Ishiba Confronts Trumps Tariffs

Ishiba Builds His Team on Tariffs


By Takuya Nishimura, APP Senior Fellow, Former Editorial Writer for The Hokkaido Shimbun The views expressed by the author are his own and are not associated with The Hokkaido Shimbun
You can find his blog, J Update here.
April 14, 2025. Special to Asia Policy Point

After the FY2025 budget was approved on March 31, Japan’s Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba turned to dealing with the Trump Administration tariffs. While Ishiba has been organizing his negotiating team, the opposition parties have separately been calling for policies to support businesses and households. Their policy demands are designed to garner public support for the coming Upper House elections.

Ryosei Akazawa, the Economic Revitalization Minister, was named the top negotiator. He arrives in Washington April 16 for three days of meetings with U.S. officials who include Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer. Akazawa’s mission is to have the Trump administration rethink its tariff policy. He will emphasize Japan’s role as the top foreign investor in the U.S.

Ishiba also launched a task force on U.S. tariff policy, co-headed by Akazawa and Chief Cabinet Secretary Yoshimasa Hayashi, in the general headquarters on tariffs in the Ishiba Cabinet. “Under the leadership of Akazawa and Hayashi, we will construct an all-Japan organization in which the officers work on negotiation with the U.S. and measures for domestic industries beyond the border of ministries,” said Ishiba at the announcement of the task force.

Ishiba is concerned not only about trade and domestic industries but also about foreign exchange. Trump has been complaining about the devaluation of the Japanese yen against the U.S. dollar. As a founder of a hedge fund, Bessent is an expert in foreign exchange. It is likely that the exchange rate will be one of the talking points in the negotiations between Japan and the U.S. later this week. The Minister of Finance, Katsunobu Kato, will lead the currency negotiations. Kato plans to visit Washington for the annual spring meetings of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank later in April. Although his schedule has not fixed, Kato hopes to have a meeting with Bessent during his visit.

National security is another topic. Trump reiterated that the U.S.-Japan security treaty is unfair because the U.S. pays hundreds of billions of dollars to defend Japan, but Japan does not pay anything. The Ishiba administration will explain that the Japanese government has provided extensive host nation support for the U.S. Forces in Japan. In anticipation of this discussion, Ishiba has included National Security Advisor, Masataka Okano, in the taskforce. Trump seems unaware of Japan’s constitution that prohibits engaging in non-defense war fighting.

Rice will also be a priority topic in the negotiations. “We feel like we could have more and better agricultural market access,” said Greer in pre-negotiation remarks. Because rice is the staple food in Japan, the government strictly controls the rice trade inside the country. The U.S. argues that Japan’s rice trade is not transparent and hard for foreign countries to access. Although the Japanese government is reluctant to open its rice market, the recent price hikes of rice in Japan may increase demand for foreign rice.

It is inevitable that Trump’s tariffs will have a negative impact on the Japanese economy. Beyond the “reciprocal” tariffs, the 25 percent tariffs on cars and other specific products are certain to reduce exports from Japan to the U.S. “The greatest concern is about financing of small and mid-size entrepreneurs,” said the leader of the Constitutional Democratic Party of Japan (CDPJ), Yoshihiko Noda. All political parties in Japan share a common interest in supporting business sectors.

Meanwhile, the parties are fighting over how to help households: should there be a cash handout or a tax cut? On the one hand, cash handouts could be delivered soon after the Diet passes the supplemental budget, while tax cuts would be part of the perennial debate over tax reform. A decision on tax cuts could not be made until the end of this year. On the other hand, a tax cut is more helpful for the families than a cash handout since the cut would last for several years. A cash handout is a one-time event, which has limited and temporary effects.

The parties have different views. The Liberal Democratic Party is leaning toward a cash handout in the hope of immediate effects shortly before the elections. Its coalition partner, Komeito, is urging both a handout and a tax cut. The Democratic Party for the People is promoting reduction of the consumption tax rate from 10 percent to 5 percent. Reiwa Shinsengumi wants to abolish the consumption tax entirely. Noda is reluctant to cut the consumption tax, even though some members of his party support a tax cut.

All parties are motivated to deliver an economic stimulus plan in time for the Upper House election expected to be held in July. To do so, the Diet must pass a supplemental budget by the end of the current Diet session on June 22. Passing a budget bill is hard work for a minority government. Ishiba nevertheless plans to deliver an economic policy package, which may require a supplemental budget.

APRIL - Genocide Awareness Month

PURCHASE BOOK

The month of April marks the start of some of the most horrific genocides – Rwanda, Cambodia, Armenia, Anfal campaign against Kurds – and it is also the end of others, like the liberation of Auschwitz. This is why the month has been deemed Genocide Awareness Month. And the year of 2025 further marks pivotal anniversaries – the 30th anniversary of Srebrenica during the Bosnian War, the 50th anniversary of Cambodia’s Khmer Rouge, and the 90th anniversary of the beginning of the Armenian genocide.

The United States has also played a pivotal role in many of these unfortunate and deadly moments in history. But with all this atrocity, the history books can only cover so much. And each country has a different history to tell depending on their role in the genocide and who or where the story comes from, be it a survivor, a government, an organization, or a bystander. Films and books can tell these stories in a variety of ways, and by rounding out our experiences, only then can we begin to understand and not repeat the mistakes of the past.

The co-founders of the Mass Atrocity Research Initiative (MARI), American University (Washington, DC) professors Jeff Bachman and Claudine Kuradusenge-McLeod, recommend the following. Although this list is not exhaustive of all the tragedies that have taken place, it serves as one small step toward educating ourselves.

Professor Bachman is author with Esther Ruiz of A Modern History of Forgotten Genocides and Mass Atrocities. This book is a great resource for anyone interested in genocides and mass atrocities that are often overlooked or forgotten in mainstream discussions. Bachman and Ruiz cover a range of tragic events that don’t always get the attention they deserve, shining a light on underreported genocides and mass killings in modern history.

Films

Bosnia: Years Eaten by Lions [Godine koje su pojeli lavovi] (Boro Kontic, 2010). This film looks at the Bosnian War and the ethnic cleansing that occurred during the 1990s. It follows the personal stories of survivors and the deep trauma caused by the violence. The film provides a poignant reflection on how nationalism and ethnic division led to genocide in the region.

Cambodia: Facing Genocide: Khieu Samphan and Pol Pot (David Aronowitsch/Staffan Lindberg, 2010). This documentary looks at the Khmer Rouge regime and the devastating genocide in Cambodia. Through interviews with survivors and experts, the film examines the ideology and political motives behind the regime’s brutal actions, which led to the deaths of millions. It’s a sobering and thought-provoking exploration of political violence.

Congo: CONGO: White King, Red Rubber, Black Death (Peter Bate, 2003). This documentary exposes the horrific exploitation and genocide of the Congolese people under King Leopold II’s rule in the Congo Free State. Through archival footage and historical analysis, the film chronicles the brutal tactics used to extract rubber and other resources, including forced labor, mutilations, and mass killings. It serves as a stark reminder of the colonial legacy and its long-lasting effects on Congo’s development.

Holocaust: 75 Years After Auschwitz’s Liberation, Watch Four Documentaries That Keep the ‘Memory of the Camps’ Alive This PBS Frontline article contains full access to four documentaries: Memory of the Camps (1985); Shtetl (1996); Never Forget to Lie (2013); The Last Survivors (2019).

Indigenous genocide: Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee (Yves Simoneau, 2007) This film adapts Brown's book into a dramatic portrayal of the events leading up to the Wounded Knee Massacre, focusing on the US government's betrayal of Native Americans. It provides a harrowing look at the destruction of Native American cultures and the brutality of the US Army in its quest to quell resistance. The film vividly portrays the human cost of colonialism and imperialism.

Indonesia: The Act of Killing (Joshua Oppenheimer, 2012).This documentary offers a view of some of the perpetrators of murder in Indonesia in 1965 and 1966. The general lack of remorse for and detachment from the impacts of this violence on families and communities is both startling but important to see.

Iraq, Kurdistan region: Good Kurds, Bad Kurds (Kevin McKiernan, 2000). This documentary explores the long history of the Kurdish people and the genocide they’ve suffered at the hands of various Middle Eastern governments, especially Iraq under Saddam Hussein. It focuses on the 1988 Anfal campaign, where tens of thousands of Kurds were killed or displaced. It’s a great resource for understanding the complex political dynamics in the Middle East.

Rwanda: Sometimes in April (Raoul Peck, 2005). A powerful dramatization of the 1994 Rwandan genocide, focusing on the lives of ordinary people caught up in the violence. The film depicts the horrors of the genocide from multiple perspectives, illustrating both the overwhelming cruelty of the Hutu extremists and the resilience of survivors. It is an emotional and haunting portrayal of one of the most tragic events of the 20th century.

Rwanda: Shake Hands with the Devil: The Journey of Romeo Dallaire (Peter Raymont, 2004). This documentary follows Romeo Dallaire, the Canadian peacekeeper who led the UN mission during the Rwandan genocide. It focuses on his personal journey, the moral dilemmas he faced, and the emotional scars he carries after witnessing the failure of the international community to stop the killings.

Books

Armenia: The United States and the Armenian Genocide: History, Memory, Politics by Julien Zarifian. The most comprehensive and detailed account of the domestic and international politics associated with the significant amount of time it took for the U.S. Congress and a US President to formally recognize the Armenian genocide as such.

Cambodia: The Pol Pot Regime: Race, Power, and Genocide in Cambodia under the Khmer Rouge, 1975-79 by Ben Kiernan. Examines the rise of Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge by studying the violence through which they emerged and received popular support in some circles, even as they were murdering and starving millions. Kiernan also addresses the role of the U.S. war on Vietnam in their rise.

Canada: Suffer the Little Children: Genocide, Indigenous Nations and the Canadian State by Tamara Starblanket. It is just over 150 years since Canada opened its first residential boarding school (1874). Recommended for anyone interested in learning more about what the Canadian government has even referred to as “cultural genocide.

Congo: King Leopold's Ghost by Adam Hochschild. A must-read! Dives into the horrors of King Leopold II’s rule over the Congo Free State. Hochschild reveals the brutal exploitation, forced labor, and the millions of deaths caused by Leopold's greed. It’s a powerful critique of imperialism and a real eye-opener about colonial violence.

East Timor: A Not-So-Distant Horror: Mass Violence in East Timor by Joseph Nevins. Reviews and explains the politics associated with the death and suffering In East Timor and, as with the massacres in Indonesia, the role of members of the international community, including Australia, Japan, the United Kingdom, and especially the United States. Nevins writes that much, if not all, of the killings and other preventable deaths could have been avoided had these countries not provided Indonesia with political, diplomatic, economic, and military assistance.

Holocaust: The Liberation of the Camps: The End of the Holocaust and Its Aftermath by Dan Stone. Historian Dan Stone focuses on the survivors—their feelings of guilt, exhaustion, fear, shame for having survived, and devastating grief for lost family members; their immense medical problems; and their later demands to be released from Displaced Persons camps and resettled in countries of their own choosing. Stone also tracks the efforts of British, American, Canadian, and Russian liberators as they contended with survivors’ immediate needs, then grappled with longer-term issues that shaped the postwar world and ushered in the first chill of the Cold War years ahead.

Indigenous Genocides: Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee by Dee Alexander Brown. A heartbreaking account of the U.S. government’s treatment of Native Americans, particularly focusing on the systematic destruction of indigenous tribes in the American West. The book highlights broken treaties, massacres, and the tragic massacre at Wounded Knee. It’s an essential read for anyone wanting to understand the brutality of American colonialism.

Indonesia: The Killing Season: A History of the Indonesian Massacres, 1965-66 by Geoffrey B. Robinson. Researches one of the most underexplored cases of mass violence, including by scholars in the field of genocide studies. Robinson also details the critical role played by the United States, Britain, and other major powers in facilitating mass murder.

Namibia: The Herero Genocide: War, Emotion, and Extreme Violence in Colonial Namibia by Matthias Häussler. Explores the genocide of the Herero and Nama people by German colonial forces in Namibia in the early 1900s. He examines the extreme violence and forced labor, alongside the emotional and psychological toll of this genocide. It’s a compelling look at a lesser known, but significant, atrocity in colonial history.

Rwanda: Becoming Evil: How Ordinary People Commit Genocide and Mass Killing by James Waller. Explores a really important question: how do ordinary people become perpetrators of mass violence? Using case studies from events like the Holocaust and Rwanda, Waller examines the psychological and social factors that allow people to commit horrific acts. It’s a deep dive into the human psyche and the conditions that enable genocide.

Rwanda: Eyewitness to a Genocide: The U.N. and Rwanda by Michael N. Barnett. A critical look at the role the United Nations played during the Rwandan genocide. Barnett interviews survivors and UN personnel to show how the international community failed to intervene when mass slaughter was unfolding. It’s a sobering reflection on bureaucratic inertia and the limits of international peacekeeping.

United States: On Genocide: And a Summary of the Evidence and the Judgments of the International War Crimes Tribunal by Jean-Paul Sartre. On Genocide was written at the end of the 1967 International War Crimes Tribunal (also known as the Russell Tribunal after British philosopher Bertrand Russell) and was adopted by the tribunal as part of its findings. I recommend it because, even if one disagrees about use of the term genocide, On Genocide is meticulous in its summary of violence carried out by the United States. For example, Sartre writes that the intent to commit genocide is “implicit in the facts,” including “villages burned, the population subjected to massive bombing, livestock shot, vegetation destroyed by defoliants, crops ruined by toxic aerosols, and everywhere indiscriminate shooting, murder, rape and looting.”

United States: We Charge Genocide: The Crime of Government Against the Negro People by William Patterson. Argues that the US government’s treatment of African Americans during the 20th century meets the definition of genocide. Written by civil rights leaders, it documents racial violence and systemic oppression as an intentional strategy to eliminate Black communities. It’s an important read to understand the broader scope of genocide in a U.S. context.

United States: Narratives of Victimhood and Perpetration: The Struggle of Bosnian and Rwandan Diaspora Communities in the United States by Claudine Kuradusenge-McLeod: Explores the experiences of Bosnian and Rwandan diaspora communities in the U.S., particularly in how they navigate their identities as both victims and perpetrators of genocide. The author delves into how these communities grapple with their pasts and the trauma of genocide while trying to integrate into American society. The book is an essential read for understanding the complexities of post-genocide identity and the lasting effects of trauma on displaced populations.

Asia Pacific WWII:  Japan's Holocaust: History of Imperial Japan's Mass Murder and Rape During World War II by Bryan Mark Rigg, Ph.D. Unreviewed.

Monday Asia Policy Events, April 14, 2014

4/12-20 - Passover

4/13 - Palm Sunday
4/13-15 - Songkran Festival (Thai New Year). Beware of being splashed with water.
4/13- 10/13 - Osaka Expo.  

GLOBAL RESPONSE TO AN AMERICAN RESET OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE. 4/14, 9:00-10:15am EDT). VIRTUAL. Sponsor: Brookings; Research Institute of Economy, Trade, and Industry (RIETI). Speakers: Jesús Carrillo, Guest Lecturer, Former Economics Director, El Colegio de México; Scott Kennedy, Senior Adviser and Trustee Chair in Chinese Business and Economics, CSIS; Cecilia Malmström, Nonresident Senior Fellow, PIIE; Shujiro Urata, Chairman Emeritus, Professor Emeritus, RIETI, Waseda University.

TECH COLD WAR: THE GEOPOLITICS OF TECHNOLOGY. 4/14, 12:30-2:00pm (EDT). HYBRID. Sponsor: Stimson. Speakers: Ansgar Baums, Nonresident Senior Fellow, Stimson Center; Nicholas Butts, Global Cybersecurity and AI Policy, Microsoft. 

RUSSIAN HYBRID WARFARE IN CENTRAL EUROPE. 4/14, 5:00–6:00 pm (EDT), IN PERSON ONLY. Sponsor: Institute of World Politics. Speaker: Ivana Stradner, Research Fellow, FDD’s Barish Center for Media Integrity. 

Japan Confronts Trump

Japanese PM Calls Trump’s Tariffs a National Crisis

By Takuya Nishimura, APP Senior Fellow, Former Editorial Writer for The Hokkaido Shimbun

The views expressed by the author are his own and are not associated with The Hokkaido Shimbun. You can find his blog, J Update here.

April 7, 2025. Special to Asia Policy Point

U.S. President Donald Trump announced “reciprocal” tariffs on April 2, which will be imposed on goods from foreign countries with a specific rate for each country. Products from Japan other than automobiles will be subject to a 24 percent tariff, a rate well beyond the expectations of policymakers and business sectors in Japan. (There is a separate 25% tariff on Japanese auto imports.) Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba called it “national crisis” and asked for the opposition’s cooperation in responding to Trump’s announcement.
 
In his address in the White House Rose Garden, Trump argued that foreign countries had taken advantage of the U.S. in international trade “For decades, the United States slashed our trade barriers on other countries while those nations placed massive tariffs on our products and created outrageous non-monetary barriers to decimate our industries,” said Trump. He called April 2 “liberation day” to make America wealthy again.
 
The impact of the Trump tariffs on Japanese economy will be significant. Of Japan’s total exports, about 20 percent go to the U.S. Total exports to the U.S. amounted to 21.29 trillion yen ($146 billion) in 2024. Cars had the largest share (based on yen) of all exports from Japan to the U.S. – 28 percent. Trump had earlier announced a 25 percent tariff on automobile imports from most countries, including Japan. This tariff took effect on April 3. An economist calculates that Trump’s tariff policy, including auto tariffs, would reduce Japan’s gross domestic product by between 0.71 and 0.76 percent.
 
Ishiba immediately responded that Trump’s tariff policy was “extremely regrettable,” describing the situation for Japanese industries as a “national crisis.” He convened a meeting with six party leaders to discuss measures to mitigate Trump’s tariffs. “This is the issue with which we all together need to deal with,” said Ishiba. The opposition leaders did not refuse to join the government’s discussions. The head of the Constitutional Democratic Party of Japan, Yoshihiko Noda, recommended that Ishiba establish an inter-ministry team to address the problem.
 
Ishiba hopes to travel to the U.S. a second time this year and to meet with Trump as soon as possible. Ishiba made it clear that he would focus on fairness in trade at such a meeting. “It has been Japan that made the biggest investment to the U.S. and the biggest contribution to create new jobs. We did not exploit them or made unfair activities. I will have a logical and sincere negotiation without being emotional,” said Ishiba in the Upper House on April 7. Notably, over the weekend Trump ordered the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States to review again Nippon Steel’s proposed takeover of U.S. Steel.
 
Later in the day, Ishiba was able to speak with Trump by phone for 25 minutes. The two did not reach any agreement other than to appoint high-level teams to negotiate the tariffs next week. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent will lead the U.S. team. Japan’s negotiator will be Ryosei Akazawa, Economic Revitalization Minister. Bessent says Japan will get priority in negotiations. Unsaid, is that Japan has some leverage as the U.S.’s biggest creditor and investor, as reminded by PM Ishiba.
 
In his tariff announcement on April 2 in the Rose Garden, Trump referred strangely to former Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe. “I went to him, and I said, Shinzo, we have to do something, trade is not fair. He said, I know that, I know that. And he was a great gentleman. He was a fantastic man, but he understood immediately what I was talking about, --- and we worked out a deal and it would have been a much better deal,” said Trump. Trump might have been implying that Japan would understand his tariff policy if its leader was still (the now deceased) Abe.
 
“A much better deal” that Trump referred to was interpreted in Japan as the 2019 trade agreement with the U.S. That agreement reconfirmed that the two countries would not impose additional automobile tariffs. Has Trump now walked away from that agreement? “I can’t help questioning Trump’s tariffs in light of the joint statement on the Japan-U.S. Trade Agreement,” Minister of Finance Katsunobu Kato said.
 
“National crisis” is a phrase that Abe liked to use. He explained in 2017 that his decision to hold a snap election of the House of Representatives was to overcome a “national crisis” with the convergence of an aging society with a low birth rate and the situation in North Korea. The crisis in fact seemed a personal one: at the time, he was in jeopardy with a scandal of relationships with Moritomo and Kake Gakuen. The snap election did not otherwise address the broader concerns.
 
In 2020, Abe called COVID-19 a national crisis once in a hundred years to explain the highly unusual allocation of reserves in the national budget for COVID measures. Abe repeatedly used “national crisis” as an excuse for an unreasonable policy.
 
Ishiba used Abe’s wording in the same way. By calling Trump’s tariffs a “national crisis,” Ishiba is seeking a temporary political ceasefire with the opposition parties. This is politically unusual. Trump’s reference in the Rose Garden to Abe might have reminded Ishiba of Abe’s technique to survive a political crisis.

Trump's Tariffs

International Trade Remade

By Milton Koch, International Trade Advisor at Buchanan, Ingersoll & Rooney.  He is an APP member. He can be reached at milton.koch@bipc.com.  First appeared in the April 5, 2025 Asia Policy Calendar.
     
On April 2, 2025, President Trump announced that he is imposing a baseline tariff of 10 percent on imports from all countries, with higher reciprocal tariffs applied to countries which have an “unfair” trade relationship with the U.S, based upon the size of the trade deficit with each country.  The reciprocal tariffs represent a significant increase in U.S. protectionist trade action and from actions taken by the Trump administration in its previous first 100 days.  Specifically, Trump declared a national emergency to address the “the large and persistent trade deficit that is driven by the absence of reciprocity in our trade relationships.”[1]

The Reciprocal Tariff Policy Executive Order lays out the details for how reciprocal tariffs will be implemented.  First, a 10 percent tariff applies to all merchandise imported into the United States from April 5 onward.  Second, Annex I sets forth the country-specific tariff rates, with countries with a higher net trade deficit with the United States receiving a higher rate.  For example,  Japan and Korea’s reciprocal tariff rates are 24% and 25% respectively.  In comparison, Vietnam’s rate is 46%, ensuring that Vietnamese exports to the United States will decrease and resulting in more balanced trade.

To date, only limited exemptions from the reciprocal tariffs have been announced.  One path is through merchandise having either sufficient U.S. or USMCA compliant content.  The Executive Order states that the tariff rates apply only to non-U.S. content, “provided at least 20 percent of the value of the subject article is U.S. originating.”[2] 

For merchandise that qualifies as from Canada or Mexico under the USMCA, the reciprocal tariffs do not apply.  Additionally, the Executive Order indicates that the reciprocal tariffs do not apply to any merchandise for which a Section 232 national security tariff applies (autos, steel, aluminum, etc) and products listed in Annex II such as lumber, pharmaceuticals, and other products.   Many of these products, such as pharmaceuticals, still have low or limited tariffs applied.

The reciprocal tariffs are broad and serve as a floor on many imports.  The Reciprocal Tariff Policy Executive Order includes a modification mechanism to increase tariffs if other countries retaliate or U.S. manufacturing capacity and output worsens.  Steps taken by other countries to reduce non-reciprocal trade may also result in reduced duties.  Japan Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba spoke by telephone today with President Trump; the two countries will designate high-level teams to negotiate tariffs.  U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent will lead the U.S. side.[3] 

Going forward, there may be opportunities to pursue exemptions from the reciprocal tariffs or to add tariffs to additional products.  The recent Section 232 Steel and Aluminum tariffs also included a mechanism to add derivative products.  While the process is not expected to start until May, the Bureau of Industry and Security modified the Section 232 Aluminum 25% tariffs last week to include aluminum cans. 
 

---

[1] https://www.whitehouse.gov/fact-sheets/2025/04/fact-sheet-president-donald-j-trump-declares-national-emergency-to-increase-our-competitive-edge-protect-our-sovereignty-and-strengthen-our-national-and-economic-security/

[2] Id.

[3] Bessent to lead U.S. tariff talks with Japan, with yen on agenda - Nikkei Asi

Historians Defend the NEH

 April 4, 2025

The American Historical Association condemns 

the evisceration of the National Endowment for the Humanities

On April 3, 2025, the so-called Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), using a nongovernmental microsoft.com email address, notified hundreds of recipients that grants awarded by the National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH) have been terminated. These grantees include state humanities councils, museums, teachers, researchers, and organizations that serve the public, including the American Historical Association. Later that night, letters were sent from a DOGE microsoft.com email address notifying roughly 75 percent of NEH staff that they have been placed on administrative leave. This frontal attack on the nation’s public culturedemo is unpatriotic, anti-American, and unjustified.

The NEH and the grants it administers nourish our democracy through research, education, preservation, institutional capacity building, and public programming in the humanities for the benefit of the American people. These grants support work ranging from professional development workshops for teachers to the preservation of historic sites, research initiatives, and a wide array of programs for politically and demographically diverse audiences. Despite these significant contributions to public culture, DOGE justifies the termination of these programs by declaring their destruction to be “an urgent priority for the administration.”

The grant termination notices refer to a reallocation of funds to “a new direction in furtherance of the President’s agenda.” The specific reallocations remain unknown, but that agenda, as several executive orders have made clear, prioritizes narrow political ideology over historical research, historical accuracy, and the actual historical experiences of Americans.

The NEH was established in 1965 by an act of Congress. The legislation affirmed that “the arts and the humanities belong to all the people of the United States.” The AHA recognizes that the chair of the NEH always has been a political appointment made by the president. The overall agency and its grantmaking programs, however, include a wide range of topics, perspectives, and approaches. The agency was never intended to be, nor has it been, focused solely on a single president’s narrow—and in this case, deeply ideological—agenda.

Under the guise of “safeguarding” the federal government, DOGE has terminated grants and diminished staffing to a level that renders it impossible for the agency to perform its mission responsibly and with integrity. These actions imperil both the education of the American public and the preservation of our history.

Take action to save the NEH today!

Monday Asia Events, April 7, 2025

EVOLVING ISSUES IN REGULATION OF DIGITAL PLATFORMS: A VIEW FROM THE UK AND THE EU. 4/7, 8:00-9:00am (EDT). VIRTUAL. Sponsor: Hudson. Speakers: Suzanne Rab, Barrister, Matrix Chambers; Harold Furchtgott-Roth, Senior Fellow and Director, Center for the Economics of the Internet. 

BRIEFING ON HISTORY OF THE FEDERAL CIVIL SERVICE. 4/7, 9:00am (EDT), IN PERSON ONLY, Capitol Hill. Sponsor: American Historical Association. Speakers: Joseph A. McCartin, Georgetown; Margaret Rung, Roosevelt University; Eric S. Yellin, University of Richmond. 

REPORT TALK: STATE OF SOCIAL PROTECTION REPORT 2025 - SUPPORTING PEOPLE IN A TIME OF TRANSITION. 4/7, 10:30-11:30am (EDT), HYBRID. Sponsor: World Bank Group. Speakers: Mamta Murthi, Vice President, People Vice Presidency, World Bank; Mamta Murthi, Nentawe Goshwe Yilwatda, Minister of Humanitarian Affairs and Poverty Reduction, Niger; Nentawe Goshwe Yilwatda, Minister of Humanitarian Affairs and Poverty Reduction, Nigeria; Nentawe Goshwe Yilwatda, Jamele Rigolini, Senior Advisor, Social Protection and Labor, World Bank; Jamele Rigolini, Senior Advisor, Social Protection and Labor, World Bank; Shanta Devarajan, Professor, Practice of International Development, Georgetown. 

A TARIFF DEBATE: WHAT'S NEXT AFTER "LIBERATION DAY"? 4/7, 10:45am (EDT), VIRTUAL. Sponsor: Foreign Policy Live. Speakers: Oren Cass, Founder, Chief Economist, American Compass; Kimberly Clausing, Nonresident Senior Fellow, PIIE; Ravi Agrawal, Editor in Chief, Foreign Policy. 

IMPOSSIBLE STATE LIVE PODCAST: THE FUTURE OF U.S.-ROK-JAPAN TRILATERAL COOPERATION. 4/7, 11:00-11:45am (EDT). VIRTUAL. Sponsor: Korea Chair, CSIS. Speakers: Victor Cha, President, Geopolitics and Foreign Policy Department and Korea Chair; Michael J. Green, CEO, United States Studies Centre. 

BOOK TALK: THE PRICE OF ZERO: CHINA'S SLOWDOWN AND IMPLICATIONS FOR ASIA. 4/7, Noon (JST), IN PERSON ONLY. Sponsor: ICAS, Temple University Japan. Speaker: author Donald Low, Senior Lecturer, Professor of Practice, Public Policy, Director of Leadership and Public Policy, Executive Education, Hong Kong University of Science and Technology. Contact/RSVP: robert.dujarric@tuj.temple.edu, https://www.tuj.ac.jp/icas PURCHASE BOOK: https://amzn.to/4ijOH1z

RESEARCH IN RUIN: SLASHING NIH WILL STIFLE DEVELOPMENT OF LIFESAVING MEDICAL TREATMENTS AND HARM THE ECONOMY. 4/7, 1:00-2:00pm (EDT), VIRTUAL. Sponsor: Center for American Progress. Speakers: Howard P. Forman, M.D., MBA, Professor, Yale University, co-host, Health & Veritas podcast; Michael Z. Lin, M.D., Ph.D., Professor, Stanford University; Christian D. Menefee, County Attorney, Harris County, TX; Hardeep Singh, M.D., MPH, Professor, Baylor College of Medicine.  

BOOK TALK: ENTWINED ATROCITIES: NEW INSIGHTS INTO THE U.S.-JAPAN ALLIANCE. 4/7, 7:00-8:30pm (EDT), VIRTUAL. Sponsor: Modern Japan History Association. Speaker: author Yuki Tanaka, Research Professor Emeritus, Hiroshima City University. PURCHASE BOOK: https://amzn.to/3XJkr7Z

2025 CARNEGIE GLOBAL DIALOGUE: CHINA AND INDIA. 4/7, 8:30-9:30pm (CST); 8:30-9:30am (EDT). VIRTUAL. Sponsor: Carnegie China. Speakers: Rick Waters, Director, Carnegie China, Maurice R. Greenberg Director’s Chair; Saheb Singh Chadha, Senior Research Analyst, Security Studies Program; Li Li, Senior Research Professor, Tsinghua University; Jabin Thomas Jacob, Associate Professor, Department of International Relations and Governance Studies, Shiv Nadar University. 

A GRAND BARGAIN BETWEEN THE US AND CHINA? 4/7, 5:30-7:00pm (EDT), IN PERSON ONLY. Sponsor: Foreign Policy Research Institute. Speaker: Wu Xinbo, Director, Center for American Studies, Fudan University. 

Unification Church Again

Japanese Court Orders Dissolution of the Unification Church

By Takuya Nishimura, APP Senior Fellow, Former Editorial Writer for The Hokkaido Shimbun

The views expressed by the author are his own and are not associated with The Hokkaido Shimbun
You can find his blog, J Update here.
March 31, 2025. Special to Asia Policy Point

On March 25, the Tokyo District Court issued an order to dissolve the religious corporation, Family Federation for World Peace and Unification (FFWPU), broadly known as former Unification Church (UC). The Court found that the UC had damaged its believers and their families through requirements for expensive donations. The Federation plans to appeal. The broader social issue, which goes beyond the district court’s ruling, is how to draw a line between religious groups and politics.
 
The UC was established in the Republic of Korea in 1954 and was incorporated in Japan in 1964. It changed its name to the current one in 2015. In several instances in the 1980s and 1990s, UC believers reportedly suffered from the expensive purchase of purported “spiritual” goods, such as porcelain vases or Korean ginseng.
 
The government, however, ignored these scams until the assassination of former Prime Minister Shinzo Abe in 2022. The shooter, Tetsuya Yamagami, whose mother had donated over 100 million yen to the UC, plunging her family into poverty, explained that his motivation for the assassination was the close relationship between the UC and Abe.
 
Acknowledging accumulated damages on the believers, the Minister of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology requested from the court a dissolution order to the FFWPU in October 2023. The Ministry argued that there had been at least 32 civil cases in which courts in Japan had ordered the Federation to compensate its believers’ from the financial harm caused by sales of putative religious objects and from compulsory donations.
 
Tokyo District Court found that the damages in those 32 cases between 1980 and 2009 amounted to 1,784 million yen on 168 believers, and recognized other 985 million yen of damages on 179 believers after 2009 when the federation issued a declaration of compliance. Based on those illegal activities, Tokyo District Court ordered dissolution of the FFWPU.
 
The Court based its order of dissolution on Article 81 of the Religious Corporation Act, which authorizes a court to dissolve a religious corporation when it commits an illegal activity obviously against the public welfare. The activity against the public welfare in this case was the FFWPU’s donation requirement, which rendered believers insolvent and unable to maintain a reasonable lifestyle.
 
There are two earlier dissolution cases that may be instructive. In 1995, in a fortunately rare case, a court ordered that Aum Shinrikyo be dissolved for its sarin attack on the Tokyo subway. In 2002, in a case like that of the FFWPU, a court ordered the dissolution of the Myokakuji Temple for fraud in seeking donations for their baseless spiritual powers. Both cases, however, were based on criminal law. The order against the FFWPU case is the first one based on violations of the civil code.
 
The FFWPU immediately announced its intention to appeal. “The civil court judgements, which are listed as grounds for dissolution, are cases of 32 years ago in average. All damages for the court judgements have already been paid and each of the cases has already been settled,” said the president of FFWPU, Tomihiro Tanaka, in his press conference at Foreign Correspondents’ Club of Japan.
 
Stripping the FFWPU of its status as a religious corporation does not prevent it from practicing its religion. Tanaka, however, contends that the court decision would interfere with the FFWPU’s freedom of religion under Article 20 of the Japanese constitution.  The FFWPU’s legal director, Norishige Kondo, has also noted that the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which Japan has adopted, confirms the rights of religious groups.
 
However, Article 18-3 of the covenant states that “Freedom to manifest one’s religion or beliefs may be subject only to such limitations as are prescribed by law and are necessary to protect public safety, order, health, or morals or the fundamental rights and freedoms of others.” 
 
The Deputy Chief Defense Attorney of Lawyers Across Japan for the Victims of the Unification Church, Masaki Kito, has asserted that the believers’ donations to the Federation disturbed their own constitutional rights: rights to their own property and a basic right to their life. According to Kito, the FFWPU also violated the believers’ freedom of marriage in the UC’s mass weddings.   
 
The appeals court faces a complicated task in reconciling the various rights asserted.  If the court affirms the decision of the district court, the process of dissolution will begin. Tokyo District Court estimates that the Federation possessed 1,136 million yen of assets at the time of March 2022. Once dissolution process starts, those assets will be liquidated and the FFWPU will no longer receive tax relief for religious corporation.
 
The nature of the FFWPU’s involvement in political activities over the years is not entirely clear. The former Prime Minister Nobusuke Kishi, grandfather of Shinzo Abe, was one of the backers of the political branch of the UC, the International Federation for Victory over Communication. The founder of UC, Sun Myung Moon, urged his followers to support the Seiwa-kai, one of the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) factions once led by Shinzo Abe and his father Shintaro Abe. Tanaka has stated, however, that each believer may vote for a candidate in each electoral district that best reflects their family values. Acceptable candidates are not limited to members of the LDP.
 
On the other side, the lawyers for the victims have emphasized that the FFWPU is under the strict control of the religion’s headquarters in South Korea and has a strong influence on Japanese politics, especially in the time of the Shinzo Abe administration. The lawyers have called for legislation to regulate foreign lobbyists or spies and to preserve the assets of the FFWPU to ensure the compensation of the victims as ordered by the district court and before the federation sends funds to South Korea or another foreign country.
 
Stressing that the LDP had cut off its relationship with the FFWPU, Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba warned LDP lawmakers against any ties to the FFWPU. Ishiba observed that penalties for receipt of donations or other support from the Federation were possible. Whether the party can campaign without the FFWPU will be closely watched in the Upper House election this summer.
 
N.B.: The Unification Church [Family Federation for World Peace and Unification International], is also involved in U.S. politics through its ownership the conservative Washington Times and funding of conservative organizations such as CPAC. The family is currently in a legal dispute over the late-Reverand Moon’s assets

SAVE the Institute of Museum and Library Services

American Library Association 
statement on 
White House assault on the 

Institute of Museum and Library Services

March 15, 2025A

WASHINGTON – An executive order issued by the Trump administration on Friday night, March 14, calls for the elimination of the Institute of Museum and Library Services, the nation’s only federal agency for America’s libraries. The following statement was made by the American Library Association:

Americans have loved and relied on public, school and academic libraries for generations. By eliminating the only federal agency dedicated to funding library services, the Trump administration’s executive order is cutting off at the knees the most beloved and trusted of American institutions and the staff and services they offer:

• Early literacy development and grade-level reading programs
• Summer reading programs for kids 
• High-speed internet access
• Employment assistance for job seekers 
• Braille and talking books for people with visual impairments
• Homework and research resources for students and faculty
• Veterans’ telehealth spaces equipped with technology and staff support
• STEM programs, simulation equipment and training for workforce development
• Small business support for budding entrepreneurs

To dismiss some 75 committed workers and mission of an agency that advances opportunity and learning is to dismiss the aspirations and everyday needs of millions of Americans. And those who will feel that loss most keenly live in rural communities. 

As seedbeds of literacy and innovation, our nation’s 125,000 public, school, academic and special libraries deserve more, not less support. Libraries of all types translate 0.003% of the federal budget into programs and services used in more than 1.2 billion in-person patron visits every year, and many more virtual visits.

ALA implores President Trump to reconsider this short-sighted decision. We encourage U.S. Congressmembers, Senators and decision makers at every level of government to visit the libraries that serve their constituents and urge the White House to spare the modest federal funding for America’s libraries. And we call on all Americans who value reading, learning, and enrichment to reach out to their elected leaders and Show Up For Our Libraries at library and school meetings, town halls, and everywhere decisions are made about libraries.

###

The Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS) is an independent federal agency that supports libraries and museums in all 50 states and U.S. territories through grantmaking, research and policy development. IMLS administers both federal grants to states, which determine how funds are spent, and discretionary grants to individual library entities.

HOW TO HELP

LETTER TO CONGRESS EMAIL

Monday Asia Policy Events, March 31, 2025

ARCTIC WOMEN LEADERSHIP ADDRESSING CLIMATE, GEOPOLITICAL, AND ECONOMIC TRADITION: LOCAL FEDERAL, AND INDIGENOUS PERSPECTIVES. 3/31, Noon-1:30PM (EDT), HYBRID. Sponsor: George Washington University. Speakers: Rebecca Alty, Mayor of Yellowknife, NWT, Canada; Carina Sammeli, Chair of the Municipal Board, Luleå municipality, Sweden; Meghan Tapqaq, Former member of the Nome Common Council, Staff Attorney, Kawerak; Jackie Schaeffer, Director of Climate Initiatives, Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium; Mary Peltola, Former member of the U.S. Congress and Alaska State Legislature. 

INNOVATION TIES AND US-JAPAN ADVANCED TECH WORKFORCE INVESTMENTS. 3/31, 1:00-2:00pm (EDT), VIRTUAL. Sponsor: Wilson Center. Speakers: Bharati B. Belwalkar, Senior Industrial and Organizational Researcher, American Institutes for Research; Jeffrey Dressler, Partner, Head, Global Government Affairs, Softbank; Michi Kaifu, CEO, ENOTECH Consulting; Brandon Possin, CEO, Merito Network.

A FRACTURED LIBERATION: KOREA UNDER US OCCUPATION. 3/31, 4:00–5:30pm (EDT), VIRTUAL. Sponsor: Wilson Center. Speakers: author Kornel Chang, Associate Professor of History and Chair of the History Department, Rutgers University-Newark: Eric Arnesen, the Teamsters Professor of History in the Columbian College of Arts and Sciences, The George Washington University; Christian F. Ostermann, Founding Director of the History and Public Policy Program (HAPP).  PURCHASE BOOK 

VIEW FROM TREASURY: THE GLOBAL ECONOMY. 3/31, 5:00-7:00pm (EDT), IN PERSON ONLY. Sponsor: GWU Elliott School of International Affairs. Speaker: Professor Jay Shambaugh, fmr. Under Secretary of the Treasury for International Affairs. 

A “NEW GOLDEN AGE” IN U.S.-JAPAN RELATIONS? 3/31, 6:00-7:00pm (EDT), HYBRID. Sponsor: National Committee on American Foreign Policy (NCAFP). Speakers: Dr. Ken Jimbo, Professor, Faculty of Policy Management, Keio University; Mr. Christopher B. Johnstone Partner and Chair, Defense & National Security Practice, The Asia Group. 

JAPAN'S ZELENSKYY SHOCK. 3/31, 4:00-5:00pm (PDT) 7:00-8:00pm (EDT), VIRTUAL. Sponsor: UC San Diego School of Global Policy and Strategy. Speakers: Ulrike Schaede, Professor of Japanese Business, UC San Diego School of Global Policy and Strategy; Yuji Idomoto, Postdoctoral Scholar, UC San Diego School of Global Policy and Strategy. 

WHEN FORESTS FALL SILENT: INVESTIGATING ENVIRONMENTAL CRISES IN SOUTHEAST ASIA. 3/31, 5:00-6:00pm (EDT), IN PERSON ONLY. Sponsor: Georgetown Berkley Center for Religion, Peace, and World Affairs. Speaker: Anton L. Delgado, Freelance Journalist. 

This page is a preview of the weekly Asia Policy Calendar 

that is available via subscription for only $100/year

Gift Cards in Japanese Politics

 The Gift Certificate Scandal Skews into an Issue of Morality and Tradition

By Takuya Nishimura, APP Senior Fellow, Former Editorial Writer for The Hokkaido Shimbun. The views expressed by the author are his own and are not associated with The Hokkaido Shimbun
You can find his blog, J Update here.
March 24, 2025. Special to Asia Policy Point

While Japan faces important questions about its political and economic future, Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba has been spending days in the Diet defending himself from accusations that he broke the law when he distributed gift certificates – or “souvenirs” – to young lawmakers in the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP). His gifts are now widely thought not to be a criminal matter but to present issues of morality and tradition. The opposition parties have not been able to push the prime minister to resign.

During the discussion over the FY2025 budget bill in the Upper House, the opposition parties argued that the distribution of gift certificates was illegal because the recipients could use them for political activities. Ishiba has repeatedly rejected that line of thinking. “I had no intention to let them use them for political purposes. It was just for thanking,” insisted Ishiba.

Still, Ishiba has continued to apologize for his indifference to public sentiment against luxurious gift certificates, each worth 100,000 yen (US$664), when inflation is hurting every household. “Over the years I have been called many things, such as unsociable and stingy,” said Ishiba, as an explanation of why he was encouraged to thank those young colleagues with souvenir.

He has insisted that the certificates were a private expenditure saying, “As I have been in this position (of a lawmaker) for 40 years, I have some pocket money at my disposal.” Ishiba’s strategy is to address this issue not as a matter of legality, but as one of morality. He supposes that a violation of a moral obligation does not necessarily lead to a prime minister’s resignation.

While Ishiba was defending himself, it emerged that other LDP prime ministers had done the same thing. Asahi Shimbun reported that some LDP lawmakers admitted that they had received gift certificates worth 100,000 yen from Fumio Kishida as “souvenirs” after a 2022 meeting at the private section of Prime Minister’s Official Residence. A member of the House of Representatives, Toshitaka Ooka, said that he had received “something like gift certificates” for a meeting hosted by Shinzo Abe in 2013.

Many observers suspect that the prime ministers from LDP have been giving souvenirs to junior lawmakers for a long time. The Minister of Justice, Keisuke Suzuki, who was first elected to the Lower House in 2005, thinks the opposition parties have engaged in the same practice. “I have heard a story that gift certificates for tailored business suit were offered to the members of opposition parties in circumstances such as the occurrence of a scuffle in the Diet over its procedures,” said Suzuki.

The head of the biggest opposition party, Yoshihiko Noda of the Constitutional Democratic Party of Japan (CDPJ), has demanded an investigation of whether the souvenirs from prime ministers from LDP violated the Political Funds Control Act. Noda has not made up his mind whether to submit a non-confidence resolution to the House of Representatives. “I am going to make a decision not only relying on this issue, but with comprehensive political considerations,” said Noda.

As for the Diet’s real work, the Japan Innovation Party (Nippon Ishin-no Kai) has decided to vote for the FY2025 budget bill, even if it returns to the Lower House from the Upper House with changes to the high-cost medical expense benefit. The Democratic Party for the People (DPP) is not joining the opposition parties in introducing a bill to prohibit political donations from companies and organizations.

Ishin and DPP have helped Ishiba not only by joining with the LDP – Komeito coalition on policy matters but also by walking away from the coordinated efforts of the opposition parties to work against the Ishiba administration. Some opposition leaders have asked Ishiba to testify before the Political Ethics Council. Ishiba has indicated that he might do so, but it is likely that Ishiba would make the same arguments to the council on legality and morality that he has already made in the Diet.

The LDP has shown no inclination to replace Ishiba. One of the possible candidates to succeed Ishiba, Shinjiro Koizumi, has argued that the LDP must not change leaders whenever poll numbers fall. It seems like everyone around Ishiba is waiting to see how the prime minister will manage the election of the Upper House, probably to be held in July.

Monday Asia Policy Events, March 24, 2025

COMBATTING DISINFORMATION: THE IMPORTANCE OF PARTNERSHIP BETWEEN JAPAN AND CANADA. 3/24, 8:00-9:30am (EDT), VIRTUAL. Sponsor: Macdonald-Laurier Institute. Speakers: Chris Beall, Executive Director, Project Connie; Marcus Kolga, Senior Fellow, Macdonald-Laurier Institute; Kyoko Kuwahara, Fellow, Macdonalad-Laurier Institute. 

LOOKING BACK TO LOOK FORWARD: THE ROLE AND CHALLENGES OF ACCOUNTABILITY IN POST-ASSAD SYRIA. 3/24, 10:00-11:00am (EDT), VIRTUAL. Sponsor: Carnegie. Speakers: Omar Alshogre, Director of Detainees Affairs, Syrian Emergency Task Force; Federica D’Alessandra, British Academy Global Innovation Fellow, Global Order and Institutions Program; Nousha Kabawat, Head of Program, Syria, International Center for Transitional Justice; Robert Petit, UN Assistant Secretary-General; Stephen J. Rapp, Senior Fellow, International Justice, Center on National Security, Georgetown Law.  

HOW CEOS ARE NAVIGATING THE TRUMP ERA. 3/24, 11:00am (EDT), VIRTUAL. Sponsor: Foreign Policy Live. Speaker: Jeffrey Sonnenfeld, Founder, President, Chief Executive Leadership Institute. 

RECHARGED? THE FUTURE OF EUROPE’S AUTO SECTOR AND EU-CHINA RELATIONS. 3/24, 9:00-10:45PM (EDT), VIRTUAL. Sponsor: CSIS. Speakers: Ilaria Mazzocco, Deputy Director and Senior Fellow, Trustee Chair in Chinese Business and Economics, CSIS; Maria Martin-Prat De Abreu, Deputy Director-General, Directorate-General for Trade and Economic Security, European Commission; Max Bergmann, Director, Europe, Russia, and Eurasia Program and Stuart Center, CSIS; Francesca Ghiretti, Adjunct Fellow (Non-resident), Wadhwani AI Center; Julia Poliscanova, Senior Director, Vehicles & Emobility Supply Chains, Brussels (EU), T&E. 

ABE MEMORIAL LECTURE: THE FUTURE OF GLOBAL DIPLOMACY AND THE INDO-PACIFIC. 3/24, 9:30-11am (EDT), IN PERSON ONLY. Sponsor: Georgetown University’s School of Foreign Service. Speakers: Ambassador Shigeo Yamada, Ambassador of Japan to the United States; Dr. Kurt Campbell, 22nd Deputy Secretary of The United States Department of State; Dr. Evan Medeiros (moderator), Director of Asian Studies, Penner Family Chair in Asia Studies in the School of Foreign Service. 

PUTIN'S REVENGE AND RUSSIA'S WAR ON UKRAINE. 3/24, 11:00am–Noon (EDT). VIRTUAL. Sponsor: Atlantic Council. Speakers: author Lucian Kim, Journalist.  PURCHASE BOOK: https://amzn.to/3XVCR5u

FORECASTING DISASTER: HOW DOGE'S CUTS TO NOAA WILL AFFECT WEATHER AWARENESS AND WELL-BEING. 3/24, 1:00-2:00pm (EDT), VIRTUAL. Sponsor: Center for American Progress. Speakers: Todd Carter, Chief Development Director, Hospitality House of Northwest North Carolina; David Dickson, Meteorologist, Covering Climate Now. 

GLOBAL PUBLIC OPINION ON CHINA: HOW DOES THE WORLD SEE CHINA? 3/24, 3:00-4:00pm (EDT), VIRTUAL. Sponsor: Asia Society. Speakers: Andrew Chubb, Fellow, Foreign Policy and National Security, Center for China Analysis, Asia Society Policy Institute; Maria Repnikova, Associate Professor, Global Communication, Georgia State University; Cindy Yu, Expert, Modern China. 

CITIZENSHIP AND MULTICULTURALISM IN EAST ASIA: A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF MARRIAGE MIGRATION IN JAPAN, SOUTH KOREA AND TAIWAN. 3/24, 4:00–5:30pm (EDT), HYBRID. Sponsors: Harvard University Asia Center. Speakers: Margarita Estévez-Abe, Associate Professor, Political Science Department, Syracuse University; Susan J. Pharr, Edwin O. Reischauer Research Professor of Japanese Politics, Harvard University. 

The Turmoil in Seoul

Will Korea-Japan Relations Survive the Turmoil in Seoul?

By Daniel Sneider, Lecturer, International Policy at Stanford University, APP member

The Oriental Economist (Toyo Keizai), March 16,2025

This was supposed to be a year to celebrate the improvement of relations between South Korea and Japan. However, amid the turmoil in South Korea – and across the ocean in the United States -- the fate of relations between South Korea and Japan is increasingly uncertain.

On my recent visit to Korea, the streets of the capital city were filled on weekends with rival gatherings of fervent demonstrators.

In the boulevard leading from City Hall to the grand Gyeongbokgung Palace, rightwing supporters of the impeached President Yoon Suk-yeol, most of them pensioners, waved Korean and American flags. They proudly wore red baseball caps imitating the pro-Trump MAGA movement in the U.S.

Over by the National Assembly building, across the Han River, dense crowds of mostly younger people, many of them women, sang K-pop songs and marched in support of democracy and against the attempted martial law coup.

The decision of the Korean Constitutional Court on impeachment will not end these deep divisions in South Korea. But hopefully it will put set the country back on the road, through a new national election, toward forming a government capable of ruling the polarized country.

This could not come too soon. Korea is beset by twin threats. One one side, there is a nuclear-armed North Korea, strengthened by its military alliance with Russia and the ongoing support of China. On the other, there is a new danger in the form of an unpredictable isolationist Trump regime in the U.S. which could potentially withdraw the American armed forces that help protect South Korea and impose tariffs that could seriously damage the trade-dependent Korean economy.

Korea and Japan – strategic partners?

This is a year of milestones that could have celebrated the progress in relations under the conservative government of President Yoon and Prime Minister Kishida Fumio. It marks both the 60th anniversary of the treaty to establish diplomatic relations, and the 80th anniversary of the end of the war, which Koreans celebrate as a moment of liberation from Japanese colonial rule.

Instead, Yoon is effectively removed, impeached after his failed coup and facing potential imprisonment. Barring his unlikely return to office if the Court fails to uphold impeachment, an election within two months seems poised to bring to power the progressive Democratic Party, headed by populist politician Lee Jae-Myung. The Democrats have been deeply critical of Yoon’s Japan policy and Lee personally has been an unabashed spokesman for those who believe Japan has failed to confront the crimes of its colonial rule.

“Given Lee’s past record – his views, his arguments on Korea-Japan relations – a rollback of relations is quite predictable,” former Korean Amb to Japan, Shin Kak-soo, told me in Seoul.

In a separate conversation, a conservative former senior official with long experience in foreign affairs predicted that Lee will be “very adversarial” toward Japan. “He may not rattle the boat but basically Lee Jae-myung has a negative approach to Japan. He is more forthright about China and more critical of the U.S.”

That somewhat pessimistic prediction is easy to find in Tokyo as well. But Lee’s close advisors point to his pragmatic, rather than ideological, character to suggest that he will not seek to reverse the progress that was made and will be supportive of the U.S. security alliance.

Amb Cho Hyun, a former senior Foreign Ministry official who was deeply engaged in shaping Korea-Japan relations during the previous progressive government of Moon Jae-in, laid this out to this writer over breakfast in Seoul.

“We will not change what has been agreed upon between Korea and Japan,” Cho said, while acknowledging that he had opposed the Comfort Women agreement reached in 2015 between Park Geun-hye and the late Prime Minister Abe Shinzo.

“Our relationship has two bookends. On one end, we share enemies, a sense of threat, and are both allies to the United States. But at the other bookend, Japan did so many horrible things and denies doing it. They fail to educate their young people. On our part there is a sense of wounded nationalism. Diplomacy must operate between these two bookends.”

Cho and other progressive foreign policy advisors pointed to the failure of the Japanese government to reciprocate the unilateral decision of Yoon to create a fund to compensate the former forced laborers who worked in Japanese mines and factories during the wartime period. Japanese firms, who employed the workers, should now add to the fund, with the support and encouragement of the Japanese government, Cho and others suggest.

“Some people in the leadership of the Minjudang (Democratic Party) are fully aware of what went wrong,” Cho said. “They are willing to change their position. They would keep the unilateral announcement of Yoon regarding forced labor and maintain trilateral security cooperation. I hope the Japanese government may allow companies to join the funding. I have been arguing to Japanese friends that they need to talk to progressives.”

Some Japanese foreign policy experts share this cautious optimism. Tanaka Hitoshi, the former senior Foreign Ministry official who was a key architect of the outreach to North Korea under former Prime Minister Koizumi, voiced that to this writer in a recent interview.

“Even if the opposition takes power, we may still have a chance to preserve the improvement in relations,” Tanaka said. “The Democrats are against Japan and the US, the latter because of its support of the military regimes in Korea. But Japan-Korea relations and trilateral relations are the natural result of the current situation.”

The Trump factor enters the picture

Korean thinking about Japan has also now shifted due to the Trump factor. The angry exchange between the American leader and the Ukrainian President in the Oval Office had a similar shock effect in Seoul as in Tokyo.

Korean discussion of the need to develop an independent nuclear capability has spread from the right, where it has long been advocated, to the progressive camp. The new watchword among Koreans is “nuclear latency,” to follow the Japanese in creating a full nuclear fuel cycle, long opposed by the U.S. In that way, South Korea could move to reprocess spent fuel from its large number of nuclear power plants or create a uranium enrichment facility. A stockpile of fissile material would then allow South Korea to move towards nuclear weapons very quickly.

For now, Korean officials, like their counterparts in Japan, continue to talk confidently about their ability to offer sufficient concessions to keep the worst from happening. They point to the visit of Ishiba Shigeru to Washington as a model for Korea to follow.

Assemblyman Wi Sung-lac, who was the chief foreign policy advisor to Democratic party leader Lee in the last presidential election, believes the best they can hope for is a non-confrontational meeting which, like the one reached by Ishiba, at least reaffirms the alliance along lines of previous statements with the Biden administration.

“The Japanese still believe they will try to deal with Trump just as Abe did,” Wi said in an interview in his National Assembly office. “The joint statement has a preventative effect. When we come to that moment (of a summit), at minimum we hope we can have a similar document. It won’t be easy creating personal rapport between the two leaders, but we are going to try that. If we are not successful, then Japan, Korea and the Europeans will have to think this through.”

Some Koreans see Ishiba as a particularly good potential partner, given his greater willingness to deal with history issues and his support for improved relations with China and other Asian nations.

“Ishiba is really interested in trilateral relations – China, Japan, Korea,” Kim Joon Hyung, a progressive member of the National Assembly and a former senior Foreign Ministry official. “He is willing to approach China. I wish Ishiba survives longer.”

In some circles in Seoul, there is even talk of forging a strategic relationship with Japan to balance, if not counter, a U.S.-led Trump.

“Under the Biden administration we have some reason to work together on a trilateral basis because we had to deal with a rising China,” says Wi, a former senior foreign ministry official who was recently elected to the National Assembly. “That issue remains but now we have under the Trump administration new uncertainties and unpredictability that affect trade and bilateral relations and could affect both Japan and Korea.”

One idea that is quietly discussed in Seoul – with an eye toward Tokyo – is to use the expansion of the CPTPP (the Trade Pacific Partnership trade pact) to counter Trump’s tariff and trade wars. Korean application for membership could be accelerated and even linked to the European Union.

It may, however, be premature to talk of an anti-Trump alliance, some say.

“I am not sure Seoul and Tokyo policy makers have the incentive to work together (against Trump),” says Wi, who is likely to play a prominent role if Lee wins a presidential election. “Some Europeans like [French President Emmanuel] Macron or the Germans may try to launch this kind of idea with Asian nations. But Asian responses to that will be careful.”

That caution, however, may be blown away by Trump himself as he continues to assail the postwar international system.