by Kanji Ishiwara

Part 1: Final War Theory

This is a transcription of a lecture given at the Kyoto Gihou Society on May 29, 1940, with some additions made in August of the same year.

Chapter 1: Overview of the History of War

Section 1: Decisive War and Attrition War

War is an act in which a state achieves its policy objectives through the direct use of military force. Currently, the United States has concentrated almost its entire fleet in Hawaii to intimidate Japan. It seems that Japan is struggling due to a lack of rice and other necessities, so the U.S. is attempting to pressure Japan by concentrating its fleet in Hawaii, hoping that Japan might relent on the Sino-Japanese issue. In essence, the U.S. is using its naval power to execute its policy toward Japan, but this is an indirect use, so it does not yet constitute war.
The distinctive feature of war, as is obvious, is the use of military force. However, depending on how much military force is valued compared to other means, two tendencies arise in war. The higher the value of military force compared to other means, the more masculine, powerful, thick, and short the war becomes. In other words, a positive war—what I call a “decisive war.” On the other hand, due to various circumstances, when the value of military force becomes less absolute compared to other political means, war becomes thin, long, and feminine—what I call an “attrition war.”
The true essence of war should ideally be a decisive war, but the reasons for an attrition war are not singular. Thus, even in the same era, there may be cases where both decisive wars and attrition wars occur. However, the main reason for this division into two types of wars is historical influence, and from a military perspective, world history has alternated between eras of decisive wars and eras of attrition wars.
Regarding war, it seems that the Western world, known for its belligerence, is the true origin of war. Especially in the West, where many powerful nations with similar strength are located close to each other and where the battlefield’s size is appropriate, the historical shifts between eras of decisive and attrition wars are clearly evident. Japanese wars, on the other hand, often start with declarations like “Let the distant ones hear the sound…” without much clear distinction between war and sports. Therefore, I intend to examine the history of war, particularly the history of the Western world, which is regarded as the home of warfare (refer to the first appendix on page 64).

Section 2: Ancient and Medieval Times

In ancient times—specifically, during the eras of Greece and Rome—all citizens were soldiers. This phenomenon was not limited to the West; similar trends existed in Japan and China. In primitive societies, social conditions often reflected ideal human conditions, and war was no exception. The military tactics of the Greek and Roman eras were very well-organized, with large groups of soldiers forming tight formations that advanced and retreated skillfully, overwhelming the enemy. Even today, the tactics of the Greek and Roman eras remain a subject of study in military science. Due to the fact that all citizens were soldiers and tactics were highly organized, the wars of this period had a decisive nature. Wars conducted by figures like Alexander the Great and Julius Caesar were relatively free from political constraints and were thus decisive wars.
However, as the Roman Empire reached its peak, the system of all citizens being soldiers gradually deteriorated and gave way to a reliance on mercenaries. This shift led to a transformation from decisive wars to more attrition-like wars. A similar trend can be observed in the East. In China, for example, during the peak of the Han Chinese under the Tang dynasty, the system of all citizens being soldiers started to deteriorate, leading to reliance on mercenaries. This decline marked a weakening of the Han Chinese state’s power, a situation that persisted until the present day, even though the Republic of China has shown great courage and fought valiantly in the ongoing Sino-Japanese War. However, they have yet to fully realize the system of all citizens being soldiers. After centuries of valuing culture over military prowess, the Han Chinese people face a deep and serious challenge. I hope that the current conflict will serve as an opportunity for the Han Chinese to return to their former strength.
Returning to the topic, as the military system deteriorated and political power weakened, the vast empire unified by Rome was essentially conquered by Christian monks. This period marks the Middle Ages. During the Middle Ages, the military organization that had developed during the Greek and Roman periods completely collapsed, leading to a focus on individual knightly combat. Just as the general culture of the Middle Ages can be considered a dark age, so too can the military aspect of this era.

Section 3: The Renaissance

The Renaissance marked a significant revolution in military affairs as well. The introduction of firearms fundamentally changed the nature of warfare. The knights, who had prided themselves on their martial prowess for generations, were now vulnerable to a single shot from a commoner’s firearm. This change led to the inevitable decline of the era of chivalric duels, and the revival of ancient military tactics brought about significant social transformations.
During this period, particularly influenced by the Crusades, commerce flourished in the Mediterranean and along the Rhine, leading to an era of mercantilism where money became the most important factor. However, new emerging states were often small and could not afford to maintain large standing armies, leading to the development of military entrepreneurship, such as the hiring of mercenaries from places like Switzerland. Such mercenary armies lacked the deep seriousness inherent in warfare, leading to a general tendency towards attrition warfare. As states grew stronger, the transition to permanent standing armies became inevitable, similar to the military forces of the warlord era in China. With the shift to standing mercenaries, military tactics became more sophisticated and technical, resulting in highly skilled and cunning strategies. However, as these soldiers were hired with money, the tactics of the time mirrored the principles of the prevailing despotism.
These practices even influenced the military tactics of Japan, which had adopted Western methods. For example, the tradition of drawing a sword and commanding “Attention!” in the Japanese military originated from the era of European mercenaries. Although no one today thinks of threatening to cut down disobedient soldiers, the practice of drawing a sword during command dates back to the time of mercenary armies in Europe. In Japan, the traditional gesture was to raise a war fan if necessary. When giving the order “Right face!” during a salute, the commander would toss his sword forward, symbolizing the act of throwing away his weapon, as if to say, “I surrender.” This practice can be seen as an ancient tradition. Marching in step originated as a way to suppress fear and advance towards the enemy under heavy fire during the age of despotism.
Because these soldiers were mercenaries, it was necessary to maintain strict control and not allow any freedom. As firearms became more advanced, battle formations became wider and less deep to facilitate shooting and minimize losses. However, due to the despotic nature of the time, transitioning from line tactics to skirmish tactics was difficult.
Line tactics, being highly specialized, required great skill. Aligning thousands of soldiers in a line and maneuvering them on the battlefield required tremendous expertise. The complexity and specialization of tactics during this period were signs of decay, making battles difficult to execute effectively. Even minor terrain obstacles could hinder movement, making decisive battles less frequent. Moreover, maintaining a mercenary army was extremely expensive, so leaders were reluctant to engage in bloody battles, further entrenching the trend towards attrition warfare.
The Thirty Years’ War and the Seven Years’ War, led by Frederick the Great, are representative examples of this attrition warfare. In such wars, the primary strategies involved either deciding the outcome through a pitched battle or avoiding battle altogether by maneuvering to threaten the enemy’s rear, minimizing casualties while gradually encroaching on enemy territory.
Frederick the Great initially utilized pitched battles, contrary to the prevailing trends of his time, but eventually, even he leaned towards maneuver warfare, recognizing the difficulties in deciding the fate of a war through bloody confrontations.
A famous French military scholar who had the privilege of observing Frederick’s maneuver exercises in 1789 stated, “We will not see large wars in the future, and pitched battles will become a thing of the past.” He predicted that future wars would be conducted primarily through maneuvers, avoiding the bloody confrontations of pitched battles.
Thus, the era of attrition warfare had reached its peak. However, history teaches us that when an idea reaches its extreme, a revolution is imminent. Ironically, the year this military scholar made his prediction, 1789, was the year of the French Revolution, marking a significant turning point.

Section 4: The French Revolution

During the French Revolution, even in France, it was believed that using mercenaries was the best approach to war. However, hiring a large number of mercenaries was extremely expensive, and at the time, impoverished France, surrounded by enemies, simply could not afford it. Faced with the threat of national extinction, revolutionary France, despite opposition from the populace, forcibly implemented conscription. This led to riots, but the energetic French suppressed them and managed to gather a massive army, reportedly numbering a million, to counter the experienced professional armies of the coalition forces closing in on France from all sides.
At that time, the dominant military tactic was the line formation. However, the line formation required a high degree of skill, which the hastily conscripted peasants lacked. Despite recognizing its limitations, the French adopted column formation tactics as an alternative. The column formation had its drawbacks—it concentrated too many troops in a small area, making them vulnerable to enemy fire—but it was more effective than the line formation, which required higher skill levels. The column tactic allowed the French army, with its sheer numbers, to overwhelm the enemy, and by placing new recruits in the middle of the columns, they could follow the lead of the veterans. As a result, the French forces scored a series of victories, changing the fate of the war.
The French Revolution fundamentally transformed the nature of warfare. First, the concept of a national military emerged, replacing the mercenary armies that had been prevalent for centuries. A national military was not simply an army organized for the nation; it reflected the people’s will and was sustained by the entire population. Even women participated in the war effort, supporting the front lines from behind.
Second, new military tactics emerged. When the new French troops initially adopted line tactics, they encountered difficulties due to the complex nature of this approach. The more straightforward column tactic allowed them to succeed, and when the French army reached the enemy’s vicinity, they rushed at the enemy without hesitation. Moreover, since the columns had no flanks, the troops didn’t have to worry about exposing themselves to enemy fire, allowing them to advance at full speed. This tactic made up for the army’s lack of skill and provided the French with an advantage over their opponents.
Additionally, the introduction of skirmishers helped protect the columns, and the French were also the first to successfully implement the formation of skirmish lines, which combined elements of both line and skirmish tactics. With their larger numbers and superior organization, the French army was able to defeat the coalition forces. These innovations in tactics marked the end of the era of attrition warfare and the beginning of a new era of decisive warfare.
The French Revolution also sparked a military revolution in which the emphasis shifted from technical skills to the use of force, leading to an increase in the scope and intensity of battles. Moreover, the French Revolution shattered the rigid military structures of the past, leading to the emergence of new forms of warfare that emphasized flexibility, mobility, and innovation.
The most significant military figure to emerge from the French Revolution was Napoleon Bonaparte. Napoleon’s brilliance as a military commander lay in his ability to combine the new tactics developed during the Revolution with his own innovations. He was a master of maneuver warfare, using speed and surprise to outflank and defeat his opponents. Napoleon’s campaigns demonstrated the effectiveness of the new military tactics and marked the beginning of a new era in warfare.
The French Revolution and Napoleon’s subsequent military successes changed the face of warfare forever. The era of decisive warfare, which had been in decline for centuries, was revived, and the focus shifted from attrition warfare to a more dynamic and aggressive approach to military conflict. The legacy of the French Revolution and Napoleon’s military innovations continued to influence warfare for generations to come.

Section 5: The First World War

Schlieffen passed away in 1913, before the outbreak of the European War. In other words, the First World War erupted at the peak of the development of decisive warfare. Everyone, including even the simplest minds, expected that the war would be resolved in a very short period. However, by the time people realized how wrong they were, the world had already changed. Contrary to all expectations, the war turned into a prolonged conflict lasting four and a half years.

However, looking back calmly today, we can see that even before the First World War, there were already subconscious premonitions of a protracted war. In Germany, the need for “economic mobilization” was already being discussed before the war. Moreover, in the final Franco-German operational plan drafted by Schlieffen as Chief of Staff in December 1905, it was proposed to drastically reduce forces in the Alsace-Lorraine region, concentrate the main force west of Verdun, encircle Paris with a large force, and then, using a formidable army corps of seven corps (fourteen divisions), conduct a wide flanking maneuver to attack the enemy’s rear from the southwest of Paris. This was truly a grand strategy (see the map on page 25). However, the Franco-German operational plan at the beginning of the First World War, executed by General von Moltke, who became Chief of Staff in 1906, initially appeared to be a resounding success, as the Germans swept through Belgium and northern France and advanced to the Marne River, seemingly on the brink of a great German victory. But the main focus of the German deployment had shifted significantly eastward compared to Schlieffen’s plan. The German right wing did not reach Paris, and when faced with a counterattack from the Paris direction, it was quickly repelled and forced to retreat, leading ultimately to a protracted war. General von Moltke has been heavily criticized for this point. Indeed, it must be said that General von Moltke’s plan was considerably inadequate as a German operational plan aimed at decisive warfare. If there had been an ironclad will to execute Schlieffen’s plan and sufficient preparation for it, the First World War might have turned into a decisive war with a possible German victory.

However, I acknowledge that even in this change of plans, there was a strong unconscious influence of premonitions about a protracted war. During Schlieffen’s time, it was assumed that the French army would take a defensive stance, but later, it was judged that the French army would take an offensive stance towards the Saar region, which was a vital industrial area for Germany. This judgment led to an increase in forces in that area. Furthermore, I am convinced that the most influential reason for the failure to execute the large-scale flanking maneuver was General von Moltke’s decision to abandon the violation of Dutch neutrality, which was a crucial condition in Schlieffen’s plan. The protection of the Saar mining and industrial area, particularly the respect for Dutch neutrality, was based on economic considerations for sustaining the war. In other words, it is fascinating to see that considerations for a protracted war were unconsciously beginning to influence the leaders of the German General Staff, even though they were still clamoring for decisive warfare.

Four and a half years may seem short compared to the Thirty Years’ War or the Seven Years’ War, but the tension was different. In the wars of the past, such as the Thirty Years’ War, there were long breaks in between. Even during the Seven Years’ War, when winter came, mercenaries, if left in cold places for long, would desert, so both sides would take a break. However, in the First European War, the intense tension continued for four and a half years.

The reasons for the protracted war were, firstly, the significant advancement in weaponry. Particularly, automatic firearms—machine guns—were extremely effective defensive weapons, making it difficult to break through the front lines easily. Secondly, during the time of the French Revolution, even with universal conscription, the number of soldiers was not that large, but in the First World War, all healthy men were sent to war. This created a massive military force unprecedented in history, making it impossible to break through the front lines. And when attempts were made to outflank the enemy, the front lines had extended from Switzerland to the North Sea due to the increase in forces, making it impossible to outflank them. Unable to break through or outflank, the war became a protracted conflict.

During the French Revolution, the social revolution influenced tactics, changing the nature of war from protracted to decisive warfare. However, in the First World War, advancements in weaponry and the increase in military forces transformed the nature of war from decisive to protracted warfare.

Despite being a protracted war lasting over four years, unlike the protracted wars of the 18th century, where battles were avoided, the First World War saw continuous decisive battles. During this period, new tactics emerged naturally due to the new weaponry.

The advancement of artillery made it easier to break through the enemy’s skirmish lines, forcing defenders to hold off enemy attacks more effectively, resulting in so-called multiple-line positions. However, since these positions carried the risk of being individually defeated by the enemy, a new method of deep defense in layered formations naturally emerged, moving away from the idea of resisting in multiple-line positions.

In other words, a unit the size of a platoon (combat group), centered on automatic firearms, occupied positions at wide intervals, and these positions were further arranged in depth (see the figure on page 27). This dispersion of forces not only reduced the effectiveness of the enemy’s artillery fire but also allowed the forces arranged in depth to support each other skillfully. As a result, attackers were subjected to irregular, unexpected fire from all directions, making the attack significantly more difficult.

Consequently, the attackers, to avoid heavy losses from the enemy’s line of soldiers, also spread out in depth and aimed to exert their strength in a similar manner. While line tactics, as previously mentioned, were guided by the spirit of autocracy, skirmish tactics encouraged freedom of action and autonomy for each soldier and unit, embodying liberalism in tactics. However, when attacking an enemy with deep defensive formations, simply leaving it to the autonomy of each soldier and unit would lead to chaos, requiring clear command and control. Deep defensive formations required control based on a consistent plan.

In other words, the guiding spirit of today’s tactics is control. However, unlike line tactics, where soldiers’ free will was suppressed by strong authority to enforce blind obedience, this control is necessary to avoid confusion and duplication by providing clear objectives, thereby enabling autonomous, proactive, and independent actions of each unit and soldier. It should be said that control is not to suppress freedom but to encourage free action.

These new tactics emerged naturally during the First World War, and after the war, particularly in the Soviet Union, active research led to significant progress. Japan, which avoided the sacrifices of the European War, was the last to adopt these new tactics and is now diligently pursuing their study and training.

Additionally, during the First World War, there was a vigorous debate that the protracted war was due to the weak spirit of the Westerners and that decisive battles could be achieved with the Japanese spirit (Yamato-damashii). However, the truth has become clear, and in recent years, it has become common sense that wars are long-term and total wars, and that military power alone cannot decide the outcome of a war. At the beginning of the Second World War, everyone thought it would turn into a protracted war, but recently, due to the great successes of the German army, significant doubts have arisen.

Section 6: The Second World War

In the Second World War, the so-called German Blitzkrieg was able to quickly enforce decisive warfare against weak countries like Poland and Norway. This is, of course, nothing to be surprised about. However, it was expected that when facing the French and British armies, they would likely confront each other along the Maginot and Siegfried lines, making it extremely difficult to break through, resulting in a prolonged war.

Even though Germany might invade the Netherlands and Belgium, it was thought that this would be merely to secure a base of operations against the United Kingdom. It was not expected that a true major decisive battle would take place between the main forces of the Allied armies and Germany. However, starting on May 10, the ferocity of the German assault quickly subdued the Netherlands and Belgium, broke through the extension of the Maginot Line, believed to be impenetrable, and advanced into Belgium, outflanking the French and British forces from behind. The Germans then swiftly annihilated these forces and turned their focus towards Paris, bypassing it and, within just five weeks of the invasion of the Netherlands, forced the formidable France to sue for peace. In other words, Germany achieved an unprecedented victory in world history and carried out a splendid decisive war even against France. However, if asked whether this truly represents the nature of modern warfare, I would emphatically answer, “No.”

During the First World War, Germany’s military power was superior to the Allied forces in many respects, but Germany was vastly outnumbered, and the will to fight was equally unyielding on both sides, leading to a roughly equal contest. However, since Hitler took control of Germany, the nation had been united in a true national effort, focusing all its strength on the massive expansion of military power. In contrast, the liberal democracies of France and Britain passively observed this without taking significant action. As a result, the German air force was recognized worldwide as decisively superior in both quality and quantity. When the war finally broke out, it was clear that the German mechanized divisions were not only extremely elite and superior, but the number of German general divisions also seemed to outnumber the French and British forces by perhaps more than a third. Moreover, while the entire national power of Germany was being completely unified and mobilized under the leadership of the heroic Hitler, during Germany’s occupation of the Rhineland a few years earlier, France had decisively called for a military response based on the Versailles Treaty, but Britain opposed it. Even after that, it is believed that the two countries could not agree on operational plans. Due to this, the French will to fight was not as strong as it had been during the First World War, and the extension of the Maginot Line remained largely unconstructed.

It seems that France, with its significantly inferior military power, should have taken a defensive stance at the border. The military authorities likely wanted to do so, but due to political strategy, they advanced into Belgium. This powerful Belgian expeditionary force encountered the German Blitzkrieg and was thoroughly defeated, with the British forces retreating back to their homeland. If Britain had been truly committed, it should have entrusted its homeland defense to the navy and deployed its entire army to fight in France. It is likely that the relations between the French and British deteriorated considerably as a result. When Germany advanced south, the French army ultimately lacked the capability to resist and, under the leadership of the esteemed General Pétain, surrendered to Germany.

Considering all of this, it is clear that this war was not a contest between equals but rather that the extreme inferiority of the Allied forces, both materially and mentally, inevitably led to this outcome. A protracted war generally occurs only between opponents with roughly equal military strength. In the early stages of the First World War, Germany’s operations seemed poised for total victory, but after being defeated by the French counterattack at the Marne and failing in Ludendorff’s major offensive in 1918 in northern France, which had given the impression that Germany might decisively interrupt the enemy’s operations and decide the war’s outcome, Germany eventually failed. The two sides were roughly equal, leading to a protracted war, and Germany ultimately surrendered, primarily due to its defeat in the economic war.

Although Finland eventually succumbed to the Soviet Union, it demonstrated the remarkable defensive capabilities of modern weaponry by holding out against the Soviet onslaught for a long period with extremely inferior military strength. On the Belgian front as well, although the details are still unclear, it appears that the German forces attacking from the Brussels area encountered significant resistance and had difficulty breaking through the enemy’s lines. Although there have been significant advances in air power and tanks compared to the First World War, breaking through a well-prepared and determined enemy front remains exceedingly difficult today, making the likelihood of a protracted war high. Therefore, it can be observed that we are still in an era of protracted warfare.

Chapter 2: The Final War

Since the end of the First World War, we have been living in an era characterized by the tactics of combat groups and the age of protracted warfare. As I mentioned earlier, even though decisive wars occurred in certain parts during the Second World War, the essence of the era remains one of prolonged conflict. However, historical observations make it clear that we will eventually transition into the next era of decisive warfare.

What kind of war will this decisive conflict be? Let’s speculate based on what we know so far. First, in terms of the number of soldiers, today, every able-bodied man is called to participate in war. In the next conflict, not only men but also women, and if it becomes truly comprehensive, people of all ages—young and old—will be involved.

Regarding the evolution of tactics, we have moved from dense formations to line formations, to skirmishers, and then to combat groups. From a geometrical perspective, dense formations can be seen as points, line formations as lines, skirmishers as dotted lines, and combat group tactics as a surface-level strategy. We’ve moved from dotted lines to surfaces. It can be imagined that the next war will involve three-dimensional (volumetric) tactics.

As for how the command units have evolved, although it hasn’t always followed a strict formula, the logic goes like this: the command unit for dense formations was the battalion. With today’s advances in loudspeakers, it might be possible to command a regiment of 3,000 men to move all at once with the order “Advance!” But using just one’s voice, even a person with a strong voice could only command a battalion. When I was young, we vigorously trained in battalion dense formations. However, with line formations, even a person with a strong voice could not command a battalion, so the command unit became the company. With skirmishers, a company commander could not give orders, so the platoon commander had to take charge, making the platoon the command unit. In the tactics of combat groups, the clear command unit is the squad—typically a squad equipped with one light machine gun and about a dozen rifles. The command units have progressively gotten smaller, from battalion to company to platoon, and then to the squad. It stands to reason that the next command unit will be the individual soldier.

When the command unit becomes the individual and the scale involves the entire nation, it means that the full extent of a nation’s war power will be utilized to its maximum capacity. The method of warfare will likely center around volumetric tactics, meaning primarily aerial combat. We cannot comprehend anything beyond three dimensions, such as a four-dimensional world. If such a thing exists, it would probably be something like the spirit world or the realm of ghosts, which is beyond our understanding. In essence, this next decisive war will reach the ultimate limits of warfare development.

In this next decisive war, where warfare reaches its ultimate limits, war itself will cease to exist. Humanity’s instinct for conflict will not disappear, but war will. How can conflict persist without war? It’s because the conflicts between nations will disappear—in other words, the world will unify as a result of this final decisive war.

Some may think that my explanation thus far is far-fetched, but I am convinced that it is theoretically sound. The ultimate development of warfare will make war impossible. For example, Japan’s unification at the end of the Warring States period was a result of military advancements, particularly in weaponry. Nobunaga, Hideyoshi, and Ieyasu—three of the most remarkable figures in world history—were born in Japan at the same time. Their collaborative efforts led to Japan’s unification. Nobunaga, with his genius, shattered the rigid structures that hindered major reforms. However, it would have been problematic if his genius had continued to shine after that, which is why Akechi Mitsuhide killed him. Nobunaga died because his task was complete. Hideyoshi then roughly completed Japan’s unification and even demonstrated Japan’s power by invading Korea. Finally, Ieyasu emerged to meticulously organize everything like a meticulous caretaker. It is deeply regrettable that the Tokugawa regime did not implement the emperor-centered ideology that Nobunaga and Hideyoshi envisioned, but these three figures nonetheless unified Japan. The reason unification was possible was due to the arrival of firearms from Tanegashima. No matter how great Nobunaga or Hideyoshi were, unification would not have been successful with just spears and bows. Nobunaga, understanding the times, proclaimed the great cause of reverence for the emperor and made clear the focal point for Japan’s unification, but he also laid the groundwork by purchasing a large quantity of firearms from Sakai.

In today’s world, if we were to eliminate all projectile weapons beyond pistols, political parties would likely not bother with verbal battles during elections. Verbal contests are slow in determining outcomes, and they would certainly resort to physical force. However, the police have pistols, and soldiers have machine guns. No matter how skilled one is in martial arts like kendo or judo, it is of no use in such situations. Therefore, despite being an indirect method, elections are contested through verbal battles. The development of weaponry is what maintains peace in the world. In this next, terrifying decisive war, humanity will reach a point where war is simply no longer feasible. Only then will humanity finally achieve the true peace that it has long yearned for.

In short, when the military force of one region of the world can swiftly exert its power over all parts of the globe, subduing any resistance, the world will naturally unify.

Now, let us imagine what form this decisive war will take. The war will involve everyone—men, women, young, and old. It won’t just be people; every aspect of nature—mountains, rivers, trees—will be drawn into the vortex of war. However, not everyone, including women and children, will go off to fight in places like Manchuria, Siberia, or the South Seas. There are two critical aspects to war.

One is to strike the enemy—to inflict damage. The other is to endure the damage inflicted upon you. In other words, in the next decisive war, while the ones striking the enemy will be a select group of elite troops, the ones who must endure will be the entire nation. Even in today’s European war, since there is no absolute confidence in the success of aerial warfare, defenseless cities are not bombed. While they claim to be bombing military facilities, in a true decisive war, troops who are determined to die for their country are not prime targets. Instead, the weakest individuals and the most crucial national infrastructure will become targets. Industrial cities and political centers will be thoroughly targeted. Thus, old and young, men and women, mountains, rivers, trees, pigs, and chickens will all be treated the same. This will lead to a truly comprehensive annihilation war conducted by air forces. The nation must cultivate a steely will to endure this devastation. Moreover, it is widely known that current buildings are extremely vulnerable. With thorough national awareness, I strongly propose that the state should immediately, within the next twenty years at most, undertake fundamental air defense measures in major cities. This should include a massive overhaul of government authorities, the complete abolition of all secondary schools and above in urban areas (a fundamental reform of the education system), the decentralization of industries, and a significant reorganization of urban populations, accompanied by extensive reconstruction of necessary urban areas.

As long as the army and navy exist in their current form, the final decisive war will not occur. Mobilization and transport are too slow to be effective. Taking ten to twenty days to move warships across the Pacific is out of the question. Even the current air force is insufficient. Even if, hypothetically, aircraft development allows Germany to conduct a massive air raid on London and decide the war through air combat, it would still be challenging in the case of Germany and Russia. The same applies to the relationship between Russia and Japan. Furthermore, a decisive air battle between Japan and the United States, separated by the Pacific, is still far in the future. The time when a decisive air battle is fought across the vast Pacific will mark the final major showdown of humanity. This will be the era when aircraft can circle the globe without landing. In addition, the destructive weapons being used in the current European war are still not decisive enough. Far more advanced, unimaginable weapons capable of flattening tens of thousands of people with a single blow must be developed.

Planes will circle the globe without landing, and the most advanced destructive weapons will be used. For instance, if a war starts today, by the next morning, as the sun rises, the capitals and major cities of enemy nations would be completely destroyed. In exchange, Osaka, Tokyo, Beijing, and Shanghai would all be reduced to rubble. Everything would be blown away… Such is the level of destruction that I envision. War would end in a short period. As long as we’re talking about things like total mobilization and total war, the final war will not come. Such lukewarm actions belong to the era of prolonged warfare and have no place in a decisive war. In the next decisive war, the attack will be so swift that there will be no time to even take shelter from the storm. Those who create such decisive weapons and can endure this devastation to the end will emerge as the final victors.

Chapter 3: The Unification of the World

When we take a broad view of Western history, we see that in ancient times, Rome unified the region following the conflicts between various states. During the Middle Ages, the Church took over this role, and when its influence waned, new states began to emerge. As nationalism gradually developed, there was a brief moment during the French Revolution when globalism was advocated. Figures like Goethe and Napoleon truly idealized globalism, but ultimately, this goal was not achieved, and the world entered an era dominated by nationalism, leading up to the First World War.

The profound devastation of the European War led to another experiment in globalism with the creation of the League of Nations. However, it was too idealistic too soon, and the League of Nations ultimately became a hollow institution. Nevertheless, we did not regress to the peak era of nationalism before the European War; instead, we entered an era of national alliances. Broadly speaking, the world is now divided into four major blocs.

The first bloc is the Soviet Union, a federation of socialist states. While the world may have lost its fascination with Marxism, the Soviet Union’s unique capabilities, particularly demonstrated during the Second World War, cannot be ignored. The second bloc is the Americas, centered around the United States, which is gradually integrating North and South America. Although there is significant resistance to this union in South America, where ethnic and economic ties to Europe are strong, the overall trend is steadily moving toward the unification of the Americas.

Next is Europe. The Versailles system, established after the First World War, was reactionary and untenable, leading inevitably to the current catastrophe. As this war began, the prevailing opinion among Britain’s intellectual elite was that “if we win this war, we will not return to the Versailles system. The Nazis must be defeated for the sake of humanity’s peace, and we must establish a new European union based on our principles of liberalism.” What about Germany? In the fall of last year, when German ambassador Franz von Papen, who was stationed in Turkey, was on his way back to Germany, he was asked by a journalist in Istanbul about Germany’s war aims. Despite not being a Nazi and needing to be cautious, Papen declared that “if Germany wins, we will create a European federation.” It is believed that Hitler’s ideal is to create a European federation guided by the Nazi worldview of a “community of fate.” Given Germany’s actions after France’s defeat, this seems beyond doubt. After the First World War, Austria’s Coudenhove-Kalergi advocated for a Pan-Europe, and statesmen like France’s Briand and Germany’s Stresemann showed great enthusiasm for this idea, but it never materialized. In light of the current catastrophe, the idea of creating a European union seems to be once again becoming a serious consideration for Europeans.

Lastly, we have East Asia. At present, Japan and China are engaged in a massive war, the likes of which has never been seen in the region before. However, this war is ultimately a painful process for the two countries to truly form an alliance. Japan has gradually come to recognize this since the Konoe Statement. In fact, from the very beginning of the war, it was called a “holy war” with this in mind. Japan is increasingly adopting the belief that no matter the sacrifice, as long as a new alliance between Japan and China is firmly established, nothing more is needed. After the Meiji Restoration, Japan aimed to complete its nation-state, but this also led to a tendency to disregard other ethnic groups. The biggest reason Japan failed to win the hearts of other ethnic groups in Taiwan, Korea, Manchuria, and China lies in this attitude. Reflecting deeply on this is the foundation for resolving the incident, achieving the Showa Restoration, and forming the East Asia League. In China, too, Sun Yat-sen’s nationalism has evolved since the time of the Three Principles of the People, and I believe that the current incident will lead to its development in response to new global trends. In today’s global situation, if the nations of East Asia, which are lagging behind in scientific civilization, want to compete with Westerners, it is essential that we unite through spiritual and moral strength. I believe that the wise Japanese and Chinese people will soon fully understand this and reach mutual understanding.

There is also the reality of the British Empire as a bloc, which still controls vast territories such as Canada, Africa, India, Australia, and the South Pacific. However, I do not consider this to be significant. The British Empire’s time ended in the 19th century. During a period when the only powerful nations were in Europe, Britain maintained its control by securing naval supremacy, monopolizing the route to the colonies from Europe, and constantly pitting European powers against each other to ensure its own security and dominance.

However, by the end of the 19th century, the British Empire was already being questioned, especially as Germany began to build a large navy and pursued the “Three Bs” policy, which aimed to extend its influence by land from Berlin to Baghdad and Egypt. Britain’s ability to subdue Germany through naval supremacy alone became increasingly uncertain, which was the fundamental cause of the First World War. Fortunately, Germany was defeated. Since Britain embarked on its global policy, it had successively defeated Spain, Portugal, and the Netherlands, and later Napoleon’s France, becoming the world’s dominant power for a century. But in the end, Britain faced its final showdown with the German nation.

Britain’s victory in the First World War granted it the honor of being the undefeated champion in the European power struggle. However, this moment of honor was also the beginning of the end. Just when Britain thought it could finally relax, Japan emerged as a significant power in the Far East, and the United States was asserting itself in the New World. Today, the British Empire retains its territories largely thanks to the self-restraint of Japan and America, not through its own strength.

Britain’s territories in the Americas, including Canada, cannot be held against the power of the United States. From Singapore eastward, including Australia and the South Pacific, Britain cannot maintain its hold against Japan’s might. Even in India, the Soviet Union or Japan has more influence than Britain. The so-called invincible British navy might only be able to secure its African colonies at best. The British Empire has become a crafty old fox, surviving through historical inertia and diplomatic maneuvering, much like Belgium and the Netherlands. We have long believed that the first half of the 20th century would be the period of the British Empire’s collapse, but in this current European war, the empire is being struck at its core by a resurgent Germany, and it is increasingly becoming a relic of history.

In this era of national alliances, scattered entities like the British Empire are no longer viable. Only regions that are geographically contiguous will naturally form a unified entity, as determined by the course of world history. I view the post-World War I era of national alliances as the semifinal phase leading up to the final war. After the Second World War, I anticipate that the world will be divided between two major blocs: the Japan-Germany-Italy alliance, representing East Asia and Europe, and the Americas. The Soviet Union, while tactically positioned between the two, is likely to lean more toward the Americas, according to common sense. Ultimately, I believe that two main forces will emerge as the final contenders. In my view, these two will be East Asia and the Americas.

When we consider human history, even though this is not an academic analysis, it seems that civilization, which originated in the western part of Asia, has advanced both eastward and westward, and now, after several millennia, these two have finally come face to face across the vast Pacific Ocean. It is destiny that these two will engage in the final showdown. From a military perspective, the most challenging confrontation is between the two groups separated by the Pacific. Thus, I believe that these two blocs will remain as the final contenders in the semifinals.

Based on this understanding, we see that the Soviet Union has made great efforts, sacrificing countless lives and resources under Stalin’s leadership as it transitions from liberalism to a period of control. However, it seems as fragile as porcelain—hard, but likely to shatter if dropped. Should something happen to Stalin, it could collapse from within. This would be a great misfortune.

Regarding Europe, despite the considerable strength of Germany, Britain, and France, these impressive nations are all located too close to each other. Although they may aspire to form a “community of fate” or a liberal union, the reality is that Europe has always been the home of conflict. The instinct to fight may lead to their mutual downfall. Although this may be disrespectful to our ally Germany, which is performing extraordinarily under Hitler’s leadership, I can’t help but think this way. European nations must engage in deep self-reflection. Given this, it seems likely that the rather lazy East Asians and the flashy but youthful Americas will be the ones to reach the final showdown. These two will likely engage in humanity’s last great war across the Pacific. This war will not last long; it will be resolved quickly. The most significant question of human destiny—whether the Emperor of Japan should be the world’s ruler or the President of the United States—will be decided. In other words, the conflict will determine whether Eastern royal principles or Western hegemony will be the guiding principle for world unification.

It is our firm belief that the Emperor, who has upheld the Eastern moral tradition for ages, will soon be revered as the leader of the East Asia League and eventually as the Emperor of the world. In light of this, I urge the Japanese people to cultivate humility and willingly bear the greatest sacrifices as our national power increases, ensuring that the people of East Asia will sincerely revere the Emperor’s position. The day when the Emperor is truly recognized as the leader of the East Asia League will be the day that the league is fully realized. However, even when the Emperor is acknowledged as the leader of the East Asia League and the world, Japan itself will not become the leader.

So, when will this final war occur? While this may sound more like fortune-telling than science, it is not purely fantasy. As I have mentioned several times, historical periods of great changes in the art of warfare have coincided with major cultural shifts. If we consider the time spans, the Middle Ages lasted around a thousand years, followed by the Renaissance up until the French Revolution, which lasted roughly three to four hundred years. There are various interpretations, but this is the general estimate. From the French Revolution to the start of the First World War was clearly 125 years. If we apply the ratio of a thousand years, three hundred years, and 125 years, how long should we expect between the start of the First World War and the next final war? When I asked many people, the general consensus was that it would be within fifty years. Although this seems quite short, and initially, I thought it might be seventy years, I eventually concluded that it would indeed be within fifty years.

The First World War began in 1914, and more than twenty years have passed since then. From today, it will likely take another twenty or thirty years before we enter the period of the next decisive war—the final war. Although this seems very short, consider this: the airplane was invented only about thirty years ago, and it has only been around twenty years since airplanes became truly functional, with the most rapid advancements occurring in the last few years. The rapid progress of civilization is unprecedented, and we must not use conventional wisdom to predict the future.

This year, American passenger planes are expected to fly in the sub-stratosphere. I believe that the conquest of the stratosphere will soon be realized. Given the progress of science, there is no saying what terrifying new weapons might emerge. With this in mind, over the next thirty years, the entire nation must be united, and indeed the hundreds of millions of people in East Asia must band together and demonstrate their full potential.

How long will this final war last? Although this is even more speculative, if we assume a decisive battle between East Asia and the Americas, it will likely be resolved very quickly once it begins. However, even though both blocs would have survived the semifinals, there are still many other significant nations remaining, so the period of the final war, during which the world will become truly unified and the prehistory of humanity will end, could last around twenty years. In other words, we will enter the final period of human conflict within thirty years from now, and within fifty years, the world will be unified. This is the conclusion I have reached.

Chapter 4: The Showa Restoration

The French Revolution marked a major transformation, shifting from protracted wars to decisive battles, and from line formation tactics to skirmish tactics. In Japan, the Meiji Restoration period corresponded to such a transformation. With the First World War, the world shifted from decisive wars to protracted wars, and from skirmish tactics to battle group tactics. Today, we have entered the greatest period of innovation since the French Revolution, and indeed, this innovation is currently underway. This is what we call the Showa Restoration. While many people believe that the Second World War brought about a new era, I see it as a rapid advancement of the transition from liberalism to control-oriented governance, a change that was initiated by the First World War. In other words, this is the Showa Restoration.

The Showa Restoration is not just a Japanese issue. It is about fully integrating the strength of the East Asian peoples to prepare for a decisive battle against the representatives of Western civilization. Just as the Meiji Restoration focused on the restoration of imperial rule and the abolition of feudal domains, the political goal of the Showa Restoration is the formation of the East Asia League. The principles of this league were identified during the Manchurian Incident, and they are now on the verge of becoming state policy.

There are two critical factors for the success of the Showa Restoration, which centers on the formation of the East Asia League. First, there must be the creation of a new morality for the Eastern peoples. Just as the Meiji Restoration involved a shift in loyalty from the feudal lords to the Emperor, the formation of the East Asia League requires the emergence of a new morality that transcends ethnic conflicts and promotes true unity among the states of East Asia. The realization of ethnic harmony, the spirit that guided the founding of Manchukuo, is central to this new morality. This spirit, this feeling, is of utmost importance.

Second, we must develop material power that rivals that of our potential adversaries. East Asia, which has lagged behind, must develop a productive capacity that surpasses that of Europe or the Americas. From this perspective, the current national policy focuses on the formation of the East Asia League and the massive expansion of productive capacity. As the latecomers to scientific civilization, we cannot rely on conventional methods to achieve this expansion. We must somehow develop an industrial capability far greater than that of the Westerners.

Recently, I was deeply impressed by a book titled “Nazi National Defense Economics” by Kanichiro Kamei. It explains how Germany, despite being short of resources and oppressed under the Versailles system, was spurred to action, leading to a second industrial revolution over the past twenty years, especially in the last ten years.

Although I do not fully understand the theory, the essence is that Germany has shifted from traditional manufacturing under normal temperature and pressure to high-temperature, high-pressure industries and electrochemical processes. This shift has freed them from the constraints of traditional raw materials, allowing them to produce anything with ease. This remarkable second industrial revolution is currently unfolding. It is this confidence in their industrial revolution that likely empowered Germany to plunge into the current great war. Although we are significantly behind in scientific civilization, we possess keen intellects. When I look at everyone here, you all seem like bright individuals. We must mobilize all our intelligence to surpass Germany’s scientific progress and industrial development, swiftly acquiring the latest science and the most advanced industrial capabilities. This must be the most crucial condition of our national policy. We must carry out our own industrial revolution ahead of Germany, and certainly ahead of America.

This great industrial revolution will have two effects. One is destructive, and the other is constructive. The destructive aspect is this: We are already heading toward the final showdown thirty years from now, but our current airplanes are insufficient. We must quickly develop extraordinary aircraft capable of operating freely in the stratosphere. Additionally, we need to create decisive weapons that can deliver overwhelming blows to the enemy. This industrial revolution must produce astonishing decisive weapons, far surpassing Germany’s new weapons in this war, so that we can establish an invincible position for the final showdown thirty years from now. Germany has only had a few years to prepare for war. I give you twenty years. Isn’t that more than enough time?

The other aspect is constructive. Even the destructive aspect is not mere destruction. The final great showdown may reduce the world’s population by half, but politically, the world will become unified. This, in a broader sense, is constructive. Simultaneously, the beautiful constructive aspect of the industrial revolution is the ability to produce essential materials free from the constraints of traditional raw materials. The most important resources for us, such as water and air, are not sources of conflict. They are abundant. While water disputes occasionally occur, there is rarely any fighting over air. Through this remarkable industrial revolution, we will produce everything we need. The distinction between resource-rich and resource-poor nations will disappear, as we will be able to create anything we require.

However, this grand endeavor must be underpinned by the spirit of nation-building, the unifying faith in Japan’s national essence. As the world becomes politically unified and thought and belief are harmonized, the need to fight over essential materials will disappear. This will be the true realization of world unification, or “Eight Corners of the World Under One Roof” (Hakkō Ichiu). Diseases will disappear. Although current medical science is still rudimentary, true scientific progress will eliminate disease and realize the dream of eternal youth and immortality.

The East Asia League Association’s “Theory of the Showa Restoration” outlines that under the expectation of a final showdown occurring within thirty years, we must aim to make East Asia’s productive capacity comparable to that of Western civilization within twenty years. This is the economic construction goal. From this perspective, an authority has examined America’s productive capacity twenty years from now, and the results are astonishing. Although I don’t remember the exact figures, the general estimate is that the annual production of steel and oil will reach several hundred million tons, and coal will require several billion tons annually. Under the current method of relying on underground resources, this civilization will completely reach its limits within twenty years. This industrial revolution is inevitable, and the observation that “human prehistory is about to end” seems extremely rational from this perspective.

Chapter 5: Buddhist Prophecies

This time, I would like to shift focus slightly and discuss a perspective from the standpoint of religion. One of the major aspects of religion is the longing for non-scientific prophecies. Human beings are not entirely satisfied or at peace with scientific judgments or rationality alone, which is why there is a strong desire for prophecies and foresight. The Japanese people today are eager for a way to resolve the current situation and are in need of foresight. They want prophecies. Hitler rose to power, and what made that possible was his foresight. After the First World War, when Germany was in a complete deadlock and no one could conceive a way out of that dire situation, Hitler harbored the belief that by overthrowing the Treaty of Versailles, the nation could be revived. What was crucial was Hitler’s foresight. Initially, he was treated as a madman, but when, after a few years, the German people began to see that his foresight might actually be true, they began to trust him, leading to the current state of affairs. I believe that prophecy is one of the most important aspects of religion.

From the perspective of prophecy, I think Buddhism, particularly the religion of Nichiren, is perhaps the most grand and precise. When you look at the sky, you see many stars. According to Buddhism, each of these stars is a world unto itself. Among them, though we don’t know which one, there is a world called the Western Pure Land, which is a wonderful world. There may be even better worlds out there. In each of these worlds, there is always a Buddha who presides over it, and these Buddhas have a certain period during which they rule. For example, on Earth, we are currently in the era of Shakyamuni Buddha. However, Shakyamuni will not rule this world forever. There is already a successor planned, and it is said that the future Buddha, Maitreya, will come next. Furthermore, the era of each Buddha is divided into three periods: the Age of True Dharma, the Age of Semblance Dharma, and the Age of the Decline of Dharma. The Age of True Dharma is when the Buddha’s teachings are most purely practiced, the Age of Semblance Dharma is when practices similar to the original ones prevail, and the Age of the Decline of Dharma is, as the name suggests, when the teachings begin to degenerate. Shakyamuni’s era is said to be composed of 1,000 years for the Age of True Dharma, 1,000 years for the Age of Semblance Dharma, and 10,000 years for the Age of the Decline of Dharma, totaling 12,000 years (see the chart on page 53).

Moreover, a sutra called the Daishikkyō contains even more detailed prophecies for the first 2,500 years after the Buddha’s death. According to this sutra, the first 500 years after the Buddha’s death are called the Era of Liberation, during which people can attain spiritual powers and understand the affairs of the spiritual world by following the Buddha’s teachings. It was a time when humans were pure and possessed sharp intuition—a good era. The Mahayana sutras were not written by Shakyamuni himself. They were written during the first 500 years after his death, during the Era of Liberation, by various people. I find it fascinating that these sutras, written by many people over such a long time, form a coherent system without significant contradictions. I believe this coherence was made possible because they resonated with something in the spiritual realm. Some people dismiss the Mahayana sutras because they are not directly the words of the Buddha, but I think the fact that the Mahayana sutras were not spoken by the Buddha actually demonstrates the profound and mysterious nature of Buddhism.

The next 500 years are called the Era of Meditation, during which people were not as straightforward as in the Era of Liberation, so they sought enlightenment through meditation. These first 1,000 years are known as the Age of True Dharma. During this period, Buddhism spread throughout India, the land of meditation, and saved the people there.

The first 500 years of the Age of Semblance Dharma are known as the Era of Reading and Reciting, a time focused on studying the teachings. This was an era of scholarly study, where people sought to find peace by studying the Buddhist scriptures and exploring Buddhist theories. The transition from the land of meditation, India, to the land of organization and theory, China, occurred during the early part of this Age of Semblance Dharma. The voluminous sutras, which were preached in a scattered manner in India, were systematically organized through the diligent efforts of the Chinese people, who read and re-read them multiple times. The greatest contributor to this work was Master Tiantai, who lived during this scholarly period. The Buddhist organization established by Master Tiantai remains largely undisputed among many Buddhist schools to this day.

The next 500 years of the Age of Semblance Dharma are known as the Era of Building Many Pagodas and Temples. This was a time when many temples were built, adorned with magnificent statues of the Buddha as their main object of worship, and incense and beautiful voices were used in Buddhist ceremonies. During this time, Buddhism entered Japan, a country focused on practice. The distinguished Buddhist art of the Nara and early Heian periods was born during this era.

The next 500 years, the first 500 years of the Age of the Decline of Dharma, are known as the Era of Strife. During this time, the Buddha predicted that ordinary Buddhist powers would no longer be effective, and conflict would become rampant. As predicted, during the Age of the Decline of Dharma, the monks of Mount Hiei, with headbands tied tightly around their heads, descended the mountain to burn down Miidera Temple and even carried the sacred palanquin of the Sanno Shrine into the capital. The era had come when monks who were supposed to preach began to brandish their fists, just as the Buddha had foretold. In Buddhism, a Buddha must not only appear during their time but also prophesy the progression of their teachings as they spread, which is why Shakyamuni Buddha is said to have left prophecies for 2,500 years, even though his teachings are supposed to last for 10,000 years. The Daishikkyō prophecy ends by stating that after 2,500 years, Shakyamuni’s teachings would no longer be effective, implying that his teachings would be exhausted after this period.

However, in the Lotus Sutra, which Master Tiantai considered the highest Buddhist scripture, it is predicted that during the Era of Strife, the Buddha would send forth his messenger, a general bearing a sword, to guide the people of that time. This messenger is said to carry out certain tasks, spread specific teachings, and lead the long era of the Age of the Decline of Dharma. In other words, during the period of 2,000 years after the Buddha’s death, the world will become extremely complicated, so the Buddha left instructions for his messenger to appear during that time and for the people to obey his commands. Nichiren, who was born about 220 years after the start of the Age of the Decline of Dharma, felt doubts about the Jōkyū War, entered the Buddhist path, and realized that he was the bodhisattva predicted in the Lotus Sutra who was to appear during the Age of the Decline of Dharma. He regulated his actions according to the Lotus Sutra and manifested all the prophecies in the sutras within his own life. His prophecies about internal strife and external threats were fulfilled by the internal conflicts in Japan and the Mongol invasions. As his prophecies were fulfilled, he gradually clarified his position within Buddhism, and after all his prophecies were fulfilled, he publicly declared himself as the messenger of Shakyamuni Buddha sent to guide the Age of the Decline of Dharma. He passed away the year after the great national crisis of the Kōan era had ended.

Nichiren also made significant prophecies about the future. He predicted that an unprecedented great war would surely break out in the world, centered around Japan. At that time, the bodhisattva predicted in the Lotus Sutra would reappear in the world, build the sanctuary of the true teachings in Japan, and achieve the unification of the world centered on Japan’s national polity. This was his prophecy before passing away.

Now, I humbly present my personal belief as an amateur in Buddhist teachings. Nichiren’s teachings are centered on three elements: the True Dharma of the Title, the True Dharma of the Object of Worship, and the True Dharma of the Sanctuary. The Title was first revealed, the Object of Worship was revealed when Nichiren was exiled to Sado Island, and the Sanctuary was only briefly mentioned at Minobu, where Nichiren said that the time had not yet come and that it should be awaited. This is because the Sanctuary would only be needed when Japan occupies a global position, and the time had not yet come during the Ashikaga or Tokugawa periods. However, when Japan’s national polity began to take on global significance during the Meiji era, the late Tanaka Chigaku-sensei was born and completed the organization of Nichiren’s religion, particularly clarifying the theory of the True Dharma of the Sanctuary, or the theory of Japan’s national polity. Thus, it was only in the Meiji era that Nichiren’s teachings, that is, Buddhism, were fully and systematically clarified by Tanaka Chigaku-sensei.

However, something strange happened when Nichiren’s teachings were fully clarified—serious questions arose regarding the date of the Buddha’s death among Buddhists. This is a significant issue because if Nichiren had not been born at the beginning of the Age of the Decline of Dharma, but instead during the Age of Semblance Dharma, it would mean that Nichiren was not the predicted messenger. This question challenges the foundation of Nichiren’s religion, yet Nichiren’s followers have comforted themselves by saying that history is unclear and that they cannot tell which is true. Such believers may be fine, but those who do not accept this will not trust in the dream of Itten Shikai Kaiki Myōhō (the unification of the world under the True Dharma).

This significant issue is something Nichiren’s followers are overlooking. The Kanjin Honzon-shō states, “We must know that when these four bodhisattvas appear and demonstrate refutation, they will become wise kings and sincerely admonish foolish kings. When they carry out propagation, they will become monks and spread the true teachings.” Both instances of their appearance, as indicated by the sutra, are within the first 500 years of the Age of the Decline of Dharma. The strife during the period of propagation should be understood primarily as disputes within Buddhism. Until the Meiji era, all Buddhists believed that Nichiren was born at the beginning of the Age of the Decline of Dharma. During that time, acting as if it was still the Age of Semblance Dharma would have been unacceptable. Nichiren’s actions at the beginning of the Age of the Decline of Dharma were only natural. According to the calculations of the Buddhists of that time, the first 500 years of the Age of the Decline of Dharma roughly corresponded to the period from when the monks of Mount Hiei began their unruly behavior to the time of Oda Nobunaga. Although Nobunaga persecuted the Hokke and Jōdo sects, that period marked the end of the violent behavior of the monks, thus fulfilling the Buddha’s prophecy.

The strife in the case of refutation should be understood as global war. In this regard, we must consider the current year in relation to the Buddha’s death. While there may be complex debates among historians, let us consider the commonly accepted estimate that about 2,430 years have passed since the Buddha’s death. This suggests that the beginning of the Age of the Decline of Dharma coincided with the time when Westerners discovered America and arrived in India—when the conflicts between Eastern and Western civilizations began. These conflicts have since deepened and are now on the verge of becoming the final global showdown.

It seems that the question of dates arose only after all of Nichiren’s teachings had been fully revealed during the Meiji era, which I believe to be a manifestation of the Buddha’s supernatural power. The first 500 years of the Age of the Decline of Dharma were cleverly used in two distinct ways, leading me to believe that the unification of the world as envisioned by Buddhism should be completed approximately 60 to 70 years from now. I previously mentioned a period of 50 years for the war, and it is strange that these periods are somewhat similar. Although Nichiren placed great importance on prophecy, he did not predict when the great world war would occur or when the unification of the world and the establishment of the True Dharma Sanctuary would happen. One might criticize this as irresponsible, but I believe that prophecy was unnecessary because it was already understood. He was simply waiting for the moment to manifest the Buddha’s supernatural power. If not, Nichiren should have made a specific prophecy about the timing, which I believe he would have done.

Those who specialize in the Lotus Sutra might dismiss this as a layperson’s superficial interpretation. However, what strikes me most powerfully is a statement by Tanaka Chigaku-sensei, the foremost successor of Nichiren, in a lecture given in 1918, where he said, “The unification of the world under the True Dharma can be achieved within 48 years” (from Shishiō Zenshū, Teachings Volume 1, page 367). He stated that the world would be unified around 48 years from 1919. Although he did not explain how he arrived at this calculation, I believe that since Tanaka-sensei was the person appointed to fully reveal Nichiren’s teachings—just as Master Tiantai had prepared for Nichiren’s teachings—his words carry great weight.

Furthermore, Nichiren predicted that the Japanese Buddhism that came from India would eventually return to India and continue to illuminate the darkness of the Age of the Decline of Dharma. In an effort to fulfill this prophecy, Fujii Nichikan, a monk of Nipponzan Myohoji, went to India to beat the drum of Buddhism. However, the Sino-Japanese War broke out, and the British propaganda made the Indians believe that Japan was struggling and in danger. As a result, a Buddhist monk in India named Yalladaya, who had a close friendship with Fujii Nichikan, said, “If Japan loses, it will be disastrous. I have a relic of the Buddha that I feel should be sent to Japan.” Fujii Nichikan returned to Japan two years ago and entrusted it to the Japanese army and navy. According to Fujii Nichikan, the Buddhists of Ceylon (Sri Lanka) also firmly believe in the prophecy that the world will be unified under a Buddhist ruler after 2,500 years since the Buddha’s death, and that time is soon approaching according to Ceylon’s calculations.

Chapter 6: Conclusion

When we comprehensively consider everything discussed so far—whether from a military perspective, the general trends in political history, the progress in science and industry, or even from the standpoint of faith—it is certain that humanity’s prehistory is about to come to an end, and we must recognize that this pivotal moment will arrive within several decades. We are now at an unprecedentedly significant period in human history.

There are still those who, viewing the Sino-Japanese War as an extraordinary event, believe that once it is over, a peaceful era will follow. However, such a small-scale change is not what we are talking about. In the past, there were long periods of normalcy, or “ordinary times,” between revolutions. For instance, even between the French Revolution and the First World War, there were times when the world was relatively peaceful. The revolutionary period following the First World War has yet to stabilize, and when this revolution ends, it will immediately lead to the next major upheaval—the final, great showdown for humanity. The current extraordinary time is directly adjacent to the coming super-extraordinary time. The next few decades will be the most critical period during which human history will undergo fundamental changes. If our nation can understand this, I believe that we will naturally be able to mobilize our spirit comprehensively without resorting to overly complicated methods. If East Asia can advance to the semi-finals, with whom will we battle? Earlier, I speculated that it might be the Americas. However, there is something I want everyone to clearly understand: today, wars between nations are often fought for the benefit of one’s own country. Today, Japan and the United States are at odds, and a war might break out. From their perspective, they cannot allow the Dutch East Indies to be monopolized by Japan. From Japan’s perspective, it is outrageous that the United States is enforcing its self-serving Monroe Doctrine while meddling in the stability of East Asia. Many of these wars stem from conflicts of interest. But I am not talking about such wars. The global showdown we envision is not merely about interests. Achieving the long-held, common aspiration of humanity for world unity and eternal peace requires us to fervently wish for an era to come where such brutal and cruel acts like war are unnecessary. This is our daily prayer. However, it is regrettable that humans are so imperfect. This great endeavor cannot be accomplished through mere theoretical debates or moral discourse. Only by the most serious and earnest combat by those who hold the last championship title in the world will the guiding principles for global unity be established. Therefore, the war we expect to face in several decades is an inevitable, enormous sacrifice necessary to achieve eternal peace for all humanity.

Even if we were to engage in a final battle with the European bloc or the Americas, it is not out of hatred for them, nor is it about competing interests. Although terrible acts of brutality will occur, the fundamental spirit is akin to a martial arts competition where both participants give their all. The culmination of human civilization will be determined by a just and honorable struggle where we will face divine judgment.

As Orientals, especially as Japanese, we must constantly maintain this correct mindset and must never insult or despise the enemy. Instead, we must face them with full respect and dignity in battle.

Some people might say, “What you’re saying seems true, so don’t spread it too widely; otherwise, the other side will prepare, so let’s do it secretly.” But this is not the attitude of an Eastern man, a Japanese man. This is not the way of the Eastern ethos and certainly not the Imperial Way. Let them prepare fully; we will also prepare, and we will face them in an honorable battle. This is what I believe.

However, I must clarify that a people or a nation that can grasp the great significance of this era sooner than anyone else is inherently destined to be the leading force in the world. From this perspective, I am convinced that our most important task is to ensure that all Japanese people and all East Asian peoples quickly come to understand this great spirit of the age in order to achieve the grand objective of the Shōwa Restoration.

Part 2: Questions and Answers Regarding the “Theory of the Final War”

Written on November 9, 1941, in Sakata

Question 1: The idea that world unification will be achieved through war is an affront to humanity, and I believe that humanity must build an absolutely peaceful world without resorting to war.

Answer: The instincts of survival competition and mutual aid coexist within human nature. The yearning for justice and the reliance on power also coexist within our hearts. In the past, it is said that monks who lost religious debates would remove their robes, offer them to their opponents, and convert to the winning side, but this is something that is beyond the imagination of people today. Even in purely academic matters, we occasionally see situations where theoretical disputes are difficult to resolve. Without overwhelming power, it is usually very difficult to resolve practical issues related to politics, economics, and other matters solely through ethical or theoretical means. The resolution of humanity’s greatest challenge—world unification—ultimately lies in a serious struggle where all possible forces are concentrated, leading to divine judgment. While it is truly regrettable, there is no other way.

Emperor Jinmu, who envisioned “bringing peace to the world without resorting to the power of the sword,” eventually had to resort to military force repeatedly. Similarly, Emperor Meiji, who declared that “the four seas are all brothers,” ultimately led the nation into the major wars of the Sino-Japanese and Russo-Japanese conflicts. The Buddha taught that protecting the true Dharma cannot be achieved through mere theoretical disputes but requires taking up arms and confronting the enemy, which reflects a deep understanding of human nature. Nichiren Shonin, who advocated tirelessly for the realization of the ideal of “all under heaven returning to the True Dharma,” also predicted that the unification of faith would ultimately be achieved only through an unprecedented great struggle.

We sincerely long for the unification of the world without resorting to the sword (as stated on page 62), but sadly, this is likely impossible. If it is by any chance possible, then even for that purpose, the Emperor, who is the highest guardian of morality, must have absolute and supreme military power. As civilization progresses, the world is not becoming more peaceful, but rather, conflicts are intensifying. As the final war approaches, we must constantly prepare with unwavering confidence in our ultimate victory.

The final war will unify the world. However, the final war is only the rough work necessary to achieve unification, and the development and completion of the ideal of “Eight Corners of the World Under One Roof” should be achieved by peaceful and rightful means, not by force.

Question 2: As long as humanity’s instinct for conflict remains, isn’t it inevitable that war will never cease, just as it has not ceased up until now?

Answer: Indeed, since the dawn of human history, war has never ceased. However, it is premature to assert that this will continue to be the case after today. Before the Meiji Restoration, who in Japan could have imagined that war within the country would cease? Due to the rapid development of civilization, particularly in transportation and the significant advancements in weaponry, the occurrence of war within Japan is now completely unthinkable (p. 35). As civilization progresses, military power increases, and with the expansion of its sphere of influence, the scope of political unification has also broadened. When military power based in one part of the world is able to rapidly project its influence everywhere and quickly subdue any resistance, the world will naturally unify (p. 35).

A further issue arises: even if an unprecedentedly large war were to unify the world, wouldn’t it soon lead to the emergence of forces that resist that control, resulting in war and the re-establishment of opposing states? However, this is merely a common-sense judgment based on current civilization, without considering the extraordinary leaps in progress that will make the final war possible. The overwhelming destructive power that can obliterate an enemy’s central areas in an instant (p. 37) will not only make the horrors of war extreme but also compel humanity to avoid war, becoming a significant force for peace. Moreover, such powerful advances in civilization will transform global transportation. We should consider an era when circumnavigating the world will take only a few hours, making the earth feel smaller than Japan does today. Humanity will naturally, from the heart, come to understand the futility of national conflicts and war. Furthermore, the final war will bring about the unification of ideologies and faiths, and the progress of civilization will satisfy material needs, making the era of competing for resources through war a thing of the past. In this way, humanity will gradually stop even thinking about war (pp. 49-51).

Humanity’s instinct for conflict will likely not disappear in the coming decades, and it will probably never vanish as long as humanity exists. This instinct for conflict is, on one hand, the driving force behind the development of civilization. However, after the final war, the instinctual drive to use this conflict instinct for armed conflict between nations will naturally dissolve, shifting instead to peaceful competition—the competition to build a higher civilization. For instance, when we were children, it wasn’t rare to see adults fighting in the streets, but today, such sights are almost non-existent. Farmers will direct their competitive spirit toward improving and increasing crop yields, industrialists toward creating superior products, and scholars toward making new discoveries and inventions, each applying themselves with even greater fervor than today to their respective fields, thereby satisfying their combative instincts.

The above, however, is largely a theoretical consideration and somewhat speculative. Yet, for those who believe in the Japanese national polity, the eradication of war must be a firm conviction. The concept of “Eight Corners of the World Under One Roof” embodies the elimination of war. If someone professes belief in “Eight Corners of the World Under One Roof” while in their heart believing in the perpetuity of war, it is a truly pitiable contradiction. In this era, where Japanese nationalism is on the rise and the sanctity of the Japanese national polity is being emphasized, it is deeply regrettable that there are still many who cannot truly believe in the grand ideal of “Eight Corners of the World Under One Roof.”

Question 3: It is hard to believe that the final war could happen within just 30 years, even if it might occur in the distant future.

Answer: I am convinced that the final war will occur in the near future (p. 33-35). My suggestion that the final war will primarily take place between East Asia and the Americas is speculative (p. 44). The idea that the final war will occur within 30 years is more of a prediction than a certainty (p. 45). Even from a common-sense perspective, it is difficult to imagine it happening within 30 years.

However, the final war will be a pivotal moment in human history, one that will bring about extraordinary changes in the world. Up until now, wars have mainly been fought on land and sea. It is common sense to think that the development of warfare on land, with all its obstacles, would not progress rapidly. But when warfare leaps into the air, it will bring about truly earth-shattering changes. The leap into the air has been a human aspiration for thousands of years. When Shakyamuni Buddha sought to preach the central doctrine of the Lotus Sutra, which is beyond ordinary comprehension, he moved the teaching site to the sky above Mount Gṛdhrakūṭa in India. This was an incredibly visionary idea. The leap into the air, with its unimpeded reach, is something that defies the imagination of those who toil on the ground. With the common sense of ground warfare, it is difficult to easily grasp the profound changes that the next war will bring.

The shortening intervals of change in military tactics—first 1,000 years, then 300 years, and then 125 years—suggest that the next change could come within about 50 years. This may be a crude estimate, but it is not entirely baseless. While it may seem that 30 years is too short from a common-sense perspective, when we consider, with reverence, that the next major change will transcend our common sense, I believe it is not wise to dismiss the possibility of it happening within 30 years. If the final war does not occur within 30 years but is delayed by 50, 70, or even 100 years, it will not harm the nation. But if we assume it won’t happen in 30 years and it does, the consequences will be serious.

I have detailed my reasoning based on the rapid progress of technology and science, the state of the industrial revolution, and Buddhist prophecies, arguing that a final war occurring in 30 years is not so outlandish. Furthermore, until World War I, the world was divided into dozens of political units, but since then, we have rapidly entered an era of state alliances, with a clear trend toward four political units today. Some may even see the world already divided into two major camps—liberal democracies and the Axis powers. How do we view this rapid tempo as we near the end of the semifinals?

Moreover, while some people seem to regard totalitarianism as the highest form of human culture, I cannot agree with that. Totalitarianism is inherently too restrictive, demands excessive tension, and lacks safety valves. The frequent purges in the Soviet Union, the executions of the SA leaders in Germany, and the Deputy Führer’s escape should all be seen as symptoms of this tendency. I am convinced that the era of totalitarianism is not something that will continue indefinitely. The current global trend is pushing each country, whether it likes it or not, to adopt totalitarianism to achieve maximum efficiency in preparation for war, even at the expense of safety. Therefore, I see totalitarianism as something like the training camp that martial artists undergo before a championship match.

While a training camp is the best way to increase efficiency, if one were to remain in such a state of tension all year round, it would become unbearable. It should only be carried out for a short period before the decisive battle.

Totalitarianism is a product of humanity’s unconscious intuition that the final war is near, leading us to enter a training camp-like state in preparation for it. For the next few decades, we will likely continue living in this state of preparation, which suggests that the final war is indeed drawing very close.

Question 4: It is said that Eastern civilization is based on “王道” (the Way of Kings or the Path of Righteousness) and Western civilization on “覇道” (the Way of Conquest or the Path of Might). Could you explain this?

Answer: Such a question should ideally be answered by scholars in the field, and it is presumptuous of me to respond. However, I will borrow the opinions of two respected individuals, Shirayagi Shūko and Shimizu Yoshitarō, to offer some thoughts.

The character of a civilization is greatly influenced by climate and geography, with more significant differences arising between the north and the south than between the east and the west. For instance, we, the northern peoples, generally worship the rising sun, while the southern peoples, who suffer from intense heat, also revere the sun but kneel before the setting sun. Just as Muslims worship the setting sun, Buddhists long for the sunset, believing that the Pure Land of Amitabha Buddha lies in the golden light of the west. When Nichiren Shōnin worshiped the rising sun and founded his school of Buddhism, it signified the establishment of true Japanese Buddhism.

In tropical regions, people do not need to worry much about clothing, food, or shelter. Particularly among the ruling class, this led to abstract metaphysical meditation and the development of religion. The so-called three major religions were all born in the subtropics. On the other hand, the southern peoples, accustomed to an easy life, allowed their social systems to become entirely fixed, as seen in India, where even today, a system from four thousand years ago persists, rendering them politically powerless and subject to the rule of a small number of British.

The northern peoples were likely an inferior race that was driven out of the comfortable tropics and subtropics. However, they were trained by adversity and the cold climate, leading to the natural development of scientific pursuits. The strong sense of nationhood that arose from agriculture, combined with the consultative processes born from hunting life, fostered powerful political strength. Today, all the peoples who are flourishing on the world stage belong to these northern races. The southern peoples tend to be autocratic and are not skilled in the operation of parliamentary systems. The ability to reform social systems and political structures is a characteristic of the northern peoples. It is natural that there are significant differences between the history of the Japanese people, who mainly belong to the northern peoples of Asia, and that of the Chinese people, who mainly belong to the southern peoples of Asia. However, while the Han Chinese belong to the southern peoples, the areas along the Yellow River and even the Yangtze River cannot be considered subtropical, and compared to the peoples south of the Himalayas, they exhibit many traits closer to the northern peoples.

Shimizu Yoshitarō states in his book “Nihon Shintai-seiron” (The True System of Japan) as follows: “Although Arctic civilization has dominated the world, it has not brought true happiness to the Arctic peoples themselves. A world built on the science of power, where the strong exploit the weak, has not brought happiness to humanity. Not only the weak, but the strong, too, were unhappy. In truth, the tropical civilization was more religious, more artistic, and better suited to human life goals. Arctic civilization ultimately serves only the economic life of humans, which is merely a means to an end. The state of human life created by Arctic civilization is, therefore, an inversion of priorities.

These two civilizations should not remain separate; they must be unified. The people of India and China have indeed created profound spiritual cultures, but they have not succeeded in mimicking and nurturing the mechanical civilization of the Arctic peoples. Although the white races speak of the stagnation of material culture, their plans for renewal remain confined within the realm of Arctic civilization.

In any case, the Japanese people clearly have their own distinctive characteristics. The Japanese people must unify and integrate these two civilizations—tropical and Arctic—and create a new mode of human life. It seems that the Japanese people are uniquely capable of creating a third civilization by merging these two great civilizations. When the mechanical civilization of the West becomes a means for the spiritual culture of the East, only then will Western material culture gain significance, and Eastern spiritual culture will achieve its true development.”

Western civilization, with its materialistic emphasis derived from Arctic civilization, is therefore a civilization of “覇道” (the Way of Conquest). On the other hand, one might ask whether tropical civilization represents the “王道” (the Way of Kings or the Path of Righteousness). The answer is no. The “王道” (the Way of Kings) must find balance and avoid extremes. It must maintain the purpose of life on the Path of Righteousness while fully utilizing material civilization as a means to achieve that purpose. In other words, “王道” civilization must be the third civilization that Shimizu speaks of.

Even within the northern races, there are significant differences between the civilizations of the northern peoples of Asia and those of Europe. The Japanese people, of course, belong primarily to the northern races. Not only do we match the best of the white races in scientific ability, but the great ideals of our nation’s founding, as clearly and forcefully proclaimed by our Imperial ancestors, flow in our blood as the unshakable faith of our people. Additionally, we have beautifully incorporated elements of tropical civilization by appropriately blending in the blood of the southern races, thus enhancing the grandeur of our civilization. Some recent research suggests that the ancient Chinese civilization was not created by the Han people, who belong to the southern races, but rather by the northern races. The concept of the “Way of Kings” as an ideology can rightly be said to align with the explanation of the Japanese national structure. Even if this ideology was not originally championed by the Han people, they adopted it and have maintained it to this day. I believe that today’s Han people, having mixed much of the blood of the northern races, possess the qualities necessary to harmonize both northern and southern civilizations and, if well-led, are fully capable of effectively utilizing scientific civilization.

Did the northern peoples of Europe, in ancient times, have such clear great ideals as the Eastern peoples? Even if they did, they were overwhelmed by the power of material civilization and did not have the strength to carry those beliefs forward as an enduring faith. It is said that Hitler has a passion for reviving the thoughts and beliefs of the ancient Germanic peoples, but even with Hitler’s power, it will be extremely difficult to revive them as a living force within the blood of the people. The northern peoples of Europe, except for France, have relatively little mixed blood with the southern races, even in geographically connected places like the United Kingdom, and the northern peoples of Germany and the other Scandinavian countries are almost entirely composed of northern bloodlines, leading them to heavily favor realism. In Europe, particularly, where powerful nations have long been densely concentrated in small areas and engaged in severe conflicts, rapid scientific progress has been made, but this has also greatly increased the harmful effects of conquest, contributing to today’s social unrest. As Shimizu asserts, it is fundamentally impossible to reform this deeply entrenched system.

Western civilization has already thoroughly embraced conquest and is reaching its limits. “王道” civilization is emerging, centered around the Japanese national structure, through the self-awareness and revival of East Asian peoples and the assimilation and utilization of Western scientific civilization. The true value of “王道” civilization will only be realized when humanity sincerely embraces the faith in a living god. The final war, or the ultimate battle between “王道” (the Way of Kings) and “覇道” (the Way of Conquest), is essentially a battle between those who believe in the Emperor and those who do not. In concrete terms, it will determine whether the Emperor will become the Emperor of the world or whether a Western president will become the world’s leader. This will be an unprecedented and unparalleled event in human history.

Question 5: If the final war is to occur several decades from now, the cause will likely be economic disputes rather than a battle of ideals between “王道” (the Way of Kings) and “覇道” (the Way of Conquest).

Answer: The cause of war lies in what the people of the time are most deeply concerned with. In the past, wars were fought between different races or over religion, and during the feudal era, the acquisition of land was the primary motive for war. The struggle for land was driven largely by economic concerns. In modern times, advanced economies have concentrated society’s attention on economic interests to the extent that war motivations are primarily thought to be economic.

During the era of liberalism, the economy came to dominate politics. However, in the era of control, politics must dominate the economy. The world is now undergoing significant changes. Yet, even thirty years from now, society’s greatest concern will likely still be economics, and ideologies will not be considered the primary cause of war. However, the rapid progress in civilization that makes the final war possible will also, on the other hand, lead to the fulfillment of material needs, gradually bringing an end to the current era of economic supremacy. Economics is, after all, not the purpose of life, but merely a means to an end. As humanity becomes free from the constraints of economics, its greatest concern will naturally shift back to the spiritual realm. It is inevitable that war, too, will shift from a battle over interests to a battle over ideologies, which is the direction in which civilization is evolving. In other words, by the time of the final war, the primary cause of war will have already shifted to ideological conflicts.

Even if the substance of civilization undergoes a major transformation, humanity’s thinking will not easily keep pace with it. Therefore, the initial motivation for the final war several decades from now will likely still involve economic issues. However, during the course of the war, the purpose of the war will inevitably undergo a rapid transformation, turning into a battle of ideologies. Ultimately, it will become a struggle to determine the superiority of either the “王道” or “覇道” civilizations. Nichiren Shōnin, in his teachings on an unprecedented great struggle, explained that while the initial conflict may be fought for material gain, as the conflict deepens, people will come to realize that only the true teachings of Buddhism can be relied upon, leading to a rapid unification of faith. This insight aptly illustrates the nature of the final war.

Since the First World War, countries that have overcome great national crises have gradually carried out social revolutions, transitioning from liberalism to control. Japan also entered this period of change, known as the Shōwa Restoration, triggered by the Manchurian Incident. However, many intellectuals, even then, secretly yearned for liberalism, and although many criticized liberalism, they often acted in a liberal manner themselves. Yet, during the progress of the Sino-Japanese War, the construction of a highly advanced national defense state suddenly became common sense for the populace. In retrospect, extraordinary changes that would have been unimaginable during peacetime occurred without any sense of wonder. While I have speculated that the era of the final war might span roughly twenty years (as I mentioned earlier), the changes that will occur in human thought and life during this period are entirely beyond imagination. Therefore, the idea that an economically driven war could evolve into a thoroughly ideological conflict is not as far-fetched as it may seem.

Question 6: It is hard to believe that the final war, which may occur several decades from now, will result in the immediate and complete political unification of the world.

Answer: The final war is the most significant turning point in human history, and it marks the first step toward global unification, or the realization of “八紘一宇” (unification of the world under one roof). However, it is truly only the first step, and the completion of “八紘一宇” will require long and sustained efforts by humanity. In this regard, I believe the questioner and I are in general agreement, but I will share my predictions on the matter.

Various nations have developed their cultures over thousands of years, and humanity is now rapidly advancing toward the long-desired goal of global unification. The Meiji Restoration was a revolution for Japan, but the Shōwa Restoration is truly a revolution for East Asia. In the imperial rescript delivered at the 74th opening of the Imperial Diet on December 26, 1938, the Emperor declared the goal to “establish a new order in East Asia.” Furthermore, we believe that the final war, which is rapidly approaching within a few decades, will be the gateway to the unification of the world under “八紘一宇.”

The Meiji Restoration took place in the early Meiji era, and with the war of 1877 (the Satsuma Rebellion), it was largely completed. Over the subsequent decades, Japan became a truly unified modern nation-state. The new order in East Asia, which is the focus of the Shōwa Restoration, began with the Manchurian Incident and has been rapidly advancing with the Sino-Japanese War. However, its completion will require the correct and deep understanding, as well as the enormous efforts, of not only the Japanese people but also the other East Asian nations.

Today, we are advocating for the formation of an East Asian Federation. The idea of the East Asian Federation began with the founding of Manchukuo. At that time, many Japanese in Manchuria hoped for the immediate establishment of an East Asian Federation under the Emperor, but the Chinese people believed the time was not yet ripe. They argued that the East Asian Federation should be established through the consultation and cooperation of Japan, Manchukuo, and China, and this was ultimately adopted as the first phase of the new order in East Asia.

The new order in East Asia should strive for the highest possible level of unity to ensure victory in the final war. If the mistrust among East Asian nations can be eliminated, we must quickly advance to at least an East Asian Federation to strengthen the overall power of the region. Furthermore, if mutual trust among the nations is thoroughly established, they will naturally desire to abolish national borders and achieve complete union, leading to the establishment of a Greater East Asian nation—essentially, the expansion of Greater Japan across East Asia. This would not be in doubt if Japan, following the Emperor’s will and with humility, were to willingly make the greatest sacrifices for the benefit of East Asia. In such a scenario, it might be possible to leap directly to the establishment of a Greater East Asian state without passing through the stage of an East Asian Federation.

We believe that those who have faith in the Emperor and who sincerely support the Imperial House are all our brethren and should serve the Emperor equally. In the early stages of the East Asian Federation, before the other nations have come to revere the Emperor as their leader, Japan, the only nation that has the Emperor, must become the central and leading state of the Federation. However, this should be done in a spirit of equality with other nations, allowing them to naturally elevate Japan to leadership through our virtues and strength, rather than asserting our leadership through force during times of conflict. This approach aligns with the spirit of “皇道” (the Imperial Way). The power of Japan is recognized by the East Asian nations. If Japan truly follows the Emperor’s will and, with humility, willingly makes the greatest sacrifices for East Asia, I do not doubt that the day when Japan is looked upon as the leader by the other East Asian nations will come unexpectedly quickly. Was it not the case that during the Russo-Japanese War, the nations of Asia already referred to Japan as the “leader of Asia”?

The East Asian Federation is the first step toward the new order in East Asia. Although some criticize our approach as weak because we do not assert ourselves as the leading state and instead seek to establish a federation on an equal footing, this is far from the truth. While it is true that our approach is not aggressive, those of us who firmly believe in the inevitable realization of the great ideal of “八紘一宇” stand on a foundation of absolute confidence and are committed to achieving our goals through the most practical means. Those who fear that being too humble will cause others to take advantage of us are not qualified to speak of “八紘一宇.”

When people hear of the “final war,” some may think of it as a fanciful, outrageous theory, and those who agree with the idea of the final war may imagine that it will immediately create a utopian world. Both views miss the mark. The final war is certain to happen soon, and it will be the most significant turning point in human history. However, those who experience it may not perceive it as such a drastic change. They may pass through this unprecedented period of great upheaval without feeling that it is all that different from past revolutionary times.

The final war will result in the unification of the world. Of course, in the early stages, we will likely experience many aftershocks, but civilization will stabilize surprisingly quickly, and the combative spirit that once drove wars between nations will be redirected toward the construction of a new, integrated global civilization. This will lead to the advancement of “八紘一宇.” One of Japan’s great minds, Mr. Yoshitaro Shimizu, offers some interesting ideas about the development of civilization in his book “The True Structure of Japan.”

He suggests that if we can uncover the secrets of the processes in a single leaf, we might be able to create food in test tubes, producing perhaps 1,500 times more food than we do now from the same amount of land. Instead of raising pigs and chickens, we might breed bacteria that are easy to reproduce and taste like beef or chicken, making it extremely easy to obtain protein-rich foods. This is not merely a fantasy; during World War I, Germany did indeed eat bacteria.

As for energy, we might not need to rely on precious coal. Since there are heat-emitting substances like radium and uranium underground that warm the Earth’s crust, if we could extract these substances, we would have an infinite source of power. Moreover, there is a vast amount of atmospheric electricity in the stratosphere, so if we could find a way to bring it down to the Earth’s surface, we would have an endless supply of electricity. Furthermore, in the upper reaches of the stratosphere, hydrogen from the Earth’s surface is plentiful. If we could combine this hydrogen with oxygen, it would become an incredible source of power. Thus, an airplane could ascend to that height, take in the hydrogen as fuel, and fly endlessly. And when it needs to land, it could store the hydrogen to use for the next takeoff. Flying around the world would become extremely easy.

In this era, a method to achieve immortality might be discovered. The reason humans die is due to the accumulation of waste products in the body, which causes toxicity. Therefore, if a way to continuously eliminate these waste products is developed, life could continue almost indefinitely. Even now, when bacteria are placed in a broth of boiled straw, they thrive and multiply vigorously. Over time, their reproduction rate slows down due to toxicity from their waste products, but if they are transferred to fresh broth, they become active again. By continuously transferring them to fresh broth, they can live indefinitely, effectively achieving immortality.

Some may worry that if humans achieve immortality, the population will grow excessively and overpopulate the world. However, there is no need for concern. Nature works in mysterious ways, and there would be no need to bring in someone like Mrs. Sanger (referring to birth control advocates). Humans would likely produce offspring at an extremely slow rate, perhaps only once every thousand years. This is similar to how grafted or cloned orange trees gradually stop producing seeds. While rapid reproduction is necessary when life spans are short, once humans achieve immortality, they will live serene, god-like lives.

Time, in essence, is a function of temperature. If we can change temperature without harming living beings, or increase temperature without destroying objects, compressing ten years into one year becomes easy. Conversely, by lowering the temperature to absolute zero (-273°C), all activity would cease. This would make the story of Urashima Tarō (a Japanese folktale about time travel) no longer a fantasy. It would become a world where true freedom and flexibility are possible.

Furthermore, by inducing artificial mutations, we could bring about astonishing leaps in development. After the final war, humanity will gradually enter a new era of remarkable integrated civilization, and eventually, beings even greater than humans as we know them will emerge. In Buddhism, this era is referred to as the time of Maitreya (the future Buddha).

In an era like the one Mr. Shimizu envisions, it is impossible to imagine that humanity would direct its combative instincts toward war. As the questioner suggests, the political unification of the world will not be accomplished in one fell swoop, but rather, human civilization will continue to evolve through constant development. However, there are moments of rapid acceleration in the progression of civilization. We must recognize that the final war is the greatest of these accelerations in human history, and we must hasten all preparations for its passage.

Question 7: I believe it is unfair to base the development of warfare solely on Western military history, especially without considering Eastern, particularly Japanese, military history.

Answer: As I confessed in the introduction to the “Overview of Military History,” my knowledge of military science is extremely limited. The only part of military history I have studied somewhat extensively is a portion of Western military history centered around the French Revolution (page 144). This is the first reason why my argument on the final war is based on Western military history. I sincerely hope that individuals with interest will further research this topic from a broader and more comprehensive perspective, considering both Eastern and Western, ancient and modern, military history. I am confident that they will arrive at the same conclusions as I have.

The past few hundred years have been a history of white European world conquest, and today the entire world bows under the influence of Western civilization. The primary reason for this is the superior military power that the white races have attained. However, war is by no means the purpose of life or the state; it is merely a means to an end. The correct fundamental view of war is not found in the West but is something we possess.

The sword among the Three Sacred Treasures symbolizes the meaning of military power in Japan. The exercise of military power to protect the national polity and support the Imperial mission is what defines Japan’s wars.

Even in Buddhism, which is regarded as one of the most peaceful religions, the Nirvana Sutra teaches: “Good men, those who protect the true law do not receive the five precepts or cultivate proper conduct, but instead, they should wield swords, bows, arrows, spears, and halberds. If one receives the five precepts, they cannot be considered a person of the Great Vehicle. Even if they do not receive the five precepts, those who protect the true law can be called persons of the Great Vehicle. Those who protect the true law should indeed take up swords and weapons.” Nichiren Shōnin also declared, “The great matter of military strategy and swordsmanship also arises from this wonderful law.”

I do not know if such a perspective exists in the West, but even if it does, it is likely ineffective against them today. The true meaning of war should always be guided by the principles of “王道” (the rule of the benevolent king). However, the methods of executing war are primarily a matter of power, and it is only natural that the West, where “覇道” (the rule of the strong) has developed, has become the main theater of war.

Japanese wars have mainly been domestic, lacking the deep-seated intensity of ethnic wars. Furthermore, the peaceful nature of the Japanese people played a significant role, as seen in the actions of warriors who sympathized with the enemy’s food shortages and sent them salt, or in the exchanges of poetry during battles, such as the episode of Nasu no Yoichi shooting the fan target. At this point, the distinction between war and sports becomes blurred. The fact that weapons became exquisite works of art also reflects the unique characteristics of Japanese military power.

In the East Asian continent, the Han Chinese have long maintained a central presence, and while they were conquered several times by so-called northern barbarians, the confrontations between strong nations were not as intense as those in the West. Moreover, even when the barbarians militarily conquered China, they respected Chinese culture. Additionally, in East Asia, ethnic consciousness was not as strong as in the West, and even today, the ethnic affiliations of certain historical peoples remain unclear. Furthermore, the vast land of East Asia tends to mitigate the severity of warfare.

Europe is originally just a peninsula of Asia. Numerous powerful nations have crowded into that small area, leading to constant struggles. The development of Western scientific civilization can be seen as a product of these ethnic conflicts. While the East maintained the tradition of “王道” civilization, the West fell under the influence of “覇道” civilization, largely due to these environmental factors. Because the West became the main theater of war and consistently fielded superior warriors in appropriately sized battlefields, the development of warfare naturally became more systematic there. Although my knowledge is limited and my study has leaned heavily on Western military history, I do not believe this is an unreasonable approach when it comes to the forms of warfare.

While my treatment of military history focuses primarily on the West, I must emphasize that this does not mean I consider Western civilization to be the center of all civilization.

Question 8: Is it truly correct to assert that decisive wars and wars of attrition alternate with each era?

Answer: Napoleon conducted brilliant decisive wars against countries such as Austria and Prussia, but found it extremely difficult to do so against Spain and nearly impossible against Russia, despite his full efforts. In the Second European War (World War II), the emerging Nazi Germany imposed highly effective decisive wars not only on weaker nations like Poland, the Netherlands, Yugoslavia, and Greece, but even on France. However, despite achieving great success in the initial surprise attacks against the Soviet Union, the situation has not been as straightforward. Similarly, while Napoleon was forced into a decade-long war of attrition with Britain, it is also extremely difficult for Hitler to impose a decisive war on Britain.

As illustrated above, even within the same era, decisive wars may occur at one time and in one place, while wars of attrition happen elsewhere. The view that decisive wars and wars of attrition alternate with each era needs to be thoroughly examined.

It is naturally the case that when there is a significant disparity in military power between two warring countries, the conflict does not result in a war of attrition, as seen between Germany and smaller nations during the Second European War. The true essence of war lies in decisive warfare, but when the military power of the opposing nations is nearly equal, wars of attrition occur for the following reasons:

1. Decline in Military Effectiveness
   Mercenaries during the Renaissance were entirely professional soldiers. Given the difficulty of making a profession of risking one’s life, even highly trained armies found it challenging to fully employ their military force. This was the fundamental reason why wars of attrition persisted until the French Revolution. The military significance of the French Revolution lies in the shift from professional armies to national armies. Modern people can truly sacrifice their lives only through the sincerity of patriotism.In China, since the collapse of the universal conscription system during the peak of the Tang Dynasty, the Chinese people have harbored an extreme disdain for military affairs. Even today, the idea that “good men do not become soldiers” has not been completely eradicated, making it difficult for military power to be fully realized.In Japan’s Sengoku period (Warring States period), the samurai, driven by the code of Bushido rooted in Japanese national character, demonstrated intense combat strength. However, bribery was still common, and wars often centered on schemes, where even one’s own parents, siblings, and children could be sacrificed for profit. The strategic cunning of Japanese warlords during the Sengoku period was such that even Chinese and Westerners would avoid it. The Japanese are formidable in any situation. The reason modern-day strategies are not as successful is the result of 300 years of peace under the Tokugawa shogunate.
2. Strength of Defensive Power
   The stronger side in a war always seeks to attack the enemy and force a decisive war. However, when the means of warfare favor defense to a great extent, the attacking side cannot break through the enemy’s defensive lines, preventing them from reaching the enemy’s core. As a result, the war inevitably turns into a war of attrition.Although decisive wars were the norm after the French Revolution, the immense defensive power in the First European War (World War I) led to a war of attrition. In the Second European War, the advancement of tanks and the significant development of air forces increased the offensive power, enhancing the possibility of breaking through enemy lines. Compared to the time of the First European War, there has been a shift towards decisive warfare.The construction of fortresses during the Sengoku period made it difficult to capture them through force alone, which was a major cause of wars of attrition. Schemes became extremely potent tools of warfare as a result.Napoleon was forced into a decade-long war of attrition with Britain and eventually lost. Despite Britain’s relatively weak land forces, the protection offered by the formidable natural moat of the English Channel prevented Napoleon from imposing a decisive war. Similarly, the strong resistance of Nazi Germany today also relies on the English Channel. Britain’s wars of attrition against Napoleon and Hitler should be seen as the result of the strong defensive power provided by the English Channel.
3. Vastness of the Territory
   Even if the attacking force is strong enough to break through the enemy’s defensive lines, if the operational radius of the attacking army does not reach the heart of the enemy country, the war naturally turns into a war of attrition.Napoleon quickly defeated the Russian army and advanced deep into Moscow. However, this operation exceeded the sustainable operational radius of Napoleon’s forces, leading to difficulties. Consequently, the rear of Napoleon’s army became vulnerable, leading to the disastrous retreat from Moscow and the downfall of Napoleon’s grand ambitions. The primary factor that protected Russia was not its military strength, but its vast territory.In the Second European War, the Soviet Union possessed formidable military power as the only totalitarian state capable of challenging Germany. Had the command been properly executed, it is conceivable that the Soviet Union could have held onto the Stalin Line and engaged in a war of attrition with Germany. However, Germany’s massive surprise attack inflicted severe damage within the Stalin Line, leading to a disadvantageous situation, and Moscow was on the brink of being lost. Nonetheless, it is possible that, if Stalin resolved to do so, the vast territory of the Soviet Union could allow it to continue the war of attrition.Chiang Kai-shek’s war of attrition against Japan during the current conflict relies on the vast territory of China.

Among the three causes mentioned above, the third point should not be viewed as a matter of the era. In regions with vast territories, the distinction between the eras of decisive wars and wars of attrition is not always clear. However, as time progresses, it is only natural that the scope within which decisive wars are possible gradually expands. When military power is able to impose decisive wars across the entire world, it marks the beginning of the possibility of the final war.

The first point is inseparable from general culture, while the second point is mainly constrained by weapons and fortifications, and both are closely related to the era. However, decisive wars have been impossible against enemies that use the sea as a complete barrier with the help of a navy. Only when the air force becomes a true decisive military force will this obstacle lose all its power.

In other words, in the vast lands of the Orient, it is difficult to clearly distinguish between the eras of both types of warfare. However, in Europe, where powerful nations are adjacent to each other, where the territories are not too vast, and where war has become the primary battleground of the “rule of the strong” (覇道), the connection between the eras of both types of warfare is clear. Especially in modern Western Europe, where the territories seem increasingly small compared to the operational radius of the military, and where the increase in military strength makes flanking maneuvers nearly impossible, the nature of warfare is tightly linked to the power of weapons, and it is entirely under the influence of the era.

Question 9: Even if offensive weapons make significant advancements, defensive weapons will also advance accordingly. Does this mean that the emergence of a thoroughly decisive war is unlikely?

Answer: The advantage of weapons in either offense or defense is a significant factor in determining whether a war becomes a war of attrition or a decisive war.

Swords and spears are decisive weapons in personal combat between unarmored individuals, but their effectiveness is limited by the advancement of armor, and especially by the difficulty of attacking an enemy fortified in a castle.

Rifles are often more suited for defense than offense. The defensive power of machine guns, in particular, is substantial. However, artillery, compared to rifles, offers advantages in offense, although its effectiveness is curtailed by the advancement of fortifications and defensive techniques. Recently, the advent of machine guns and the development of fortifications have rapidly increased defensive power. Still, the mass use of large-caliber artillery temporarily made it possible to break through enemy lines. However, as defensive positions became more dispersed, it once again became exceedingly difficult to break through enemy lines with artillery support.

Tanks are offensive weapons. The appearance of tanks during the First World War caused a major upheaval in military tactics, but their quality and quantity were not yet sufficient to shift from wars of attrition to decisive wars. Over the subsequent twenty years, the significant advancements in the number and quality of tanks during the Second World War, combined with the power of air forces, enabled the German army to impose decisive wars on weaker nations and even on France. However, equipping anti-tank guns in response to tanks is relatively easier with serious effort, and today, breaking through enemy positions with tanks is still not necessarily easy against a well-prepared opponent.

However, when it comes to aircraft, even compared to tanks, which are extremely decisive as ground weapons, aircraft are far more decisive. In ground combat, terrain can be utilized for fortifications and, in some cases, can act as a strong barrier, providing great strength in defense. At sea, there is no such terrain to utilize, making defensive combat much more difficult, with the only means of defense being offense. Furthermore, in aerial combat, defense is virtually nonexistent.

Defending against attacks from the sea on land is relatively easy. Even with a large fleet, there have been many historical instances where outdated coastal fortresses were impossible to conquer. Moreover, the range within which sea-based attacks can strike land is extremely limited. However, the power of aerial attacks on land and sea is extremely great, while air defense is extremely difficult. Even as anti-aircraft shooting and other air defense methods advance, defending large targets such as cities from aircraft operating at increasing speeds and potentially in the stratosphere becomes almost impossible without control of the skies. Against this aerial might, even if one attempts to bury everything underground, it would be extremely difficult to execute, and even if possible, it would significantly reduce various capabilities.

Defending the homeland against air forces will become increasingly difficult. Astonishing aircraft that can freely maneuver through the stratosphere, combined with revolutionary weapons capable of destroying the core of the enemy nation, will render all defensive measures ineffective, leading to a thorough decisive war and making the final war possible.

Question 10: In the final war, might the decisive weapons be not aircraft but rather death rays or lethal radio waves?

Answer: Rifles and cannons are not directly lethal weapons by themselves. The bullets fired from them are what exhibit the lethal and destructive power. Similarly, the hull of a warship does not have the ability to destroy an enemy. It is the shells and torpedoes fired from the ship’s guns and launch tubes that sink enemy vessels.

The same principle applies to aircraft as it does to warships. Aircraft do not harm the enemy directly. The value of an aircraft as a weapon lies in its ability to rapidly deliver bombs and other munitions over long distances.

If death rays, lethal radio waves, or other such terrifying new weapons were to become capable of exerting their destructive power over thousands or even tens of thousands of kilometers, then aircraft would lose their absolute value as weapons, and the need to build air forces would vanish. However, unless the weapons used in the final war to directly annihilate the enemy can themselves project their power over such vast distances, aircraft, with their ever-increasing capabilities and range, will continue to be necessary. The air force will have to be utilized as the decisive military force in the final war. It is believed that a weapon of immense destructive power, even more fearsome than today’s bombs, will be invented, but aircraft will still be necessary to transport these weapons over long distances to annihilate the enemy.

Question 11: It is said that the combat command unit in the final war will be the individual, but considering that aircraft will become increasingly larger, isn’t it incorrect to say that the command unit will be the individual?

Answer: The judgment that the command unit will become the individual stems from the general trend up to now, where command units have progressively been broken down from battalion → company → platoon → squad, leading to the speculation that the next step will be the individual. This reasoning does not seem unreasonable. However, since we cannot foresee the exact methods of combat that will emerge in the future, I, like the questioner, feel a certain unease when thinking concretely about this. The reality of the final war involves many aspects that are difficult for us to imagine with our current common sense. Even though it is said that the decisive battle will be conducted by air forces, this implies the emergence of entirely different aircraft from those we know today. Therefore, in response to this thoughtful question, I will provide my own common-sense speculations, though I do not claim them to be authoritative answers.

Fighter aircraft, limited by fuel capacity, have a small operational range. Moreover, as aircraft advance, very small ones face various limitations, and it becomes difficult for them to maintain their traditional superiority over larger aircraft that achieve greater speeds. Additionally, with the improved formation tactics and armament of large bombers, the value of fighter aircraft was expected to gradually decline. However, based on the experiences of the China Incident and the Second European War, the value of fighter aircraft in securing air superiority remains exceedingly high.

While the mission of bombers, which drop bombs on the enemy, is certainly critical, it is also conceivable that the main focus of air combat in the future will still be on fighter aircraft. If there is a revolutionary advancement in propulsion technology that significantly extends the operational range of small fighter aircraft, they may take on an increasingly important role in air combat as the star of the skies. Although large aircraft might aim to improve their formation tactics, firepower, and even add armor for protection, the heavy defensive equipment common on ships will be difficult to implement in the air due to weight constraints. Thus, small aircraft will be able to fully leverage their offensive power. If the outcome of air combat, which will determine the fate of the war, is largely decided by small fighter aircraft, then the idea that the command unit will be the individual seems correct.

Question 12: What do you think will be the guiding spirit of combat in the final war?

Answer: The transition from the current prolonged war to the next decisive war, that is, the final war, as I have repeatedly emphasized, represents a truly extraordinary leap beyond common sense. Unlike developments on the ground, this shift involves unimaginable changes. Setting aside the mathematical increase in the number of soldiers (from all men to the entire population), the geometrical interpretation of battle formations (from surface to volume), and the combat command units (from squads to individuals), we cannot judge what the next form of combat formation after the battle group will be, as the methods of combat are entirely beyond our imagination. Similarly, it is difficult to determine what the guiding spirit of combat operation, after control, will be. Therefore, I have left these two areas blank in my previous writings. However, I will now dare to offer my bold opinions on these matters.

In terms of control, it is necessary to use force, that is, authoritarian power, to avoid confusion and duplication of efforts while simultaneously demanding more independent and autonomous activities from individual soldiers and units. Authoritarian force is used to promote free activity, not to regress from freedom to authoritarianism. In other words, control should not be seen as a retreat from freedom but as a higher guiding spirit that skillfully integrates and advances both freedom and authoritarianism.

Authoritarianism was the guiding spirit of society during the feudal era, and all superior nations have experienced it at some point. At certain stages of cultural development, feudalism is necessary. The decline of modern Korea was due to the premature implementation of a county system of government, which led to bureaucratic politics where officials, during their short terms of office, sought to extract as much as possible, ultimately eroding the productive and constructive spirit of the people and reducing their economic activities to the bare minimum necessary for survival. Feudal lords, who ruled their territories and people with the intention of passing them down to their descendants, practiced authoritarian governance that was the best system for that time. However, as human intelligence progressed, it became increasingly difficult to fully utilize progressive abilities under authoritarian rule, leading to successive revolutions in freedom among superior nations around the time of the French Revolution, where vibrant individual creativity was respected, resulting in remarkable advances in civilization.

However, everything has its limits. The unchecked pursuit of individual freedom has, with the progress of society, intensified various conflicts, leading to a situation where unrestricted freedom no longer contributes to the overall efficiency of society. Control emerged naturally as the new guiding spirit of the age to correct these ills and maximize the efficiency of society as a whole. The same reasoning applies to the shift from freedom to control in the guiding spirit of combat operations.

As societies move into a new phase of control, it is inevitable that authoritarianism, or compulsion, must be used somewhat strongly at first to counteract the excessive focus on self-interest that had gone too far in the era of liberalism. Particularly in our country, where social training is still limited, it must be acknowledged that control sometimes seems like a regression from freedom rather than progress. However, in order to fully harness the capabilities of society and the state through control, individual creativity and passion remain essential, and therefore freedom must be increasingly respected within the framework that avoids unnecessary friction and uneconomical duplication. Ideally, control should primarily focus on unifying minds, while legal restrictions should be minimized. It is desirable that the scope of self-governance control be expanded rather than relying solely on official control. In other words, as control training progresses, the authoritarian aspects should gradually diminish.

As control training continues in the era of the semi-final war, the guiding spirit of society during the era of the final war is expected to progress beyond today’s control, allowing for much greater freedom, thereby enabling the full expression of the state’s capabilities. “A General View of War History” predicts that military service, which was a “profession” during the mercenary era until the French Revolution and became a “duty” after the revolution, will further evolve into “volunteerism” in the final war era. Translating “mercenaries” in Britain and America as “volunteers” is inappropriate. The “volunteers” referred to here are true volunteers who willingly sacrifice themselves to support the emperor’s cause.

After the French Revolution, the number of soldiers increased dramatically, and in today’s prolonged war, which is the semi-final period, all healthy men are mobilized to the front lines. Such large-scale mobilization requires a sense of duty. In the final war, while the entire population will participate passively in enduring the enemy’s attacks, the offensive military forces will likely consist of a small, highly elite group.

In such an army, conscripted soldiers enlisted through a sense of duty may not be suitable. Duty is still somewhat passive. The most desirable scenario is the voluntary participation of genuinely superior individuals recognized by everyone. The Nazi Stormtroopers and the Fascist Blackshirts may have provided some indication of this trend.

The guiding spirit of combat operations, like military service, will likely move in the same direction, striving to maximize combat capability through greater freedom than today’s control, and evolving through the integration and development of freedom and control. Furthermore, after the final war, when we enter the period of constructing the concept of “eight corners of the world under one roof” (a universal brotherhood), individual freedom will be even more highly respected. In the midst of the united efforts of all humanity, each person will demonstrate their full abilities independently and conscientiously, embodying a highly refined spirit of freedom.

Today’s era of control represents the most tense period in human history, where even a little strain is accepted in the effort to achieve the maximum effect in the shortest period, like an intensive training camp.

Question 13: It has not been sufficiently explained what objective conditions will allow Japan to secure victory in the final war. I don’t think mere faith alone is enough to provide reassurance.

Answer: We are aiming for the production capacity of the East Asia League to surpass that of the Americas within twenty years, with the expectation that the final war will occur within thirty years. Indeed, this is a remarkable plan, and it’s not unreasonable for some to dismiss it as fantasy. We, too, are not overly optimistic—it is an extremely difficult task. However, for the sake of the Emperor and all of humanity, we must achieve this at any cost.

In recent times, Japanese people have been fervently focused on acquiring resources, while still espousing the importance of spirit first. Today, Germany’s scientific and technological advancements have been driven by their efforts to overcome the challenges posed by resource scarcity. Those who respect Germany should learn from this example. Especially now, as we face what is called the second industrial revolution, which is inseparably linked to the final war, this point is of utmost importance.

Resources are necessary to some extent, but Japan, Manchuria, and China alone hold enormous resources. Japan, which forged unparalleled swords from iron sand, has been said to possess 8 billion tons, perhaps even 10 billion tons, of this resource, making Japan the world leader in iron resources. However, Japan, which has been imitating Western methods of steelmaking that rely on less iron sand, has not yet fully succeeded in refining this resource. Recently, a purely Japanese method, such as the Narazaki method, has been showing promising results. The amount of iron ore in Manchukuo (Manchuria) is also substantial. Japan has a decent amount of coal, but the eastern half of Manchukuo is rich in coal deposits. Furthermore, in Shanxi, there is a well-known vast coal resource. Japan also has its own domestic oil resources, and it is likely that there is a significant oil field stretching from Rehe through Shaanxi, Gansu, Sichuan, and Yunnan, all the way to Burma. The oil in the Dutch East Indies is said to be just the tail end of this vast oil field. It is widely known that oil has been found in Rehe, and that Shaanxi, Gansu, and Sichuan also produce oil. We must conduct large-scale test drilling. Coal liquefaction, which has faced difficulties until now, is also starting to show success through a purely Japanese, highly efficient method. The success of the Narazaki method, mentioned earlier, is something we firmly believe in. Other resources are also not a cause for concern. The areas west of Shanxi, Shaanxi, and Sichuan are mostly unexplored, and it is impossible to predict what large resources might be discovered.

The greatest strength of East Asia is its human resources. In the future, human resources will be particularly important for production. The five hundred million people of Japan, Manchukuo, and China, who live densely packed around the Japan Sea and the China Sea, are truly the greatest treasure in the world. People worry about the lack of education in China, but it is not a significant issue. The Chinese are astonishingly cultured people. We have no doubt that they will be able to harness their incredible skills, which produced art and crafts that amazed the world, and quickly demonstrate high levels of ability.

The real question is whether we can mobilize these human and material resources on a large scale within just twenty years. It is, of course, an extremely challenging task. However, when we consider that the Soviet Union, which was fundamentally destroyed by revolution, managed to overcome the disadvantage of its vast, dispersed resources and population, and successfully expanded its production capabilities over five to ten years using its previously ignorant populace, we cannot doubt our success. However, this requires great foresight and powerful political leadership. National unity and selfless service can only demonstrate their true value when they are powerfully concentrated on this clear, grand objective.

What I particularly want to emphasize is that while Westerners are addicted to material civilization, we, due to the traditions of our ancestors over thousands of years, are able to genuinely embrace a simple life. The difference in combat power between Japan’s 10,000-ton cruisers and America’s equivalent cruisers is largely due to the robust lifestyle of Japanese naval officers. Recently, I visited the site of Rikisuke Ishikawa’s work in Akita Prefecture, and I was deeply moved. Ishikawa lived alone for ten years in a small grass hut in the mountains of Kusakidani, measuring about four and a half tatami mats. After the death of his heir, he reluctantly returned home, but he continued to live a simple life in a small, narrow hut for the rest of his days. During this extremely simple life, he composed tens of thousands of poems, burned incense, made tea, and lived a truly high spiritual life, while also conducting astonishingly advanced scientific research and improvements in agriculture. By preserving this Eastern and Japanese spirit, simplifying our lives to the maximum extent, and dedicating everything to preparing for the final war, we can unleash power that Westerners cannot even imagine. Japanese nationalists must take the lead in implementing this way of life rather than merely talking about it. I believe this simple lifestyle will also provide great hope in solving the pressing issue of air defense, which is currently causing great anxiety among the people.

It is challenging, but we are confident that we will be able to build a military force capable of surpassing that of the Americas within twenty years. It is important to note that while the outcome of prolonged wars is primarily determined by quantity, the outcome of decisive wars is primarily determined by quality. However, if we can decisively create new, innovative weapons of war, we can easily overcome the setbacks we have faced so far. When the situation undergoes a dramatic change, it is relatively easier for a backward nation to seize the opportunity to surpass the pioneers. The thoroughness of scientific education, the raising of technical standards, and the large-scale expansion of production capacity are our goals, but the state must also place the highest priority on encouraging invention and implement bold, decisive measures.

To encourage invention, the first thing the public must do is to show respect for inventors. One of Japan’s geniuses, Tamejiro Ohashi, proposed building a shrine to invention near the Meiji Shrine to commemorate the 2600th year of the imperial era. He campaigned passionately to enshrine those who brought great happiness to humanity through outstanding inventions throughout history. While I believe it was a very meaningful plan, it unfortunately did not materialize. I hope that everyone in the nation will build a shrine to invention in their hearts. In these critical times, geniuses are often buried under social pressure.

The method of encouraging invention must absolutely not be bureaucratic. It is better to mobilize the newly wealthy, who can make bold, independent decisions to invest large sums of money. If an invention shows signs of success, the state should reward the inventor with a large prize and award honors to those who supported the invention. Currently, most honors are awarded to bureaucrats based on years of service. In the era of liberalism, it made sense for bureaucrats under state control to receive special rewards, but in the era of control, it is crucial that honors be fairly awarded based on genuine contributions to the nation, regardless of occupation. If an invention is deemed highly valuable, the state should even consider granting a peerage to its benefactor. Additionally, imposing extremely high inheritance taxes on wealth accumulated in a single generation would encourage the wealthy to dedicate all their earnings to supporting invention. Dedicating their wealth to encouraging inventions that prepare for the final war should be the honor and pride of the newly wealthy in the Showa era.

Once an invention shows a high probability of success, it should be industrialized swiftly through the comprehensive academic power of state research institutions. While the establishment of new large research institutions is necessary, the unification of all Japanese research institutions in an organic rather than formal manner, to fully and proactively unleash their potential, is essential.

The question of how much territory we must include within our cooperative range for the final war is a major issue. In terms of strategy and resource considerations, the broader the range, the better. However, at the same time, war and construction are difficult to reconcile, and for major construction, a long period of peace is desirable. We must be careful not to waste our strength by aimlessly expanding our range. Unlike in the era of prolonged wars, in the final war, where decisive war is the focus, we do not necessarily need a vast area for strategic purposes. This is because superior military power can decisively conclude the war in one swift move.

As described above, while we should not be overly optimistic about the objective conditions for our victory in the final war, we believe it is absolutely possible if we fully mobilize all our capabilities. And what makes this superhuman effort possible is the faith of the people. The unshakable faith of the people in achieving the great ideal of “eight corners of the world under one roof” (a universal brotherhood) will overcome any difficulty. Even in the depths of hardship, this faith will constantly provide the light and peace of mind that drives us to advance boldly and resolutely. The spiritual power of Japan’s national polity will compensate for any deficiencies and ensure victory in the final war.

Question 14: The necessity of the final war is explained religiously, but unless it is explained scientifically, modern people will not understand.

Answer: I am quite surprised to receive this kind of question so often. As a believer in Nichiren Shonin, I am convinced of his prophecies and have a strong desire to spread this faith to the entire nation. However, I believe that anyone who reads “The Final War Theory” carefully will immediately understand that it is by no means primarily a religious explanation. This theory is based on my military scientific considerations, and the Buddha’s prophecy is merely one example I have raised to support my military research alongside the general trends in political history and the progress of science and industry.

I fully acknowledge that my explanation from a military scientific standpoint is far from complete. However, it is impossible to fully prove such a comprehensive social phenomenon through science alone. Even Marxism, which prides itself on being scientific, is ultimately a hypothesis when it asserts that a dictatorship of the proletariat will inevitably follow the era of capitalism; it is not scientifically accurate. From this perspective, my prediction of the inevitability of the final war, though imperfect, could be considered reasonably scientific. Japanese intellectuals have historically neglected the study of military science, especially during the liberal era, when the study of war in history was deliberately overlooked. Since war involves the most intense and comprehensive mobilization of all human capabilities in a moment, its history should be considered the most direct reflection of the principles of civilizational development. Moreover, among many social phenomena, war is perhaps the most amenable to scientific examination.

Recently, with the growing trend of rejecting religion, I have heard that many people criticize “The Final War Theory” for mentioning prophecies, claiming that such predictions mislead the world. No matter how advanced human intelligence becomes, it is limited by the number and quality of brain cells, and thus scientific inquiry naturally has its limitations. These limitations represent only a minuscule portion compared to the vastness of the universe’s phenomena. There is a mystical force in the universe, and humans are part of that force. It is a privilege granted by the heavens to humanity to correctly harness this mystical force and penetrate secrets beyond scientific investigation. If one were to deny this mystical force of the universe, it would be tantamount to denying Ame-no-Minakanushi (the central deity in Japanese mythology), and the sacredness of Japan’s national polity would lose its profound significance. Sacred figures like Amaterasu Omikami, Emperor Jimmu, and the Buddha possessed the strong spiritual power to accurately predict events thousands of years into the future. How do modern people, who attempt to criticize prophecy and believe in the omnipotence of science, view the great prophecies of “eternity of the heavens and the earth” and “eight corners of the world under one roof”? The great prophecy of our imperial ancestors is indeed the foundation of our peace of mind.

Question 15: I believe the explanation regarding the inevitability of the Industrial Revolution is insufficient.

Answer: You are absolutely correct. My knowledge outside of military matters is close to non-existent. “The Final War Theory” was published because I believed that the final war, which I intuitively grasped through faith, could be somewhat concretely interpreted through my modest but earnest research in military science, which is my area of expertise. In doing so, I merely expressed a few thoughts based on the principle that military developments align with the overall progress of civilization, believing that observing from various perspectives would lead to the same conclusion.

I fully acknowledge that there are many presumptuous and overconfident assertions in this Q&A that exceed my expertise, and I find this deeply embarrassing. I sincerely ask that those with the necessary expertise in thought, society, economics, and other fields thoroughly examine these matters and kindly provide their guidance. I am truly moved by the publication by Mr. Tachibana Atsushi in the magazine “East Asia Federation.”

---

Original Source: “The Theory of the Final War / Overview of War History,” Chuko Bunko, Chuokoron-sha
First Edition: July 10, 1993
Fifth Edition: June 10, 1995

Parent Source: “Ishiwara Kanji Selected Works Vol. 3: The Theory of the Final War,” Tamai Labo
Published: March 1986