¿Fueron las armas nucleares la causa de la rendición de Japón?

Ward Wilson: Repensar las armas nucleares

Grabado el 16 de enero de 2013

En un evento de 2013 en Carnegie Council, Ward Wilson, ahora director ejecutivo de Realist Revolt, afirma que la declaración de guerra soviética y no el bombardeo nuclear de Hiroshima provocó la rendición de Japón al final de la Segunda Guerra Mundial. Un miembro del público plantea entonces que los soviéticos declararon la guerra a causa de Hiroshima.

Haga clic aquí para ver la transcripción completa y el audio de esta charla.

Nuclear weapons shocked Japan into surrendering at the end of World War II—except they didn’t. Japan surrendered because the Soviet Union entered the war. Japanese leaders said the bomb forced them to surrender because it was less embarrassing to say they had been defeated by a miracle weapon. Americans wanted to believe it, and the myth of nuclear weapons was born.

Look at the facts. The United States bombed 68 cities in the summer of 1945. If you graph the number of people killed in all 68 of those attacks, you imagine that Hiroshima is off the charts, because that’s the way it’s usually presented. In fact, Hiroshima is second. Tokyo, a conventional attack, is first in the number killed. If you graph the number of square miles destroyed, Hiroshima is sixth. If you graph the percentage of the city destroyed, Hiroshima is 17th.

Clearly, in terms of the end result—I’m not talking about the means, but in terms of the outcome of the attack—Hiroshima was not exceptional. It was not outside the parameters of attacks that had been going on all summer long. Hiroshima was not militarily decisive.

The Soviet Union’s declaration of war, on the other hand, fundamentally altered the strategic situation. Adding another great power to the war created insoluble military problems for Japan’s leaders. It might be possible to fight against one great power attacking from one direction, but anyone could see that Japan couldn’t defend against two great powers attacking from two different directions at once.

The Soviet declaration of war was decisive; Hiroshima was not.

After Hiroshima, soldiers were still dug in in the beaches. They were still ready to fight. They wanted to fight. There was one fewer city behind them, but they had been losing cities all summer long, at the rate of one every other day, on average. Hiroshima was not a decisive military event. The Soviet entry into the war was.

And they said this. Japan’s leaders identified the Soviet Union as the strategically decisive factor. In a meeting of the Supreme Council in June to discuss the war in general, policy, they said Soviet entry would determine the fate of the empire. Kawabe Toroshiro said, "The absolute maintenance of peace in our relations with the Soviet Union is one of the fundamental conditions for continuing the war."

Japan’s leaders said Hiroshima forced them to surrender because it made a terrific explanation for losing the war. But the facts show that Hiroshima did not force Japan to surrender.

If nuclear weapons are a religion, Hiroshima is the first miracle. What do we make of a religion when its miracles turn out to be false? Nuclear weapons shocked Japan into surrendering in World War II—except they didn’t.

Transcript of the entire lecture

This talk was based on a discussion of Five Myths About Nuclear Weapons.

Recursos sobre ética nuclear y militarización

15 DE DICIEMBRE DE 2021 - Podcast

¿Es esencial la militarización para la seguridad en 2022 y más allá?

28 DE JULIO DE 2022 - Podcast

The Doorstep: ¿Cuál es la amenaza real de una guerra nuclear? con el Dr. Gary Samore

El profesor Gary Samore, de la Universidad Brandeis, se une a los copresentadores de Doorstep, Nick Gvosdev y Tatiana Serafin, para hablar de cómo la disuasión nuclear fomenta la moderación y la cautela, y de la esperanza ...

SEP 9, 2021 - Podcast

Veinte años desde el 11-S: Guerras grises, valores estadounidenses y el futuro de la seguridad nacional

En los 20 años transcurridos desde los atentados del 11-S, las decisiones en materia de seguridad nacional han puesto a prueba los valores de la democracia estadounidense. Este panel, presentado por el Presidente de Carnegie Council , Joel Rosenthal,...

Materiales a nanoescala y regímenes actuales de control de armamento

Carnegie Council sigue publicando recursos centrados en la intersección de la tecnología emergente y los conflictos internacionales.

Cómo pueden los responsables políticos tomar decisiones responsables sobre el uso de nanomateriales en la guerra?

Escuchar el podcast