Yonaguni, Ryukyu – The Japanese government has released a detailed evacuation plan to relocate approximately 120,000 Ryukyuans from Ryukyu’s Yaeyama and Miyako Islands in Okinawa Prefecture in the event of a military crisis involving Taiwan. The plan, announced on March 27, 2025, comes as Japan bolsters its military and prepares for potential conflict in the Taiwan Strait, a region increasingly fraught with geopolitical friction.

The Ryukyu Islands comprises over 160 islands in the archipelagoes of Yaeyama, Miyako, Okinawa, Amami, and Tokara. The island of Yonaguni is the closest to Taiwan at roughly 100 kilometers. Japan’s Chief Cabinet Secretary Yoshimasa Hayashi stated that the plan is designed to activate under a scenario where “armed attacks are predicted,” though officials have privately acknowledged that a Taiwan contingency is the primary concern driving this initiative.

Under the evacuation plan, the government aims to relocate 120,000 people—comprising 110,000 residents and 10,000 tourists—over a six-day period, averaging 20,000 evacuees per day. The plan states that residents from the same local districts are evacuated to the same municipalities. For example, residents of Yonaguni Town will be relocated to Saga City or Tosu City in mainland Japan.

In 2023, Japan opened a missile base on Ishigaki Island, deploying Type-12 surface-to-ship guided missiles and Type-03 surface-to-air guided missiles intended to be used against China. Additionally, Yonaguni, which hosts a Japanese Self-Defense Force base, is constructing temporary underground shelters stocked with food and water for two weeks, and plans are in place to deploy surface-to-air missile units on the island.

The announcement of the evacuation plan has sparked strongly negative reactions among Ryukyuans. Some residents of the southern Ryukyu Islands, like those on Yonaguni, express skepticism about its practicality. Local voices, such as Fumie Kano, have previously called such plans “absurd,” arguing that if Okinawa becomes embroiled in a conflict, all of Japan would likely be at risk, rendering localized evacuation efforts useless. Ryukyuans have long opposed both the U.S. and Japanese military bases in the Ryukyu Islands and have demanded their removal. The Japan government, however, does not recognize Ryukyuans as an indigenous peoples, in spite of repeated urgings from various United Nations organizations. Japan’s Defense Minister Gen Nakatani, speaking in January 2025, claimed that a “strong sense of crisis” exists among Ryukyu residents, though failed to acknowledge Ryukyuan’s longstanding opposition to Japanese military occupation.

The plan also coincides with heightened U.S.-Japan military cooperation in the region. On March 30, 2025, U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth visited Tokyo, announcing the creation of a new joint U.S.-Japan “war-fighting headquarters” and an increase in joint military exercises in the Okinawa islands near Taiwan.

Critics of Japan’s evacuation and militarization efforts argue that these measures could escalate tensions rather than deter conflict. Many Okinawans, who have long borne the burden of hosting 70% of U.S. military bases in Japan despite the prefecture occupying just 0.6% of the country’s land mass, fear that their islands could once again become a battlefield, as they did during the devastating Battle of Okinawa in 1945, which claimed over 200,000 lives, including one-third of the Uchinaanchu or native Okinawan population. Local opposition to the military buildup is strong, with protests against U.S. and Japanese bases continuing into 2025, driven by historical grievances, Japanese prejudice against Ryukyuans, and incidents of misconduct by U.S. personnel.

Ryukyu leaders have pointed out that the evacuation plans are eerily similar to Japan’s wartime buildup of Okinawa during the 1930s and 40s, which cumulated in the Ryukyuan genocide of 1945. The Ryukyuan group “No More Okinawa War – Life is a Precious Treasure” criticized Japan’s evacuation plan saying that “Okinawans will again be sacrificed,” noting the increased risk of another Ryukyuan massacre. The Peace For Okinawa Coalition echoed these sentiments, stating that Japan’s actions constitutes a form of ethnic cleansing in order to remove Ryukyuans and ensure total and uncontested Japanese control over Ryukyu.

The government of China has not yet issued a response to Japan’s plans to remove Ryukyuans from Ryukyu under the pretext of a Taiwan crisis. China and Ryukyu historically had a close relationship during the Ming and Qing dynasties, with Ryukyuans paying tribute to China and playing a critical role facilitating China’s maritime Silk Road trade network in the region, and China promising to protect Ryukyu from foreign invasion. China twice failed to keep their promise when Japan invaded Ryukyu in both 1609 and 1879. After Japan’s annexation, Ryukyuan envoys and political leaders fled to China, pleading with the Chinese to help restore Ryukyu’s independence, though China ultimately did not act. Though Chinese media or government officials in the 21st century have occasionally made off-hand statements regarding Ryukyu, the Chinese government at large appears unconcerned and uninterested in the well-being of the Ryukyuan people. Some international NGO’s and analysts attribute this to China’s fear of provoking the U.S. and Japan, heightening the risk of war and harming China’s economic interests.

The United Nations has also yet to respond to Japan’s intentions to remove Ryukyuans from Ryukyu.

As Japan moves forward with its evacuation and defense strategies, the Ryukyu Islands remain a critical flashpoint in the broader geopolitical struggle over Taiwan. The government’s plan, while a proactive step, raises questions about the feasibility of evacuating such a large population under the chaos of a military crisis and whether these preparations will ultimately deter conflict or draw Okinawa – and all of the Ryukyu Islands – deeper into the crosshairs of another potential war. For now, Ryukyuans live with the uneasy reality of their strategic location, caught between the ambitions of global powers and the specter of history repeating itself.