&w=3840&q=100)
Double whammy for Japan: Decline of Ishiba's LDP, and rise of far right
Japan's Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba attends a press conference at the headquarters of the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) in Tokyo on July 21, 2025, the day after the prime minister's coalition lost its upper house majority. File Image/Pool via Reuters
With the results of Japan's latest upper house (House of Councillors) election held on Sunday, July 20, trickling in, voters have dealt a double blow to the ruling coalition of Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba's Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) and its junior partner, the Buddhist Komeito party.
Held just nine months after Ishiba assumed the prime ministership, the election served as a strong rebuke to both the prime minister and the LDP—Japan's historically dominant party. Under Ishiba's leadership, the coalition has now suffered two consecutive defeats in national elections in under a year—in the lower house (October 2024), and in upper house now.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
First Time in Seven Decades
Of the 248 seats in the upper chamber, 125 were contested in Sunday's election. The LDP and Komeito needed to retain at least 50 of their combined 66 seats to maintain their majority. They fell short, winning only 47 seats—better than early projections, but not enough to hold control.
This marks the first time since World War II, and in the LDP's 70-year history, that an LDP-led coalition does not hold a majority in either house of Japan's national legislature—the House of Representatives and the House of Councillors.
Results Decoded
According to NHK's Monday, July 21 morning projections, the results break down as follows:
The LDP is likely to win 39 seats, and its partner Komeito 8 seats, for a total of 47.
The main opposition, the Constitutional Democratic Party of Japan (CDP), is projected to secure 21 seats.
The populist conservative Democratic Party for the People (DPP), with only four incumbents up for re-election, is expected to win 17 seats.
The surprise of the election is the far-right Sanseito party, which had just one seat going in but is projected to win 14. Sanseito ran a staunchly anti-immigration campaign under the slogan 'Japanese First'.
Nippon Ishin no Kai is projected to win seven seats.
The Japanese Communist Party and Reiwa Shinsengumi are expected to win three seats each.
And the Real Winner Is…
Mirroring a broader trend seen across Europe and beyond, Japan's latest election signals the rising clout of far-right and anti-establishment forces. Once relatively insulated from such movements, Japan has now joined this global wave.
The standout winners in Sunday's election are two far-right parties—Sanseito and the Democratic Party for the People—both of which didn't exist five years ago. These parties, with their populist messages, have made significant inroads, particularly among younger voters.
Most notable is Sanseito's dramatic leap from one seat to 14. The five-year-old party campaigned on the idea that Japan is under a 'silent invasion' from foreigners, claiming foreign investment and tourism have made the country an 'economic colony'. They described reliance on foreign labor as a 'national doping scheme'.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
Sanseito has signaled its intent to join a coalition government after the next Lower House election—a possibility experts believe could gain traction amid mounting anti-LDP sentiment.
The Double Whammy
This comes on the heels of an earlier defeat in the more powerful Lower House election in October 2024, when Ishiba's coalition lost its majority in the 465-seat chamber. That loss was widely seen as voter punishment for numerous financial scandals.
The ruling bloc's seat count fell from 279 to just 215—their worst performance since briefly losing power in 2009. The Lower House, unlike the Upper House, selects the prime minister and can override the upper chamber on budgets and legislation.
To Stay On
Despite the double setback, Ishiba has resisted calls to step down. In interviews with NHK on July 20 and a press conference on July 21, he made it clear he intends to remain in office to fulfill his campaign pledges.
'We've received an extremely harsh judgment from the public,' Ishiba acknowledged at LDP headquarters. '(The result) was extremely deplorable. I apologise.' But he added, 'We will not allow stagnation in national politics.'
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
He cited ongoing tariff talks with the United States, rising prices, and the looming threat of a major earthquake in Tokyo as reasons to stay. 'Such things do not wait for the political situation to be settled,' he said.
Regarding US trade negotiations, he added, 'With the new date of August 1st in mind, I want to reach an agreement that benefits both Japan and the United States based on the idea of investments, rather than tariffs.'
Dismal Approval Rating
Public approval for Ishiba's cabinet has been low since he took office in October 2024. According to the latest Jiji Press survey, approval dropped 6.2 points in July to just 20.8 per cent—the lowest since his administration began.
Meanwhile, disapproval surged by 6.6 points to 55.0 per cent. The reasons cited include lack of hope (29.7 per cent), lack of leadership (21.9 per cent), and disapproval of policies (21.6 per cent).
Election Issues
Economy: The top issue for voters was the economy—particularly rising prices following decades of stagnation.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
Wage Stagnation: While wages have increased somewhat, they haven't kept pace with the cost of living.
Spike in Rice Prices: A key frustration has been the sharp rise in rice prices, attributed to government failure in balancing supply and demand.
Trump Tariffs: Japan's export-reliant economy is grappling with the unpredictability of former US President Trump's on-again, off-again tariff threats.
In June, inflation rose by 3.3 per cent compared to a year earlier, while real wages fell 2.9 percent in May. While the ruling coalition proposed cash handouts to ease the burden, opposition parties favored cuts to the consumption tax.
Confusion Galore
Though Ishiba has only been in office since October 1, 2024, past prime ministers have struggled to retain power after similar losses. In fact, no LDP leader has survived after back-to-back electoral defeats. The defeats of Sosuke Uno in 1989 and Ryutaro Hashimoto in 1998 are poignant precedents.
Still, Ishiba has vowed to continue—for now. But the odds are stacked heavily against him.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
A Jiji Press exit poll found that 24.3 per cent of respondents want an opposition-centered government to replace the current regime. Only 18.4 per cent supported continuation of the LDP-Komeito coalition.
The poll also revealed widespread uncertainty:
9.6 per cent favored a DPP entry into the coalition.
7.0 per cent wanted the CDP to participate in government.
5.1 per cent hoped for a LDP-Komeito partnership with Nippon Ishin no Kai.
A significant 35.5 per cent supported none of the above or were undecided.
What Next?
No national election is due until 2028. The next LDP presidential election is set for September 2027—unless Ishiba resigns earlier.
The ruling coalition now finds itself in a legislative bind. Without a majority in either house, passing laws will be a challenge. Forming a third coalition partner may prove difficult; building consensus on critical issues could be even harder.
After back-to-back defeats in both houses—a historic first in 70 years for the LDP—the latest Upper House loss may well signal that time is running out for Prime Minister Ishiba. Public trust in the coalition's ability to tackle inflation, stabilise prices, and push through reforms has eroded.
Experts suggest the coalition's best bet may be to accept opposition policy proposals where possible and form 'diagonal' partnerships on a case-by-case basis to pass legislation.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
Future Uncertain
As the dust settles, the questions loom: Is this the beginning of the end for the LDP's dominance? Do the new far-right parties represent a fleeting protest vote, or a long-term shift in Japan's political landscape? Is this the voice of the young and disillusioned?
It's too early to say with certainty—but what is clear is this: the ruling coalition has reached a checkmate moment. And if the fragmented opposition unites to bring a no confidence motion against the ruling LDP coalition, the unthinkable may possibly happen in Japan.
The author is a multi-disciplinary thought leader with Action Bias and an India based impact consultant. He is a keen watcher of changing national and international scenarios. He works as President Advisory Services of Consulting Company BARSYL. Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect Firstpost's views.
Hashtags

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

Business Standard
an hour ago
- Business Standard
Gabbard's claims of anti-Trump conspiracy not supported by documents
Gabbard cited newly declassified emails from Obama officials and a 5 year old classified House report in hopes of undermining the intelligence community's conclusion that Putin wanted to boost Trump AP Washington Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard this month declassified material that she claimed proved a treasonous conspiracy by the Obama administration in 2016 to politicise US intelligence in service of casting doubt on the legitimacy of Donald Trump's election victory. As evidence, Gabbard cited newly declassified emails from Obama officials and a five-year-old classified House report in hopes of undermining the intelligence community's conclusion that Russian President Vladimir Putin wanted to boost Trump and denigrate his Democratic opponent Hillary Clinton. Russia's activities during the 2016 election remain some of the most examined events in recent history. The Kremlin's campaign and the subsequent US government response were the subject of at least five major investigations by the Republican-led House and Senate intelligence committee; two Justice Department special counsels; and the department's inspector general. Those investigations either concluded or accepted the conclusion that Russia embarked on a campaign to interfere in the election through the use of social media and hacked material. The House-led probe, conducted by Trump allies, also concurred that Russia ran an election interference campaign but said the purpose was to sow chaos in the US rather than boost Trump. Several of the reports criticise the actions of Obama administration officials, particularly at the FBI, but do not dispute the fundamental findings that Moscow sought to interfere in the election. Russian election interference CLAIM: The intelligence community had one assessment: that Russia did not have the intent and capability to try to impact the outcome of the US election leading up to Election Day. The same assessment was made after the election. Gabbard to Fox News on Tuesday. The documents Gabbard released do not support her claim. She cites a handful of emails from 2016 in which officials conclude that Russia had no intention of manipulating the US vote count through cyberattacks on voting systems. President Barack Obama's administration never alleged that voting infrastructure was tampered with. Rather, the administration said Russia ran a covert influence campaign using hacked and stolen material from prominent Democrats. Russian operatives then used that information as part of state-funded media and social media operations to inflame US public opinion. More than two dozen Russians were indicted in 2018 in connection with those efforts. Republican-led investigations in Congress have affirmed that conclusion, and the emails that Gabbard released do not contradict that finding. Shift in assessment? CLAIM: There was a shift, a 180-degree shift, from the intelligence community's assessment leading up to the election to the one that President Obama directed be produced after Donald Trump won the election that completely contradicted those assessments that had come previously. Gabbard to Fox News on Tuesday. There was no shift. The emails Gabbard released show that a Department of Homeland Security official in August 2016 told then-Director of National Intelligence James Clapper there was no indication of a Russian threat to directly manipulate the actual vote count. The public assessment the Obama administration made public in January 2017 reached the same conclusion: DHS assesses that the types of systems Russian actors targeted or compromised were not involved in vote tallying." Putin's intent CLAIM: The Obama administration "manufactured the January 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment that they knew was false promoting the LIE that Vladimir Putin and the Russian government helped President Trump win the 2016 election. Gabbard on Truth Social Wednesday. The material declassified this week reveals some dissent within the intelligence community about whether Putin wanted to help Trump or simply inflame the US public. That same question led to a partisan divide on the House Intelligence panel when it examined the matter several years later. Gabbard's memo released last week cites a whistleblower who she says served in the intelligence community at the time and who is quoted as saying that he could not concur in good conscience with the intelligence community's judgment that Russia had a decisive preference for Trump. Such dissent and debate are not unusual in the drafting of intelligence reports. The Republican-led Senate Intelligence Committee examined whether there was any political interference in the Obama administration's conclusions and reported that all analysts expressed that they were free to debate, object to content, and assess confidence levels, as is normal and proper. In 2018, Putin directly addressed the question of whether he preferred Trump at a press conference in Helsinki even as he sidestepped a question about whether he directed any of his subordinates to help Trump. Yes, I did, Putin said. Because he talked about bringing the US-Russia relationship back to normal. Steele dossier CLAIM: They used already discredited information like the Steele dossier they knew it was discredited at the time. Gabbard to Fox News on Tuesday. The dossier refers to a collection of opposition research files compiled by a former British spy, Christopher Steele, whose work was funded by Democrats during the 2016 election. Those files included uncorroborated tips and salacious gossip about Trump's ties to Russia, but the importance to the Russia investigation has sometimes been overstated. It was not the basis for the FBI's decision to open an investigation in July 2016 into potential coordination between the Trump campaign and Russia, the Justice Department's inspector general found. Some of the records released by Gabbard this week also reveal that it was a Central Intelligence Agency human source close to the Kremlin that the agency primarily relied on for its conclusion that Putin wanted to help Trump and hurt Clinton, not the Steele dossier. FBI agents on the case didn't even come to possess the dossier until weeks into their inquiry. Even so, Trump supporters have seized on the unverified innuendo in the document to undercut the broader Russia investigation. Many of Steele's claims have since been discredited or denied. It is true, however, that the FBI and Justice Department relied in part on the Steele dossier to obtain surveillance warrants to eavesdrop on the communications of a former Trump campaign adviser, the inspector general found. FBI agents continued to pursue those warrants even after questions arose about the credibility of Steele's reporting. The dossier was also summarised over the objections of then-CIA Director John Brennan, he has said in a two-page annex to the classified version of the intelligence community assessment. (Only the headline and picture of this report may have been reworked by the Business Standard staff; the rest of the content is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)


Mint
an hour ago
- Mint
'Cleaned drains myself...': Smriti Irani says she did the ‘impossible' by defeating Rahul Gandhi in 2019 polls
Former Union minister Smriti Irani said she turned the "impossible into possible" when she defeated Congress leader Rahul Gandhi in Uttar Pradesh's Amethi in the 2019 Lok Sabha Elections. She also reflected upon the hard work she put in to achieve that feat. Smriti Iran told India Today in an exclusive interview that after losing the 2014 Lok Sabha Elections, she spent the next five years working tirelessly on the ground. 'I cleaned drains myself, brought electricity to villages, built over a lakh homes, set up a medical college, a 200 bed hospital, a collector's office, a police line and even a fire station,' Irani was quoted as saying. Five years later, in the 2019 Lok Sabha polls, Smriti Irani ousted Rahul Gandhi to clinch his stronghold constituency, Amethi. However, in the 2024 general elections, she faced defeat at the hands of Congress leader Kishori Lal Sharma in a big upset for the BJP-led National Democratic Alliance (NDA). When asked whether Irani could have defeated Rahul Gandhi again if he had contested in 2024 from Amethi, Irani responded with a smile, 'Absolutely, that's why he didn't contest.' The former minister also clarified her less aggressive stance against Gandhi after the 2024 poll debacle. "Now, it's not my responsibility to be aggressive toward Rahul Gandhi. In 2024, the Gandhi family refused to face me. I can't chase after them," she said. During the interview, Smriti Irani said the Gandhi family moved to contest from Wayanad due to its favourable social demographics. 'No intelligent leader willingly chooses a seat where defeat is certain,' she said. 'If a seat like that is given, it's only out of duty to the party. But in 2019, I turned the impossible into possible," she added. Citing political history, Irani said losing from Amethi is not new for big leaders. "Sharad Yadav lost from Amethi, Menaka Gandhi lost. The Gandhi family only chose that seat due to favourable social equations," Irani said. She added that her defeat would have been more painful had she not worked extensively in Amethi between 2014 and 2019.


United News of India
an hour ago
- United News of India
Siddaramaiah slams Goa CM over Mahadayi remarks
Bengaluru, July 24 (UNI) Karnataka Chief Minister Siddaramaiah today lashed out at the Goa Chief Minister Pramod Sawant over his remarks on the Mahadayi river water dispute, calling them "an insult to the people of Karnataka," and accused the BJP-led Union government of betraying the state through silence and covert obstruction. In a statement, Siddaramaiah questioned the Centre's failure to officially respond to Karnataka's repeated representations on the issue. "Is this what federalism looks like under BJP rule – betrayal, sabotage from behind closed doors, and a calculated silence?" he asked. The controversy intensified after the Goa Chief Minister reiterated his government's firm opposition to any diversion of the Mahadayi river, asserting that the water must continue to flow into the state to meet essential drinking water needs and sustain the Mhadei Wildlife Sanctuary ecosystem. "Our issue is simple — the Mahadayi river water that comes to Goa must keep flowing. We need it for drinking, and it is also the lifeline of the Mahadayi Wildlife Sanctuary. The survival of wildlife there depends on this water," the Goa CM said. He further added that Goa would continue to pursue the matter in all legal forums. "Whether it is the Supreme Court or the Tribunal, our fight will go on. We will fight this case in the Supreme Court till the very end," he asserted. Reacting sharply to these remarks, Siddaramaiah reiterated that the Mahadayi project is not meant for luxury or wasteful use, but is a "lifeline" for over 40 lakh people in the parched districts of Belagavi, Dharwad, Gadag, Bagalkot, and surrounding areas. 'What crime have Kannadigas committed? Are we being punished for not surrendering to the BJP?' he asked. He also hit out at BJP and JD(S) leaders in Karnataka for their silence, calling it 'shameful and spineless.' 'Their silence today will be remembered tomorrow,' the Chief Minister warned. Despite the Mahadayi Water Disputes Tribunal's 2018 verdict allocating 13.42 TMC of water to Karnataka, Siddaramaiah alleged that the Centre, in collusion with Goa's BJP government, was stalling the project's implementation through indirect means. Reaffirming his government's commitment to the cause, Siddaramaiah said: 'We will fight legally, politically, and morally until our people receive what is rightfully theirs.' UNI BDN PRS