Iran hawks in Congress, all of whom are also staunch supporters of Israel, have been lobbying the White House to join Israel's war. Many of them take cues from pro-Israel lobbying groups, which have also dispatched members of proxy think tanks like the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies (FDD) to go on channels like Fox News and advocate for full US military engagement. As the debate rages, Trump himself was on the defensive in an interview with The Atlantic. "For those people who say they want peace - you can't have peace if Iran has a nuclear weapon. So for all of those wonderful people who don't want to do anything about Iran having a nuclear weapon - that's not peace," he said. "Iran cannot have a nuclear bomb, very simple. Regardless - Israel or not Israel - Iran cannot have a nuclear bomb," he added. On Monday, he took aim directly at Carlson. 'I don't know what Tucker Carlson is saying. Let him go get a television network and say it so that people listen,' Trump told reporters, implying that Carlson no longer had the viewership and reach he had as a mainstream media broadcaster. And as of Sunday, the US was not yet operationally engaged in the war, Trump told ABC News. "We're not involved in it. It's possible we could get involved. But we are not at this moment involved," the president said. But that's not what Cruz appeared to let slip in his discussion with Carlson. Iran is "trying to murder Donald Trump," Cruz said. "We're carrying out military strikes today." "You said Israel was?" Carlson asked. "I've said we - Israel is leading them, but we're supporting them," Cruz responded. "Well this is you breaking news here," Carlson responded, alluding to a White House spokesperson who denied US operational involvement in a post on X. "We're not bombing them, Israel's bombing them," Cruz said. "You just said we were." "We are supporting Israel," Cruz said. The US president has been cryptic in his messaging on what course of action he will take next in Iran, giving mixed signals regarding being open to talks but saying it's too late to talk and then also saying that the US may strike, but they may not. Trump's MAGA base, however, has not yet given up in trying to dissuade the American president from what they think will become another costly entanglement in the Middle East - and a potential fracture in the Republican Party's voter base.

Airbus seals VietJet deal as hopes rise at air show for tariff rollback
Airbus seals VietJet deal as hopes rise at air show for tariff rollback

Gulf Today

time7 hours ago

  • Gulf Today

Airbus seals VietJet deal as hopes rise at air show for tariff rollback

Airbus struck a deal with budget airline VietJet for up to 150 single-aisle jets at the Paris Airshow, where industry hopes for a return to tariff-free trade were given a boost by US Transport Secretary Sean Duffy. Duffy said he wanted civil aviation to return to a 1979 zero-tariff trade agreement, in one of the clearest signs yet that the Trump administration might favour such a move. However, Duffy added that while the White House was aware that the US is a net exporter in aerospace, it was also dealing with a complex tariff situation. 'Now, again, you look at what free trade has done for aviation. It's been remarkable for them. It's a great space of net exporters,' he said. 'And so the White House understands that, but if you go over there and you see the moving parts of what they're dealing with, it is pretty intense and it's a lot.' US President Donald Trump's sweeping 10% import tariffs are a headache for an industry already battling supply chain challenges and facing fresh turbulence from last week's deadly Air India crash and conflict in the Middle East. In early May, the US Commerce Department launched a 'Section 232' national security investigation into imports of commercial aircraft, jet engines and parts that could form the basis for even higher tariffs on such imports. Airlines, planemakers and several US trading partners have been lobbying Trump to restore the tariff-free regime under the 1979 agreement. On day two of the air show, European planemaker Airbus signed a provisional deal for VietJet to buy 100 A321neo planes, with the option to buy up to 50 more in future. Vietnam's largest private airline operates an all-Airbus fleet, apart from two Chinese-made regional jets. The airline has not to date taken delivery of any of the around 200 MAX planes it has ordered from Boeing. Airbus is the main supplier of jets to Vietnam, accounting for 86% of the planes currently operated by Vietnamese airlines. However, the export-dependent Southeast Asian country is under pressure from Washington to buy more US goods. VietJet Chairwoman Nguyen Thi Phuong Thao said the scale of the airline's orders was backed by plans to develop a major aviation hub in Vietnam, which Airbus says has seen its aviation market grow by 7.5% a year. A deal for 150 A321neos could be worth around $9.4 billion, according to estimated prices provided by Cirium Ascend. The agreement was the latest in a flurry of business announced by Airbus at the world's biggest aviation trade fair. AIRASIA FINALE US rival Boeing was having a subdued show and parking announcements as it focuses on the probe into last week's fatal crash of an Air India Boeing 787 and after it racked up huge deals during Trump's recent tour of the Middle East. Attention turned to another big Airbus customer, AirAsia, long associated with buzzy show finales and looking at buying 100 A220s, with Brazil's Embraer seeking to wrest away the deal after losing a key contest in Poland, delegates said. Airbus was also expected to reveal Egyptair as the airline behind a recent unidentified order for six more A350s. But its hopes of using the event as a showcase for its first significant deal with Royal Air Maroc faded after the airline postponed plans to announce a larger Boeing deal, delegates said. None of the companies involved in last-minute air show negotiations agreed to comment. Airlines have been battling the engine industry over long waiting times for repairs on the latest generation of engines in the busiest part of the market for workhorse narrow-body jets. Pratt & Whitney commercial engines head Rick Deurloo said durability was top priority and the number of aircraft out of service while waiting for engine repairs was stabilising. Rolls-Royce CEO Tufan Erginbilgic told reporters it was 'even more true' that the British jet engine maker wanted to re-enter the narrow-body market, preferably via a partnership. On the defence side, analysts are expecting a flurry of deals as European companies tap into a surge in arms spending. Leonardo CEO Roberto Cingolani said he saw advantages to new entrants joining an Italian-British-Japanese next-generation fighter jet programme, particularly in terms of technology, but added that it would be a decision for the governments involved. He said the addition of Saudi Arabia to the Global Combat Air Programme - something that has long been mooted - would open up a big market with great potential. Startup Riyadh Air has signed a deal with Rolls-Royce for 116 Trent XWB-97 engines that will power its Airbus large wide-body fleet, the Saudi airline said on Tuesday. The company said in a statement that the deal, which was signed at the Paris Airshow, was worth several billion dollars, without providing a specific figure. The engines will power 50 Airbus A350-1000 jets, Riyadh Air said, after the airline signed a deal on Monday to buy 25 of the jets with an option for 25 more. Riyadh Air is set to commence operations later this year and its fleet orders amount to 182 aircraft across three fleet types. Agencies

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store