Takaichi’s Legislative Strategy Unites Opposition

Three Reasons for This Diet Session’s Unusual Procedure

By Takuya Nishimura, Senior Fellow, Asia Policy Point
Former editorial writer for the Hokkaido Shimbun
You can find his blog, J Update here.
July 21, 2026
 
The Diet decided to extend the term of the current special session for eight days with approval of the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) and Japan Innovation Party (JIP). Although these leading parties have been trying to pass all the bills submitted by Sanae Takaichi Cabinet before the end of the term set on July 17, the boycott of discussions by the opposition parties made it impossible. The opposition parties accuse Takaichi of mismanaging the Diet. This abnormality was brought about by Takaichi’s arrogant administration of the Diet, JIP’s insistence on its own agenda, and the opposition parties’ unusual unification against leading coalition.
 
Takaichi’s Capriciousness
This is a very unusual session of the Diet. The ordinary session 2026 was convoked on January 23 and ended the same day because Takaichi dissolved the House of Representative to hold a snap election. After the Lower House election on February 8, the Takaichi administration set a special session. Although a special session is ordinarily convoked for a few days to elect a new prime minister, Takaichi set a 150-day term from February 18 to July 17 to discuss the fiscal year 2026 budget and tackle other critical issues. The Diet did not work between January 23 and February 17.
 
During the final weeks in the current session, Takaichi was unwilling to attend the Diet discussion. After opposition parties criticized her for defamation in her LDP presidential campaign last October, Takaichi refused to answer their questions in the Diet. The opposition parties, holding a majority in the Upper House, boycotted the Diet discussion in late June and early July. The leading parties were unable to pass all the bills by July 17, the regular end of the current session.
 
Takaichi prioritized passage of the revised Imperial House Law and the National Flag Vandalism Punishment Act in the final phase of the session. The LDP has not been active in extending the Diet session. Every year, lawmakers get back to their hometowns after the ordinary session to meet their supporters, to reinforce their political base, and to prepare for the next election. Extension of the Diet session will reduce their chances to cultivate their voters in the local districts.
 
The LDP nevertheless submitted a motion to the Diet to extend the term of the current special session for the passage of some important bills. The Diet Law provides that an ordinary session can be extended once and an extraordinary or special session twice. The LDP has a majority in the Lower House and not in the Upper House. If the two chambers of the Diet reach different decisions on an extension, the decision of the Lower House controls.
 
The extension of the current session for eight days was thus approved by the votes of   the LDP-JIP majority coalition in the Lower House. The opposition parties blamed the extension on Takaichi’s mismanagement of the Diet schedule. If she had not dissolved the Lower House, and if she had not refused the discussion on her defamation scandal, the parties would have had enough time to discuss all the bills. It was Takaichi who delayed the schedule.
 
JIP’s Insistence on Its Own Agenda
The opposition parties’ boycott of discussion was based on another reason. The leading coalition unilaterally decided to start discussion on the bills for reducing Lower House seats and for introducing a “backup capital” bill. Discussion on a bill usually starts with an overwhelming consensus among the parties. But in this case, the leading parties ignored the protest of the opposition parties. The two bills are strongly supported by JIP.
 
Established in 2012, the JIP had been a determined opposition party, pushing for political reforms. Forming the leading coalition with LDP led by Takaichi in 2025 changed everything. The JIP needed a cause to join the coalition and decided that reduction of Diet seats would be its top priority. JIP leader and the Governor of Osaka, Hirofumi Yoshimura, labeled the issue “political reform 101.” Yoshimura believed that the seat reduction would receive wide public support because it would lead to a reduction in governmental spending for the Diet.
 
Opposition parties had reason to oppose the bill. The bill includes the reduction of forty-five seats in the proportional districts of the Lower House. That reform of the election system would work against small opposition parties which are heavily dependent on proportional districts. It also did not make good sense for the House to reduce its seats at the initiative of the governor of Osaka. Not only the opposition parties but some lawmakers in the LDP were skeptical about the bill. Takaichi finally decided to postpone the seat reduction bill to the next session.
 
JIP still hopes to enact the Backup Capital Act in the extended term of the current session of the Diet. While the law enables local prefectures and cities to have stronger authority for governance as the Tokyo Metropolitan Government currently possesses, most lawmakers believe that the system of backup capital will help the Osaka Capital Initiative, which JIP has been promoting since its establishment.
 
Opposition parties have criticized JIP’s strong push for the bill, arguing that the law only benefits Osaka. They demand a detailed examination of the bill in the Diet, which requires weeks of discussion. Although the leading coalition passed the bill in the Lower House with the approval of Team Mirai, they have still not secured a majority in the Upper House. The leading parties have not yet decided whether to extend the term of the current session again.
 
If the LDP fails to enact the two bills for seat reduction and a backup capital, the JIP may lose its major cause for staying in the leading coalition with the LDP. Although the merits of leading coalition should be greater than leaving it, the JIP is worried about its political power shrinking, as they are growingly dependent on the LDP’s leadership. Voters in future elections may regard JIP as a supplemental group of LDP. It would be a major concern for the LDP whether the JIP stays or goes.
 
Unusual Unification of Opposition Parties
When the leading coalition unilaterally began discussion over the Lower House seat reduction and the Backup Capital Act, the opposition parties took united action to stop the unilateral procedure in the Diet. They requested impartial treatment of the bills by the leaders in both chambers. The possible crucial impact of seat reduction on small opposition parties made that concerted action possible.
 
The action included a wide range of parties. The highly conservative Sanseito and the far-left Japan Communist Party joined the frontline in protesting capricious management of the Diet by leading coalition. Adding to those two parties, the Centrist Reform Alliance (CRA), the Democratic Party for the People (DPP), and Team Mirai demanded that the chairman (from JIP) of a Lower House committee not start discussion on the seat reduction bill. When the chairman declared that discussion had begun, those opposition parties boycotted the committee.
 
Ironically, JIP’s push for a seat reduction bill unified opposition parties from the right to the left. This unification became a threat to the leading parties, causing them to think which other bills would be blocked by the opposition parties.
 
However, the opposition parties are not completely united against the leading parties. The CRA, DPP and Sanseito voted yes to revisions to the Imperial House Law, while JCP and some others opposed it. The National Flag Vandalism Punishment Act passed the Diet with the approval of DPP and Sanseito, but the Constitutional Democratic Party of Japan, Komeito, JCP and Reiwa Shinsengumi opposed. The coalition of opposition parties is still limited to some specific bills.

Imperial Succession

Diet Discussion on the Imperial Family Resumes

By Takuya Nishimura, Senior Fellow, Asia Policy Point
Former editorial writer for the Hokkaido Shimbun
You can find his blog, J Update here.
April 20, 2026

Both chambers of the Diet, including all the parties, resumed on April 16 their discussion of a stable process for succession to the imperial throne. The Speaker of House of Representatives, Eisuke Mori, hopes to wrap up the discussion and approve a revised Imperial House Law by the end of current session of the Diet, which is scheduled to close on July 15^th. However, opinions of the parties are so different that they are unlikely to reach a consensus soon.
 
It was the first meeting with all the parties since April 2025 when two former prime ministers, Taro Aso with the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) and Yoshihiko Noda with the Constitutional Democratic Party (CDPJ) of Japan, hit an impasse on the details of revision of the law. The structure of both chambers has changed significantly since then after the elections of the Upper House in 2025 and the Lower House in 2026.
 
It is recognized that keeping members of the Imperial Family would contribute stable succession to the throne. With a decrease in the number of male members in the Imperial Family who can succeed to the imperial throne, it is urgent that Japan find a way to put a workable succession process in place. The current Imperial House Law limits succession to male offspring in the male line. The Emperor Abdication Special Law, enacted in 2017, which allowed Emperor Akihito to abdicate, compels the Diet to reach a consensus on imperial succession as the will of the legislative branch.
 
A governmental conference of experts proposed to the Diet in 2021 two options for keeping members of the Imperial Family. They were 1) allowing female members to stay in the Imperial Family after marriage and 2) reinstating male members of the former Imperial Family along the male line through adoption. While the LDP, with its coalition partner the Japan Innovation Party (JIP), considers the latter the top priority, the CDPJ focuses on the former.
 
The CDPJ argues for the first option that the spouse and children of female members in the Imperial Family should also be given the status of members of the Imperial Family. The LDP is adamantly opposed, fearing that it would pave the way for an emperor in the female line. The CDPJ is skeptical about the second option because a former member of the Imperial Family may prefer not to be reinstated in the Imperial Family. These conceptual gaps have not narrowed in the discussions among the parties.

The Centrist Reform Alliance (CRA) in the Lower House, which resulted from the merger of the CDPJ and Komeito in January 2026, does not have internal agreement on this issue. Mori has asked the CRA to reach a consensus within a month and before the next meeting. The Democratic Party for the People, Komeito, and Sanseito all agree with both options.
 
The conservative parties, including the LDP, JIP and Sanseito, strongly advocate for exclusively patrilinear succession and oppose an emperor in the female line. Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi asserted in her speech to the LDP national convention on April 12^th that the history of succession through the male line is the source of the throne’s authority and legitimacy.
 
It is a controversial argument. The Constitution of Japan does not include her conception of the emperor’s status. Article 1 states that the emperor’s position derives from “the will of the people with whom resides sovereign power.” The emperor’s “authority and legitimacy” thus stems from the people – who therefore may call for changes. Takaichi and the conservative powers’ insistence on succession along the male line may undermine the legal basis of the emperor as stated in the Constitution.
 
Currently, there are 16 members alive in the Imperial Family, all of whom are descendants of Emperor Yoshihito of Taisho. Five are males, and 11 females. The order of succession to Emperor Naruhito is topped by Crown Prince Akishino, Naruhito’s younger brother, followed by Akishino’s son Prince Hisahito, and Prince Hitachi, a younger brother of Emperor Emeritus Akihito. Under the patrilinear descent concept, Hisahito is the only possible successor in the next generation of Naruhito. Akihito is not included in the order of possible successors.
 
Female members of the Family include Princess Masako, her daughter Princess Aiko and Akihito’s wife Michiko. In the branches, the Akishino family has two females, Kiko and Kako, and other branches have six who have not married. A female member who marries a commoner must leave the Imperial Family.
 
In 1947, just before the Imperial Household Law took effect, there were 51 members of the Imperial Family. Eleven families left the Imperial Family later that year, partly because the General Headquarters of the Allied Forces shrank the budget for the privileges of the Imperial Family. The departing families were branches of male lines of former Emperors.
 
Those 11 former Imperial Families included the Fushimi, Kan-in, Yamashina, Kitashirakawa, Nashimoto, Kuni, Kaya, Higashifushimi, Asaka, Takeda, and Higashikuni branches. Now, only four of them, Kuni, Kaya, Takeda and Higasikuni, have male members in the male lines. Other families are expected to be eliminated as former Imperial Families, since they have no male successor.
 
Among the 11 families, the Takedas may be the best known. Tsunekazu Takeda is former president of Japan Olympic Committee. He is the third son of Tsuneyosi, a grandson of the Meiji Emperor. Tsunekazu, as the chairman of the bid committee, was involved in lobbying for the 2020 Tokyo Olympic Games (actually held in 2021), was targeted by French prosecutors in an Olympics corruption probe. Tsunekazu’s son, Tsuneyasu Takeda, is well known as an ultra-conservative TV commentator. Tsunekazu and Tsuneyasu, however, have never been members of the Imperial Family because they were born after the Takeda family had left the royal household.
 
The second option in the 2021 experts’ report proposed that patrilinear members of the imperial family could adopt male members of the eleven families who had left in 1947.  However, the CRA and the CDPJ argue that such adoptions may violate Article 14 of the Constitution of Japan. Article 14 prohibits discrimination based on family origin. Forcing a man in one of the 11 families into the Imperial Family but who does not want to go may constitute discrimination. Debate over the stability of the Imperial Family is hard to keep politically neutral.

The Opposition is CRA_P_arty

Japan’s Shrinking Opposition

By Takuya Nishimura, Senior Fellow, Asia Policy Point
Former editorial writer for the Hokkaido Shimbun
You can find his blog, J Update here.
February 16, 2026

As the ruling Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) led by Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi garnered more than two-thirds of the seats in the Lower House in the February 8 election, the opposition parties have shrunk. This gives Takaichi’s government great power to turn its policies into law. It is a major question how the opposition powers are going to survive under huge pressure from the Takaichi administration and its high popularity. Democracy in Japan may depend on whether the opposition parties can properly check her unilateral exercise of power that is not limited by any need to compromise.

The top opposition party, the Centrist Reform Alliance (CRA), lost 71% of its seats, falling from 167 to 49, in the election. The CRA is a new entity in the Lower House that is the result of a merger of the Constitutional Democratic Party of Japan (CDPJ) and Komeito. The parties merged just one day before Takaichi dissolved the Lower House. Voters saw the merger as a cynical political ploy by the two parties to keep power in the Lower House. The CRA’s policy differences with the LDP did not register with the voters in any significant way.

Unsurprisingly, the co-leaders of the CRA announced their resignations the day after the election. “We have an obsolete image,” said one of them, Yoshihiko Noda. Just four days later, on February 13, the CRA held an election for a new leader.

In that election, former CDPJ Secretary General, Jun-ya Ogawa, 54, defeated former Parliamentary Vice-minister for Internal Affairs and Communications, Takeshi Shina, by 27 to 22 votes. A son of a hairdresser in Takamatsu, Kagawa, Ogawa has positioned himself on the liberal side of the CDPJ, representing the interests of ordinary citizens. He is known as a policy expert from his time at the Ministry for Internal Affairs and Communications.

Ogawa made clear his differences with Takaichi in his press conference as the new leader where he emphasized the role of the CRA in advocating for democracy, promoting pacifism, and engaging in people-first and transparent politics. He questioned Takaichi’s slogan “responsible and proactive public finances” as an outmoded process of limiting the government’s budget to a percentage of GDP. According to Ogawa, it is not meaningful to compare an indicator under the government’s control (the budget deficit) with a measurement that is not (GDP). .

Before it can compete with the LDP’s super majority in the Lower House, the CRA must integrate itself. Now, the CRA exists only in the Lower House. The CDPJ and Komeito in the Upper House decided not to merge into the CRA, splintering the two parties’ power there. In the Lower House, the powers of the two former parties are not equivalent.

The CRA fielded 236 candidates in the Lower House election; 202 for single-seat districts (SSD) and 34 for proportional districts (PD). All the candidates for SSD were from the CDPJ. In PD, 28 were from Komeito and 6 from the CDPJ. It is notable that 200 were doubly nominated both on SSD and PD, who had chance to get seats in PD even after they had lost in SSD.

Here’s the result. The CRA achieved 7 seats in SSD and 42 in PD. Of the CRA’s slate of candidates for PD, all the 28 from Komeito won the seat, because they were ranked at high position. Only 14 candidates from the CDPJ could secure their seats in PD. The seats with legacy CDPJ lawmakers fell by 86% from 148 to 21. The former Komeito gained seats in the Lower House from 24 to the 28 CRA candidates who were elected.

Former CDPJ members in the CRA are of course frustrated with the results of unification of the two parties. They have lost not only colleagues but also substantial parts of their policy agenda. The CRA accepts the constitutionality of the 2015 security legislation while the CDPJ does not. The CRA also does not object to nuclear power or the resumption of shut down nuclear power plants, although the CDPJ has been looking to end use of nuclear power. These positions have been pillars of the CDPJ platform, but they have been given up in the Lower House. Some former CDPJ lawmakers believe that the CRA’s rejection of the two CDPJ policies alienated liberal supporters.

Ogawa has not bridged the differences between the two groups. Komeito favors a constitutional amendment expanding the definition of self-defense, and Ogawa did not rule out an amendment to describe “self-defense force” in the constitution. But this is one part of four in the LDP’s agenda for discussion. The CDPJ group in the CRA firmly opposes any such change and is worried about the hawkish movement to increase war preparations. Ogawa has since explained he did not mean to concede so easily to the LDP’s proposed amendment.

Meanwhile, the CRA hopes to develop a cooperative relationship with the Democratic Party for the People (DPP), which is popular among young voters. Both the CRA and the DPP enjoy support from the Japanese Trade Union Confederation (Rengo). Although the LDP considered adding the DPP as a coalition partner, the LDP’s overwhelming electoral success eliminated any need for the LDP to ask for the DPP’s cooperation. The DPP has said that it will not join the LDP coalition.

From the DPP side, the party has no great interest in cooperating with the CRA, which comes across as an old and undynamic political body. The CRA’s positions on the constitutional amendment and on the resumption of nuclear power plants will push the DPP away. Still, the CRA will try to find commonalities with the DPP over some issues in the Diet.

Other populist parties, Sanseito and Team Mirai, that received a modest surge in the Lower House election, will go their own way, given the size of the LDP majority. These parties are also unlikely to coordinate their positions with those of the CRA. The leftist parties, Japan Communist Party and Reiwa Shinsengumi, lost significant numbers of seats in the election and will not have a substantial presence in the Lower House.

Politics in Japan is now much like our solar system in which small planets orbit the sun. As long as the LDP maintains its majority and the Japan Innovation Party supports the LDP agenda, opposition parties cannot take meaningful countermeasures to constrain Takaichi’s free hand in bringing her policies to fruition.

Japan's Continued War

Behind Japan's political battles, a war over history By Daniel Sneider, lecturer in East Asian Studies in Stanford University, the former co-director of the Divided Memories and Reconciliation project at the Asia-Pacific Research Center, and an APP member. First appeared on Observing Japan, August 5, 2025 Constitutional Democratic Party leader Noda Yoshihiko questions Prime Minister Ishiba Shigeru in a 4 August meeting of the Budget Committee of the House of Representatives. During their exchange, Noda asked about Ishiba’s plans to mark the eightieth anniversary of the end of World War II; Ishiba said he intended to issue a personal statement, though not a formal cabinet statement. Source: CDP The political battles now raging in Japan in the aftermath of the July Upper House election are being waged across many fronts – tax policy, trade, corruption, and at base, a struggle for power. Largely hidden from sight is another, deeper and more long-standing conflict – the war over Japan’s wartime history and its national identity. This dimension of the political battles emerged into the open this past week when the embattled Prime Minister Ishiba Shigeru seemed to back away from his plan to issue a potentially landmark statement to mark the eightieth anniversary of the end of the war on August 15. The Japanese media reported last week that Ishiba had changed his mind when faced with fierce resistance from the rightwing of the Liberal Democratic Party, mostly but not entirely followers of the late Prime Minister Abe Shinzō. For these conservatives, the last words on the meaning of the war were uttered by Abe in his seventieth anniversary statement. Fearing what Ishiba might say, they mounted a growing campaign to demand he back off from his plans. “I believe it is unnecessary and will cause unnecessary confusion,” argued Nishimura Yasutoshi, a former Minister of Economy, Trade and Industry and a former senior member of the Abe faction in the party. They are leading the charge to force Ishiba to step down after the election results led to the loss of the majority in the Upper House for the ruling LDP-Kōmeitō coalition. As the Asahi Shimbun put it: Having been dealt a devastating blow in the Upper House election July 20 and facing calls from within his Liberal Democratic Party to resign, Ishiba has chosen not to rankle conservative elements in the party that would take umbrage at a fresh interpretation of Japan’s role in the war. But in answer to a question from an opposition leader in the Budget Committee of the House of Representatives on Monday, August 4, Ishiba left open the possibility he may still issue some kind of eightieth anniversary statement as a personal message rather than a formal cabinet approved document which carries more weight. "We must not let history fade away,” Ishiba replied. “We need to make active and proactive efforts to prevent this from fading away. Regardless of the formality, it is necessary to issue a statement to ensure that war never happens again." The anniversary statement over time The wars over anniversary statements are not new – they are in fact one of the most significant battlegrounds in the fight over Japan’s past. The baseline for Japan’s official view of the war remains the statement issued in 1995 by Prime Minister Murayama Tomiichi, a Socialist who had joined an unusual coalition government with the LDP. For the first time, a Japanese leader not only marked the end of the war but apologized directly for Japan’s aggression and colonization in Asia. He expressed “deep remorse” and “heartfelt apology” for “tremendous damage and suffering to the peoples of many countries, particularly those of Asian nations” that Japan caused “through its colonial rule and aggression.” From the start this was a target of attack from those in the LDP who embraced revisionist views of the war, regarding it as a justified act of self-defense, of liberation of Asia from Western colonial rule, who focused on Japan’s victimization and condemned apologies as acts of “masochism.” Despite this opposition, which among other things blocked a Diet resolution echoing Murayama’s statement, his clear view remained as the official view. In 2005, when then Prime Minister Koizumi Junichirō issued his sixtieth anniversary statement, he very notably echoed Murayama’s language. When it was Abe’s turn in 2015, he issued a statement that carefully stepped around this challenge to rewrite the Murayama precedent. Under clear pressure from the Obama administration and from within Japan, Abe’s own statement does echo key words – “aggression” and “colonial rule” – while also trying to rewrite the narrative about the war. As I wrote at the time, based on my own expertise on the formation of historical memory about the war, in Nippon.com: Abe’s version of events can be read as a justification for Japan’s own imperialism (which he neglects to mention began in the late 1800s with the seizure of Taiwan) and a denial of historical responsibility. But he goes on to acknowledge Japan’s own decisions that led to war (my italics): ‘With the Manchurian Incident, followed by the withdrawal from the League of Nations, Japan gradually transformed itself into a challenger to the new international order that the international community sought to establish after tremendous sacrifices. Japan took the wrong course and advanced along the road to war.’ This version of history will not satisfy many people, including many historians, but it is a step away from the view held by Japanese revisionists, including Abe himself, that Japan waged a war of self-defense and not of aggression, or even more provocatively, that it was engaged in the noble cause of liberating Asia from colonial rule. Since that time, the backers of the revisionist right in Japanese politics have been eager to both protect the Abe legacy but also to correct even the concessions he made at the time. The most ardent advocates of this view of the past include the leader and members of the newly emergent darlings of the right in Japan – Sanseitō, a new party that made a significant showing in the recent election, now holding fifteen seats in the Upper House. Sanseitō* is now well known as a Japanese echo of Trumpian rhetoric – from its slogan of “Japanese People First” to its anti-immigrant rhetoric. But what is less well understood is its passionate advocacy for an ultra-nationalist view of Japanese history, articulated by its leader Kamiya Sōhei and distributed for many years now on his YouTube Channel, CGS or Channel Grand Strategy. The channel features so-called “history lessons” taught by prominent rightwing historians. “A fundamental reason for Sanseitō's rise, I believe, is rooted in the historical perspective shared by its candidates,” wrote historian Fujioka Nobukatsu in the rightwing daily Sankei Shimbun. “Building on the momentum of these study sessions, Sanseitō, established in 2020, has uniquely emphasized the importance of taking pride in Japanese history. It's an approach no other political party has adopted.” Fujioka is a historian and the vice president of the Japanese Society for History Textbook Reform (Tsukurukai), the driving force for decades behind revision of Japanese middle and high school textbooks and opposition to what it views as a distorted view of Japan’s past. Sanseitō members have been active in promoting use of their alternative textbooks in Japanese schools. What would Ishiba say? If Ishiba were to deliver his own judgement on Japan’s wartime history in an anniversary statement, what would he say? There are some clear clues to this, clear enough to have fueled the fears of the revisionist rightwing in Japan. Ishiba has made numerous remarks that indicate he shares Murayama’s view of Japan’s aggressive and colonial past and saw the eightieth anniversary as a key moment to declare Japan’s intention not to repeat that past, despite his reputation as a defense hawk. Ishiba was among the most forthright of Japanese politicians in advocating close ties to South Korea based on a recognition of the illegality of Japan’s 1910 annexation of Korea. “There’s no need to flatter Korea or to lay out the logic of the past, but we should admit that what was a mistake was a mistake,” he said in a December 2023 interview touting his bid for leadership. “We must redouble our emphasis on the fact that it is vital for this region that Japan and South Korea understand one another and cooperate.” In unscripted remarks to the Global Dialogue organized by the Japan Institute for International Affairs, where this author was present, Ishiba spoke frankly about his desire to mark the eightieth anniversary as a moment for self-reflection about the disaster of the decision to go to war. “It is time for us to revisit and review the war experience,” he said. He called for Japan to understand “how to position itself in the world to create a world with more peace.” The idea that the mistakes that led to Japan’s war and its total defeat should not be repeated is a persistent obsession of Ishiba. As he told the Diet this week: What should we do to ensure that war never breaks out again? It is not simply a matter of expressing our thoughts, but rather of what went wrong. I have strong feelings about what our country will convey to the world this year. Tanzan Ishibashi Perhaps the most intriguing, and least known, clue as to what an unfettered Ishiba would say is his membership, since its beginning in 2023, in a study group dedicated to the life and work of former Prime Minister Ishibashi Tanzan. Ishibashi, also a former editor of the august Japanese weekly Tōyō Keizai, was a long time opponent going back to the prewar era of Japanese militarism and aggressive nationalism. In his brief tenure as PM in the 1950s, he sought to defy the United States and establish diplomatic relations with Communist China. According to Richard Dyck, a longtime resident of Japan and a businessman with a passion for Ishibashi and his work, Ishiba has been a regular attendent at these study sessions. Among the members are also two prominent members of his cabinet and close friends – Foreign Minister Iwaya Takeshi and Defense Minister Nakatani Gen. At the most recent meeting of the group, according to Dyck, Foreign Minister Iwaya gave introductory remarks along the lines of “the message we get from Ishibashi is that relations in Asia need to transcend nationalism, ideology and history.” From all this we can gain a glimpse into the largely hidden – at least to Western eyes – war over history that still is being fought in Japan and that lies behind, in part, the fate of Ishiba and his government. ### *According to Sanseito Senator Gen Yamanaka's [山中泉] X feed, he and Sanseito founder and leader Sohei Kamiya [神谷 宗幣] will be in Washington, DC in mid-August. Their visit will be arranged by their Washington lobbyist Matthew Martin Braynard who is an all-in MAGA loyalist and J6er. Love to hear from anyone who they visit or who knows how to get ahold of Mr. Braynard. [APC Editor]

The No Change Change

Ishiba Government Loses Majority in Both Houses

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.
July 21, 2025. Special to Asia Policy Point

Japan’s July 20 Upper House elections resulted in a significant defeat for the coalition government led by the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP). The coalition of the LDP and Komeito lost its majority in the Upper House, as it did last October in the Lower House. Although Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba announced that he would stay in his position, his government will be in an extremely unstable condition that could break down in short order.
 
In the Upper House election, 125 members (including a supplement for one vacancy in Tokyo district) out of all 248 seats were elected. The rest of 123 members do not have an election this year. Among those 125, the LDP saw its seats reduced from 52 before the election to 39 after, while Komeito also lost six seats, from 14 to eight. The coalition secured only 47 seats in the election. The LDP and Komeito hold 75 seats without election this year. Thus, the total sum of their seats in the Upper House is 122, which is short of a simple majority by three seats.
 
The biggest opposition party, the Constitutional Democratic Party of Japan (CDPJ), had no change from its pre-election status. The CDPJ had 22 seats up for election and won 22 seats in the election. The Japan Innovation Party (Nippon Ishin-no Kai) added just two seats, from five to seven. The Democratic Party for the People (DPP) made a significant surge from four seats to 17, while the new populist party, Sanseito, expanded from one seat to 14.
 
It has been said that the LDP has its supporters, 60 percent of whom always vote for the party in every election. The other 40 percent are indecisive and go back and forth between the LDP and other parties. It is likely that those swing voters, disappointed with the lack of LDP leadership in the Diet, went for the DPP or Sanseito this time; there is speculation that most of these voters were conservatives.
 
The advance of Sanseito resembles the far-right movements in some European countries. Creating the slogan “The Japanese First,” the party received public support for its xenophobic agenda, such as blocking foreign workers and foreign investments. However, Sanseito is not yet a leading force in the national politics in Japan. Fiery and controversial anti-immigrant speeches of its leader and candidates have isolated the party from the others.
 
The LDP’s campaign strategy fared poorly. The party promised cash payments for children and low-income families to offset consumer price inflation. However, many voters viewed the handouts as temporary and less effective than lowering the consumption tax rate, a cut promoted by the opposition parties. Additionally, the LDP lost credibility with voters by failing to enact legislation dealing with political donations from companies, to introduce separate surname legislation, and to conclude tariff negotiations with the United States.
 
The opposition parties also reached a wider range of voters than the LDP did. The DPP’s slogan, “The summer of increasing take-home pay,” had broad appeal, as if the party could give all voters more cash in their pockets by the end of the summer. By contrast, the LDP presented long-term and conceptual policies, such as “1 million yen of additional salary in 2030” or a future target of “1,000 trillion yen of Japan’s GDP.”
 
The LDP also lagged in social media. At the beginning of the campaign season, immigration was not a major issue. But through advertisements and posts on social networking services, Sanseito turned anti-immigration measures into the top priority for many voters during the final week of the election campaign. The LDP could not reverse the trend, continuing to rely on traditional town meetings and chants of candidates’ names from campaign cars.
 
Prime Minister Ishiba, as the president of the LDP, declared that he would stay on as premier. “I will take responsibility as the leader of largest party (in the Diet),” Ishiba said in his press conference on July 21. There is no precedent since the establishment of the LDP in 1955 for a leading party or coalition to run the government without a majority in both Houses.
 
Although the Lower House has decisive power to choose the government, even an Upper House election can have a significant impact, as seen in the collapse of the Ryutaro Hashimoto Cabinet in 1998 and the first Shinzo Abe Cabinet in 2007.
 
Ishiba has chosen to stay because he believes that he can buck tradition and govern without the traditional majorities. Despite losing a majority of the seats in the Lower House last fall, he saw through the Lower House’s approval of the FY2025 annual budget by the end of March this year. He also headed off submission of a no-confidence resolution against Ishiba Cabinet by the opposition parties. It shows that Ishiba has remarkable political dexterity.
 
It is unlikely that the opposition parties, from the leftist Japan Communist Party to the far-right Sanseito, can form their own coalition and defeat the Ishiba administration. Another reason for Ishiba’s confidence in his staying power is the absence of any rival in his party so far.
 
Two days before the Upper House election, Sanae Takaichi, the finalist in the most recent LDP presidential election in 2024, expressed her willingness to run in the next presidential election. However, LDP Secretary General Hiroshi Moriyama has discouraged such moves, saying that it is not the time for a leadership struggle within the LDP. Other contenders in the last presidential election have not challenged Ishiba, nor are they able to do so.
 
It is likely that Ishiba will enter discussions with opposition parties on a policy-by-policy basis as he has done since losing the Lower House majority. He expects good opportunities to add opposition parties to his coalition and bolster his administration. However, the Ishiba administration will always be vulnerable to the collective efforts of opposition powers as well as to an upsurge of anti-Ishiba sentiment within the LDP.