Beirut – Ruba Al-Baini
Years after a dramatic exit from… Japanreturns a name Carlos Ghosn “to the forefront of a crisis”April“, not just as a page from the past, after it was reported that some shareholders angry at the path the Japanese company had taken proposed his return. During a noisy general assembly, the name of the former president of the alliance was put forward.”Renault -April- Mitsubishi“Again, in a moment that reflects the extent of the decline that Nissan has experienced since 2019: a sharp decline in the value of the stock, a decline in sales, the closure of factories, and the layoff of thousands of employees.
As a reminder, Ghosn’s case began in 2018, when he was arrested in Tokyo on financial charges related to hiding part of his bonuses and using Nissan funds, charges he denies. In Japan, no final conviction was issued against him; He fled to Lebanon In late 2019 before trial. One of his associates, Greg Kelly, was convicted in Japan in part on charges of helping hide Ghosn’s income, and received a suspended sentence, but not Ghosn himself. In France, Ghosn faces a separate file related to transfers and consultations within the Renault-Nissan alliance. To date, there is no final French conviction against him either; He is scheduled to be tried in France in September 2026 on charges of exploiting influence, while he maintains his innocence.
In this dialogue, Ghosn speaks in a tone that is not devoid of bitterness, but also of confidence, stressing that what happened with Nissan was not just a passing crisis, but rather the result of a “strategic mistake” and weak management, according to his description. He believes that the alliance, which was once a global force in the automobile industry, has turned into an ineffective entity.
Ghosn, who insists on his innocence of the Japanese accusations, says that his return to Nissan is politically difficult but not practically impossible, stressing that he knows the company, Japan and the market more than ever before, and that he is capable, if conditions exist, of rebuilding Nissan and saving it from decline.
 
The following is the text of the dialogue:
After one of Nissan’s shareholders put forward your name again to return to the presidency of its board of directors, can it be said that there is someone who acknowledges, indirectly, that your removal is a strategic mistake, neither legal nor administrative?
This reaction is normal, and it is long overdue. When we look at reality, we find that a number of shareholders who attended the last general assembly are retirees from Nissan, meaning they know the company well. They lived in it, worked in it, and perhaps their children worked in it as well. Therefore, the company’s interest concerns them directly.
Between 2019 and 2026, they saw Nissan stock fall by about 80 percent. The stock was worth nearly $1,200, and its value today is about $305. Sales also declined from about 5.5 million cars to about 3 million cars, and the company lost about 40 percent of its sales. When sales decline like this, it means fewer factories and fewer employees. The company announced the closure of 7 factories and the dismissal of about 20,000 employees. The alliance with Renault exists only in form. The brand is weak, the strategy adopted is unclear, and no one fully understands what the current management is doing.
Shareholders say “enough”. The company has been waiting for six or seven years to rebuild itself, and it has not succeeded. It is natural then that they ask: Why don’t we bring in someone who knows how to manage it? Who is this person? He is the man who arrived in Japan in 1999, led Nissan for 17 years, and achieved clear results: profits, growth, and an increase in the value of the stock.
I am sad about what the company to which I gave 19 years of my life has become, and I am sad about the condition of the employees I know. 130,000 employees today live obsessed with their future. I am also sad for the cities where factories were closed, and for the 20,000 who lost their jobs without it being necessary.
The problem is that those who planned to fire me thought that the company would remain strong on its own. They did not understand that my departure was also accompanied by the departure of more than 20 of the strongest talents that I had selected and trained. Since then, the company has fallen into the hands of slow politicians and administrators who do not have a clear vision. This reminds me of Nissan’s situation between 1990 and 1999, before I took over its management.
Lebanese businessman and former head of the Renault-Nissan-Mitsubishi alliance (An-Nahar).
Ready to come back!
There are those who say that your return to Nissan is politically and legally impossible, but it is administratively required. Are you really prepared to return if invited, or would you rather remain a witness to the downfall of the model you have built?
Politically, returning is difficult, and this is clear. Everyone knows how I left Japan. Legally, there is no real problem, because they did not prove any of the accusations they made against me. When I left Japan, there was no trial, and the accusations were not proven.
Look at what happened to people tried in Japan in files related to the Nissan case. In the end, the main accusations were not proven as they were reported. Therefore, in my opinion, the issue is more political than legal. We asked to send the file to Lebanon to try me here and end the matter, but they did not do so, because they know that the file is empty of any criminal evidence. Judicially, there is no problem if the judiciary performs its normal role. But if politics interfered in the judiciary, things would be different.
Regarding my possibility of returning to fix Nissan, I say it clearly: Yes, if there is anyone capable of fixing Nissan, it is me. Because I have the necessary experience for that. I did it before. I know the company. I know Japan, and I know the market much better today than I did in 1999. When I first headed Nissan, I didn’t know Japan, the Japanese culture, or the company inside out. Today, I know all of this, and if I have the opportunity, the task is easier than the first time. Yes, I am ready for that, not out of greed for a position, but rather in response to the call of duty for the benefit of the company, for the benefit of employees, shareholders, and the cities that were affected as a result of the closure of factories. And finally for my reputation, after I was subjected to systematic distortion. But…do I expect that to happen? Politically, it is difficult. They lost more than $30 billion in this process, and they still insist on continuing with the mistake instead of admitting it and reversing it.
The shareholders’ meeting witnessed apparent chaos and attempts to withdraw confidence from the current management headed by Ivan Espinosa. What do you say today about the legal process and issues related to Nissan?
If I were a shareholder sitting in that hall, I would also tell them: Change this management. No clear strategy, and no satisfactory results. It is true that the current Chairman of the Board of Directors arrived about a year and a half ago, but he was previously in the administration, and therefore he cannot act as if he had no connection to what happened. For seven years, management has been saying, “We’re going to close a factory and we’re going to lay off employees,” and then things will get better. But the results do not improve, and what is worse is that they repeatedly say that all the problems go back to the era of Carlos Ghosn, and this is not true.
Between 1999 and 2018, the company did not have a single “loss” year, but was profitable, growing and developing. We increased sales from about 2.3 million cars annually to about 5.5 million cars. We achieved record profits and record liquidity. When I left the company, it had about $20 billion in cash. Today, Nissan is struggling with debt.
What really bothers me is the evasion of responsibility. When they make a mistake, they do not say, “We will fix it for the good of the company, the employees, the country, and the reputation of Japan.” Rather, they persist in making the same mistake, because admitting it will cost them politically and morally.
How big is the internal crisis at Nissan, until one of the shareholders goes so far as to demand the return of Carlos Ghosn?
My return is not in the hands of Nissan alone, but also in the hands of the Japanese state. I’m not moving on my own after everything that happened. But I say that I can save the company if the necessary conditions are present. When I took over Nissan in 1999, the then Chairman of Renault asked me what my chances of success were, and I told him, “50 percent,” and we were very successful. Today, I think the chances of success would be higher than 50 percent, because the obstacles that existed then no longer exist today. I know Nissan, I know what it needs, and I can attract high-caliber talent to it in just a few days. It is not the size of the task that actually worries me, but rather what some political or administrative parties that participated in what happened previously could do. I love Japan, and I believe in Japanese people and Japanese employees. But there were those who behaved very badly. Some of them have left the company, while others are still inside Nissan or around Renault. They bear a great responsibility in dismantling what was built.
I can get her back on the path to success!
Do you still believe that the Nissan-Renault-Mitsubishi alliance was a global economic power? Who bears the responsibility for dismantling this force?
certainly. This alliance was a global economic power. In 2018, we were number one in the world. Today, the alliance is no longer visible even among the Big Five or Six. This was all destroyed in six years. The responsibility for this falls on those who broke up the alliance, as the CEOs who succeeded the company did not succeed in providing clear results. Renault also bears part of the responsibility, especially through its Chairman of the Board of Directors and its representatives on the Nissan Board of Directors. Renault owned 43 percent of Nissan, and it saw the company disintegrating and did not act. This was collusion or negligence. You should have said: “We have to keep working together to win together.” But Renault managers chose to continue a weak and fragile relationship. Therefore, I describe the coalition today as “zombie,” that is, it exists on paper, but is ineffective.
The decisions taken that led to the dissolution of the alliance did not harm the shareholders alone, but also the employees and the cities in which they live. When you close a factory that employs six or seven thousand people, you put 15 to 20 thousand people in a cycle of anxiety and stress, because families, suppliers and the entire local economy are affected.
What prompted a Nissan shareholder to restore your name to the General Assembly?
Usually, if a company’s major shareholders are not satisfied with what is happening in their company, they sell their shares and leave. Those who stay are the small shareholders, or those who believe there is hope. In Nissan’s case, those who raised their voices at the General Assembly are often small shareholders, retirees from the company, and their hearts are with Nissan. For them, it is not just a stock or a financial profit, but a company to which they gave the best years of their lives. So they said: Enough. I think I’m right on their side.
If we assume that you return today to the presidency of Nissan’s board of directors, can you restore the company to what it was? What are the first decisions you would make?
Yes, I can return it to how it was, maybe even better. However, the first thing to do is to enter the company and find out the extent of the damage from within. I know Nissan’s potential because I helped build it, but the current situation must be carefully evaluated.
First, the brand must be rebuilt; Second, a strong management team must be formed that is capable of making quick decisions. The problem today is that the administration is not making the right decisions at the required speed. In the current automobile market, with China’s strong offensive in technology, products and design, the company cannot be managed with fear and hesitation. If you encounter difficulties in Europe, do not withdraw from them immediately, but rather strive to have your share of the market, because the competitor who defeats you in Europe will follow you to Japan, China, and other markets. Not every market can become difficult to escape. This is a mentality that leads the company to decline and gradual death.
Nissan’s potential is great
In your opinion, what is the biggest problem with Nissan today? Is it the absence of a strategic plan or the difficulty of making decisions?
The problem is not only strategy, but also management. I don’t know what their strategy is, and I don’t see them clearly explaining how they read the market today or how they plan to confront their competitors. The general manager of any automobile company must monitor the market daily, understand what his competitors are doing, and prepare for what comes next. However, what we see in Nissan today is incomprehensible. Every time the CEO changes, someone new comes in and says they have a new plan. After two years, the plan collapses or fails, and no one bears responsibility. When I took over Nissan in 1999, I made it clear: “If I don’t make a profit in the first year, I’m out. If I don’t reduce the company’s debts by half in the second year, I’m out. If I don’t reach a profit margin of more than four percent after that, I’m out.” This is how companies are run: with clear results and direct accountability. As for the administration saying: “If the plan does not work in America, we will try something else, and if it does not work in another market, we will withdraw,” this is not appropriate in strong competition such as what we are witnessing today in the automobile sector.
What is your ultimate message to Nissan, its shareholders and employees?
Nissan still has great potential, but it needs clear leadership, a strong team, quick decisions, an understood strategy, and real accountability for results. The company does not continue to hold the past responsible for the present. What happened in recent years is the result of the decisions of the current and previous administration after 2019. If they want to save Nissan, they must admit that the current path does not lead anywhere, but rather they must return to the logic of responsibility and results. Nissan is a large company with a long history, competent employees, and loyal shareholders. But it cannot be saved with words, but rather with decisions and leadership that bears what it promises, and bears responsibility if it does not fulfill its promises.
