The Trump revolution is sweeping through the world. Many people probably have the impression that the U.S. president is simply doing as he pleases, destroying all semblance of order as he follows his instinctual impulses.
But will the United States revert to “normal” after President Trump leaves office? Sadly, the answer is no. We are at a historic turning point and facing an irreversible regime change. President Trump’s presence may simply be a matter of coincidence.
In a society where inequality is advancing an alarming rate, it is difficult to understand President Trump’s actions merely as the behavior of someone who is favoring the interests of working-class whites in Middle America over the interests of the East and West Coast elites. It is clear that at the heart of his behavior is a non-interventionalist stance, which represents the revival of an isolationism that the United States had practiced before World War II.
Although President Trump may appear to be nothing but a “bully,” it can also be said that he is in fact very honest and is not shy about discussing issues openly. He is likely unwilling to tolerate the kind of politics that is played by those who advocate lofty ideals in public but engage in shady activities behind the scenes.
We need to carefully accept the honest messages of President Trump and the American people, including “Stop relying on America,” “Stop taking advantage of America,” and “Stop using exports to rip off the U.S. market.”
◆◆◆
Throughout our lifetimes, the United States has acted as a global patriarch, so to speak, bearing the burden of supporting a family of allied and other friendly countries and serving as that family’s spiritual pillar. The “father” (the United States) fostered, supported, and protected the “children” (Japan and other allies) and the “children” have grown up following their father’s teachings.
Suddenly, the “father” has started ranting about the burden of parenthood. The “children” are left dumbfounded as the “father” tells them to stop depending on him, declaring that he could no longer protect them. For decades, the United States has maintained its patriarchal appearance, but now that its frustration has been stretched to the limit, it will not return to its previous role.
From an economic perspective, the Trump revolution leaves much to be desired, including the president’s problematic view of the significance of trade imbalances (which are more a reflection of comparative advantage and the international division of labor), the effectiveness of the use of tariffs as a policy tool, and the theoretical basis for the size of tariff hikes (see the table below). These arguments would likely be entirely dismissed by President Trump, who is known for his use of SNS to spread arguments that are not based on evidence. Negative reactions from financial markets seem to have been the only factor that served as a deterrent, albeit a modest one.
From the perspective of someone who witnessed the Japan-U.S. trade friction in the 1980s first hand, it represented nothing but an act of harassment by the United States to force a country that had been threatening to surpass it into submission, regardless of whatever noble cause may have been used as an excuse for the confrontation at the time. The attitude of the United States, a country trapped in a trade deficit (a “red” trade balance), toward Japan, a country enjoying a trade surplus (a “black” trade balance), was somewhat like an unreasonable bully in a “red” had attacking an innocent boy in a “black” had for wearing the wrong color of cap.
The failure of that same approach against China despite its success against Japan represented a great miscalculation on the part of the United States. That is why we should regard the Trump administration’s threats to take outrageous actions against the rest of the world (under plausible pretexts) as an earnest, serious message: “Don’t depend on America and don’t free-ride at our expense.”
How should the rejected “children” react?
One option is to continue to “live under the same roof” with the “father.” In that case, it is the “children’s” turn to protect the “father,” and they should also consider providing him with assistance. Perhaps they will have to do whatever he demands.
A second option is for the “children” to remove themselves from the paternal protection and live independently and self-sufficiently but cooperating with each other as a family should.
In short, President Trump is forcing us to face up to the issue of whether or not to continue “living under the same roof” with the United States—that is, we must decide what form our alliance with the United States should take. Europe has been quick to detect a regime change and has taken steps toward greater independence. However, it appears that Japan has not even been awoken to the fact that its alliance and security relationship with the United States are being fundamentally shaken.
Of course, in the case of Japan, which is surrounded by nuclear powers, including Russia, China and North Korea, while not possessing nuclear weapons itself, and may face a crisis if a military conflict occurs across the Taiwan Strait, it is impossible to suddenly leave the umbrella of U.S. protection. However, that does not mean that Japan should totally acquiesce to what the United States demands. How should Japan respond to the “honest cries” made by the United States as a disgruntled father? Now is the time for Japan to create a grand design, that is, the vision of what kind of country it wants to be.
What reaction is appropriate in the short term? The most that can be done for now is to expand imports of the items that President Trump has identified. One lesson from the experience of the trade friction in the 1980s is that negotiations over non-tariff barriers, such as vehicle safety standards, are likely to last forever as the U.S. continues to make additional demands.
Of course, even if Japan accepts all of the U.S. demands, it is difficult to imagine a visible increase in the number of American cars running on Japanese roads, as desired by President Trump.
Endless negotiation is also a likely outcome with respect to the proposal to increase the “sympathy budget,” or the Host Nation Support for U.S. forces stationed in Japan. Regarding the expansion of imports, the most effective approach is to increase imports of U.S. agricultural and livestock products on a temporary basis to make up for the expected steep decline in U.S. exports to China.
Next, let us consider what Japan should do from the medium-term perspective, that is, under a timeframe of several years. Regarding vehicles, it is necessary for Japanese automobile manufacturers to discontinue exports from Japan and production in Canada and Mexico entirely and to shift completely to production in the United States. The fundamental message of the U.S. demands is that foreign manufacturers should build factories in the United States if they want to sell products to the U.S. market. Another option is to support the revival of the U.S. shipping industry, which has hollowed out. This matter is expected to be discussed in the Japan-U.S. tariff negotiations.
◆◆◆
Finally, we must address the big-picture, long-term perspective. In terms of the larger framework of the world order and guiding principles, we must clearly recognize that the era epitomized by the global free trading system led by post-war America—which, in a sense, embodied a utopian vision—and by the economically rational, meticulously developed supply chains that depended on that system have come to an end.
The World Trade Organization (WTO) has remained dysfunctional for a very long period of time. The only path forward is for countries and regions that can truly understand the benefits of trade and the spirit of free trade to work together to promote regional free trading systems. In this context, Japan should consider steadily reducing the ratio of its exports to the United States at the macro level (this measure should be considered on a volume basis out of consideration for domestic production by U.S. competitors) over the medium to long term.
Japan is not alone in having advanced into the vast U.S. market and leveraging export-driven growth to achieve economic development in the postwar years, but it is no longer possible to return to that era. In addition, the economy and security cannot be separated within the Japan-U.S. relationship. It may be too late for this advice, but the first step for Japan should be to increase awareness of the need for independent defense capabilities.
>> Original text in Japanese
* Translated by RIETI.
May 16, 2025 Nihon Keizai Shimbun
