日本横须贺市市民团体代表岸牧子：随着"战斧"巡航导弹的部署，如今日本全国正在走向扩军的道路。如今的高市政权甚至有可能修改宪法，把日本变成可 以发动战争的国家，这种可能性真的很高。我认为这是极其严重的问题。 目前，横须贺市已经收集到超过3万份民众签名，反对"战斧"巡航导弹的部署。与会者表示，将继续通过集会、请愿等方式表达反对立场，推动以和平方式 解决分歧，避免日本走上进一步军事扩张的道路。 日本横须贺市市民团体代表 新仓裕史：我们这几个城市都有日本海上自卫队的基地。二战结束，日本战败之后，日本拥有了和平宪法，也决定今后要走和 平道路。但现在这几个港口城市又和80多年前一样，成为以军事优先的海军基地，"战斧"导弹的部署就说明了这一点。我们希望能够设法阻止"战斧"巡航导 弹的部署。 日本防卫省数据显示，截至2025财年，日本防卫费连续13年上涨。据了解，日本2026财年防卫预算将主要用于获取长射程导弹、以及构建海岸防御系统所需 的攻击型无人机等。对于日本政府的扩军动向，当地民间团体感到担忧。 根据日本防卫省的计划，从2025财年起至2027财年，日本分批采购约400枚美国产"战斧"巡航导弹。19日，来自日本横须贺、 ...

Core Viewpoint - A civil group in Nagaoka City, Niigata Prefecture, Japan, held a peace study meeting opposing the government's military expansion policy, arguing it contradicts post-war peace principles and may escalate regional tensions [1]. Group 1: Opposition to Military Expansion - Participants emphasized that Japan's constitution advocates for non-aggression and disarmament, urging adherence to these principles [3]. - The "Three Non-Nuclear Principles" should remain unchanged, asserting Japan must not possess or manufacture nuclear weapons [5]. - Organizers argued that relying solely on military expansion does not enhance security but may deepen confrontational sentiments, advocating for dialogue and cooperation instead [6]. Group 2: Criticism of Political Statements - The vice president of the Niigata Peace Committee criticized remarks made by a political figure, calling for their retraction [8]. - The president of the Niigata Peace Committee expressed a desire for citizens' movements and elections to prompt the government to reconsider its current policies [9]. - Participants condemned the political figure's statements as interference in China's internal affairs, highlighting the historical context of Japan's acknowledgment of Taiwan as part of China [10].

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses a peace meeting held by a civic group in Nagaoka City, Niigata Prefecture, Japan, opposing the government's military expansion policy, which is seen as a deviation from the post-war peace principles and a potential source of regional tension [1][3]. Group 1: Opposition to Military Expansion - Participants at the meeting emphasized that Japan's constitutional spirit is to refrain from aggression and not to possess military arms, advocating for adherence to these principles [1]. - The "Three Non-Nuclear Principles" must not be altered, and Japan should not possess nuclear weapons, as efforts should focus on preventing war rather than provoking it through military means [3]. Group 2: Call for Dialogue and Cooperation - Several organizers pointed out that relying solely on military expansion does not genuinely enhance security but may deepen confrontational sentiments, advocating for stability through dialogue and cooperation instead of military provocations [3]. Group 3: Criticism of Political Statements - The Vice President of the Niigata Peace Committee criticized the remarks made by Japanese Prime Minister Sanna Takagi as alarming and called for their retraction [5]. - The President of the Niigata Peace Committee expressed a desire to influence the government to reconsider and correct its current policies through elections or civic movements [5]. Group 4: Impact on Japan-China Relations - Participants noted that the relationship between Japan and China, which had taken decades to restore post-World War II, is being jeopardized by Takagi's statements, which are viewed as absurd and alarming [7].

Group 1: Military Actions and International Relations - President Trump announced that military actions against drug cartels in Mexico will "soon" commence, highlighting the increasing tension in U.S.-Mexico relations [2][3] - Trump emphasized that drug cartels are controlling Mexico and are responsible for the deaths of 250,000 to 300,000 people annually in the U.S. [2] - Mexican President López Obrador opposes U.S. military actions in Mexico, advocating for cooperation rather than subordination [2] Group 2: Greenland Island Controversy - Trump stated that the U.S. needs to acquire Greenland and warned of taking "difficult measures" if a simple agreement cannot be reached [3][4] - The U.S. has previously expressed intentions to acquire Greenland, with Trump indicating that military options are on the table [3][4] - European officials, including those from Denmark and the EU, have expressed strong opposition to U.S. threats regarding Greenland, calling for respect for international law [4][5] Group 3: Investment in Venezuela's Oil Industry - Trump met with executives from about 20 major U.S. oil companies to discuss potential investments in Venezuela's oil sector, but many executives expressed caution [5] - ExxonMobil's CEO stated that Venezuela is currently "not investable" without significant changes to its legal and business framework [5] - Trump proposed that U.S. oil companies invest at least $100 billion to rebuild Venezuela's oil infrastructure, promising "full" security guarantees for these companies [5]

Group 1: Trump's Actions on Drug Cartels and Venezuela - Trump announced that military actions against drug cartels in Mexico will "soon" commence, highlighting the severe impact of these groups, which reportedly kill between 250,000 to 300,000 people annually in the U.S. [2] - The relationship between the U.S. and Mexico is increasingly tense, with Mexican President AMLO opposing U.S. military actions on Mexican soil, advocating for cooperation rather than subordination [2][3]. - Trump is pushing for U.S. military intervention, asserting that drug cartels are the actual rulers of Mexico, coinciding with recent U.S. military actions in Venezuela [2]. Group 2: Greenland Acquisition Threats - Trump reiterated the U.S. need for Greenland, stating that if a simple agreement cannot be reached, he may resort to "harder" methods [3][4]. - The U.S. has faced strong opposition from Denmark and other European nations regarding Trump's threats to acquire Greenland, with discussions about potential military options being raised [4][5]. - European officials are considering how to respond to U.S. threats, emphasizing the need for respect for international law [5]. Group 3: U.S. Oil Companies' Investment in Venezuela - During a meeting with major oil executives, Trump sought to secure at least $100 billion in investments to rebuild Venezuela's oil infrastructure, promising full security for the companies involved [5]. - Executives from major oil companies expressed caution regarding investments in Venezuela, citing the need for significant changes in the country's legal and business framework before considering investment [5]. - Chevron remains the only major U.S. oil company currently operating in Venezuela, with other companies hesitant due to past losses and the unstable political environment [5].

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the escalating tensions in Venezuela following a U.S. military operation that resulted in the capture of President Maduro and his wife, with significant implications for U.S.-Venezuela relations and potential military actions by the U.S. [1][2][9] Group 1: U.S. Military Actions and Responses - On January 3, the U.S. launched a large-scale military operation in Venezuela, capturing Maduro and his wife, which drew widespread international condemnation [2][4] - The Venezuelan National Assembly passed a resolution to honor the victims of the U.S. military actions, declaring them national heroes and calling for international condemnation of the U.S. actions [4] - Trump indicated plans for ground operations against drug trafficking in Venezuela, claiming a 96% reduction in drug transport via sea routes [5][7] Group 2: Political Reactions and Legislative Actions - The U.S. Senate passed a resolution requiring Trump to seek congressional approval before using military force in Venezuela, reflecting a significant political pushback against unilateral military actions [9][10] - Trump criticized Republican senators who supported the resolution, asserting that their actions undermined U.S. military authority [10] Group 3: Economic Implications - Trump mentioned plans for U.S. oil companies to invest at least $100 billion to rebuild Venezuela's oil infrastructure, indicating a strategic interest in Venezuela's oil reserves [7][8] - He claimed that the U.S. would gain access to 30 to 50 million barrels of heavy Venezuelan crude oil, although he acknowledged that restoring the oil industry would take years [8]

Core Viewpoint - The U.S. government, led by Secretary of State Rubio, has indicated that various options, including military action, remain on the table regarding Venezuela, following the U.S. military's forceful control of President Maduro and his wife [1][3]. Group 1: U.S. Military Actions and Statements - The U.S. military conducted a large-scale operation against Venezuela on January 3, forcibly taking control of Maduro and transferring him to the U.S. [3] - Rubio stated that President Trump retains the option of military action, although no such actions have been taken yet [3]. - Trump has expressed willingness to manage Venezuela until a "safe" transition occurs, with plans for U.S. oil companies to invest in the country [3]. Group 2: International Reactions - Multiple governments, political figures, and regional organizations have condemned the U.S. military actions in Venezuela, urging adherence to the United Nations Charter [1][3]. - There are concerns that U.S. aggressive actions could lead to another prolonged overseas intervention or a failed nation-building attempt [3]. Group 3: Ongoing Military Operations - The U.S. has been conducting large-scale military deployments in the Caribbean near Venezuela under the pretext of anti-drug operations, with significant military actions reported since September 2025 [4]. - The U.S. has not provided evidence to support claims that its targets are involved in drug trafficking, despite over a hundred reported deaths from these operations [4]. - In December, Trump ordered a comprehensive blockade of all sanctioned oil tankers entering or leaving Venezuela, with two tankers already seized [4].

Group 1 - Venezuelan President Maduro and his wife were captured by U.S. military forces during a raid in Caracas and transported to a U.S. Navy ship before arriving in New York [3][4] - U.S. President Trump announced that the U.S. will "manage" Venezuela until a "safe" transition can occur, indicating a significant shift in U.S. foreign policy towards Venezuela [3][8] - The military operation involved over 150 aircraft and lasted approximately 2 hours and 20 minutes, with no U.S. casualties reported [3][4] Group 2 - Trump stated that U.S. oil companies will invest billions of dollars to repair Venezuela's oil infrastructure, despite ongoing oil sanctions [8] - The U.S. has been conducting military operations in the Caribbean since August 2022, citing the need to combat "drug terrorism" linked to the Venezuelan government [9] - A Venezuelan official reported that the U.S. military actions resulted in at least 40 deaths, including both military personnel and civilians [10][12]

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the U.S. military operation in Venezuela that resulted in the capture of President Maduro and his wife, with President Trump stating that the U.S. will "manage" Venezuela until a safe transition can occur [1][3][5]. Military Operation Details - The U.S. military operation took place from the night of February 2 to the early morning of February 3, involving all branches of the military and over 150 aircraft [3]. - The operation lasted approximately 2 hours and 20 minutes, with one aircraft being hit but remaining operational [3]. - No U.S. military personnel were killed, and no military equipment was lost during the operation [3]. U.S. Plans for Venezuela - Trump indicated that if necessary, a "larger" second wave of strikes could be launched against Venezuela, but currently, it may not be needed [5]. - A working group will be established to manage Venezuela, with Secretary of State Rubio overseeing the details [5]. - Trump expressed skepticism about the ability of opposition leader Maria Corina Machado to manage the country, stating that the Venezuelan people neither support nor respect her [5]. Economic Implications - Trump announced that major U.S. oil companies would enter Venezuela to invest billions of dollars in repairing the country's severely damaged oil infrastructure, aiming to generate revenue [5]. - The U.S. oil embargo against Venezuela remains fully effective [5]. International Reactions - Following the military operation, various governments and regional organizations condemned the U.S. actions and called for adherence to the United Nations Charter [6]. - Since August of the previous year, the U.S. has conducted significant military deployments in the Caribbean near Venezuela under the pretext of combating "drug terrorism" [6]. - The Trump administration has threatened to escalate military actions against what it labels as "drug trafficking groups" in Venezuela [6].

Core Viewpoint - The U.S. Southern Command conducted a kinetic strike against three drug trafficking boats operated by designated terrorist organizations in international waters, raising questions about the legitimacy of the military actions in the region [1][3]. Group 1: Military Actions - On December 30, 2025, the "Southern Sword" joint task force, under the command of U.S. Secretary of Defense, targeted three drug trafficking boats, resulting in the death of three "drug terrorists" [1]. - The Southern Command reported that intelligence confirmed the boats were operating along known drug trafficking routes and were involved in drug transfers prior to the attack [1]. Group 2: Regional Context - The U.S. has deployed multiple warships in the Caribbean near Venezuela under the pretext of drug enforcement, initiating the "Southern Sword" military operation on November 13, 2025, to exert pressure on Venezuela [3]. - The U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration's recent reports indicate that Venezuela is not a major source of drugs flowing into the U.S., contradicting the justification for military actions [3]. - Venezuela has accused the U.S. of attempting to instigate regime change through military threats and expanding its military presence in Latin America [3].