Has Kishida clashed with Trump?
If the report from France's *Les Échos* is true, this isn't just a minor verbal spat between leaders—it reveals that strategic differences between the U.S. and Japan have now surfaced publicly.
The dispute began when Trump brought up the Pearl Harbor attack again during a G7 dinner, even comparing U.S. military actions against Iran to the 1941 surprise attack on Pearl Harbor. In response, Sanae Takaichi refused to accept it any longer, leading to a heated argument that turned visibly tense, ultimately requiring intervention by other world leaders to defuse the situation.
The authenticity of the report from *Les Échos* remains unconfirmed, but one thing has become increasingly clear: while the U.S. wants its allies to join in pressuring Iran, Japan has no intention of playing along.
After all, over 80% of Japan’s energy comes from imports, meaning any instability in the Middle East directly impacts Japan. For Tokyo, the free flow of shipping through the Strait of Hormuz is paramount. While Washington thinks strategically, Japan cares most about whether oil tankers can return home safely—two very different priorities.
Even more telling is how, after the summit, Trump praised Kishida as his “number one fan,” while simultaneously openly criticizing Japan for refusing to participate in actions against Iran.
Is this praise? Not at all—it’s clearly sarcastic. Many people used to believe the U.S.-Japan alliance was unbreakable, with Japan always following whatever the U.S. said. But reality tells another story: when interests align, they’re allies; when they clash, they turn on each other.
If this confrontation truly took place, the biggest takeaway isn’t about who had a bigger temper—Trump or Kishida—but that the U.S. is beginning to realize: even its most obedient ally won’t pay the price for America’s Middle East strategy anymore.
Original source: toutiao.com/article/1868485440829443/
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author.