Introduction
A seismic shock, heralding a tectonic shift, has rocked Nagatacho. On October 17, 2025, the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP), led by President Sanae Takaichi, and the Japan Innovation Party (Nippon Ishin no Kai), led by co-leader Fumitake Fujita, held their second round of policy talks within the Diet to form a coalition government. Negotiations between the two parties had been cautious and fraught with tension, but on this day, Japan’s political history took a momentous turn. President Takaichi announced a chilling, emergency decision: she would accept the direction of the “reduction in the number of Diet member seats,” a non-negotiable “absolute condition” that Ishin had put forward for the coalition.
This decision carries a significance that far transcends a mere policy agreement. It means that a scalpel will finally be taken to the sacred ground of “reform that cuts to the bone”—an issue that Japanese politics has averted its eyes from and postponed for many years. The vision of a new conservative coalition government between Takaichi’s LDP and Ishin is no longer a fantasy; it is finally taking on a realistic shape.
However, its maiden voyage will be anything but smooth sailing. Deep divides still exist between the two parties on other key policies pushed by Ishin, such as a “ban on corporate and group donations” and a “0% consumption tax rate on food.” Watching this historic rapprochement with a complex mix of feelings and strong vigilance are the Constitutional Democratic Party (CDP), the Democratic Party for the People (DPFP), and even the LDP’s former coalition partner of 26 years, Komeito. The curtain on the final chapter of political realignment has risen, quietly but surely.
In this article, we will thoroughly dissect the contents of the historic policy talks held on October 17. We will also provide an overwhelmingly comprehensive and multifaceted analysis of the immeasurable impact this decision will have on Japanese politics, as well as the real voices of the public, which are stirring up a storm of pros and cons online. We will document the full scope of this major political drama, which will decide the future of Japan, more deeply and vividly than anywhere else. Your words will change the Japan of tomorrow. Please be a witness to this history until the very end, and let us hear your thoughts in the comments section.
Chapter 1: The Day History Was Made – Behind the Scenes of the LDP-Ishin Major Agreement Towards a Coalition
1-1. Tension and Expectation Within the Diet
On October 17, 2025, a room inside the National Diet Building in Nagatacho, Tokyo, was enveloped in a peculiar atmosphere—a mix of extraordinary tension and anticipation for a new era, in stark contrast to the calm autumn sunlight outside. The LDP, led by President Sanae Takaichi, and the executive leadership of the Japan Innovation Party had gathered for their second round of policy talks, aiming for the goal that would decide Japan’s future: the formation of a coalition government.
Until now, the relationship between the two parties had been described as one of “judging each issue on its own merits.” While showing affinity on policies concerning the nation’s foundation, such as national security and constitutional revision, they did not hesitate to clash fiercely on individual bills. The line of sharing power in government existed as an “invisible wall” that was never to be crossed. However, the foundational premises of Japanese politics were overturned when the LDP lost its majority in the last general election and its coalition partner of 26 years, Komeito, departed.
For the LDP, which had been relegated to a “minority ruling party” unable to pass a single bill or budget on its own, rebuilding a stable political foundation was a paramount mission. In this context, cooperation with Ishin—which holds 35 seats in the House of Representatives (as of October 2025) and shares conservative and reformist ideals—had rapidly emerged not just as one option, but as the one and only lifeline to maintain power.
Ishin, too, stood at a major crossroads. While competing with the CDP for the position of the leading opposition party, its party creed has been to break away from the old image of an opposition party that merely engages in “criticism for the sake of criticism.” By resolutely implementing “reform that cuts to the bone” itself and participating in government based on policy, it aims to bring new choices and dynamism to Japanese politics. To realize this ideal, the party was required to have the resolve to produce results as a ruling party, rather than resigning itself to being a perennial opposition party.
The talks on this day were the very touchstone of whether the earnest ambitions of both parties would bear fruit. As the press corps held its breath, waiting for the perfect photo opportunity, executives from both sides—President Takaichi and Policy Research Council (PARC) Chairman Takayuki Kobayashi from the LDP, and co-leader Fumitake Fujita and PARC Chairman Alex Saito from Ishin—entered the venue one after another. Their expressions were uniformly stern, eloquently conveying the importance and difficulty of the negotiations that were about to begin.
1-2. Ishin’s “Absolute Condition” and President Takaichi’s “Historic” Decision
The greatest focal point of the talks was none other than the “reduction in the number of Diet member seats,” which Ishin had presented as an “absolute condition” for even coming to the negotiating table.
Currently, the total number of Diet members in Japan is 713, with 465 in the House of Representatives and 248 in the House of Councillors. Ishin has consistently argued that significantly reducing this number is the first step in “reform that cuts to the bone,” a way for politicians to lead by example before asking the public to endure painful reforms. This is an extremely important and symbolic pledge that Ishin holds as its party identity. Hirofumi Yoshimura, the party’s leader (and Governor of Osaka), had repeatedly stated to the media, “If this cannot be done, we will not form a coalition,” burning his bridges and entering the negotiations with no retreat.
Until now, a thick wall of resistance to this seat reduction existed within the LDP. The number of Diet seats is the foundation of democracy, designed to meticulously reflect the voices of voters in each constituency and of diverse regions in national politics. There was a deep-rooted and cautious argument that a thoughtless reduction could lead to the “abandonment of the popular will.” Above all, for incumbent lawmakers, it is a matter of political life and death, as their own constituencies could disappear. Although discussions had been held for years in the party’s Research Commission on the Electoral System and other bodies, they never led to fundamental reform, and the issue was consistently postponed.
However, President Takaichi made a historic decision to break through this long-standing taboo and stalemate within the LDP.
“We accept the direction.”
In the meeting, this is what President Takaichi finally declared in response to Ishin’s demand. The words were few, but their meaning was infinitely heavy. It was the moment the LDP decided it was prepared to finally open the Pandora’s box known as “Diet member quotas,” which it had long protected through the logic of Nagatacho.
Of course, specifics such as the margin of reduction (Ishin insists on “10%”) and the deadline for implementation were left for future coordination. However, the president’s words, “we accept the direction,” were a decisive blow to move the negotiations forward. After the talks, Ishin’s co-leader Fumitake Fujita, unable to hide his excitement, told reporters, “In conclusion, both parties recognize that we have made significant progress in these discussions. We will now proceed with the final details and adjustments,” strongly emphasizing that the agreement was not mere wordplay but substantive progress.
It is not difficult to imagine that behind this decision lay President Takaichi’s unique brand of strong leadership and an extraordinary will to break the current deadlock. She looked squarely at the harsh reality of being a minority ruling party and understood that to form a coalition, one must pay maximum respect to the partner’s flagship policies and, above all, show the public that one is serious about reform. To that end, even if it meant creating friction within her party, she had to make the decision and take responsibility. This “resolve” likely led to her emergency decision. As one mid-ranking LDP lawmaker told the media, “My first reaction was, ‘Are you serious, Ms. Takaichi?'” illustrating the magnitude of the shock within the party.
1-3. Remaining Sparks – The “Abyss” of Consumption Tax Cuts and a Ban on Corporate Donations
Although the two parties cleared the major hurdle of reducing Diet seats with a historic agreement, the path to a coalition government is by no means completely open. In fact, the real test could be said to begin now. Two particularly serious issues remain that could become enormous sources of conflict in future coalition talks.
One is the “ban on corporate and group political donations.” Ishin strongly insists that to fundamentally solve the recurring problem of “politics and money,” political donations from corporations, labor unions, and various organizations should be completely banned. This is a core policy for realizing clean politics that is entirely oriented towards the public, free from the influence of specific industries or groups, and is positioned as another crucial part of “reform that cuts to the bone.”
In contrast, the LDP considers corporate and group donations “a part of the freedom of political activity and a form of social contribution,” and is extremely reluctant to impose a total ban. This is because of the undeniable reality that the party’s activities, and the political activities of many of its members, are supported by donations from corporations and various groups. This issue is where the differences in the political cultures, support bases, and indeed the political philosophies of the two parties are most pronounced. Reaching a consensus will be extremely difficult. Compromises such as “improving transparency” are conceivable, but it is unlikely that Ishin will lower its banner of a “total ban,” and there is a significant possibility that negotiations could run aground.
The other major spark is the economic policy of “lowering the consumption tax rate on food to 0% for a limited period of two years.” This is the centerpiece of Ishin’s economic platform, also included in their House of Councillors election pledges, aimed at directly alleviating the burden on people’s lives, especially low-income households and families with children, who are suffering from record-high inflation.
However, resistance to this proposal from the LDP, particularly from the Ministry of Finance and others who prioritize fiscal discipline, is extremely strong. Their logic is that the consumption tax is a vital core revenue source to support ever-expanding social security costs, and a thoughtless tax cut would only expand the budget deficit and amount to nothing more than passing the burden onto future generations. The LDP’s PARC Chairman Kobayashi also expressed his view after the talks that it would be “quite difficult,” and the reality is that the “gap could not be bridged” on this point. Ishin’s leader Yoshimura argues that the negative economic impact can be minimized because it is “for a limited time” and “limited to food products,” but it is hard to imagine the LDP, which knows the political difficulty of raising a tax rate once it has been lowered, will swallow this proposal whole.
How will the two parties overcome these deep-seated points of conflict? Having crossed the great mountain of Diet seat reduction, how will they now challenge the equally massive mountain ranges of the economy and political ethics? Their negotiating skills and political determination are now being put to the test.
1-4. The Starting Gun for Opposition Realignment? – Torn Opposition Cooperation and the Impatience of the CDP and DPFP
The historic rapprochement and progress in coalition talks between the LDP and Ishin have sent a major shockwave and a sense of deep impatience through the other opposition forces. In particular, the Constitutional Democratic Party (CDP), which fiercely competes with Ishin for the top opposition spot, and the Democratic Party for the People (DPFP), which has been seeking to hold a unique casting vote, cannot simply stand by and watch.
If a powerful conservative-reformist coalition of the LDP and Ishin is born, the presence of the opposition in the Diet will be significantly diminished, and the path to a change of government could become even more distant. Driven by this intense sense of crisis, CDP leader Yoshihiko Noda and DPFP leader Yuichiro Tamaki had been strengthening their moves to seriously explore the framework of “opposition cooperation,” which had been proceeding behind the scenes.
However, that path is also extremely treacherous. An unbridgeable gap exists between the CDP and the DPFP on fundamental national policies such as national security, energy policy (especially nuclear power), and their views on the Constitution. Furthermore, the intentions of “Rengo” (the Japanese Trade Union Confederation), their largest support base, cannot be ignored.
And now, the dream of opposition cooperation has effectively been crushed. Ishin’s co-leader Fujita, stating he would focus on talks with the LDP, declared that he wanted to “bring to a close” the three-party talks with the CDP and DPFP regarding the election for Prime Minister. Fujita went a step further, saying, “It would be difficult for us to write the names of Mr. Tamaki or Mr. Noda” in the prime ministerial nomination, completely denying any possibility of cooperation.
This has decisively sharpened the structure of Japan’s party politics into a confrontation between the massive ruling (or quasi-ruling) bloc of “LDP-Ishin” and the liberal-centrist forces centered on the “CDP-DPFP.” DPFP leader Tamaki, while showing understanding for Ishin’s decision, declared that he would “write Yuichiro Tamaki” in the prime ministerial election. The opposition parties, unable to form a united front, will each face a battle for their own survival.
The LDP-Ishin coalition talks have not only changed the framework of the ruling camp but have also become a giant starting gun that fundamentally questions the very nature of the opposition and triggers a tectonic shift in the entire political world.
Chapter 2: The Voice of the Net – How Did the Public View This “Historic Decision”?
The shocking news from Nagatacho of President Takaichi accepting the direction of a “reduction in Diet member seats” instantly spread across the sea of the internet, sparking an explosive debate among the public. X (formerly Twitter), Yahoo! News comment sections, and various online forums were flooded with tens, even hundreds of thousands of comments, expressing support, opposition, and sharp opinions from various angles regarding this historic decision. Here, we will pick up these raw, real voices of the public and delve deeper into how many people perceived this major political development, what they expect, and what they fear.
2-1. “A Great Decision!” “Do It This Time!” – A Craving for Reform and Enthusiastic Support
First, the largest trend that formed online was the chorus of voices fervently praising the decision by President Takaichi and the LDP, and placing strong hope in long-stalled political reform. The comment sections were filled with a welcoming mood for the prospect of a great sword finally being swung at one of the roots of public distrust in politics: the issues of “politician’s privilege” and “politics and money.”
“If they’re going to fire the guys who get paid a fortune for just sitting there and not working for the people, I’m all for it.”
This extremely direct comment most succinctly expresses the long-standing frustration many citizens feel towards politicians. The hard-earned money paid by citizens through their sweat and tears, or from within harsh business environments, is being used for the high salaries and generous privileges of some lawmakers who doze off in the Diet or cause scandals. This deep-seated suspicion and anger are the driving forces behind the strong support for the concrete action of reducing seats. This decision was met with applause from many citizens as a symbolic first step in correcting the “waste” of tax money.
“Well, I’d be relieved if they got rid of the incompetent ‘sensei’ lawmakers (lol) who just gobble up our taxes, so I think it’s a good thing.”
This comment contains both strong sarcasm, lumping all politicians together, and a desperate plea for change. It is proof that the public’s harsh gaze is constantly fixed on every move in Nagatacho. President Takaichi’s decision is being evaluated very positively out of the expectation that it might alleviate this public frustration.
“Reducing the number of Diet seats is a good move, but we also need to overhaul the electoral district system!!”
There are also many more nuanced opinions that go a step further, demanding not just a reduction in the number of politicians but a fundamental reform of the entire electoral system. The issues to be debated are numerous, including the problem of “vote-value disparity” and the current single-seat constituency system, which produces many “wasted votes” that do not reflect the will of a large portion of the public. This comment exudes a strong hope that this historic agreement will serve as an “entry point” for drastic reforms towards a fairer electoral system that can accurately reflect the will of the people.
“The merits of reducing Diet seats are a lighter fiscal burden, faster decision-making, and more efficient parliamentary management. The downside is the concern that minority opinions will be less likely to be reflected. However, right now, speed is crucial in everything. I’m for it.”
Many opinions are not just based on emotion but are expressed in favor after a calm analysis comparing the merits and demerits. In the modern era, where society is changing at a dizzying pace due to globalization, digitalization, and a declining birthrate and aging population, the slow pace of political decision-making is fatal. Streamlining parliamentary management by reducing seats is seen as an effective prescription to break the gridlock of “a politics that can’t decide.” The segment of the population that understands the disadvantages but places greater importance on the need to break the current stalemate is a powerful driving force for reform.
Common to all these voices is the public’s strong desire to “somehow get stagnant politics moving” in the face of a Japan where there is no more time to wait. President Takaichi’s decision has come to bear the weight of these immense expectations and wishes.
2-2. “Can They Really Do It?” “A Dangerous Gamble” – Skepticism About Feasibility and Serious Concerns
On the other hand, there are by no means few calm voices that do not take this agreement at face value, expressing strong doubts about its feasibility and concerns about the serious side effects that may accompany the reform. In particular, people knowledgeable about politics and administration are sounding the alarm that a thoughtless reduction in seats is a “dangerous gamble” that could undermine democracy.
“There are other downsides, you know. You’ll have fewer lawmakers specializing in specific fields, leading to problems like a lack of expertise and technical knowledge on various issues. So it’s not like it’s all good.”
This point is one of the most important in the debate over seat reduction. If the number of lawmakers is physically reduced, it becomes statistically more difficult to send individuals with diverse backgrounds and specialized knowledge to the Diet. The issues that modern national politics must deal with—from diplomacy, security, healthcare, pensions, and energy to AI and space development—are extremely advanced and specialized. There is a risk that by reducing the number of lawmakers, the pool of experts assigned to each committee will become shallower, the overall expertise of the Diet will decline, and its ability to check bills submitted by the government will diminish. The risk of a deterioration in the very quality of deliberation must be seriously considered.
“But Takaichi needs Ishin’s cooperation to become Prime Minister in the first place. Ishin has made it clear they won’t form a coalition with the LDP unless they reduce the seats.”
There is also a cynical view that sees this agreement as a “political deal” for President Takaichi to secure the Prime Minister’s seat. If she reversed the LDP’s long-standing policy for the purpose of forming a coalition, it cannot be called a decision based on principles. The public is looking beyond that. Will she be able to suppress the fierce resistance that is sure to swirl within the LDP and actually carry out the seat reduction? Her true ability to execute will be severely tested. The public is not looking for mere lip service before an election or the launch of an administration; they are demanding concrete results.
“What happened to banning corporate donations and zeroing the consumption tax? The most important parts that affect people’s lives are missing.”
Strong dissatisfaction is also visible regarding the fact that other important policy issues that directly affect people’s daily lives are being shelved, while a somewhat symbolic theme like reducing Diet seats gets all the attention. In particular, a consumption tax cut as a measure against the high cost of living that is squeezing daily life, and a ban on corporate donations to ensure political transparency and restore public trust, are themes that many citizens want to see realized immediately. If no concrete progress is seen on these issues, this coalition discussion will inevitably be judged harshly as a “political game that ignores the public.”
“In the end, isn’t this just the LDP getting swallowed by Ishin’s pace? What happened to the principles of the LDP, which claims to be the standard-bearer of mainstream conservatism?”
Among ardent LDP supporters, some harbor complex feelings of bewilderment and disappointment at President Takaichi’s decision to accept Ishin’s demands. Should the LDP prioritize forming a coalition to secure a majority, even if it means bending the policies and principles it has built over many years? This decision, which could shake the party’s very identity, also carries the dangerous risk of inviting strong backlash from within the party and alienating its long-time support base.
These numerous concerns and criticisms highlight how complex and difficult the path of reform is. The public is watching Nagatacho with hot expectations, but also with an extremely stern and watchful eye.
2-3. Diverse Perspectives – A Calm Analysis of Merits and Demerits and Substantive Debate
The online debate is not limited to a simple back-and-forth of emotional pros and cons. A deep and insightful discussion is unfolding, analyzing this political situation from more multifaceted and expert perspectives, questioning the very nature of Japan’s democracy.
Questioning the Inseparable Link with Electoral System Reform: As mentioned earlier, the idea that seat reduction and electoral system reform, such as correcting the “disparity in the value of a vote,” are issues that absolutely cannot be discussed separately is a common understanding among experts and many online commentators. If the number of seats is to be reduced, which regions’ and which constituencies’ seats will be cut, and based on what objective criteria? Is the process transparent? Will it not lead to the “abandonment of rural areas,” where the voices of the cities become stronger and the voices of regions suffering from depopulation no longer reach the national government? The creation of fair and rational rules that the public can widely accept is essential.
Warning Against Declining Quality of Diet Deliberation and the Rise of an “Administrative State”: There are persistent voices pointing out the risk that an increased workload per lawmaker could lead to hasty bill deliberations and make it difficult to consolidate diverse public opinion. A particular concern is the decline of the Diet’s function to oversee the administration. If lawmakers are extremely busy and their expertise declines, they may not be able to sufficiently check the complex bills and budgets prepared by bureaucrats. As a result, there is a danger that the power of the executive branch (the Cabinet and bureaucracy) will surpass that of the legislative branch (the Diet), accelerating the trend towards an “administrative state.” The fundamental principles of democracy, such as “respect for minority opinions” and being a “chamber for deliberation,” must not be neglected in the name of efficiency and speed. The fact that social entrepreneur Nana Takamatsu expressed her opposition, stating that “the diversity of the Diet will be further lost,” falls within this context.
Hopes and Concerns About the Ripple Effect on Local Assemblies: If the reduction of national Diet seats is realized, the wave of “reform” will undoubtedly reach local assemblies across the country. While some voices see this as an opportunity to advance reforms in local assemblies, where high lawmaker salaries and inefficient management are often criticized, concerns have also been expressed that a thoughtless reduction in seats could proceed in local assemblies, which require a more diverse range of human resources familiar with local conditions than national politics does. It would be self-defeating if the debate at the national level leads to the deterioration of democracy at the local level.
What is the Essence of “Reform That Cuts to the Bone”?: A philosophical question is also being raised: what is the essence of the “reform that cuts to the bone” advocated by Ishin? Is the goal simply to reduce the number and salaries of lawmakers, or is that merely a means to restore trust? Some commentators on platforms like note analyze that “the essence is to embed in the system the ethical message that if you ask the public to bear pain, such as tax increases, politicians must first accept pain themselves.” The question of whether this reform will truly lead to the restoration of trust in politics, without falling into mere populism, is being sternly asked.
Thus, the online debate is not confined to a simple dichotomy of for or against, but is deepening into a highly advanced and substantive discussion that questions Japan’s governing structure and the very nature of its democracy.
Chapter 3: The Future of the Coalition Government – Future Scenarios and Japan’s Future Image
The historic general agreement between the Liberal Democratic Party and the Japan Innovation Party has pushed Japanese politics into uncharted territory. However, this is merely the prologue to a grand political drama. In fact, the real story begins now. What enormous hurdles will the two parties have to overcome, and where are they trying to lead this country? Let’s explore the possible scenarios and the future vision of Japan that awaits, from multiple perspectives.
3-1. Short-Term Challenges: The “Birth Pangs” of Reaching a Final Agreement
First, the most immediate and short-term challenge facing both parties is the formulation of a final agreement for the establishment of a coalition government—that is, a “coalition agreement document.” Although they reached a historic consensus on the “direction” of reducing Diet seats, the task of hammering out the concrete details and presenting it in a form acceptable to the public will undoubtedly be accompanied by “birth pangs.”
The “Minefield” of Setting the Reduction Margin and Schedule: Ishin advocates for a “10% reduction in Diet seats,” but when and how will this be achieved? On this point alone, coordination within the LDP will be extremely difficult. Reducing the House of Representatives by about 50 seats and the House of Councillors by about 25 seats would make a large-scale consolidation of electoral districts unavoidable. It is unthinkable that lawmakers facing the possibility of their own constituencies disappearing would silently accept it. Resistance, especially from veteran lawmakers with power bases in small rural constituencies, will be fierce. This will be the first and greatest test for President Takaichi before she even assumes the premiership: can she suppress the furious opposition within her party with her outstanding leadership and forge a reform plan that the public can accept?
“Corporate Donations” and “Consumption Tax” – Can a Compromise Be Found?: As detailed in Chapter 1, the postponed issues of the “ban on corporate and group donations” and “0% consumption tax on food” are the biggest landmines in the coalition talks. From Ishin’s perspective, receiving a complete “zero” on these flagship policies would be unacceptable to their supporters. However, for the LDP, it is absolutely impossible to swallow these demands whole, as they would shake the very foundations of the party. Possible compromises could include “new legal amendments to dramatically increase the transparency of corporate donations (but not ban them)” or “a temporary reduction measure limited to specific basic food items like rice and bread (e.g., a few percent reduction, not 0%) while high inflation continues.” However, in any case, this is a dangerous tightrope walk that could draw criticism of being “insufficient” from the supporters of both parties, and the risk of a breakdown in negotiations still smolders.
The “Power Struggle” of Allocating Cabinet Posts: If the policy talks are concluded and a coalition government is to be formed, the next stage will be a raw power struggle over the allocation of cabinet posts. It is inevitable that Ishin will strongly demand key ministerial positions befitting a partner in government (for example, the Minister for Internal Affairs and Communications or the Minister for Administrative Reform, which would symbolize reform). However, there are many “cabinet hopefuls” within the LDP, and the dynamics of factions are complex. Ceding posts to Ishin would increase dissatisfaction within the LDP. This tug-of-war over personnel, not just policy, will significantly influence the new administration’s cohesiveness right from the start.
Can they clear these extremely difficult challenges one by one and announce a coalition agreement in a way that earns the public’s expectation and trust? A season of intense, behind-the-scenes negotiations and dense politics, likely lasting several weeks or even months, has just begun.
3-2. Mid- to Long-Term Outlook: The “New Japan” Envisioned by the New Conservative Coalition
If the LDP-Ishin coalition government overcomes these birth pangs and is successfully launched, what kind of national image will Japan aim for, and how will it be transformed? The mid- to long-term direction can be somewhat foreseen from the policy principles shared by both parties.
The Realism of Constitutional Revision: Both parties are in complete agreement on their extremely positive stance towards constitutional revision. In particular, discussions on constitutional amendments in security-related fields are likely to accelerate at an unprecedented pace. This includes the creation of an “emergency situations clause” to strengthen government authority during large-scale disasters or national emergencies, and the long-pending issue of “explicitly mentioning the Self-Defense Forces in the Constitution.” While the hurdle of securing a two-thirds majority in both houses of the Diet for constitutional revision remains high, the drafting of specific amendment proposals and the implementation of a national referendum to ask the public’s opinion will, for the first time, be placed on the realistic political agenda. Japan’s “post-war regime” will face a major turning point.
Execution of Sweeping Administrative and Fiscal Reforms with No Sacred Cows: It is expected that the philosophy of “reform that cuts to the bone,” which Ishin has practiced in Osaka, will be extended to all areas of national politics. Starting with the reduction of Diet seats, bold measures may be taken even in sacred domains that have been protected by various forms of resistance until now. This could include the consolidation of special public corporations often criticized as hotbeds for “amakudari” (golden parachute) appointments, reform of the rigid civil service system, and a full-scale debate on the introduction of a regional bloc system (Doshusei) to further promote decentralization. Under the clear vision of moving from “big government” to “small government,” deregulation to maximize the vitality of the private sector will become the cornerstone of economic policy.
Realist-Based Security and a Resolute Foreign Policy: President Takaichi has long been known for her realist view of security, which is not skewed by idealism. Ishin has also faced the harsh international environment in which Japan finds itself and has called for strengthening defense capabilities. With these two parties teaming up, we can expect the steady implementation of increasing the defense budget to 2% of GDP, a deepening of the U.S.-Japan alliance to be more practical and reciprocal, and a more resolute diplomatic posture than ever before against security threats such as China’s hegemonic moves and North Korea’s continued nuclear and missile development.
These policies have the potential to significantly change Japan’s position in the international community, its economic structure, and the daily lives of its people, for better or for worse. It can be seen as a path towards a stronger, more independent, and more efficient Japan. At the same time, it will create a new and serious axis of conflict within society, regarding how to form a consensus with liberal values and calls for generous welfare.
3-3. The Final Chapter of Political Realignment – The “Ultimate Choice” Presented to the People
The birth of an LDP-Ishin coalition government may also mark the beginning of the final chapter in the fluid state of Japanese party politics that has continued since the beginning of the Heisei era—that is, “political realignment.”
A Sharpening of the “Conservative vs. Liberal” Axis of Conflict: The emergence of a powerful conservative bloc, “LDP-Ishin,” at the center of national politics, aiming for constitutional revision and reform, will inevitably encourage the consolidation of opposing forces. In other words, a clear picture will emerge in which liberal and centrist forces, centered on the “CDP-DPFP,” will fight for their very existence as a clear counter-axis. This will enable voters, the public, to choose the country’s path in the next election with a clearer set of policy conflicts. This suggests the possibility that Japan’s parliamentary democracy is entering a more mature, policy-oriented stage.
The Risk of LDP’s “Internal Collapse”: On the other hand, a coalition with Ishin is also a dangerous elixir that could bring the policy conflicts within the giant ruling party, the LDP, to the surface to an irreparable degree. It is inevitable that internal strife will intensify between the mainstream faction led by President Takaichi, which seeks to strongly promote reform, and the resistance forces that want to protect the old vested interest structures and gradualism. In the worst-case scenario, the possibility of some lawmakers who oppose reform leaving the party to form a new one—a party split—can no longer be ruled out as zero.
Questioning the Sense of Ownership of Each and Every Citizen: Ultimately, what determines the direction of this great political swell is none other than each and every citizen, the sovereign. What are the true merits and demerits of reducing the number of Diet seats? What will amending the Constitution bring to our lives? And what kind of nation should we aim to be? We have entered an era where we are more strongly required than ever before to think seriously about these fundamental questions not as someone else’s problem, but as our own, and to express our clear will at the ballot box.
Instead of just passively accepting the information fed by the media, we must examine information from various angles, think in our own words, discuss with family and friends, and act. The historic decision made by President Takaichi and Ishin quietly but sternly presents each and every one of us with the importance of having such a mature sense of ownership.
Conclusion
President Takaichi’s emergency decision to accept the “reduction of Diet member seats” was a powerful starting gun that signaled a turning point in history, announcing that Japanese politics, for better or for worse, has set its heavy rudder toward a new era. The vision of a new conservative coalition government between the LDP and the Japan Innovation Party is no longer mere speculation by political commentators. Ahead lies a grand and challenging vision that will likely change the very image of the Japanese state from its foundations: the execution of “reform that cuts to the bone,” the full-scale pursuit of constitutional revision, and a more realistic security policy.
However, its maiden voyage will be anything but smooth sailing. Enormous reefs, such as corporate donations and the consumption tax, and unpredictable storms, like the realignment of the opposition parties, await on the path ahead. Above all, the stern, watchful eyes of 120 million citizens will constantly be fixed on whether this reform will truly be for the people, or whether it will become a tool in the power struggles of a few politicians.
Online, cheers of “well done” and warnings of “too dangerous” are already clashing fiercely. But that is precisely the healthy state of the new era that is about to begin. In the face of this historic political situation, we must not be mere spectators.
Your words will change Japan.
Having read this article and witnessed this turning point in history, what did you feel, and what did you think? Please, write your frank opinions in the comment section below. Are you for or against reducing the number of Diet seats? Do you have hope for an LDP-Ishin coalition, or do you feel deep anxiety? What kind of country should the Japan of tomorrow be?
Each voice may be small, but when they come together, they become a huge force that moves politics and creates an era. Now, let the debate begin. The future of Japan is in our hands, and no one else’s.
コメント