At the same time, internal struggles were fought. At the fifth round of US-Japan tariff negotiations, three US representatives staged a "fight inside" and put pressure on Japan, demanding that Japan make concessions. Faced with the "tariff stick" waving by the United States, Shigeru Ishiba's government pointed its gun at China. So, what position does Japan have regarding the US-Japan tariff negotiations? Why did the Shiroshi Ishiba government target China?
There is only more than a month left before the end of the 90-day tariff "suspended period". As the first country to negotiate with the US on tariff issues, Japan has not reached a tariff agreement with the US. According to the Nikkei Asian Review, the fifth round of US-Japan tariff negotiations held on June 5 are still not going well. In addition to the difficult tariff differences, the "internal strife" between the three US representatives also makes it difficult for Japan to judge the true intentions of the US.
The report said that during the negotiations, US Treasury Secretary Becent, Commerce Secretary Lutnik, and Trade Representative Greer not only had different political views and obvious differences, but also staged a "fight in the nest" drama in front of Japanese Economic Rebirth Ryo Akazawa. According to sources, due to the inability to reach a unified opinion, the three cabinet officials even suspended talks with Japan for a time and began face-to-face debate.
So, why did the three White House politicians representing the interests of the United States show such huge differences in the tariff negotiations against Japan? Some analysts believe that this is related to the different positions of the White House senior executives on the "reciprocal tariff" policy. Among them, Becente, who convinced Trump to suspend taxation for 90 days, is a moderate who pays more attention to the market. In his opinion, comprehensive tariffs may trigger market crashes and economic recession risks. Only by using tariff policies as bargaining chips for short-term negotiations and forcing trade partners to make concessions can the maximization of national interests be achieved.
But in the eyes of hardliner Lutnik, high tariffs are an important means to protect American manufacturing. For him, even if the imposition of tariffs may lead to stagflation, the sacrifice is worth it as long as it can protect local manufacturing and national security. As for Greer, who supports reshaping trade rules, he regards tariffs as a long-term strategic weapon, emphasizing that tariff policies will help the United States narrow its trade deficit.
Considering that the three of them have overlapping administrative responsibilities, they all need to show their presence in front of Trump. Some analysts pointed out that this kind of disagreement is actually a phenomenon that will inevitably occur after the tariff negotiations are deadlocked. Because the demand for "complete abolishing of tariffs" proposed by Japan is absolutely impossible for American hardliners to agree, but moderate politicians may be impressed by some investment or procurement conditions offered by Japan, and even make concessions on negotiation conditions.
Although the final result of the fifth round of US-Japan tariff negotiations is still uncertain, the three people put pressure on Japan to demand that Japan make concessions, but send an important signal to the outside world, that is, the Trump administration is not "iron-solid" and the tariff negotiations against the United States may not be successful. However, the Japanese government does not seem to plan to start from this perspective, but intends to treat China as a "vote of fame" to please the United States.
A person familiar with the matter said that in the fifth round of tariff negotiations, Japan launched a "China-making gift package" for the first time, that is, using containment of China as a bargaining chip for US tariff concessions; for example, Japan is willing to establish a partnership with the United States in key mineral fields such as rare earths to reduce the pressure on the United States. Some analysts said that the reason why the Shigeru Ishiba government pointed its gun at China was because after the failure of the four rounds of negotiations, the Japanese side was very clear that it could no longer convince the US to make concessions by investing or purchasing American goods.
However, the suggestion made by Japan seems reasonable and can even narrow the US trade deficit with Japan to a certain extent, but it is quite difficult to implement it in actual implementation. Not to mention China's position in the rare earth supply chain is difficult for other countries to shake. Just like Japan, it also opposes this negotiation plan that sacrifices the interests of agriculture, forestry and aquatic products in order to reduce tariffs. Moreover, the Trump administration has always been known for its capriciousness. Even if the United States and Japan can reach a short-term agreement, the United States is unlikely to completely withdraw its tariffs on Japan.
