While working on the Base Project, I researched the environmental and social impact of the U.S. military on Okinawa, Japan, from World War II to the present. My background as a history major, combined with my studies in environmental science, allowed me to make informed assumptions about potential environmental hazards, but there was still so much I didn’t know. If I still had a lot of questions, I knew many of my peers didn’t even know to ask them. Many don’t encounter these global issues and are not exposed to these topics broadly in their different academic disciplines they study at Northeastern. Given the limited public discourse around U.S. military activities abroad, I was curious to see how much they knew. I shared with them The Environmental Impact of the U.S. Military on Okinawa and asked what surprised them, what shocked them, and to share their overall impressions and reactions.

Sydnee Goldman, a friend who studies Business Administration and Communications, described learning about the military’s impact on Okinawa’s environment as “truly eye-opening.” It led her to reflect on why these issues aren’t more widely discussed. She found many of the project’s details shocking, commenting that when students are taught about World War II, the focus is rarely on the impact on the environment, wildlife, or landscape.

Even history majors like, Noah Ben-Zion, a History and Political Science major, said he was surprised by most of the content, particularly the history between Japan and the United States before World War II, the amount of firepower used during the Okinawa campaign, and the lasting U.S. military presence that remained after the war. Regarding the environmental impact, he noted “seeing the United States destroy wildlife is nothing new, but to this extent, it’s very disturbing.” Perhaps influenced by his background in political science, he reflected on the complexities of the current U.S.-Japanese relationship. He found it ironic that “Japan now serves as one of the United States’ allies, yet they put their people through awful circumstances in order to be strategically placed in the Pacific.” This conclusion highlights how the United States treats impacted by its military activities, even amidst a seemingly strong diplomatic relationship with the host nation.

Both Sydnee and Noah expressed deep sympathy for the Okinawan people. Sydnee emphasized that “the amount of harm the United States inflicted on Japan is irreparable, and I hope these important details are not forgotten over time.” Noah echoed this sentiment, believing that the people of Okinawa have gotten the short end of the stick, as their homes have been occupied and disrupted for over 75 years. I felt this profoundly while conducting my research, especially considering that little has changed regarding the practices that continue to harm the Okinawan people and their way of life.

Lauren, a student of History, Culture, and Law, was shocked by the brutality of the Battle of Okinawa and its enduring and devastating impacts. She was unaware of how long the American occupation lasted and the resulting ecological fallout. She was, however, less surprised to learn that Okinawa is now facing the effects of climate change and how those effects make the Okinawa environment less robust in the face of military operations. Lauren shared with me that reading this project has motivated her to stay updated on the environmental damage the United States continues to bring about around the world and would encourage others to educate themselves. She believes the American military’s wrongdoings should be discussed more openly so the public can fully understand what other regions endure due to our actions. I found her response particularly gratifying because it reflects one of the core goals of the US Base Project: to shed light on the historical role of U.S. militarism globally and illuminate how the network of bases continues to shape our world. The project also aims to raise awareness of the far-reaching consequences, including the rearrangement of land and environments, the displacement of people, and shifts in economies, cultures, and politics.

Lastly, I spoke to my friend Sydney, who studies Health Science and is on the pre-med track. Like my other peers, she was unaware of the events in Japan and expressed genuine sympathy for the dugongs. These marine mammals, similar to manatees, are endangered due to noise and water pollution, as well as habitat loss from expanding military projects. Sydney’s concern for the dugongs highlights a broader trend in environmental advocacy. Using animals as symbols is often an effective way to engage diverse audiences, as people tend to feel a strong emotional connection to animals. For instance, the “Save the Polar Bears” movement successfully raised awareness about climate change by tapping into the public’s sympathy for these iconic and adorable creatures. Similarly, the plight of the dugongs could serve as a powerful symbol in the anti-base movement, potentially inspiring more people to take action and care about the broader environmental issues at hand.

Overall, from these conversations with my peers, there appears to be a significant gap in understanding the ongoing issues and impacts caused by the United States military overseas. This disconnect is often referred to by scholars and policymakers as the military-civilian gap. It stems from a lack of knowledge about the military’s activities both domestically and overseas, as well as misconceptions about their actions. The Department of Defense (DoD) wants to actively address this gap because it is influencing their recruitment rates among the younger demographic. Many young people feel they don’t identify with those serving or share their values. The DoD has expressed a desire to “create opportunities for all young Americans to be able to visualize themselves serving as part of the all-volunteer force in the United States military” but this goal is difficult to achieve without sharing publicly what serving in the military can truly entail.

The unfamiliarity with the military’s global base network and its environmental damage is concerning because it reflects a lack of public discussion about the harm inflicted on nearby communities. Imagine struggling to focus in school as planes fly overhead daily or living with the constant worry that your drinking water might be contaminated with toxic chemicals. These are the everyday challenges these communities face, yet there’s still too little conversation about how to address and solve these pressing issues in mainstream discourse. Since mainstream conversation differs across age groups, a comprehensive approach is needed to engage multiple populations. A 2024 Pew Research Center study found that U.S. adults 50 and older tend to rely more on television and print media for news compared to younger adults, who are more inclined to use digital platforms such as social media or podcasts. Among U.S. adults aged 18-29, the age group most of my peers belong to, 86% prefer getting news from digital devices. Even among those aged 30-49, 73% prefer digital news sources. With fewer people turning to traditional outlets like television and radio, the military must adapt by sharing information digitally on platforms that will effectively reach their target demographic. To close the military-civilian gap, it’s essential to employ a broad strategy that engages different audiences and interests.