Part VI - Why the weapons were used... revisionist speculation...

"Better an end with terror than a terror without end." (German proverb)

            In June of 1945, with the loss of the Japanese island stronghold of Okinawa, Emperor Hirohito stepped into the political arena and began pressing his aides and the civilian elements within the militarist government to find a way to surrender. Peace feelers began through the back channels in an effort to find out what America and the Allies would demand for a negotiated peace. The Allies had already outlined their demands at the Potsdam Conference requiring Japanese "unconditional" surrender. Since that would not protect the position of the Emperor as head of the Japanese State, Japan was not willing to entertain "unconditional "surrender. 
            With the annihilation of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Emperor Hirohito appears to have broken with tradition and muddied-his-hands in the business of politics and government by directly interceding himself to force the militarist led government to end the conflict. Upon learning of the destruction of Hiroshima, it was by order of the Emperor that a scientific team was dispatched to the smoldering remnants of the city to determine if the weapon that destroyed Hiroshima was – in fact – Atomic. Three days later, on the same day that Nagasaki was obliterated and the Soviet Union declared war against Japan, the scientific team reported to the Imperial Palace that indisputable proof existed that showed the bomb was Atomic.

 



(Above: Emperor Hirohito was recognized by the Japanese people as nothing less than an Emperor-god. The first time his subjects ever heard his voice was over a recording, broadcast nationally announcing Japan's surrender.)

            Hirohito was Emperor of Japan from 1926 until his death in 1989. Insofar as the planning, the execution, and the ending of World War II, historians may never accurately decipher the real role Hirohito played in Japan's operational government. He certainly was not squeaky clean; however, while many of the militarists that ran the government and the war effort were ultimately executed for war crimes, Hirohito was never indicted by the allies. One thing is clear, though when he recognized that the end was at hand, he exercised his power as Emperor against the militarist government that exhibited a great willingness to fight it out to the end. The position Hirohito took to end the conflict was taken at great risk to his position and person.

            During the critical hours leading up to surrender, a telling but little discussed nugget of Japanese history shows just how tenuous the Emperor’s hold was on the militarist and the Army they (the militarist) still controlled. There was actually an attempted military coup against Hirohito by ranking junior officers in the Japanese Army. The Imperial Palace itself was surrounded and attacked. While there is no indication that the Navy was a part of the attempted coup, there was a substantial circle within the Japanese Army Officer Corps – including some key senior officers – that was aware of the pending attempt to prevent the Emperor from surrendering the country and ending the war.

            The ending of World War II in the Pacific was not unlike any other conflict between nations… it was messy. For over a year, since the loss of Saipan, Japan had known that their effort to defeat the allied nations was stacked against ever increasing impossible odds. Nonetheless, Japanese embrace of the Eastern philosophy adopting the Shinto warrior and Bushido Code made the process of surrender an option so extreme that the Western Allies were hard pressed to fathom the nation’s singular nationalist identity with the Samurai (warrior) code.

(Above: Emperor Hirohito at his enthronement coronation ceremony in November of 1928.)

            The face of Japan was the Emperor-god, Hirohito. Soldiers of the Japanese Army, Navy and Air Corps, repeatedly displayed blinding courage in the face of impossible odds to defend Emperor and homeland. It made no difference, uneducated or well educated, officers or enlisted/conscripted soldiers, virtually all were willing to give their life for the Emperor.  Throughout the war in the Pacific, over and over again the code of the Samurai was readily applied by the Japanese on the field of battle. U.S. and Allied Naval forces were appalled to witness the willingness of Japanese pilots to commit suicide in the infamous Kamikaze attacks; and, likewise Japanese ground forces repeatedly demonstrated their willingness to fight to a man, to die, rather than surrender.

(Above: Kamikaze just split seconds before contact with the battleship U.S.S. Missouri.)

            In the battle for Okinawa, which ended just six weeks prior to the A-bombings, Japanese troops had been cut off by U.S. Naval and Air forces from their supplies. Japanese forces were without any hope of reinforcement, there was virtually no Japanese air or naval support for the ground forces - what remained of the Japanese Air Forces was focused on Allied Naval forces with the infamous Kamikaze attacks.

(Above: When first introduced into warfare by the Japanese, the Kamikaze attacks were a complete surprise to American and Allied Naval forces. By the last year of the war, the destructive damage that could be delivered by one man in a single plane made the Kamikaze more feared than the Japanese Navy itself.) 

            By the time the ground fight began on Okinawa, Japanese forces were already malnourished; and, by the end of the battle, 82 days later, they were starving to death. Japanese ground forces at Okinawa were cut off and were left on-their own. By Western philosophy, Japanese forces had every right to surrender; after all, the largest American force ever surrendered - before or since - had done so under similar conditions when the Philippines fell to Japan in 1942. But, the Japanese would not surrender.

            In the face of such odds Japanese human losses were enormous: 107,539 soldiers killed and 23,764 sealed in caves or buried by the Japanese themselves; only a small portion of the force - 10,755 - were captured or surrendered. The Japanese also lost 7,830 aircraft and 16 combat ships.

            Since many Japanese-Okinawan residents fled to caves to escape the battle, they were subsequently also entombed. The precise number of civilian casualties will probably never be known, but the lowest estimate is 42,000 killed - somewhere between one-tenth and one-fourth of the civilian population perished; though, by some estimates the battle of Okinawa killed almost a third of the civilian population. (The US Army figures for the 82 day campaign showed a total figure of 142,058 civilian casualties, including those killed by artillery fire, air attacks and those who were pressed into service by the Japanese army.)

             Revisionist historians so often speak to how decimated Japanese war industries were; and, how by August 1945 Japan’s ability to wage war was waning to the point of becoming defenseless. Further, their argument goes that it was not necessary to wipe those cities from the face of the Earth because the war was substantially already over. However, this argument does not hold water as just six weeks before the dropping of the A-bombs, over 12,000 American boys had been killed or were missing in action on that spit of ground in the Pacific called Okinawa.

            Revisionist somehow fail to recall that just 6 weeks before the US destroyed two modern Japanese cities with two Atomic bombs, that the battle for Okinawa proved to be the bloodiest battle of the entire Pacific War for America. Thirty-four allied ships and craft of all types had been sunk, mostly by Kamikazes, and 368 ships and craft damaged. The fleet had also lost 763 aircraft.

            Total American casualties in the operation numbered over 12,000 killed and 36,000 wounded. America, from the start of the battle in March through the end of the fight in June, averaged loosing 440 boys being wounded and 153 boys killed in action, every day, for those 82 days. Over 600 American boys a day were being sacrificed at Okinawa. In fact, American losses at Okinawa were so heavy as to illicit Congressional calls for an investigation into the conduct of the military commanders.

            While the loss of American life was a fraction of what Japan was enduring, Japanese citizens and soldiers embraced the Shinto warrior code. To the American population back home, the thought of loosing 600 men a day to death and dismemberment was nothing short of appalling. Not surprisingly, the cost of this battle, in terms of lives, time, and material, weighed heavily in the decision to use the atomic bomb against Japan just six weeks later.

            Revisionist historians will point to the ongoing back-channel diplomatic attempts that were being made by the Japanese diplomatic corps as proof that Japan was ready to end the conflict. The argument goes that America never needed to use these weapons to annihilate two cities and kill a quarter-million people. However, revisionist historians need look no further than the militarist that, up until Hirohito became directly involved and took his stand, still controlled the government. These were the same militarist that had left 107,000 troops to perish on Okinawa.

            To prove to the reader that Okinawa was not just some fluke of Japanese leadership gone insane, let us examine Saipan. The battle for the island of Saipan adds reinforcement to the willingness of the Japanese soldier to give his life for his Emperor. Saipan was the scene of the largest Banzai (suicide) charge of the war. By 7 July 1944 - 9 months before Okinawa and more than a year before the Atomic bombs were employed - U.S. forces had completely cut the Japanese ground forces from their supply lines and the Japanese forces had nowhere left to retreat on the island. The Japanese commanding officer Lieutenant General Yoshitsugu Saito made plans for a final suicidal banzai charge. On the fate of the remaining civilians on the island, Saito said, "There is no longer any distinction between civilians and troops. It would be better for them to join in the attack with bamboo spears than be captured."

            At dawn, with a group of a dozen men carrying a great red flag in the lead, the remaining able-bodied troops (about 3,000 men remained out of an initial force of 30,000) charged forward in the final attack. Amazingly, behind them came the wounded, with bandaged heads, crutches, and barely armed. (One U.S. soldier recounted how he shot and killed a Japanese soldier armed with a pistol. Upon drawing near the dead soldier, the American serviceman noticed his victim was wearing a bandage around his head. Upon further investigation, he learned the victim was completely blind, both eyes covered by the bandage. The Japanese soldier had elected to join the fight and fire in the direction of the enemy... rather than surrender.)

            This rag-tag Japanese force slammed into the American front lines with such force that they very nearly overwhelmed both Army and Marine units. The 1st and 2nd Battalions of the 105th U.S. Infantry were almost destroyed, losing 650 killed and wounded. However, the resistance of these two battalions, with the help of Headquarters Company (the clerks and non-combat arms folks) 105th Infantry, and elements of 3rd Battalion, 10th Marines (an artillery unit) resulted in over 4,300 Japanese killed. (Note that the number of dead is almost half again greater than the 3,000 able bodied troops Saito had launched the attack with… those other 1,300 troops consisted of men able to still breath and “pull a trigger” but otherwise should never have been in battle. Simply put, Japanese forces on Saipan fought to a man – and the Japanese civilian population did too.)

            Saipan begs another question, too. At the end of the battle for the island, over the last few days, how did over 20,000 Japanese civilians muster enough courage to commit suicide? They did it because of their belief in the Shinto code of the Samurai... the warrior code. They did it because their Emperor told them to kill themselves before being taken prisoner by the American forces. They did it because death was preferable to dishonor... they were civilians. Mothers and fathers killed their children before killing themselves. Mothers threw their babies into the sea before jumping to their deaths. Whole families jumped to their deaths, together. Many waded into the sea and drowned themselves. This was not mass suicide, this was personal. This was individuals electing to follow a strict code of honor. This act was repeated from various points around the island over the last few days before Americans took full control. American soldiers tried to entice Japanese civilians to surrender with promises of food and care. Still, of the 25,000 civilians on the island, over 20,000 took their own lives rather than surrender.

(Above: Today, Banzai Cliff offers a wonderful view of the ocean. You stand a 100 or so feet straight above the ocean. There is no reef so the waves break directly onto the side of the cliff. You can see fishermen standing right on the edge with their fishing line dangling 100 feet below. The name came from the mass suicides of Japanese civilians at the end of the Battle of Saipan. Rather than surrender, Japanese families lined up on the cliff's edge from youngest to oldest. Each in turn gave the one in front a push.)

(Above & Below: Suicide Cliff is 820 feet above sea level with most of that being a vertical drop to the rocks just behind the last Japanese command post. It provides cool breezes and breathtaking views of the ocean and the hills of Northern Saipan. Suicide Cliff has a similar history as Banzai Cliff. The name came from the mass suicides of Japanese civilians at the end of the Battle of Saipan.)

 

            In the face of such actions by the Japanese military and civilian populations, by August of 1945 President Harry Truman probably did not give much credit to diplomatic hopes of Japan accepting the Potsdam Declaration. I am sure Truman felt that stringing along the war to see if or when the Japanese might eventually throw-in-the-towel was not seen as a viable option.

            Those revisionists who profess some back-room cloak-and-dagger reasons for America using Atomic weapons base their position on pieces of information that - loosely tied together - give an impression of facts that are un-provable and are; therefore, useless. To the revisionist historians and American detractors that bemoan the fact that America destroyed Hiroshima and Nagasaki, needlessly, they should take the proven record of the facts and then try and second guess President Truman and his decision to use these weapons. Let us review:

1. Over a year prior the use of Atomic weapons and in spite of hopeless odds, repeatedly Japanese Army, Naval, and Air forces - along with huge numbers of Japanese civilians - had demonstrated their willingness to continue to fight and die for Emperor and homeland.
2. The militarist that had run the government and the war effort remained firmly in power up to the very end. By the time that Emperor Hirohito forced the issue of a negotiated peace, Hiroshima and Nagasaki were already destroyed.
3. Factions within the Army attempted a military coup against the Emperor in an attempt to head off surrender.
4. Given points 1-3 above: The Japanese diplomatic corps that was searching desperately for a negotiated peace would have stood little hope of swaying the militarist that were in control to follow a diplomatic arrangement to end the war.

             None of the afore indicate any willingness on the part of Japan to accept the unconditional terms of surrender outlined in the Potsdam Conference. That said the American public also enters into the decision-formula.

             American dead and maimed were still coming home from Okinawa when Truman was approving the bombing orders on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Again, at this point in time no one gave a hang about taking a wait-and-see attitude towards the Japanese Empire. (Common sense has to enter into this process at some point. Try to picture a sitting American President telling families, communities, and an American press corps that, “The American Government is going to take await-and-see position to see if a negotiated peace can be worked out." After Pearl Harbor, the Bataan Death March, the Kamikaze and Banzai attacks… after the bloody island hopping campaign, and Okinawa sitting on America's chest like a boulder... stringing along the war was never an option Truman had available to him. Had he attempted to apply that option, the American public might well have rioted; and, rightfully so. Worse, while American boys continued to die while a negotiated peace was being explored, what if the public learned that we had a weapon that would have ended the war - but were never used? Most assuredly, the American public would have rioted, and rightfully so.
            This author does recognize that there existed other good, but secondary, reasons to use the Atomic weapons in August 1945. No one doubted that after the war ended there would be a return of East verses West. The post World War II world was going to be a contest between the Communist Soviet Union and the Democracies headed up by the United States. The only real question was: Would the next world war be, frigid (later named the Cold War), or would the next world war be another hot/shooting war?

            The rub was simple; at the close of WWII the Soviet Union under Stalin had the largest standing army in the world. However, with America holding the ultimate weapon, the Soviet military power could be checked. Still, that would require the Soviet Union – and the rest of the world – be made aware of the destructive potential of an Atomic bomb. By using the weapons against Japan, America accomplished two very credible objectives with the Soviet Union:

1. The United States possessed the ultimate weapon; and, just as important
2. It would use it.

           Over the coming decades, these two facts paid fantastic dividends for the Western Allies when dealing with the Soviets. Even after the Soviets caught up with weapons technology, there was no question about whether or not the United States would use the modern versions of these nuclear weapons. It came down to an issue of credibility; and the United States had rock solid credentials in that category that dated back to August 1945 - the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki underwrote the guarantee that America would use them. 

            So, did American (and the world) benefit from the destructive example offered to the world when Hiroshima and Nagasaki were annihilated? Answer: Absolutely; the doctrine of Mutual Assured Destruction (MAD) was employed and the world has recoiled from ever using nuclear weapons in another war. Does that alter the fundamental fact that America’s focus of winning and ending the war remained centered on defeating the Japanese Empire? Answer: Absolutely not; Truman could ill afford taking a "wait-and-see attitude towards a Japanese conditional surrender. The example made to the Soviets was a by-product of winning and ending World War II.

            Is the world a more dangerous place because America used Atomic weapons? Answer: No, absolutely not; in fact, use of these weapons - while in the pre-hydrogen bomb/thermonuclear era, probably save the world from experiencing the impact of the next generation (megaton size) nuclear weapons which most certainly would have been capable of endangering mankind's survival. Also of note, Japan was working on an Atomic weapon. Both the Japanese Army and Navy had extensive nuclear weapons programs. Germany, too was in the process of delivering bomb-grade Uranium ore to Japan when Nazi Germany surrendered. The U. S. Navy intercepted and escorted the German submarine carrying the precious uranium cargo back to American waters where it was confiscated.

            Also, remember that it only took the Russians a few short years (1949) to duplicate the U.S. - albeit via espionage - with their own Atomic weapons; then, add to that Great Britain (1952), France (1960), China (1964), etc. No, the fact that the U.S. was the first to use the weapons is only semantics in play. You name the country, you pick a war, some one else would have used these weapons sooner or later... and, perhaps with a far less favorable outcome.