As the world marks the passage of another October, echoes of the Cold War reverberate with fresh urgency, from the halls of academia in Hawaii to the streaming screens of Netflix and the corridors of power in Beijing. The convergence of these seemingly disparate events—an academic conference on the invisibility of women in Cold War diplomacy, China’s reflection on its historical struggles amid current geopolitical headwinds, and the release of a gripping new film about nuclear catastrophe—paints a vivid picture of a world once again wrestling with the specter of global conflict and the persistent shadows of the past.
On October 23, 2025, the University of Hawaiʻi at Mānoa’s Imin International Conference Center became the stage for a probing keynote address by Professor Naoko Shimazu, a leading historian of diplomacy and Deputy Director of Tokyo College at the University of Tokyo. Her talk, titled “Where Are the Women in Diplomacy? On the Invisibility of Women in Cold War Asia,” tackled a question that has long lingered in the footnotes of history: why have women remained largely invisible in the annals of diplomatic affairs, especially during the turbulent years of the Cold War?
Shimazu’s address focused on the landmark Bandung Conference of April 1955, when twenty-nine newly post-colonial Asian and African states gathered in West Java, Indonesia, to chart a course for a future free from imperial domination. It was a momentous event, yet, as Shimazu sought to illuminate, it was one where women’s contributions were almost entirely omitted from official records. “We cannot deny that women tend to be invisible in the annals of diplomatic history. However, we must ask why women tend not to feature in diplomacy,” Shimazu asserted, according to the University of Hawaiʻi. Her research, spanning decades and continents, has aimed to uncover these hidden stories and challenge the traditional narratives that have shaped our understanding of global affairs.
Shimazu’s keynote formed part of a broader two-day workshop on “Women, Peace and Security in the Quad’s Commitment to a Free and Open Indo-Pacific,” hosted by the University of Hawaiʻi at Mānoa’s Center for Indo-Pacific Affairs with support from the Japan Foundation. The workshop brought together scholars and practitioners to examine the role of women and gender perspectives in shaping the priorities, institutional rules, and deliverables of the Quad (comprising the United States, Japan, India, and Australia). The event underscored a growing recognition: that the security and stability of the Indo-Pacific region depend not just on military might or diplomatic maneuvering, but on the inclusion of voices and experiences long marginalized in the corridors of power.
Meanwhile, halfway across the globe, China’s leaders are grappling with a set of challenges that feel uncannily familiar. As reported by the South China Morning Post on October 22, 2025, Beijing’s planners are in the midst of drafting the country’s next five-year plan—a process shadowed by mounting geopolitical tensions, export controls, and restricted access to advanced technology. “The growing external challenges of today have similarities to those the country faced in the 1950s,” the South China Morning Post observed, drawing a direct line from the present back to the era of China’s first five-year plan, when US-led sanctions and trade embargoes during the Korean War forced the nascent People’s Republic to adopt a strategy of state-led industrialization.
Today, as in the 1950s, China finds itself navigating a complex and often hostile international environment. The US-China rivalry has supplanted the old US-Soviet competition, but the underlying dynamics—economic containment, technological decoupling, and regional security anxieties—are strikingly similar. Beijing’s leadership, according to official statements published by Xinhua and cited by the South China Morning Post, believes it is once again “navigating shifting circumstances amid storms and challenges to forge new paths.”
The parallels between past and present are not lost on observers. The Cold War may be over, but its legacy continues to shape the choices and anxieties of today’s policymakers. Nowhere is this more apparent than in the realm of nuclear security—a theme brought into sharp relief by the imminent release of Kathryn Bigelow’s new Netflix film, A House of Dynamite, set to premiere on October 25, 2025.
As reviewed by The Nation, A House of Dynamite thrusts viewers into the heart of a modern nuclear crisis. The film opens with US military personnel at Fort Greely, Alaska, detecting an incoming intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) launched from an unidentified site off North Korea. In a race against time, two Ground-Based Interceptors are fired—unsuccessfully—leaving the United States defenseless as officials in the White House, FEMA, and US Strategic Command scramble to determine whether to retaliate against China, Russia, or North Korea. The tension is palpable, the moral and strategic dilemmas excruciating.
What sets Bigelow’s film apart, according to The Nation, is its unflinching depiction of catastrophe unfolding in “real time,” as experienced by those directly responsible for the fate of millions. The movie’s preamble delivers a stark message: “After the Cold War, the global powers worked to decrease reliance on nuclear weapons. That era is now over.”
The film’s release could not be more timely. The world stands on the brink of a new nuclear era, characterized by expanding arsenals and more aggressive postures. The United States is modernizing its nuclear forces with new Sentinel ICBMs, B-21 Raider bombers, and Columbia-class submarines—an effort expected to cost around $1 trillion over the next decade. Yet the clock is ticking: the New START treaty, which caps deployed strategic nuclear weapons at 1,550 each for the US and Russia, is set to expire on February 5, 2026, with no clear path to renewal. Should the treaty lapse, both sides would be free to increase their arsenals, raising the specter of a new arms race.
Complicating matters further, China is rapidly expanding its own nuclear capabilities, growing from approximately 200 warheads a few years ago to about 600 today, and constructing 300 new missile silos. As The Nation notes, this buildup is cited in Washington as a reason to consider surpassing New START limits if the treaty is not extended. Meanwhile, Russia’s President Vladimir Putin has issued repeated threats to use nuclear weapons if the country’s territorial integrity is threatened, and US policy has shifted away from the goal of reducing the role of nuclear arms, embracing modernization and readiness for potential tactical use.
The proliferation of potential flashpoints—from Ukraine and Taiwan to the Korean peninsula—only heightens the risk. “The number of potential nuclear flashpoints has risen,” The Nation warns, and the integration of new technologies like artificial intelligence into command-and-control systems adds a further layer of unpredictability.
In this fraught environment, voices like Shimazu’s, which call for a broader and more inclusive understanding of security, take on added significance. Her call to recognize the invisible labor and perspectives of women in diplomacy is not just about historical justice—it’s a reminder that the solutions to today’s crises may require us to look beyond the familiar faces and frameworks of the past.
As the world watches A House of Dynamite and policymakers in Beijing and Washington revisit the lessons of the Cold War, the question remains: will we heed the warnings of history, or are we destined to repeat its most perilous chapters? The answer, as always, will be written not just in treaties and strategies, but in the choices—large and small—made by individuals and institutions across the globe.
