Katana VentraIP

Debate over the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki

Substantial debate exists over the ethical, legal, and military aspects of the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki on 6 August and 9 August 1945 at the close of World War II (1939–45).

On 26 July 1945 at the Potsdam Conference, United States President Harry S. Truman, British Prime Minister Winston Churchill and President of China Chiang Kai-shek issued the Potsdam Declaration which outlined the terms of surrender for the Empire of Japan. This ultimatum stated if Japan did not surrender, it would face "prompt and utter destruction".[1] Some debaters focus on the presidential decision-making process, and others on whether or not the bombings were the proximate cause of Japanese surrender.


Over the course of time, different arguments have gained and lost support as new evidence has become available and as new studies have been completed. A primary focus has been on whether the bombing should have been categorized as a war crime and/or as a crime against humanity. There is also the debate on the role of the bombings in Japan's surrender and the U.S.'s justification for them based upon the premise that the bombings precipitated the surrender. This remains the subject of both scholarly and popular debate, with revisionist historians advancing a variety of arguments. In 2005, in an overview of historiography about the matter, J. Samuel Walker wrote, "the controversy over the use of the bomb seems certain to continue".[2] Walker stated, "The fundamental issue that has divided scholars over a period of nearly four decades is whether the use of the bomb was necessary to achieve victory in the war in the Pacific on terms satisfactory to the United States."[2]


Supporters of the bombings generally assert that they caused the Japanese surrender, preventing massive casualties on both sides in the planned invasion of Japan: Kyūshū was to be invaded in November 1945 and Honshū four months later. It was thought Japan would not surrender unless there was an overwhelming demonstration of destructive capability. Those who oppose the bombings argue it was militarily unnecessary,[3] inherently immoral, a war crime, or a form of state terrorism.[4] Critics believe a naval blockade and conventional bombings would have forced Japan to surrender unconditionally.[5] Some critics believe Japan was more motivated to surrender by the Soviet Union's invasion of Manchuria and other Japanese-held areas.[6][7]

US public opinion on the bombings[edit]

The Pew Research Center conducted a 2015 survey showing that 56% of Americans supported the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki and 34% opposed.[214] The study highlighted the impact of the respondents' generations, showing that support for the bombings was 70% among Americans 65 and older but only 47% for those between 18 and 29. Political leanings also impacted responses, according to the survey; support was measured at 74% for Republicans and 52% for Democrats.[214]


American approval of the bombings has decreased substantially since 1945, when a Gallup poll showed 85% support while only 10% disapproved.[215] Forty-five years later, in 1990, Gallup conducted another poll and found 53% support and 41% opposition.[215] Another Gallup poll in 2005 echoed the findings of the 2015 Pew Research Center study by finding 57% support with 38% opposition.[215] While the poll data from the Pew Research Center and Gallup show a stark drop in support for the bombings over the last half-century, Stanford political scientists have conducted research supporting their hypothesis that American public support for the use of nuclear force would be just as high today as in 1945 if a similar yet contemporary scenario presented itself.[216]


In a 2017 study conducted by political scientists Scott D. Sagan and Benjamin A. Valentino, respondents were asked if they would support the use of atomic force in a hypothetical situation that kills 100,000 Iranian civilians versus an invasion that would result in the deaths of 20,000 American soldiers. The results showed that 59% of Americans would approve of a nuclear strike in such a situation.[217] However, a 2010 Pew survey showed that 64% of Americans approved of Barack Obama's declaration that the US would abstain from the use of nuclear weapons against nations that did not have them.[218]

by John Hersey

Hiroshima

Nuclear disarmament

Nuclear weapons debate

Cultural treatments of the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki

Allen, Thomas B.; Polmar, Norman (1995). . Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-0-684-80406-4. Concludes the bombings were justified.

Code-Name Downfall: The Secret Plan to Invade Japan And Why Truman Dropped the Bomb

(1995). The Decision To Use The Atomic Bomb And The Architecture Of An American Myth. Knopf. ISBN 978-0-679-44331-5. Weighs whether the bombings were justified or necessary, concludes they were not.

Alperovitz, Gar

Bernstein, Barton J., ed. (1976). The Atomic Bomb: The Critical Issues. Little, Brown.  978-0-316-09192-3. Weighs whether the bombings were justified or necessary.

ISBN

Bird, Kai; Sherwin, Martin J. (2005). . Knopf. ISBN 978-0-375-41202-8. "The thing had to be done", but "Circumstances are heavy with misgiving."

American Prometheus: The Triumph and Tragedy of J. Robert Oppenheimer

(1954). Japan's Decision to Surrender. Stanford University Press. ISBN 978-0-8047-0460-1. Explains the conflicts and debates within the Japanese government from the onset of World War II until surrender. Concludes the bombings were justified.

Butow, Robert

Feis, Herbert (1961). . Princeton University Press. Concludes that the bombs were not only necessary, but legally and morally acceptable (1966 reprint).

Japan Subdued: The Atomic Bomb and the End of the War in the Pacific

(1999). Downfall: The End of the Imperial Japanese Empire. Random House. ISBN 978-0-679-41424-7. Based on previously classified documents. Concludes that the dropping the bombs was superior to all other alternatives and saved Japanese as well as American lives.

Frank, Richard B.

(1988). Thank God For The Atom Bomb, And Other Essays. Summit Books. ISBN 978-0-345-36135-6. Exceedingly Orthodox article, defends the bomb but not a serious academic work.

Fussell, Paul

(2006). Among the Dead Cities. Walker Publishing Company. ISBN 978-0-8027-1471-8. Philosophical and moral discussion concerning the Allied strategy of area bombing in World War II, including the use of atomic weapons on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Grayling, A. C.

(2011). Hiroshima Nagasaki. HarperCollins Publishers. ISBN 978-0-7322-8845-7. Concludes that the atomic bombings were unnecessary. Challenges the view that the atomic bombings were necessary to end the Pacific War and save lives.

Ham, Paul

(2005). Racing the Enemy: Stalin, Truman, and the Surrender of Japan. Belknap Press. ISBN 978-0-674-01693-4. Argues that the bombs were not the deciding factor in ending the war. The Soviet entrance into the Pacific War was the primary cause for Japan's surrender.

Hasegawa, Tsuyoshi

Hasegawa, Tsuyoshi (17 August 2007). . Japan Focus. Retrieved 17 June 2012. Here he sharpens his earlier view that the Soviet entrance into the Pacific War was the primary cause for Japan's surrender.

"The Atomic Bombs and the Soviet Invasion: What Drove Japan's Decision to Surrender?"

Maddox, Robert James (1995). Weapons for Victory: The Hiroshima Decision. University of Missouri Press.  978-0-8262-1562-8. Author is a diplomatic historian who favors Truman's decision to drop the atomic bombs.

ISBN

Newman, Robert P. (1995). Truman and the Hiroshima Cult. Michigan State University Press.  978-0-87013-403-6. An analysis critical of postwar opposition to the atom bombings.

ISBN

Nobile, Philip, ed. (1995). . Marlowe and Company. ISBN 978-1-56924-841-6. Covers the controversy over the content of the 1995 Smithsonian Institution exhibition associated with the display of the Enola Gay; includes complete text of the planned (and canceled) exhibition.

Judgement at the Smithsonian

Takaki, Ronald (1995). . Little, Brown. ISBN 978-0-316-83124-6.

Hiroshima: Why America Dropped the Atomic Bomb

Hiroshima: Was It Necessary?

Reflections of a Far East Prisoner of War on the use of the atomic bombs

Archived 2008-07-03 at the Wayback Machine – The Alsos Digital Library for Nuclear Issues

Annotated bibliography on the decision to use the atomic bombs on Japan

archive of contemporary reactions and subsequent analises at marxists.org

Atomic Bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki

by Michael D. Pearlman U.S. Army Command and General Staff College Fort Leavenworth, KS

Unconditional Surrender, Demobilization, and the Atomic Bomb

Stephen Shalom (from New Politics, vol. 6, no. 1 (new series), whole no. 21, Summer 1996)

"The Obliteration of Hiroshima"

by Mick Hume, Spiked, 2 August 2005. Abridged version of a 1995 article in Living Marxism.

Hiroshima: the 'White Man's Bomb' revisited: Dropping the Bomb on Japan was the final act of a bitter race war in the Pacific.

.

Yuki Tanaka and Richard Falk, "The Atomic Bombing, The Tokyo War Crimes Tribunal and the Shimoda Case: Lessons for Anti-Nuclear Legal Movements", The Asia-Pacific Journal, Vol. 44-3-09, 2 November 2009

The Enola Gay Controversy – About – Overview

International Peoples' Tribunal on the Dropping of Atomic Bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki

Dietrich, Bill (1995). . Seattle Times.

"Pro and Con on Dropping the Bomb"

MacLaren, Don (1998). . The Japan Times.

"Troubling memories of the past, Better to bomb than blockade"

Christian Appy (6 Aug 2015). . Salon.

"The indefensible Hiroshima revisionism that haunts America to this day"

Richard Fisher (6 Aug 2020). . BBC.

"Can nuclear war be morally justified?"

Pruitt, Sarah (March 29, 2022). . History.

"The Hiroshima Bombing Didn't Just End WWII—It Kick-Started the Cold War"