I was appalled when newly appointed Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi endorsed US President Donald Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize at the last US-Japanese summit. I was preparing to post about another issue, but this incident was too critical for me to dismiss, and therefore, I've decided to postpone the previously planned post, and instead write about this unexpectedly emerging agenda.
I've always viewed Takaichi's behavior as dangerous, ever since the last LDP presidential election. The most desirable candidate for the LDP president was then-Chief Cabinet Secretary Yoshimasa Hayashi. What sparked my growing view of Takaichi as a danger was her "deer kicking" remark. The remark was criticized as xenophobic, and she was forced to withdraw it. However, the look in Takaichi's eyes when she made that remark instinctively filled me with fear. It was suggesting as if she was determined to beat her rivals by arguing them down and agitating the public by all means, whether fairly or unfairly. In order to understand this, further expert analysis by psychologists is required. In any case, this kind of nonsensical demagogy in order to seize power is in line with Trump's "cats and dogs eating" remarks. Right-wing populism is really scary.
And shortly after taking office, the new LDP president even held coalition talks with Sanseito. Although this did not come true, it demonstrated the right-wing nature of the Takaichi administration. The endorsement of Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize is in line with these words and deeds. This is why I was appalled by Takaichi's flattery to MAGA at the last US-Japanese summit.
But does Trump deserve a Nobel Peace Prize? First, if we evaluate his achievements in the international community, the two major issues are the peace settlements in Gaza and Ukraine, but there is no sign of peacebuilding in either case. In Gaza, Trump made a big show of exchanging hostages between Israel and Hamas boastfully, but there is no prospect of Hamas disarming since then. The Biden administration has actually released more Israeli hostages. And in Ukraine, Russian attacks show no signs of abating. The good personal chemistry between President Vladimir Putin and President Trump is completely useless in promoting peace. In the Indo-Pakistani conflict, Pakistan is satisfied, but India is dissatisfied with Trump's mediation. Trump's other mediation efforts have not completely resolved the problem. He has not achieved any results worthy of a Nobel Peace Prize.
And what countries are nominating Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize? None of them are among the world's most highly accredited liberal democracies. First, Israel claims to be the only democratic nation in the Middle East, but the Netanyahu administration's attacks on Gaza have been internationally condemned for their humanitarian impact due to the disproportionate damage to civilians. Other supporters are all autocratic states or countries governed by right-wing populism. These include Armenia, Azerbaijan, Cambodia, Gabon, Rwanda, Argentina, Hungary, Guinea-Bissau, and Senegal. Since the Meiji Restoration, Japan has striven to join the ranks of the world's civilized and first-class nations. Prime Minister Takaichi's declaration to recommend the Nobel Peace Prize runs counter to modern Japan's historical direction and places Japan in the "Shameless League."
The most troubling aspect of Trump's eligibility for the Nobel Peace Prize is that he does not know how to use armed forces properly. This hardly makes him a politician of peace. President Trump has mobilized the military in the domestic political struggle over undocumented immigration, but this disqualifies his leadership whether for war or peace. As the famous Latin proverb goes, "Si vis pacem, para bellum" (If you want peace, prepare for war), there can be no peace with the misuse of military force. The Trump administration has deployed the National Guard to Democratic cities like Chicago and Portland, ostensibly to combat crime and undocumented immigration. Such deployments should not be possible on the president's unilateral orders. Furthermore, under the pretext of combating drugs, the administration has attacked Venezuelan ships without congressional approval. The Trump administration claims the right to kill anyone, anywhere, without reason, evidence, or accountability to Congress and the public. Such arguments have been harshly criticized by William Kristol, a leading conservative Never Trump commentator. In any case, such a president would easily resume nuclear testing without consideration to others. President Trump is unworthy of the Nobel Peace Prize, not only from the perspective of international politics but also from the perspective of domestic politics. Why is Prime Minister Takaichi so willing to nominate such a person? If Japan's top leader has already fallen into MAGA-taste thinking and emotions, this is a serious problem.
However, since the Trump administration is based on the rock-solid MAGA base that harbors paranoia about globalization, it is conceivable that a certain degree of appeasement will be unavoidable in reaching a deal with them. Japanese liberals are so naïve as to dismiss this, and simply criticize "submission to America." Trump himself and those who wear bright red MAGA hats and vent their anti-globalist and anti-elite sentiment are truly difficult to deal with. In the tariff disputes launched by the Trump administration around the world, the Starmer administration in the UK managed to reach deals on relatively favorable terms. However, the reciprocal tariff was raised to 10%, which is higher than before.
Of particular note is the tech investment agreement and state guest treatment Trump received during his recent visit to the UK. This tech agreement has divided public opinion in the UK. The idea of boosting the tech industry by attracting investment from the US, supported by former Conservative Foreign Secretary William Hague, is clearly a bipartisan national policy. On the other hand, former Liberal Democrat leader Nick Clegg, who served as Deputy Prime Minister in the Cameron coalition administration, expressed concern that the deal would not lead to support for domestic startups and would only turn the UK into a data center for major US tech companies. Despite this divided public opinion, it should not be forgotten that the Lee Jae-myung administration of South Korea also reached a tech investment deal during President Trump's last visit.
Furthermore, while Trump shamelessly flaunts his childish vanity over his pursuit of the Nobel Peace Prize, the Starmer administration satisfied his vulgar greed with royal hospitality. Prime Minister Keir Starmer, a Labour politician with a serious personality, would not have been a good match for President Trump, either in terms of ideology or personal chemistry. Therefore, it was quite likely that the series of negotiations and reception required considerable patience. However, it was in line with the fundamental direction of postwar British foreign policy, which emphasizes relations with the United States regardless of party affiliation or ideology. Even Britain, which is said to have reached a relatively favorable deal, had to proceed the talks like this. Other countries needed more struggling to strike a deal with the Trump administration, which views the world through idiosyncratic, and rigid perspective. Are Japanese liberals who criticize the "subservience to the United States" at the last summit so knowledgeable about the specific issues under negotiation? If so, they need to be more focused in their criticism. Whether you like or dislike Prime Minister Takaichi, such vague criticism is meaningless. It should be noted that former British Deputy Prime Minister Clegg, mentioned above, focused on specific points when he criticized the UK-US agreement. Above all, even with such a humble stance, I would like to reemphasize that Starmer does not endorse Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize.
In any case, the Nobel Peace Prize nomination issue is intertwined with Takaichi's right-wing words and deeds, so the argument that the "glass ceiling" has been broken in Japanese politics is questionable. Right-wing politicians tend to be authoritarian, like autocrats. Under their rule, the glass ceilings based on gender, race, and so forth, are rarely broken. Reviewing history, the reign of Russia's enlightened despot, Catherine the Great, did not break any glass ceilings. As is well known, Catherine the Great's authoritarian domestic and foreign policies have served as a model for the Putin administration, which is invading Ukraine under the ideology of Russkiy Mir. It should also be noted that the current Kremlin is remarkably machismo-oriented, even by global standards. Therefore, there is absolutely no need to treat Prime Minister Takaichi as a female politician with any special consideration. The new prime minister's leadership should be examined objectively, focusing on her governance, ideology, and demagoguery techniques. Just like when discussing Catherine the Great or President Vladimir Putin.
The right-wing authoritarian Prime Minister Takaichi advocated a "work, work, work, work" political stance during the last LDP presidential election. However, as in the case of the Nobel Prize endorsement, if a leader is leading the country in a negative direction, it is preferable for them not to work too hard. Indeed, Prime Minister Hideki Tojo during World War II "worked, worked, worked, worked hard," which caused devastating damage to the Japanese nation and its people. While Trump may hold the position of President of the United States, he is essentially merely the president of MAGA. Therefore, such an unprincipled Nobel Prize recommendation seems like a challenge to anti-MAGA Americans. Currently, in Japan, as in European countries, there is discussion about the risk hedge from Trump's diplomacy by lowering Japan's security dependence on the United States. However, as a "Fragile Blossom" militarily, it is difficult to imagine Japan implementing sovereign and independent defense, and we cannot place excessive expectations on multilateral partnerships with Europe and Indo-Pacific countries without the United States. In this sense, cooperation with anti-MAGA Americans. could be seen as the strongest risk hedge against Trump's diplomacy. From this perspective, excessive prostration toward President Trump should be reconsidered.
At the last US-Japanese summit, the Abe legacy was repeatedly emphasized, and it seems that the Japanese government and media placed excessive emphasis on the personal chemistry between the two leaders. However, as the late Prime Minister Shinzo Abe himself wrote in his memoir, that is completely unreliable. In fact, Trump has been ruthless in cutting off his loyalists, both in domestic and international politics. Among the leaders of powerful countries, Prime Minister Narendra Modi of India had been in a good relationship with Trump during his first term, but that has deteriorated during his second term. Meanwhile, British Prime Minister Starmer is striving to maintain a good relationship with the administration. In light of the trends in the U.S. and around the world described in this post, I hope Prime Minister Takaichi to withdraw her endorsement of the Nobel Peace Prize for President Trump.
