By Nikos Mottas
Eighty years have passed since the United States, under the administration of President Truman, committed one of the most barbaric crimes against humanity – on August 6th in Hiroshima and a few days later, on August 9th in Nagasaki – by dropping the atomic bomb resulting to hundreds of thousands victims and many more in the following years due to the radioactivity effects.
“Having found the bomb we have used it... We shall continue to use it until we complete destroy Japan's power to make war. Only a Japanese surrender will stop us.... We thank God that it has come to us, instead to our enemies; and we pray that He may guide us to use it in His ways and for His purposes”. These creepy and utterly cynical words were delivered on August 9, 1945 by US President Truman during a radio address to the American people. Three days ago, the bomber Enola Gay had dropped the atomic bomb called “Little boy” in Hiroshima and another bomb was spreading death, destruction and chaos in Nagasaki.
Today, 80 years later, the imperialists, as well as a part of academic community, still claim that the dropping of the atomic bombs in Hiroshima and Nagasaki led to the unconditional surrender of Japan, thus ending the war and preventing more victims. However, the clear aim of the US government was to intimidate the people, to send a “message” to the USSR and to the rising communist movement, as the Second World War had in fact already ended and the use of nuclear weapons didn’t actually play a role in its outcome.
More specifically:
1) According to declassified US intelligence intercepts of Japanese diplomatic communications (the “Magic” cables), Tokyo was seeking a negotiated peace, particularly if the Allies would guarantee the preservation of the Emperor’s position. The U.S. Strategic Bombing Survey (1946) concluded: “Certainly prior to 31 December 1945, and in all probability prior to 1 November 1945, Japan would have surrendered even if the atomic bombs had not been dropped, if Russia had entered the war and if the Allies had made it clear that the Japanese could retain the Emperor” (U.S. Strategic Bombing Survey, 1946).
Similarly, General Dwight D. Eisenhower later recalled expressing his concern to Secretary of War Henry Stimson that “it wasn’t necessary to hit them with that awful thing” (Eisenhower, Mandate for Change, 1963).
Even Winston Churchill, the US most loyal ally, asserted: “It would be a mistake to suppose that the fate of Japan was settled by the atomic bomb. Her defeat was certain before the first bomb fell”.
2) Soviet entry into the war against Japan was decisive. At the Yalta Conferencem on February 1945, the Soviet Union agreed to enter the Pacific war within three months of Germany’s defeat. True to this pledge, the USSR declared war on Japan on 8 August 1945 and launched a massive offensive in Manchuria the following day.
Japanese historian Tsuyoshi Hasegawa contends that the Soviet invasion, rather than the atomic bombings, was the primary catalyst for Japan’s surrender, as it shattered Tokyo’s last hope of negotiating peace through Moscow (Racing the Enemy, 2005).
3) There were alternatives to the dropping of the atomic bombs. While Operation Downfall — the planned Allied invasion of Japan — was expected to result in significant casualties, US military leaders recognized other means to force surrender. A combination of intensified conventional bombing and a naval blockade had already crippled Japan’s war capacity.
Admiral William Leahy, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, stated: “The use of this barbarous weapon… was of no material assistance in our war against Japan” (Leahy, I Was There). General Douglas MacArthur also expressed the belief that Japan was already prepared to capitulate without an invasion or atomic attack.
4) The actual aim behind the dropping of the bombs was to indimidate the Soviet Union and the emerging socialist camp. For example, Gar Alperovitz asserts that the Truman administration was aware of Japan’s weakened position but sought to use the weapon to gain leverage over the Soviet Union in shaping the postwar order (The Decision to Use the Atomic Bomb, 1995). Secretary of War Henry Stimson’s diary entries reveal his awareness that the atomic bomb would place the United States in a position of strategic dominance, potentially making “Russia more manageable.”
5) Approximately 200,000 people were killed by the atomic bombs, while many more died in the following decades due to exposure to radioactivity. Concerns over the humanitarian and moral implications of the bombings were raised before their use. The Franck Report (June 1945), authored by Manhattan Project scientists, advised against using the weapon on a populated area without prior warning, recommending instead a non-lethal demonstration to encourage surrender: “It will be very difficult to persuade the world that a nation which was the first to use such a weapon in this way was justified in doing so”.
Conclusion: The dropping of the atomic bombs in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, in August 1945, was the most heinous war crime of the previous century. An act of barbarism the world had never seen before. Instead of securing a lasting peace, the nuclear holocaust in Japan inaugurated the arms race, initiated and promoted by the US imperialists, which continues to threaten the very existence of the world's peoples today.
Today, 80 years later, the imperialists, as well as a part of academic community, still claim that the dropping of the atomic bombs in Hiroshima and Nagasaki led to the unconditional surrender of Japan, thus ending the war and preventing more victims. However, the clear aim of the US government was to intimidate the people, to send a “message” to the USSR and to the rising communist movement, as the Second World War had in fact already ended and the use of nuclear weapons didn’t actually play a role in its outcome.
More specifically:
1) According to declassified US intelligence intercepts of Japanese diplomatic communications (the “Magic” cables), Tokyo was seeking a negotiated peace, particularly if the Allies would guarantee the preservation of the Emperor’s position. The U.S. Strategic Bombing Survey (1946) concluded: “Certainly prior to 31 December 1945, and in all probability prior to 1 November 1945, Japan would have surrendered even if the atomic bombs had not been dropped, if Russia had entered the war and if the Allies had made it clear that the Japanese could retain the Emperor” (U.S. Strategic Bombing Survey, 1946).
Similarly, General Dwight D. Eisenhower later recalled expressing his concern to Secretary of War Henry Stimson that “it wasn’t necessary to hit them with that awful thing” (Eisenhower, Mandate for Change, 1963).
Even Winston Churchill, the US most loyal ally, asserted: “It would be a mistake to suppose that the fate of Japan was settled by the atomic bomb. Her defeat was certain before the first bomb fell”.
2) Soviet entry into the war against Japan was decisive. At the Yalta Conferencem on February 1945, the Soviet Union agreed to enter the Pacific war within three months of Germany’s defeat. True to this pledge, the USSR declared war on Japan on 8 August 1945 and launched a massive offensive in Manchuria the following day.
Japanese historian Tsuyoshi Hasegawa contends that the Soviet invasion, rather than the atomic bombings, was the primary catalyst for Japan’s surrender, as it shattered Tokyo’s last hope of negotiating peace through Moscow (Racing the Enemy, 2005).
3) There were alternatives to the dropping of the atomic bombs. While Operation Downfall — the planned Allied invasion of Japan — was expected to result in significant casualties, US military leaders recognized other means to force surrender. A combination of intensified conventional bombing and a naval blockade had already crippled Japan’s war capacity.
Admiral William Leahy, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, stated: “The use of this barbarous weapon… was of no material assistance in our war against Japan” (Leahy, I Was There). General Douglas MacArthur also expressed the belief that Japan was already prepared to capitulate without an invasion or atomic attack.
4) The actual aim behind the dropping of the bombs was to indimidate the Soviet Union and the emerging socialist camp. For example, Gar Alperovitz asserts that the Truman administration was aware of Japan’s weakened position but sought to use the weapon to gain leverage over the Soviet Union in shaping the postwar order (The Decision to Use the Atomic Bomb, 1995). Secretary of War Henry Stimson’s diary entries reveal his awareness that the atomic bomb would place the United States in a position of strategic dominance, potentially making “Russia more manageable.”
5) Approximately 200,000 people were killed by the atomic bombs, while many more died in the following decades due to exposure to radioactivity. Concerns over the humanitarian and moral implications of the bombings were raised before their use. The Franck Report (June 1945), authored by Manhattan Project scientists, advised against using the weapon on a populated area without prior warning, recommending instead a non-lethal demonstration to encourage surrender: “It will be very difficult to persuade the world that a nation which was the first to use such a weapon in this way was justified in doing so”.
Conclusion: The dropping of the atomic bombs in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, in August 1945, was the most heinous war crime of the previous century. An act of barbarism the world had never seen before. Instead of securing a lasting peace, the nuclear holocaust in Japan inaugurated the arms race, initiated and promoted by the US imperialists, which continues to threaten the very existence of the world's peoples today.
* Nikos Mottas is the Editor-in-Chief of In Defense of Communism.
