Bombing
Hiroshima Changed The World, But It Didn't End WWII
By Oliver Stone and
Peter Kuznick
May 27,
2016 "Information Clearing House" -
"LA Times" - President
Obama’s visit to Hiroshima on Friday has rekindled
public debate about the U.S. atomic bombings of Japan — one largely
suppressed since the Smithsonian canceled its Enola Gay exhibit in 1995.
Obama, aware that his critics are ready to pounce if he casts the slightest
doubt on the rectitude of President Harry S. Truman’s decision to use atomic
bombs, has opted to remain silent on the issue. This is unfortunate. A
national reckoning is overdue.
Most
Americans have been taught that using atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki
in August 1945 was justified because the bombings ended the war in the
Pacific, thereby averting a costly U.S. invasion of Japan. This erroneous
contention finds its way into high school history texts still today. More
dangerously, it shapes the thinking of government officials and military
planners working in a world that still contains more than 15,000 nuclear
weapons.
Truman
exulted in the obliteration of Hiroshima, calling it “the greatest thing in
history.” America’s military leaders didn’t share his exuberance. Seven of
America’s eight five-star officers in 1945 — Gens. Dwight Eisenhower,
Douglas MacArthur and Henry Arnold, and Adms. William Leahy, Chester Nimitz,
Ernest King and William Halsey — later called the atomic bombings either
militarily unnecessary, morally reprehensible, or both. Nor did the bombs
succeed in their collateral purpose: cowing the Soviets.
Leahy,
who was Truman’s personal chief of staff, wrote in his memoir that the
“Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender…. The use of this
barbarous weapon at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material assistance in
our war against Japan.” MacArthur went further. He told former President
Hoover that if the United States had assured the Japanese that they could
keep the emperor they would have gladly surrendered in late May.
It was
not the atomic evisceration of Hiroshima and Nagasaki that ended the Pacific
war. Instead, it was the Soviet invasion of Manchuria and other Japanese
colonies that began at midnight on Aug. 8, 1945 — between the two bombings.
For
months, Allied intelligence had been reporting that a Soviet invasion would
knock Japan out of the war. On April 11, for example, the Joint Intelligence
Staff of the Joint
Chiefs of Staff predicted, “If at any time the USSR
should enter the war, all Japanese will realize that absolute defeat is
inevitable.”
The
Americans, having broken Japanese codes, were aware of Japan’s desperation to
negotiate peace with the U.S. before the Soviets invaded. Truman himself
described an intercepted cable from July 18, 1945, as the “telegram from the
Jap emperor asking for peace.” Indeed, Truman went to the mid-July summit in
Potsdam to make sure that the Soviets were keeping their Yalta conference
promise to come into the Pacific war. When Stalin gave him the assurance on
July 17, Truman wrote in his diary, “He’ll be in the Jap War on August 15.
Fini Japs when that comes about.” Truman reiterated this in a letter to his
wife the next day: “We’ll end the war a year sooner now, and think of the
kids who won’t be killed.”
In
quickly routing Japan’s Kwantung army, the Soviets ruined Japan’s diplomatic
and military end game: keep inflicting military losses on the U.S. and get
Stalin’s help negotiating better surrender terms.
The
atomic bombings, terrible and inhumane as they were, played little role in
Japanese leaders’ calculations to quickly surrender. After all, the U.S. had
firebombed more than 100 Japanese cities. Hiroshima and Nagasaki were just
two more cities destroyed; whether the attack required one bomb or thousands
didn’t much matter. As Gen. Torashirō Kawabe, the deputy chief of staff, later
told U.S. interrogators, the depth of devastation wrought in Hiroshima and
Nagasaki only became known “in a gradual manner.” But “in comparison, the
Soviet entry into the war was a great shock.”
When
Prime Minister Kantaro Suzuki was asked on Aug. 10 why Japan needed to
surrender so quickly, he explained, “the Soviet Union will take not only
Manchuria, Korea, Karafuto, but also Hokkaido. This would destroy the
foundation of Japan. We must end the war when we can deal with the United States.”
Japanese leaders also feared the spread of Soviet-inspired communist
uprisings and knew the Soviets would not look kindly upon their paramount
concerns — protecting the emperor himself and preserving the emperor system.
Truman
understood the stakes. He knew the Soviet invasion would end the war. He knew
assuring Japan about the emperor might also lead to surrender. But he decided
to use the atomic bombs anyway.
While at
Potsdam, Truman received a report detailing the power of the bomb tested July
16 at Alamogordo, N.M. Afterward he “was a changed man,” according to
Winston Churchill. He began bossing Stalin around. And he authorized use of
the bomb against Japan. If his newfound assertiveness at Potsdam didn’t show
Stalin who was boss, Truman figured, Hiroshima certainly would.
Stalin
got the message. Atomic bombs were now a fundamental part of the U.S.
arsenal, and not just as a last resort. He ordered Soviet scientists to throw
everything they had into developing a Soviet bomb. The race was on. Eventually,
the two sides would accumulate the equivalent of 1.5 million Hiroshima bombs.
And as Manhattan Project physicist I.I. Rabi astutely observed, “Suddenly the
day of judgment was the next day and has been ever since.”
Oliver Stone is an
Academy Award-winning writer and director. History professor Peter Kuznick is
director of the Nuclear Studies Institute at American University. They
co-authored the Showtime documentary series and book, “The Untold History of
the United States.”
|
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.