Peace Philosophy Centre, est. 2007, provides a space for dialogue and facilitates learning for creating a peaceful and sustainable world. ピース・フィロソフィー・センター（2007年設立）は平和で持続可能な世界を創るための対話と学びの場を提供します。피스필로소피센터(2007년 설립)는 평화롭고 지속 가능한 세계를 만들기 위한 대화와 배움의 장소를 제공합니다. 和平哲学中心（成立于2007年）致力于提供一个对话与学习的平台，以建设一个和平且可持续的世界。Follow X: @PeacePhilosophy ; Email: peacephilosophycentre@gmail.com
Here is the English translation of my latest column in Okinawan newspaper Ryukyu Shimpo, November 25, 2025. It is about Abby Martin's new documentary film Earth's Greatest Enemy. Original Japanese text follows English.
In October 2022, when Abby Martin was filming and interviewing in Okinawa for this film, she said, “Okinawa was the starting point of my journalism.” The documentary film Earth’s Greatest Enemy, created by her and her partner, Iraq War veteran Mike Prysner, has now been completed. A nationwide screening tour in the U.S. has been underway since September 20. During her Okinawa reporting, Martin was pregnant with her second child, but in this film, we can see the healthy baby who was later born.
The film argues that the U.S. military is the greatest enemy to the global environment. The U.S. military is the world’s largest consumer of fossil fuels. When Abby covered the 2024 UN Climate Change Conference (COP26) in Glasgow, she began to question why the massive presence of the U.S. military was treated almost like a taboo, never properly discussed.
The answer was “money.” The military-industrial structure places the U.S. military in a protected sanctuary. Environmental law expert Tamara Lorincz states, “NATO, a military organization led by the United States, serves as a cover for major weapons manufacturers. NATO is a guaranteed market for U.S. weaponry.”
Through interviews with specialists such as political scientist Jodi Dean, Martin gradually exposes the essence of U.S. imperialism. The global network of U.S. military dominance sustains an economic system that secures the interests of the ruling class, and it is maintained “through inequality and expansion.”
Martin goes on to say that the very formation of the United States resulted from expansion through the use of force to secure fur and mineral resources. In the pursuit of military action and resource extraction, the United States took land and dignity from Indigenous peoples. Its imperial origins lie within its own history.
In Iraq and Afghanistan, the U.S. military dropped countless bombs. Even after the wars ended, long-lasting contaminants such as lead, mercury, titanium, tungsten, and depleted uranium have caused congenital disorders and cancer among children.
The harm caused by U.S. military operations affects U.S. soldiers and base-related personnel inside the United States as well. Water contamination at Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune in North Carolina created as many as one million victims, yet the military’s responses and investigations have been insufficient. One victim stated, “I am fighting for the people who served. The U.S. military can go to hell.”
“Camp Lejeune is only the tip of the iceberg,” says Pat Elder, who has investigated contamination at more than 400 U.S. military bases worldwide. According to Elder, contamination on U.S. bases falls into four categories: “pesticides and herbicides,” “radiation,” “VOCs (volatile organic compounds),” and “PFAS (per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances).”
The film then turns to OKINAWA. The narrative leads viewers to imagine how the military contamination discussed so far has also affected Okinawa. Martin interviews Governor Denny Tamaki and is astonished: “You are an elected governor, yet you cannot even enter the bases to investigate contamination?”
The spotlight then shifts to the power of citizens who resist the empire. Scenes of resistance on sea and land at Henoko and Oura Bay, and the actions in Awa and Shiokawa to block the shipment of earth and sand, are captured vividly with the brilliance of the ocean.
According to Martin, audiences at screenings across the United States have expressed reactions such as “I was shocked by the absurd destruction at Henoko” and “I was inspired by the citizens’ resistance.” The release of a Japanese-language version of this film is eagerly awaited.
Prime Minister Takaichi’s “Existential Crisis” Response / The Wisdom of Japan and China Is Being Tested
Izumikawa Yuki (Director and Secretary-General, Association for the Promotion of International Trade, Japan)
Prime Minister Takaichi Sanae, responding to a question from Committee Member Okada Katsuya at the House of Representatives Budget Committee on November 7, stated: “For example, what means would be used to place Taiwan completely under the control of the Chinese government in Beijing? (…) If that involves using warships and also involves the use of force, then no matter how one looks at it, I believe this is a case that could constitute an existential crisis situation.” This response sent shockwaves through both Japan and China.
China has expressed profound anger. Many scheduled events have been postponed or canceled, and the situation has escalated to the point where China is urging its citizens to refrain from traveling to Japan and to reconsider Japan as a study-abroad destination. On November 18, Director-General Kanai Masaaki of the Asian and Oceanian Affairs Bureau at Japan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Director-General Liu Jinsong of the Department of Asian Affairs at China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs held director-level consultations in Beijing, but no clue toward resolution or easing of tensions has yet been found.
This issue is still unfolding, and it is difficult to make any assumptions about future developments. Here, three background factors explaining why China is expressing such visible anger will be introduced.
The first point is that the remarks were made as an official Diet statement by a sitting prime minister. Former Prime Minister Abe Shinzo had once said “A contingency in Taiwan is a contingency for Japan,” but that was spoken in an online lecture after stepping down from office and did not represent the government. This time, the remarks were delivered as an official Diet response that binds the entire government, and for China, the political weight was of a completely different dimension.
The second point is that these remarks came immediately after the summit meeting with President Xi Jinping held in South Korea on October 31. Although China had concerns about meeting Prime Minister Takaichi—who had repeatedly made harsh statements toward China—it nevertheless decided on the summit from a broader perspective of advancing Japan-China relations. From China’s viewpoint, this likely felt as though the national leader had been disgraced. The situation overlaps with September 2012 in Vladivostok, when President Hu Jintao strongly urged Prime Minister Noda Yoshihiko to refrain from nationalizing the Senkaku Islands, yet Noda proceeded with nationalization immediately upon returning to Japan, provoking strong backlash from China.
The third point is that the example raised in the response concerned the Taiwan Strait. Taiwan was ceded by the Qing dynasty under the Treaty of Shimonoseki following the outbreak of the First Sino-Japanese War in 1894, and Japan governed it as a colonial possession until Japan’s defeat in 1945. As the post-war era reaches its 80-year milestone, Japan referring to a potential “existential crisis situation” in relation to Taiwan—a region where Japan once carried out colonial rule and which China treats as its most delicate issue—was unacceptable to China and likely evoked the specter of “new militarism.”
With these circumstances in mind, both Japan and China must devote diplomatic efforts to calming the situation. The wisdom of both countries is being tested.
Izumikawa Yuki
Born 1979 in Tomigusuku City. After graduating from Okinawa International University, he studied in Beijing. Joined the Association for the Promotion of International Trade, Japan in 2006. Currently serves as the Association’s Director and Secretary-General.
Here is a five-minute talk that I gave to the webinar held on November 15/16 (depending on time zones) Securing a Pacific Ocean of Peace - Overcoming the Obstacles. Organized by World Beyond War. There were speakers from Fiji, Papua New Guinea, Philippines, Australia, Aotearoa/New Zealand, Guåhan, Hawai'i, Republic of Korea, and Japan. Here is the text of my talk (I had to shorten it a little to put it within the 5 minutes given). Japanese translation follows.
Japan and the United States Prepare a War Against China
I would like to give a brief overview of
recent developments around Japan and Okinawa in relation to the accelerating
war preparations against China in conjunction with the United States.
Japan now has its first female prime
minister, Takaichi Sanae. She is the political successor of Abe Shinzo, who
dismantled the post-war constitutional promise of the renunciation of war,
enabling Japan to exercise the so-called collective self-defense right—the
right to engage in U.S. wars against designated adversaries, in today’s context
meaning China. Upon taking office, Takaichi announced a review of the three
core national security documents adopted in December 2022: the National
Security Strategy, the National Defense Strategy, and the Defense Buildup
Program, which collectively shifted Japan’s postwar defense posture.
These documents redefined China as an
“unprecedented strategic challenge,” introduced “counterstrike capability,” and
prioritized long-range missiles, unmanned systems, cyber and space warfare
units, and deeper integration with U.S. military planning. They also committed
43 trillion yen (Approx. 300 US dollars) over five years to missiles, drones,
cyber tools, and ammunition stockpiles, while offering little on diplomacy or
conflict prevention. Takaichi says she will revise these by 2026, emphasizing
“new forms of warfare” such as drone swarms and intensified cyber operations.
It is more likely than not that her revision will be more escalatory.
Today Japanese media are all reporting that Takaichi plans so revisit the “three-non-nuclear principle” that the Japanese government upheld since 1967, which says not having, not making, and not introducing nuclear weapons. Takaichi wrote in her 2024 book that the “non introduction” clause could be an obstacle for the U.S. provision of its “extended deterrence.”
Takaichi belongs to the far-right of the
LDP and is known for historical denial, having repeatedly visited Yasukuni
Shrine. Countries victimized by Imperial Japan, including China and Korea, were
alarmed when she became prime minister. Despite diplomatic gestures—her ASEAN
debut, hosting President Donald Trump, and meeting President Xi Jinping at
APEC—her true colours soon became clear.
On November 7, she stated in the Diet that
a “Taiwan contingency” could be classified as a “survival-threatening
situation,” or sonritsu kiki jitai, under the 2015 Security Legislation—what
we opponents call the War Legislation—forced through by Abe Administration despite
nationwide protests, including self-immolation cases. The law defines such a
situation as one in which an attack on a country with close ties to Japan
threatens Japan’s survival and endangers the people’s right to life and
liberty, even if Japan is not attacked.
By directly linking a Taiwan conflict to
Japan’s national existence, Takaichi signaled a far more explicit Japanese role
in a Taiwan crisis. China reacted sharply. Takaichi was heavily criticized by
opposition parties and urged to retract the statement; she refused.
The U.S. has kept deliberate distance. It
neither endorsed nor criticized Takaichi’s Taiwan comment. Yet its silence is
telling. The US is sensitive when Japanese leaders visit Yasukuni Shrine—when
Abe visited in 2013, Washington immediately expressed concern. Not necessarily because
they care about peace in East Asia, but because it would harm the Japan-Republic
of Korea relations and thus U.S.–Japan–ROK military alliance. Takaichi will mostly
likely avoid visiting Yasukuni while in office because of this U.S. pressure.
In contract, U.S. does not seem bothered by Takaichi’s aggressive stance
against China, precisely because it aligns with the US strategic objective of
pressuring and threatening China.
As usual, the US uses its client states to do all the dirty work, just as it uses Ukraine to weaken Russia and Israel to destroy Palestine.
The latest event only added to China’s
distrust of Japan in this commemorative year, the 80th anniversary of the
victory of the resistance war against Japan and the anti-fascist war. On
September 3, Beijing held a major ceremony with 26 state leaders including Russian
President Vladmir Putin and DPRK Chairman Kim Jong-un. The Japanese government
denounced it as an anti-Japan event and told Japanese nationals in China to
stay home for safety when war commemorations were held. Japan even pressured
other countries not to attend. Imagine Germany doing this on Victory in Europe
Day.
Japan has also banned major Chinese films this year, including Dead to
Rights, which depicted the human suffering of the Nanjing Massacre. The
Japanese public is largely influenced by the denialist narrative that the Nanjing
Massacre didn’t happen. Even the Nagasaki Atomic Bomb Museum is diluting its
description, changing “Nanjing Massacre” to “Nanjing Incident,” reinforcing
China’s suspicion that Japan is whitewashing its aggression.
For China, Taiwan issue is historical as
well as contemporary. Japan colonized Taiwan as spoils of its first war of
aggression against China in 1894–95. Any Japanese involvement in Taiwan evokes
memories of Japan’s wars in China that killed tens of millions of its citizens.
Perhaps this sentiment is most clearly
expressed in the Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson’s November 13 statement:
“Japan must immediately correct and retract its malicious remarks.
Otherwise, Japan will bear all the consequences that arise from them. If Japan
dares to intervene militarily in the situation across the Taiwan Strait, such
an act would constitute aggression. China will meet it head-on and deliver a
powerful blow. We issue a stern warning to the Japanese: reflect deeply on its
historical crimes, and immediately stop interfering in China’s internal affairs
or engaging in provocative, line-crossing actions. Japan must not play with
fire over the Taiwan question. Those who play with fire will surely get
burned.”
It
is also a warning to Washington.
Indeed, Japan’s war preparation is
accelerating, making use of the Ryukyu chain of islands—again using a
historical colony that Japan forcefully annexed at the end of the 19th century. Military analyst and peace activist Konishi Makoto reiterated in his recent lecture that, over the past several years, Japan has transformed its entire southwest into an
uninterrupted military belt—from Yonaguni and Ishigaki, through Miyako and
Amami, to Okinawa, Mageshima, and western Honshu—filled with missile units,
radar stations, new bases, ammunition depots, joint training facilities, and
expanding U.S.–Japan force integration, all despite heavy local opposition and
residents’ concern for safety when war comes to their islands.
Konishi concludes:
“A military
contingency in Taiwan will not occur if Japan says ‘no.’ If Japan refuses to
allow U.S. forces to use its bases, airports, and ports, the United States
cannot initiate or execute such a conflict. Japan’s anti-war and peace
movements therefore play an increasingly crucial role.”
さて、ここで登場するのが、先ほど言及した「ノーベル平和賞受賞者」——マリア・コリナ・マチャドです。彼女は過去何十年にもわたって米国政府から資金提供を受けてきました。少なくとも2003年以来、彼女の組織は「全米民主主義基金（National Endowment for Democracy、略称NED）」から資金援助を受けています。
チャベスはそのボリバルのレガシーに深く影響を受け、「ボリバル革命」を掲げたのです。そして、国民投票によって新憲法を制定しました。有権者の約3分の2が新しい憲法の制定に賛成しました。その憲法は非常に進歩的な内容を持ち、国家の正式名称も「ベネズエラ・ボリバル共和国（the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela）」へと変更されました。
