Japan tries to break the tariff ice but walks away empty-handed (for now)

Japan’s top trade envoy, Ryosei Akazawa, wrapped up a high-stakes trip to Washington this week — but walked away without a deal. Despite an impromptu sit-down with President Trump and high-level talks with Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and USTR Jamieson Greer, the stiff U.S. tariffs remain firmly in place.

Still, the surprise face-time with Trump set off chatter across global trading desks. This wasn’t just optics — it signaled that Japan, America’s closest Asian ally and its largest external investor, may be first in the queue for tariff relief if there’s political will to match the economic logic.

Trump didn’t hold back on social media, calling the meeting “Big Progress!” — classic Trumpian code for: “no deal yet, but stay tuned.” Japan, meanwhile, is pushing hard to become the first major economy to punch through the tariff wall unleashed earlier this month, which has already jolted global markets.

Trump didn’t hold back on social media, calling the meeting “Big Progress!” — classic Trumpian code for: “no deal yet, but stay tuned.” Japan, meanwhile, is pushing hard to become the first major economy to punch through the tariff wall unleashed earlier this month, which has already jolted global markets.

Akazawa described the tariffs as “extremely regrettable” and stressed the need for a deal that strengthens both economies. While no concrete breakthrough was reached, both sides agreed to reconvene later this month — with hopes for a faster path to resolution.

Why it matters: These talks aren’t just bilateral — they’re a global litmus test. Everyone from Berlin to Seoul is watching for clues on Trump’s strategy. If Tokyo can cut a deal, it may set a precedent. If not, the message is clear: everyone’s fair game.

Japan has a lot at stake — both economically and geopolitically. It booked a ¥9tn ($63bn) trade surplus with the U.S. last year, and the looming threat of an additional 24% levy under Trump’s so-called “reciprocal” tariff regime has corporate Japan spooked. PM Shigeru Ishiba even called it a “national crisis.”

On the defense front, Trump once again floated the idea that Japan should pay more to host U.S. forces — a perennial gripe dressed up as deal leverage. Japan currently pays about $1.4bn annually, but Trump keeps repeating the narrative that America is footing the bill for global security. Markets took the bait. Shares in Japanese defense contractors jumped on Thursday.

What wasn’t discussed: No FX fireworks — yet. Akazawa said currency issues, including the weak yen (a sore spot for Washington), weren’t on the table this round. Those discussions will fall to Finance Minister Katsunobu Kato and Treasury’s Bessent in a separate track. Japan, for its part, stuck to the line that it’s not manipulating the yen.

Bottom line: No deal, but doors are open. The U.S.-Japan talks are shaping up to be the canary in the tariff coal mine. If Trump plays ball with Tokyo, it could open the door for broader trade resets — but if Japan walks away empty-handed again, expect tensions (and market nerves) to escalate. For now, this is a classic Trump tactic: keep allies close, dangle the carrot, and use uncertainty as leverage. Stay tuned.

THE VIEW

Frankly, I’m fuming. The White House barring a wire reporter for daring to question the political ethos of the administration? That’s not protecting decorum — that’s censorship, full stop. Journalism is supposed to be uncomfortable. It’s about presenting the unvarnished truth, not curated soundbites.

And let’s not pretend this playbook is new. If you were in the market back in 2012, you’ll remember what happened when Bloomberg published a blunt exposé on Xi Jinping’s family wealth — instant firewall. Beijing shut the gates, and the message was clear: cross the line, and you're out.

Now, fast-forward to today, and we’re seeing the same strong-arm tactics being normalized in Washington. It’s got China-style censorship written all over it — just dressed up in Western suits and talking points. This puts the media in a dangerous bind: either pull your punches and toe the line, or risk being blacklisted.

That’s not how a free press works. And if we start accepting that as the new normal, we’re on a very slippery slope.

I’ve been working and living in Asia for over two decades — in fact, more than half of my career — and if there’s one thing that stands out, it’s this: most people on the ground here have a far more balanced, nuanced take on global dynamics than what’s often portrayed in Western media.

They understand the role the U.S. plays in the broader Axis-and-Allies power game. And contrary to the popular myth, most don’t blindly cheer for China. It’s not about disliking Chinese people — far from it — but there’s deep skepticism toward the leadership. The CCP’s iron grip over the press, the constant top-down narrative control, the expectation that an entire nation must fall in line with every party soundbite — that doesn’t sit well with many across the region.

People here see the difference between cultural affinity and political dominance. And from where I sit, a lot of Asia is quietly hedging — not because they’re anti-China, but because they don’t want to be force-fed the CCP’s vision of order.

The unfortunate truth is, much of the real story about China never makes it to the front page — or even past the editorial desk. If there’s a piece worth writing that exposes uncomfortable realities, chances are it won’t see the light of day. Not because the journalists don’t want to tell it, but because the editors and publishers know what’s coming: the great firewall, in all its retaliatory glory.

It’s self-censorship by necessity — not principle. Western media outlets with business ties to China, or even just distribution ambitions, have to think twice before pushing anything that might rattle Beijing. And that’s the problem. When fear of access denial trumps truth-telling, the entire media ecosystem gets compromised.

Now, with Trump banging the same censorship drum, we end up with a sanitized version of global reality — one where nuance disappears and tough questions go unasked. And that, in the long run, does a disservice not just to journalism, but to the public who deserves to see the full picture.