The “tariff” problem, which the US-Japan relations now center around, continues to make itself tangible, despite the “deal”, seemingly concluded in early September.
The continuation of the “tariff” bargaining with D. Trump became the principal issue that S. Ishiba’s remaining month (until October 4) in the Prime Minister’s chair has focused on. In particular, he touched upon this topic during a brief contact with D. Trump whilst being in New York for the regular session of the UN General Assembly. And there definitely is something to talk about, since the US President does not allow his partner-opponents to relax. Just after having concluded the above mentioned “deal” with Japan, D. Trump came forward with new “tariff initiatives”, affecting, in particular, products of the pharmaceutical industry and heavy trucks.
Meanwhile, in the realms of the very same “deal”, Tokyo managed to halve the initial thirty percent “tariff” burden on the products of the Japanese auto industry, that is, on the main component of the country’s exports to the US. However, the scale of this “concession” was met by the addressee, to put it mildly, without enthusiasm. So, is D. Trump now backtracking, albeit partially? The very same pharmaceuticals, although accounting for no more than 2% of Japanese exports to the US, still, produce an annual income of about $3 billion which is rather decent money.
Thus, for Japan, not only does the “tariff” issue remain important, but it is also increasing in its significance within the entire complex of relations with the key ally. But for Washington, too, in the context of a general shift of the focus of national interests to the Indo-Pacific region, substantially provoked by the rise of the PRC as the main geopolitical opponent, the weight of the alliance with Japan is sharply escalating.
And this is undoubtedly taken into account by the D. Trump administration whose conduct, both in resolving the “tariff” problem and in the entire trade and economic sphere of bilateral relations, is noticeably more benevolent with Tokyo than with, say, Europeans. Especially since there already are signs that the “tariff war” is counterproductive for the US economy per se and, in particular, for American automakers.
In the fact of the positive completion of the two-year-long drama around the merger project of the two of the world’s largest steel companies, Nippon Steel (NS) and United States Steel (USS), alongside considerations of a purely financial and economic nature, there definitely was a component of political expediency. Which, we reiterate, resides in the increasing role for Washington of the military-political alliance with Japan.
Fukuyama Attacks D. Trump Again; Some Up-to-Date Allusions
Meanwhile, at the end of September, a by no means secondary generator of modern political meanings, Francis Fukuyama, launched a sharp criticism of the incumbent American president in one of Japan’s leading newspapers, “Yomiuri Shimbun”. Note that he does it not for the first time and in the same newspaper. In February, earlier this year, he discussed whether D. Trump is a “fascist”, acknowledging that no clear definition of this category exists.
But in this particular article, “The Self-Destruction of a Superpower”, F. Fukuyama nevertheless attempts to explain why D. Trump has displeased him to such an extent. Almost half of the article centres on an obvious gaffe made by the current administration in policy regarding India. In a generalized form, the claims against D. Trump are indicated by the introductory phrase about the “rapid decline of the superpower, caused not by any external force, but by the hand of its own leadership”.
But what the author means by the process of “decline” of the US, which actually is switching main attention to solving accumulated internal issues, manifested itself long ago and has been progressing far from “rapidly”, but rather gradually. The milestone concept on this path, “offshore balancing”, which sharply curbed the scale of US involvement in international squabbles, showed up ten years before D. Trump’s first presidency. At the end of the 2000s, the head of the American administration, B. Obama, apparently understood everything about the Afghan venture he inherited, provoked by the scam called “the 9/11 events”.
On a related note, provocations of the kind with certain “applied” purposes behind are by no means rare. The “Events of October 7, 2023” in the Middle East come across very likely to have served as such. Incidentally, the authorship of the “settlement” project that flared up after this latest conflict is attributed to an active participant in another scam involving “Iraqi chemical weapons”. And so far, for some reason, he has “gotten away with it”.
As for the adventure in Afghanistan, it was already under B. Obama when the number of the American contingent in that country considerably decreased. And it was J. Biden to have put an end to it. Not very skillfully, but that is how it turned out. By switching the US administration’s attention today to solving domestic problems, D. Trump is merely staying within the vein of a quite objective and inevitable process for the country he leads. Nevertheless, some specific actions, and especially the American president’s public rhetoric, may well be subject to criticism.
It comes across, however, that the sharp attacks against D. Trump should majorly be put down to the fact that F. Fukuyama resides in a political and ideological camp which directly opposes that of the incumbent US president. Although as far as the second “camp” is concerned, it is often said that “Trumpism” now lives on its own, so as to speak, without the presence of its founder in it.
The author of the mentioned verbal attacks professes “political liberalism”, which emerged in Europe with the end of the religious wars. It is believed to have provided for the rapid development of countries that adhered to this political movement. But, in the opinion and to the regret of F. Fukuyama, it has already exhausted itself, which leads to the triumph of “autocrats” on the international arena. Alongside the leaders of the Russian Federation and the PRC, the incumbent US president now also gets included to the list.
However, it begs a suspicion that the author of the philippics against D. Trump suffers from nostalgia “for the once-existing, but lost beautiful past”. The eternal and ubiquitous malady that arises in the course of searching for answers to extremely complex pressing problems.
In general, what seems noteworthy is the very fact of increased attention to the analysis of the state of US relations with Japan, which has been recently manifested by renowned American political scientists, as well as ex-statesmen of the very recent past. And by no means only those of Japanese nationality.
Vladimir Terekhov, expert on Asia-Pacific region issues
Follow new articles on our Telegram channel
