Japan's surrender

[Chris Allen]

What FINALLY compelled Japan to surrender?

Most historical informed comments say it was the 2 atomic bombs.

Several years ago I heard an alternative view (on radio) by an
Australian historian (I forget his name). He claimed that:
Neither Hiroshima or Nagasaki were import industrial centres
In each case the "destruction" of the city was less complete than most
of us imaging.<UTF16-2028>There is a famous photo of "flattened" Hiroshima but that
is only a small portion of the city centre (and the worst affected). If
the camera turn 180 degrees, we would see much of the city still
standing.<UTF16-2028>More to the point, the worst destruction was not near the port
or industrial suburbs.
Earlier raids on Tokyo were much more destructive, in every sense of the
word, but insufficient to persuade Japanese government to surrender.
Why then would 2 less destructive raids on less important provincial
cities do the trick?

To support this view I have since seen / heard reports to the effect that
Japanese authority was completely indifferent to the suffering of there
people, so the suffering inflicted by these 2 bombs would not have counted.
Allied submarines had virtually shut down the nation's industrial
capacity by early 1945, so the minor loss of industry in these 2
unimportant & provincial cities was not significant.

This historian claimed the final straw that pushed them to surrender was
the late Soviet entry into the war. The Soviets captured a few small
portions of territory but were likely to capture much more if
hostilities continued. It was clear to the Japanese that this would
divide the nation (like Germany) "for ever". This is what they could
not accept. Better to keep the whole nation together, with immediate
surrender.

Any comments?

[Don Phillipson]

Post by Chris Allen
What FINALLY compelled Japan to surrender?
Most historical informed comments say it was the 2 atomic bombs.
. . . I have since seen / heard reports to the effect that
Japanese authority was completely indifferent to the suffering of there
people, so the suffering inflicted by these 2 bombs would not have counted.
Allied submarines had virtually shut down the nation's industrial capacity
by early 1945, so the minor loss of industry in these 2 unimportant &
provincial cities was not significant.
This historian claimed the final straw that pushed them to surrender was
the late Soviet entry into the war.

There are of course whole shelves of books on the last 10 days
of Japanese wartime history, which include:
1. Plans were in hand to resist the expected American invasion
to the last man (and woman and child) e.g. women were instructed
to make sharpened bamboo spears and take one US soldier
with them. War Minister Anami and other hawks judged it was more
glorious for the Japanese race to die fighting than endure the
shame of surrender. (This was why several hawks committed
seppuku when the emperor ordered surrender.)
2. The war cabinet was still evaluating the Hiroshima bomb when
news arrived of Nagasaki bomb. This notified the skeptics it
was not a unique event, i.e. the USA had more A-bombs
and could be expected to use them (despite that incendiary
bomb raids had already burned out nearly all big cities.)
3. The Russian declaration of war was also a shocking surprise.
As late as the summer of 1945 the government instructed the
Japanese ambassador in Moscow to get the USSR to act
on Japan's behalf by negotiating an armistice with the USA.
4. Japanese scholars differ about whether the emperor's
personal intervention might have been forecast, or came as
a total surprise (the first such direct intervention in several
centuries.)
5. Economists and supply professionals had already
reported to the government the general collapse of
the manufacturing and fuel economies. But this did
not prompt the government to surrender; (similar
forecasts never induced Hitler to contemplate surrender.)

[Rich Rostrom]

Post by Chris Allen
What FINALLY compelled Japan to surrender?
This historian claimed the final straw that pushed
them to surrender was the late Soviet entry into the
war.
Any comments?

This these has been widely pushed by those who
condemn the atomic bombings.

It's true that neither Hiroshima nor Nagasaki
was a _major_ industrial or military center,
but both were _important_. Hiroshima was the
HQ for the II Area Army, which controlled the
defenses of southern Japan.

The bombs did not completely obliterate the two
cities, but did devastate them pretty thoroughly.
The degree of destruction was intimidating.

It's true that much of the Japanese leadership
was indifferent to the suffering and destruction
visited upon the Japanese people, but others were
not. By mid-1945, the militarists' program was
a disastrous failure and their influence was
waning.

The Soviet declaration of war did not initially
discourage the militarists. They argued that the
U.S. would now be _more_ inclined to make a
negotiated peace that would preserve Japan's
armed forces, as the U.S. would need Japan as a
counterweight to the USSR in Asia.

This argument was not taken seriously. Nonetheless
the Imperial War Council remained split 3-3. Then
the Emperor spoke out - for surrender. His exact
motives have never been rigorously established,
but it seems apparent that the destruction of Japan
concerned him - a lot more than it did for instance
General Anami, the war minister, who at point waxed
poetic about the "beauty" of the entire Japanese
nation perishing in a suicidal last stand.

[WJHopwood]

Chris Allen...wrote..

Post by Chris Allen
What FINALLY compelled Japan to surrender?
This historian claimed the final straw that pushed
them to surrender was the late Soviet entry into the
war.

This these has been widely pushed by those who
condemn the atomic bombings......

I agree. Every year around the anniversary of the
atomic bombing of Japan we see questions being
raised with regard to what made Japan surrender.
Such questions are often raised in press articles by
a few of the same old sanctimonious critics (present
company excepted) who allege that Japan was on
the verge of surrender anyway and that the A-Bomb
decision was an unnecessary overkill.
The Soviet rejection of Japan's efforts to get them
to act as intermediary for peace negotiations with the
U.S. and its allies was not a sign of Soviet friendship
toward Japan. Having been allied with the U.S. against
Germany, the Soviet entry against Japan could not have
been much of a surprise to Japan which was already
seeking other ways to negotiate an end to the war.

...the Emperor spoke out - for surrender... .it seems
apparent that the destruction of Japan concerned him
- a lot more than it did..General Anami, the war minister..

Right. It was, in my view, the Emperor's decision to accept
the Potsdam Declaration which was the specific action
ending hostilities. But in his radio speech to the nation
informing it that Japan was accepting the Potsdam
provisions, only one specific reason was given by the
Emperor as reason for the surrender decision being made
when it was--use of Atomic weapons on Japan. Here are,
in his own words, excerpts from the Emperor's surrender
speech to the Japanese nation:
"We have ordered our government to communicate
to the Governments of the United States, Great Britain,
China, and the Soviet Union that Our Empire accepts the
provisions of their joint declaration...Should we continue to
fight not only would it result in an ultimate collapse and
obliteration of the Japanese nation, but also it would lead
to the total extinction of human civilization...the enemy has
begun to employ a new and most cruel bomb, the power of
which to do damage is, indeed, incalculable taking the toll
of many innocent lives. Should we continue to fight, not only
would it result in ultimate collapse and obliteration of the
Japanese nation, but also it would lead to the total
extinction of human civilization."

WJH

[m***@netMAPSONscape.net]

Post by WJHopwood
I agree. Every year around the anniversary of the
atomic bombing of Japan we see questions being
raised with regard to what made Japan surrender.
Such questions are often raised in press articles by
a few of the same old sanctimonious critics (present
company excepted) who allege that Japan was on
the verge of surrender anyway and that the A-Bomb
decision was an unnecessary overkill.

Japan was, indeed, on the verge of surrender, or collapse. However, they
could not bring themselves to do the former, gracefully, and the latter
might have taken a couple months, which would cost time, money, and lives.
There are those in the Japanese right-wing who admit the bombs likely
saved a greater amount of Japanese lives than they took.

Japan's surrender was not in doubt; how to bring it about was, and the
bombs seem to have triggered, finally, a "sooner, rather than later"
set of actions.

Mike

[The Horny Goat]

On Wed, 06 Aug 2014 16:36:49 -0400, Rich Rostrom

Post by Rich Rostrom

Post by Chris Allen
What FINALLY compelled Japan to surrender?
This historian claimed the final straw that pushed
them to surrender was the late Soviet entry into the
war.
Any comments?

This these has been widely pushed by those who
condemn the atomic bombings.

True - but to describe Soviet conquests of Japanese held territory as
'minor' is nothing short of disingenuous.

Manchuria, northern Korea, Kurile Islands, S Sakhalin - of these the
Kuriles are the only one that could sensibly described as 'minor'

Even more so, the complete loss of the Kwantung army (over 1/2 million
troops) was the single largest campaign loss for the Japanese in the
entire war so how that can be described as minor is beyond me.

ALL of these areas except for Manchuria had been Japanese for 50+
years.

That said - US air raids were steadily destroying Japan and even
without an invasion of Kyushu or Honshu Japanese losses in the home
islands were severe.

[Rich Rostrom]

Post by The Horny Goat
True - but to describe Soviet conquests of Japanese
held territory as 'minor' is nothing short of disingenuous.

Who said it was 'minor'?

Not me.

[m***@netMAPSONscape.net]

Post by The Horny Goat
On Wed, 06 Aug 2014 16:36:49 -0400, Rich Rostrom

Post by Rich Rostrom
This these has been widely pushed by those who
condemn the atomic bombings.

True - but to describe Soviet conquests of Japanese held territory as
'minor' is nothing short of disingenuous.

Yes, but much of that fighting happened after the surrender.

Mike

[m***@netMAPSONscape.net]

Post by Chris Allen
What FINALLY compelled Japan to surrender?

I see others have already commented; these are mine.

Post by Chris Allen
Most historical informed comments say it was the 2 atomic bombs.

Most historical informed comments claim it was a combination of things,
the a-bombs being a very good excuse, and being mentioned specifically
in the Emperor's surrender speach.

Post by Chris Allen
To support this view I have since seen / heard reports to the effect that
Japanese authority was completely indifferent to the suffering of there
people, so the suffering inflicted by these 2 bombs would not have counted.

True.

Post by Chris Allen
This historian claimed the final straw that pushed them to surrender was
the late Soviet entry into the war. The Soviets captured a few small
portions of territory but were likely to capture much more if
hostilities continued.

On the morning news of the Soviet attack, Anami postponed the planned
Cabinet meeting, claiming he "had more important business elsewhere".
However, it was also suspected that the Potsdam Declaration was made with
full knowledge/cooperation of the Soviets, to while the reality of the
situation my have been a shock, the actual fact wasn't.

The Japanese were going to surrender; they were completely beaten, and
knew it, but wouldn't admit it. Kido, however, is known to have taken
the bombs seriously (as well as the Soviet attack), and this was one of
the things which impelled to to approach Suzuki to approach Hirohito.

Oh, and remember, even after all this, there was still an abortive coup
attempt.

Mike

[WJHopwood]

Post by Chris Allen
What FINALLY compelled Japan to surrender?
Most historical informed comments say it was the 2
atomic bombs....an alternative view (on radio) by
Australian historian...claimed the final straw that
pushed them to surrender was the late Soviet entry
into the war...Any comments?

I believe most historians are right about the atomic
bombs being the direct cause of the Japanese
capitulation. The attempts by Japan to get the USSR
to act as an intermediary in establishing peace
negotiations with the U.S. and its allies was only one
of several last ditch efforts of Japanese diplomats to
bring an end to the war they knew they were not
winning.
Inasmuch as the USSR had been allied with
Japan's enemies in the European aspects of WWII,
the rejection by the Soviets of Japan's efforts to
become an intermediary in Japan's desperate
efforts to negotiate peace should not have been
unexpected by Japan. Nor should the USSR's entry
in the war against them shortly thereafter.
The Emperor himself seems to have confirmed
that it was the A-bombs which finally triggered
Japan's acknowledgement of defeat and was the
ultimate reason for the surrender.
Here are excerpts from what I believe
to be an accurate translation of the Emperor's
radio address to the Japanese nation telling the
people that Japan was about to accept the
provisions of the Potsdam Declaration and thus
end the war:
"We have ordered our government to
communicate to the Governments of the United
States, Great Britain, China, and the Soviet Union
that our Empire accepts the provisions of their
joint declaration...Should we continue to fight,
not only would it result in an ultimate collapse
and obliteration of the Japanese nation, but also
it would lead to the total extinction of human
civilization...the enemy has begun to employ a
new and most cruel bomb, the power of which
to do damage is, indeed, incalculable taking the
toll of many innocent lives. Should we continue
to fight, not only would it result in ultimate
collapse and obliteration of the Japanese nation,
but also it would lead to the total extinction of
human civilization...."
[Excerpted from the book "Japan's Longest
Day" compiled by a group of Japanese historians
and members of the "Pacific War Research Society."
The book was originally published in Japanese in
1965. It was subsequently translated, then in 1968
was distributed in the U.S. and Europe by Kodansha
International of Tokyo, with branch offices in New
York, and London]

WJH

[a425couple]

Post by Chris Allen
What FINALLY compelled Japan to surrender?

I strongly urge you to get and read:
"Downfall: The End of the Imperial Japanese Empire"
by Richard B. Frank
It is very interesting, very readable, and uses decoded
information that was largely unavailable prior to 2000.
(We now know, what they were saying to each other.)
Used copies in paperback are very inexpensive.
(IMHO Max Hastings "Retribution" aka "Neemesis"
covers the same ground, but not as well)

Post by Chris Allen
Most historical informed comments say it was the 2 atomic bombs.

I would agree with that (as being the 'tipping point' for
an organized peace).

Post by Chris Allen
Several years ago I heard an alternative view (on radio) by an
Neither Hiroshima or Nagasaki were import ------
Any comments?

Many of the other arguments may seem valid and rational
and are based on realistic facts.
Problem was, Japan's decision making was NOT!
There were 6 ministers running the country and it was
already deeply involved in war. Three were very
'pro-war or suicide' and three were likely more interested
in peace (but they never really stated so,, for fear of assassination!)
Nothing was ever going to change the minds of the
three Pro-war. So, it was an impossible dead lock.
The top discussions were done in front of the Emperor,
but the 'democratic' tradition was he would not interfere.

IMHO the Atomic bombs (especially when news of the 2nd,
came right after the one of the Pro-war admirals argued it
was impossible for the US to have another after Hiroshima)
did shock and rattle the Emperor into interfering.
(" an extraordinary measure"!!)
He spoke pro-peace.
It was still very shakey ---- but eventually it worked.

Please read the whole speech:
https://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/hirohito.htm
Note "Moreover, the enemy has begun to employ a new and most
cruel bomb, the power of which to do damage is, indeed, incalculable,
taking the toll of many innocent lives. Should we continue to fight, it
would not only result in an ultimate collapse and obliteration of the
Japanese nation, but also it would lead to the total extinction of human
civilization."

When Hirohito first spoke his decision to the cabinet, they were not
that aware of the Russian advances.