
Japan's Governing Alliance Likely To Lose Upper House Elections, Exit Polls Show
The governing coalition of Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba is likely to lose a majority in the smaller of Japan's two parliamentary houses in a key election Sunday, according to exit polls, worsening the country's political instability.
Voters were deciding half of the 248 seats in the upper house, the less powerful of the two chambers in Japan's Diet.
Ishiba has set the bar low, wanting a simple majority of 125 seats, which means his Liberal Democratic Party, or LDP, and its Buddhist-backed junior coalition partner Komeito need to win 50 to add to the 75 seats they already have.
That would mean a big retreat from the 141 seats they had before the election.
Exit poll results released seconds after the ballots closed Sunday night mostly showed a major setback for Ishiba's coalition. Japan's NHK television projected a range of 32-51 seats for the prime minister's coalition, while other networks projected it would win just over 40 seats.
The LDP alone is projected to win from 32 to 35 seats, the fewest won by the party, which still is the No. 1 party in the parliament.
"It's a tough situation. I take it humbly and sincerely," Ishiba told a live interview with NHK. He said that the poor showing was because his government's measures to combat price increase have yet to reach many people.
Ishiba showed his determination to stay on to tackle economic and security challenges.
"I will fulfill my responsibility as head of the No. 1 party and work for the country."
A poor performance in the election would not immediately trigger a change of government because the upper house lacks the power to file a no-confidence motion against a leader, but it would certainly deepen uncertainty over his fate and Japan's political stability. Ishiba would face calls from within the LDP party to step down or find another coalition partner.
Soaring prices, lagging incomes and burdensome social security payments are the top issues for frustrated, cash-strapped voters. Stricter measures targeting foreign residents and visitors have also emerged as a key issue, with a surging right-wing populist party leading the campaign.
Sunday's vote comes after Ishiba's coalition lost a majority in the October lower house election, stung by past corruption scandals, and his unpopular government has since been forced into making concessions to the opposition to get legislation through parliament. It has been unable to quickly deliver effective measures to mitigate rising prices, including Japan's traditional staple of rice, and dwindling wages.
US President Donald Trump has added to the pressure, complaining about a lack of progress in trade negotiations and the lack of sales of US autos and American-grown rice to Japan despite a shortfall in domestic stocks of the grain. A 25% tariff due to take effect Aug. 1 has been another blow for Ishiba.
Ishiba has resisted any compromise before the election, but the prospect for a breakthrough after the election is just as unclear because the minority government would have difficulty forming a consensus with the opposition.
Frustrated voters are rapidly turning to emerging populist parties. The eight main opposition groups, however, are too fractured to forge a common platform as a united front and gain voter support as a viable alternative.
The emerging populist party Sanseito stands out with the toughest anti-foreigner stance, with its "Japanese First" platform that proposes a new agency to handle policies related to foreigners. The party's populist platform also includes anti-vaccine, anti-globalism and favors traditional gender roles.
Conservative to centrist opposition groups, including the main opposition Constitutional Democratic Party of Japan, or CDPJ, the DPP, and Sanseito have gained significant ground at the Liberal Democrats' expense. The CDPJ was projected to win up to 26 seats, while the DPP could quadruple to 17 seats from four, exit poll results show. Sanseito is expected to surge to 16 from just one.
None of the opposition parties said that they were open to cooperating with the governing coalition. CDPJ leader Yoshihiko Noda told NHK that his priority is to form an alliance among the opposition.
The spread of xenophobic rhetoric in the election campaign and on social media has triggered protests by human rights activists and alarmed foreign residents.
LDP has almost continuously dominated Japan's postwar politics, contributing to its political stability and social conformity.
Voters are divided between stability and change, with some voicing concern about escalating xenophobia.
Yuko Tsuji, a 43-year-old consultant, who came to a polling station inside a downtown Tokyo gymnasium with her husband, said they both support LDP for stability and unity. and voted "for candidates who won't fuel division."
"If the ruling party doesn't govern properly, the conservative base will drift toward extremes. So I voted with the hope that the ruling party would tighten things up," she said.
Self-employed Daiichi Nasu, 57, who came to vote with his dog, said that he hopes for a change toward a more inclusive and diverse society, with more open immigration and gender policies such as allowing married couples to keep separate surnames.
"That's why I voted for the CDPJ," he said. "I want to see progress on those fronts."
(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)

Business Standard
21 minutes ago
- Business Standard
Bessant warns of higher secondary tariff on India, asks EU to join hands
US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent on Wednesday warned that Washington could raise its current 25 per cent secondary tariff on India if American President Donald Trump's meeting with his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin in Alaska on Friday fails to make headway on Ukraine. He also asked the European Union to impose a similar secondary levy on India. 'We put a secondary tariff on Indians for buying Russian oil, and I could see -- if things don't go well (in the Trump-Putin meeting) -- then sanctions or secondary tariffs could go up,' Bessent told Bloomberg Television. 'President Trump is meeting with President Putin, and the Europeans are in the wings carping about how he should do it, what he should do. The Europeans need to join us in these sanctions. The Europeans need to be willing to put on these secondary sanctions.' When asked about China being the largest purchaser of Russian crude, Bessent said Trump may tell Putin that 'all options are on the table.' He added: 'Sanctions can go up, they can be loosened, they can have a definitive life, they can go on indefinitely.' In an earlier interview with Fox Business, Bessent described India as 'a bit recalcitrant' in its trade negotiations with the US. The Ministry of External Affairs on August 6 had called the 25 per cent secondary tariff, which raised the total American tariff on Indian goods to 50 per cent, 'unfair, unjustified and unreasonable,' and said it would take all necessary actions to protect its national interests. Speaking at an event in Mumbai on Wednesday, Chief Economic Advisor V Anantha Nageswaran said US tariff-related challenges would likely dissipate within one or two quarters, and urged the private sector to step up as the country addresses longer-term concerns. 'I do believe that the current situation will ease out in a quarter or two. I don't think that from a long-term picture the India impact will be that significant, but in the short run there will be some impact,' Nageswaran was quoted by PTI as saying. With speculation over whether US officials will visit India for trade talks later this month, Nageswaran said the outcome of the Trump-Putin meeting in Alaska is likely to influence developments. The CEA added that the focus on tariff disputes should not overshadow more pressing issues, including the impact of artificial intelligence, dependence on a single country for critical minerals and processing, and the need to strengthen supply chains.


India Today
21 minutes ago
- India Today
US getting in bed with Pak strategic mistake: Ex-diplomat calls ties 'short term'
Former Indian diplomat Vikas Swarup said that US has made a strategic mistake in getting close to Pakistan, which is very close to its strategic competitor China."I think it's a strategic mistake on the part of the US that you are getting in bed with Pakistan, which is in bed with China. China is the US' strategic competitor," said Swarup to have to look at US' relationship with Pakistan in a different lens from the US' relationship with India. I think the relationship with Pakistan right now is a very tactical one and is a short-term one, primarily motivated by the financial gain that the Trump family and Witkoff family hope to make from the cryptocurrency assets in Pakistan. With India, I think, the relationship is much more strategic," said the former diplomat. Speaking on US President Donald Trump's decision to impose 50 per cent tariffs on India, Swarup said, "If you cave in to a bully, then the bully will increase his demands. Then there will be even more demands. So, I think we have done the right thing. India is too large, too proud a country to become a camp follower of any other country.""Our strategic autonomy has been the bedrock of our foreign policy right from the 1950s. I don't think that any government in Delhi can compromise on that," says former diplomat Vikas Swarup on the tariff rift between India and the US," he on ceasefire claims made by the US President, he said that Trump has now made the role of a 'peacemaker' his USP and thinks the biggest conflict he has mediated in is the India and the Pakistan conflict, as both countries are nuclear powers."Trump is a dealmaker and he has now made it his USP that he is the peacemaker. Look at the number of conflict situations that he has mediated in, whether it is Thailand and Combodia, Rawanda and the Democratic Republic of Congo, Armenia and Azerbaijan; he has injected himself into each of those. He feels that the biggest one of these was the India and Pakistan one because these two are nuclear powers," said to the former Indian Ambassador to Canada, "Trump feels that he deserves credit for this and he has made no secret of his longing for the Nobel Peace Prize. He is hoping that if he can not get it for this, he hopes that bringing about a ceasefire between Russia and Ukraine might be his ticket to the Nobel Peace Prize."advertisementHe said that by imposing high tariffs, the US has become the tariff king in the world with an average tariff of 18.4 per cent."The US used to call India the tariff king. But now, with an average tariff of 18.4 per cent, it is now the tariff king of the world. But the fact is, tariffs bring in money. They will bring in about 100 billion dollars a year for the US. But the issue is that, eventually, who will pay for these tariffs? It will be the American consumers," he said, adding that this is going to increase inflation in the US with products becoming about India keeping the Indus Water Treaty in abeyance, Swarup said that Pakistan has been rattled by India's decision to suspend the treaty as it is heavily dependent on the waters of those rivers."What he (Asim Munir) always tries to stoke is the fear of a nuclear war between India and Pakistan, because Pakistan always wants external mediation. They are deliberately provoking nuclear blackmail just so that they can attract the attention of the world," he said.- EndsWith inputs from ANI advertisement


Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Top American universities at risk of losing billions in grants: What you need to know about the Trump administration's policies
Trump administration policies put major US university grants in jeopardy Several leading American universities are facing the prospect of losing billions in federal research funding due to ongoing tensions with the Trump administration. The White House has announced measures targeting institutions it claims have violated national interests, leading to a potential freeze or reallocation of significant grant money. This standoff places hundreds of millions of dollars in federal grants at risk for some of the most prestigious universities across the US. While some universities have negotiated agreements to safeguard their funding, others are resisting the administration's demands. The impact varies widely among institutions, but the stakes remain substantial, with implications for research programmes and long-term planning. Federal funding at risk for top universities The dispute centres on alleged practices by universities, including over-dependence on federal grants and collaborations with foreign entities in sensitive research areas. The Trump administration argues these actions conflict with national security and policy objectives. As a result, several universities may lose a portion of their federal funding, amounting to billions of dollars in total. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like They Were So Beautiful Before; Now Look At Them; Number 10 Will Shock You Reportingly Undo According to data reported by the TNN, the following universities face major grant reductions: University $ million in grants at risk Johns Hopkins University 245 Harvard University 127 Arizona State University 125 Texas A & M University 100 Columbia University 100 University of North Carolina 93 Tufts College 89 University of California, Berkeley 87 South Dakota State University 86 Clemson University 81 The Trump administration has proposed cancellations amounting to $3.7 billion in total, with Johns Hopkins University being the most exposed at $245 million. The importance of federal funding for university research Federal funding represents a major source of revenue for research at many American universities. The top 10 recipients accounted for approximately 20% of total federal research grants in 2023, as reported by the TNN. Johns Hopkins University alone received $3.3 billion in federal funds, the largest share. Other top recipients include: University Federal funding ($ billion) Johns Hopkins University 3.3 University of Washington 1.2 Georgia Institute of Technology 1.1 University of California, San Diego 1.1 University of Michigan, Ann Arbor 1.0 Columbia University 1.0 Duke University 1.0 Stanford University 0.9 University of Pennsylvania 0.9 University of Pittsburgh 0.9 Close to 90% of Johns Hopkins' research expenditure in 2023 came from federal grants. Columbia University, Duke University, and Michigan State also rely heavily on federal funds for their research programmes, underscoring the potential disruption caused by the proposed cuts. Universities vary in dependence on federal grants Some universities have reduced their reliance on federal funding by expanding endowment and private sources. Harvard, Boston University, the University of Pennsylvania, and Yale University show lower dependence on government grants compared to others. The share of federal funding as a proportion of total university research spending in 2023 was: University Share of federal funding (%) University Share of federal funding (%) Boston University 56 Harvard University 54 University of Pennsylvania 53 Yale University 48 New York University 45 Overall, federal funding's share of research expenditures has declined from 61% in 2010 to 55% in 2023. The shortfall has been partially offset by increased corporate contracts, private donors, and internal university investments. Federal grants concentrated in STEM disciplines Federal research funding is predominantly focused on science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields. Life sciences received the largest share at $33.9 billion, followed by engineering with $10.9 billion, and physical sciences at $4.6 billion, as detailed by the TNN. Social sciences, humanities, and other non-STEM fields receive comparatively smaller portions. Funding distribution by discipline is as follows: Discipline Federal funding ($ billion) Life sciences 33.90 Engineering 10.90 Physical sciences 4.60 Geosciences 2.70 Computer & information sciences 2.40 Social sciences 1.20 Psychology 1.00 Mathematics & statistics 0.70 Other sciences 0.50 Non-STEM & other fields 1.70 University negotiations and legal challenges In response to the funding threat, some universities are negotiating settlements with the administration, while others are challenging the decisions in court. Harvard University is reportedly nearing a $500 million settlement that would release billions in previously frozen research funds. As reported by the TNN, the agreement would redirect some funds to workforce and vocational programmes, with Harvard agreeing to affirm compliance with federal regulations without independent monitoring. Meanwhile, UCLA has taken legal action against the administration over the suspension of approximately $584 million in federal funding. A federal judge recently ordered the restoration of part of these funds, ruling the suspension violated a prior injunction, according to the TNN. UCLA faces a demand for a $1 billion settlement linked to alleged civil rights violations related to antisemitism. Columbia University has agreed to a $200 million fine and oversight measures as part of a settlement addressing complaints of antisemitism on campus. This is in line with the Trump administration's wider effort to enforce compliance with policies on campus conduct and civil rights protections. The outcome of these negotiations and legal battles will have significant implications for the future of research funding and innovation at American universities. TOI Education is on WhatsApp now. Follow us here . Ready to navigate global policies? Secure your overseas future. Get expert guidance now!