Tag: wwii

Did the Atomic Bombs End World War II?

On September 2, it marked 80 years since Japan signed the Instrument of Surrender, formally ending hostilities with the Allied powers. In 1945, Emperor Shōwa decided to surrender on August 14. Why did Japan choose to accept defeat at that moment? The United States had dropped atomic bombs on Hiroshima on August 6 and Nagasaki on August 9. As a result, many claim that these bombings brought the war to an end. This past June, U.S. President Donald Trump compared American strikes on Iran to the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, stating, “That hit ended the war.” But did the atomic bombs truly end World War II?

To explore this question, we must consider two perspectives: how the Japanese government perceived the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and whether the United States intended to use them specifically to force Japan’s surrender.

What was the Japanese government’s response to the atomic bombings?

To begin, let us examine this first question. Experts have pointed out that the role of the Soviet Union’s entry into the war is often underestimated. While many believe that the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki brought the war to an end, another perspective holds that the Soviet declaration of war was the decisive factor. The Soviet Union declared war on Japan on August 8 – two days after the bombing of Hiroshima – and launched an invasion of Manchuria on August 9.

On June 22, 1945, Japanese leaders convened a conference in which Emperor Shōwa urged peace negotiations through Soviet mediation. This was despite the fact that, back in April, the Soviet Union had formally notified Japan of its intention to terminate the Neutrality Pact. Yet Japan continued to pin its hopes on Soviet goodwill, reasoning that the pact remained legally valid until April 1946. The Soviets, for their part, offered no clear response, leaving Japan to wait in vain for a gesture that was never likely to come.

Japan had come to recognize that it could not defeat the United States and the United Kingdom on its own. The Imperial Japanese Army’s plan for a decisive mainland battle would be rendered impossible if the Soviets joined the conflict. Thus, Japan placed its hopes on Soviet mediation, aiming to secure favorable terms for peace – most importantly, the preservation of the Emperor’s position.

Yasuaki Chijiwa, Director of the Department of International Conflict History at the National Institute for Defense Studies, notes that Japanese leaders continued to await a response from the Soviets even after the bombing of Hiroshima. It took two days to assess the devastation in Hiroshima, but once the Soviets entered the war, Japan acted swiftly. Just six hours after the Soviet invasion began, Japanese leaders convened to discuss surrender terms.

Emperor Shōwa stated, “Now that we are at war with the Soviets, it is imperative to bring the conflict to a swift conclusion.” Foreign Minister Shigenori Tōgō echoed this urgency: “We must end the war immediately.” Prime Minister Kantaro Suzuki declared, “I have decided to accept the Potsdam Declaration in order to end the war.”

Although the Army continued to insist that a mainland battle could inflict significant damage on the enemy and strengthen Japan’s negotiating position, Emperor Shōwa expressed growing distrust toward the military. He had been informed as early as June 1945 that Japan’s forces lacked the capacity to sustain such a campaign, and this realization is believed to have shifted his stance toward seeking an early peace. He resolved to accept the Potsdam Declaration, provided that the Emperor’s position would be maintained.

The Byrnes Note – a diplomatic reply issued by U.S. Secretary of State James Byrnes on August 11 – did not explicitly guarantee the continuation of the Japanese monarchy. Nevertheless, despite resistance from factions within the military, Emperor Shōwa accepted the terms of the declaration on August 14.

In summary, the two atomic bombs were not the sole or decisive factor in Japan’s decision to surrender. Japanese leaders referred to so-called “new-type bombs,” yet they struggled to comprehend the full extent of their impact in such a short time. Moreover, by that point, roughly 60 Japanese cities had already suffered catastrophic damage from large-scale incendiary bombing campaigns targeting urban populations.

A 1946 report by the United States Strategic Bombing Survey – commissioned by the U.S. military to assess the impact of aerial bombardment during World War II – concluded:

“Based on a detailed investigation of all the facts, and supported by the testimony of the surviving Japanese leaders involved, it is the Survey’s opinion that 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, even if Russia had not entered the war, and even if no invasion had been planned or contemplated.”

Keep reading

Argentina charges daughter of World War II Nazi for concealing decades-old art theft

The daughter and son-in-law of a Nazi who stole art from European Jews during World War II were charged in an Argentine court on Sept 4 with hiding numerous works, including 22 by French painter Henri Matisse.

The pair came into the spotlight after an 18th century painting stolen from a Dutch art collector was 

spotted in an Argentine property ad in August, only to vanish once again.

“Portrait of a Lady” by Italian baroque painter Giuseppe Ghislandi was missing for eight decades before being photographed in the home of a daughter of Nazi Friedrich Kadgien, who had fled to Argentina after the war and died there in 1978.

Police opened an investigation and conducted multiple raids in search of the painting, only to find 22 works from the 1940s by Matisse (1869-1954), and others whose origins have yet to be determined.

The artworks were found in the Argentine seaside resort of Mar del Plata in possession of members of the Kadgien family, officials said.

Keep reading

Painting stolen by Nazis during WWII believed discovered in Argentine real estate listing

An 18th-century portrait stolen by the Nazis during WWII is believed to have resurfaced in the most unexpected place: hanging above a sofa in a coastal Argentinian home and discovered not by law enforcement or a museum, but spotted in a photo on a real estate website.

The painting, “Portrait of a Lady” by Italian baroque artist Giuseppe Vittore Ghislandi, belonged to Jacques Goudstikker, a prominent Dutch-Jewish art dealer whose collection of more than 1,100 works was seized after the Nazi invasion of the Netherlands in 1940. Senior Nazi officials, including Hermann Göring, acquired hundreds of pieces, according to the Cultural Heritage Agency of the Netherlands (RCE).

The potential discovery is the result of years of work by Dutch daily newspaper Algemeen Dagblad (AD) investigative journalists Cyril Rosman, Paul Post and Peter Schouten, who have been pursuing the case for nearly a decade.

Rosman said the team began tracing Friedrich Kadgien, Göring’s financial adviser and close confidant, several years ago.

“Kadgien escaped to South America at the end of the war,” Rosman told ABC News. “We knew from archival documents that he brought diamonds, jewelry, and two stolen paintings with him. We’ve spent years trying to piece together his life here and where those paintings ended up.”

Keep reading

Feds concealed names of Nazi collaborators over hurt feelings, Russia-Ukraine war

Federal agencies hid names of Nazi collaborators who entered postwar Canada, fearing disclosure “might cause them harm,” a B’nai Brith Canada executive stated. The group seeks to overturn secrecy orders on old files, according to Blacklock’s.

“We’re talking about records from the 1940s and ‘50s about individuals who have long since been dead,” said Richard Robertson, director of research for B’nai Brith. “One of the exemptions that is continuously being used against us is [that] it might cause them harm if we release this information.”

Ottawa withheld names of Nazi collaborators despite pleas from Conservatives, New Democrats, and Canada’s Jewish diaspora since the 1980s, claiming it would aid Russia’s war in Ukraine.

B’nai Brith claims archivists illegally withheld Nazi blacklists under the Access To Information Act, seeking sealed documents from a 1986 war crimes inquiry. “We’ve been fighting this battle for quite some time.” 

The Jewish group accuses Library and Archives Canada of unlawfully withholding information for decades. They seek full disclosure of communications with foreign states concerning a blacklist of 98 known Nazi Party members and 738 German POW laborers who immigrated to Canada in 1946.

To date, disclosures only include a February 1, 2024 summary of confidential records about the arrival of suspected war criminals, according to Nazi War Criminals. It found that Nazi collaborators entered Canada with inadequate background checks. 

Director Robertson questioned the ongoing concern for potentially offending a deceased former Nazi, asking, “At what point do we stop caring about the impact this might have on a person who’s been deceased for several decades?”

Keep reading

The ‘Miss Atom Bomb’ Beauty Pageant in Nagasaki, After the A-Bomb Fell

As you probably know by now, my current PBS film (see links above) revolves around the January 1, 1946 all-star U.S. military football game played in, of all places, Nagasaki less than five months after one of our new weapons destroyed half the city and killed at least 75,000, overwhelmingly civilians.

Beyond the Atomic Bowl, there was a second highly revealing (of American occupation attitudes) episode a few months after that.

By the summer of 1946, most of the Marine occupiers of Nagasaki had been sent home. Before departing, some helped promote and/or served as judges for a Miss Nagasaki beauty pageant, which they took to calling the “Miss Atom Bomb” contest. The contestants, whose ages ranged from 17 to 25, were young Japanese women, surely some of them widows or daughters of men killed in the Pacific war or in the atomic bombing. They had entered by responding to ads in the three leading local newspapers calling for young women who symbolized “Nagasaki rising from the ruins.”

Three U.S. Marines were among the ten judges in a competition that somehow took three days to complete (April 29-May 1). It was staged in a dance hall in the southern part of the city, well outside the zone of worst destruction. (Remember, the bomb exploded more than a mile off target, so “only” half the city was wiped out.) The hall had become slightly notorious as it was a prime site for occupying troops to pay money to dance with and maybe woo local women.

Presenting roses to the winner (above) was Marine Sgt. Robert McMenimen, who had earlier served as one of the referees at the Atomic Bowl.

Here is a clipping from Pacific Stars & Stripes, covering it at the time, and more photos that my research team found in U.S. archives.

Keep reading

Disinformation & The Dropping Of The Atomic Bombs

Legitimate disagreement about the wisdom of dropping two bombs on Japan to end World War II in 1945 persists even 80 years later, as reflected in discussions this past week.

But recently, there has often been no real effort even to present the facts, much less to consider the lose-lose choices involved in using such destructive weapons. In an age of revisionist history—when Churchill is deemed a “terrorist,” Germany did not really mean to starve millions of Jews and Ukrainians in summer and fall 1941, the British forced Hitler to continue the war, and World War II was not worth the cost—so too are Hiroshima and Nagasaki judged as either war crimes or colossal and unnecessary follies.

For today’s generation, it seems so easy to declare one’s 21st-century moral superiority over our ancestors. So we damn them as war criminals, given that they supposedly dropped the bombs without legitimate cause or reason.

What follows are some of the most common critiques of President Truman’s decision to use two nuclear weapons against wartime Japan, with an explanation of why his decision to use the bombs proved, at the time and in hindsight, the correct one.

Keep reading

ATOMIC BOMBINGS AT 80: The Mystery of the Nagasaki Bomb

“The rights and wrongs of Hiroshima are debatable,” Telford Taylor, the chief prosecutor at Nuremberg, once said, “but I have never heard a plausible justification of Nagasaki” — which he labeled a war crime.

In his 2011 book Atomic Cover-Up, Greg Mitchell says, “If Hiroshima suggests how cheap life had become in the atomic age, Nagasaki shows that it could be judged to have no value whatsoever.” Mitchell notes that the U.S. writer Dwight MacDonald cited in 1945 America’s “decline to barbarism” for dropping “half-understood poisons” on a civilian population.

The New York Herald Tribune editorialized there was “no satisfaction in the thought that an American air crew had produced what must without doubt be the greatest simultaneous slaughter in the whole history of mankind.”

Mitchell reports that the novelist Kurt Vonnegut, Jr. — who experienced the firebombing of Dresden first hand and described it in Slaughterhouse Five — said, “The most racist, nastiest act by this country, after human slavery, was the bombing of Nagasaki.”

On Aug. 17, 1945, David Lawrence, the conservative columnist and editor of US News, put it this way:

“Last week we destroyed hundreds of thousands of civilians in Japanese cities with the new atomic bomb. We shall not soon purge ourselves of the feeling of guilt. We did not hesitate to employ the most destructive weapon of all times indiscriminately against men, women and children. Surely we cannot be proud of what we have done. If we state our inner thoughts honestly, we are ashamed of it.”

If shame is the natural response to Hiroshima, how is one to respond to Nagasaki, especially in view of all the declassified government papers on the subject? According to Dr. Joseph Gerson’s With Hiroshima Eye, some 74,000 were killed instantly at Nagasaki, another 75,000 were injured and 120,000 were poisoned.

If Hiroshima was unnecessary, how to justify Nagasaki?

Keep reading

ATOMIC BOMBINGS AT 80: The Very Un-Christian Nagasaki Bomb

Eighty years ago today, an all-Christian bomber crew dropped “Fat Man,” a plutonium bomb, on Nagasaki, Japan, instantly annihilating tens of thousands of innocent civilians, a disproportionate number of them Japanese Christians, and wounding uncountable numbers of others.

For targeting purposes, the bombing crew used St. Mary’s Urakami Cathedral, the largest Christian church in East Asia. At 11:02 a.m., on Aug. 9, 1945, when the bomb was dropped over the cathedral, Nagasaki was the most Christian city in Japan.

At the time, the United States was arguably the most Christian nation in the world (that is, if you can label as Christian a nation whose churches overwhelmingly have failed to sincerely teach or adhere to the peaceful ethics of Jesus as taught in the Sermon on the Mount).

The baptized and confirmed Christian airmen, following their wartime orders to the letter, did their job efficiently, and they accomplished the mission with military pride, albeit with a number of near-fatal glitches.

Most Americans in 1945 would have done exactly the same if they had been in the shoes of the Bock’s Car crew, and there would have been very little mental anguish later if they had also been treated as heroes.

Nevertheless, the use of that monstrous weapon of mass destruction to destroy a mainly civilian city like Nagasaki was an international war crime and a crime against humanity as defined later by the Nuremberg Tribunal.

Of course, there was no way that the crew members could have known that at the time. Some of the crew did admit that they had had some doubts about what they had participated in when the bomb actually detonated. Of course, none of them actually saw the horrific suffering of the victims up close and personal.

“Orders are orders” and, in wartime, disobedience can be, and has been, legally punishable by summary execution of the soldier who might have had a conscience strong enough to convince him that killing another human, especially an unarmed one, was morally wrong.

Keep reading

Canada’s Contribution to Bombing of Hiroshima & Nagasaki

Eighty years ago today the US Air Force dropped an atomic bomb on Hiroshima resulting in 140,000 deaths. Three days later they dropped a different type of nuclear weapon on another Japanese city. 40,000 were killed immediately in Nagasaki and tens of thousands more died in the aftermath.

Those who justify the bombings claim it saved US lives by quickly ending the war. But, Tokyo had already been devastated and had delivered multiple pleas for a surrender agreement. The bombings were largely a warning to the Soviet Union about US military capabilities amidst post-war negotiations.

Canada was not an innocent bystander in the nuclear bombing. Uranium from Great Bear Lake in the Northwest Territories was used in the bombs and Canada spent millions of dollars (tens of millions in today’s money) to help research the bombs’ development. Immediately after successfully developing the technology, the US submitted its proposal to drop the bomb on Japan to the tri-state World War II Combined Policy Committee meeting, which included powerful Canadian minister C.D. Howe and a British official. Apparently, Howe supported the US proposal. When the bomb was dropped on Hiroshima, Howe immediately praised the military action. “It is a distinct pleasure for me to announce that Canadian scientists have played an intimate part, and have been associated in an effective way with this great scientific development,” he told the press. (Reflecting the racism in Canadian governing circles, in his (uncensored) diary King wrote: “It is fortunate that the use of the bomb should have been upon the Japanese rather than upon the white races of Europe.”)

Only a few years after the first atomic bomb was built Ottawa allowed the US to station nuclear weapons in Canada. According to John Clearwater in Canadian Nuclear Weapons: The Untold Story of Canada’s Cold War Arsenal, the first “nuclear weapons came to Canada as early as September 1950, when the USAF [US Air Force] temporarily stationed eleven ‘Fat Man’- style atomic bombs at Goose Bay Newfoundland.”

Canadian territory has also been used to test US nuclear weapons. Beginning in 1952 Ottawa agreed to let the US Strategic Air Command use Canadian air space for training flights of nuclear-armed aircraft. At the same time, the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission conducted military tests in Canada to circumvent oversight by American “watchdog committees.” As part of the agreement Ottawa committed to prevent any investigation into the military aspects of nuclear research in Canada.

Canadian Forces also carried nukes on foreign-stationed aircraft. At the height of Canadian nuclear deployments in the late 1960s the government had between 250 and 450 atomic bombs at its disposal in Europe. Based in Germany, the CF-104 Starfighter, for instance, operated without a gun and carried nothing but a thermal nuclear weapon.

During the past 80 years Canada has often been the world’s largest producer of uranium. Ottawa has sold dozens of nuclear reactors to foreign countries, which have often been financed with aid dollars.

Keep reading