Nissan and Renault, marriage on the brink of divorce. In the background the Ghosn case, but there is more

• Ghosn: false accusations, I'm here to defend myself
• Nissan arrested in Japan for Ghosn's wife
• Paris: "Ghosn will not be extradited to Japan"
• Nissan, the escape of the ex CEO Ghosn: away from Tokyo hidden in an instrument case

Share

Of course, surely, Ghosn says something. Accused of financial and tax fraud, the former president of Nissan-Renault really looks like the victim of a persecution: nobody claims that his crimes are not punishable, quite the contrary. But at the basis of this attitude by Japanese prosecutors there is certainly something else. International observers argue that the alliance - now twenty years - between Nissan and Renault, has been poorly digested in Japan, and Ghosn is the symbol of that wedding. While there have been vague allegations of possible misuse of Nissan's funds by Ghosn as president, ample evidence via email suggests that the offending payments may have been planned and that the board of directors had already discussed the bonuses received by Ghosn.

Be that as it may, besides the 'case' of the ex tycoon, there is something bigger at stake. The two French and Japanese automakers say they continue to work well together. However, some distances are under everyone's eye and cooperation in some sectors has objectively run aground. Nissan's own number one, Hiroto Saikawa, had revealed to the Financial Times that strong nationalist forces inside Nissan had unleashed following the arrest of Ghosn, and that some Japanese executives wanted to withdraw their twenty-year alliance with Renault.

However, the alliance basically has an unbalanced cross-shareholding agreement. Renault owns 43.4% of Nissan, but Nissan only holds 15% of the French company without voting rights. When Senard arrived in Renault last January, he immediately reorganized the structure, providing it with a leaner operational board which includes the CEOs of Renault, Nissan and Mitsubishi and which makes decisions unanimously. Ghosn, who had strongly wanted the alliance, with his strongly centralizing personality had created a series of internal struggles even if it brought the merit of having revived Nissan from a real financial meltdown. But in this way, he had actually mortified the Japanese sentiment. After Ghosn, however, Nissan's value fell by a third. And Ghosn's successor Hirutu Saikawa, despite being accused of corruption, has not been put in solitary confinement like him. On the other hand, some analysts recall, it is not the first time that Western leaders have been held captive by waves of nationalistic sentiment, and not only in Japan. To the point that in the US, Senator Ted Cruz and Tom Cotton proposed the Global Hostages Act, a bill that would mandate the president to impose sanctions, prohibiting the issuing of visas to foreign government officials responsible for taking US people hostage. Returning to Nissan and Renault, as suggested by the Wall Street Journal, to strengthen the alliance the two sides should think of a sort of joint venture, giving Renault President Jean-Dominique Senard the opportunity to dissolve the cross-stakes that underlie the report. But Nissan would be interested in maintaining an alliance with Renault only apparently, and instead unwilling to identify a strategic opportunity and understand which synergies are suitable to manage it.

After all, it is no secret that the marriage between FCA and Renault was wrecked by the Japanese 'fault'. Fiat Chrysler's strong business in the light truck sector and North America would have made up for one of Renault's most obvious shortcomings but Nissan seemed committed to preventing a stronger bond. However, the risk for Nissan is that, moving away from its European partnership, it will leave itself too small to handle the vast capital expenditures and necessary research and development costs, as the global auto industry tries to reverse the downward trend of sales and manage the transition to electric vehicles. Of course, the vision of Ghosn, that is, of a transnational company, is unlikely now that it will materialize.

The impact of a divorce would affect the entire auto industry - first of all because two of the major car manufacturers would report losses not to mention the decline in investment and the necessary strategy. Not only that but, analysts say, the experience of breaking a project that for 20 years has shown that companies can reach scale and collaboration without undertaking a complete merger would be devastating for the whole market. As sales plummet in most large markets, automakers are forced to invest in expensive technologies such as battery power to meet increasingly stringent emissions regulations, compressing their already reduced margins. The trade wars of the President of the United States Donald Trump with Europe and China and other disruptive events such as Brexit do not help, creating havoc in the world market.

Renault executives recognize, however, that the current alliance structure is unsustainable and will have to change if it wants to survive. But it is not yet clear how to do it, partly because of the influence of the French government. Which in turn certainly has no less patriotic pride than Nissan. In short, Renault claims its role as 'savior' of the Japanese house, and does not forgive its partner for having missed the alliance with FCA, even more so that the latter went to take refuge in the 'arms' of Psa Peugeot. The reality, is a comparison of a senior Nissan executive, is that the two groups are now like a couple of strangers on either side of a long dining table. "There's good food in the middle, but to get it, they have to agree to meet there," he says. Some suspect that Nissan and Renault will meet in the center of the table and enjoy the proverbial banquet, others say the couple may simply starve. But there is a common awareness, and that despite the fact that the alliance has worked between ups and downs for 20 years, it will now be a difficult model to replicate.