Questions
Japan
and the USA during the Second World War
Study Sources A to G below and then
answer the questions which follow
Source A
By the summer of 1941 opinion in Japan had veered round to the view that Japan should strike south. There lay the vastly rich resources of oil, tin, rubber and other valuables. This was the area of colonies: British, Dutch, French and American. If it seized them, Japan could hope for three results: it would make itself free from the economic pressure of the western countries which had the nerve to threaten it with economic sanctions in order to control Japanese expansion; it would make China ask for peace; and it would build up a great Japanese empire overseas, to be called 'The Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere'... The Japanese people responded to this policy; quite sincerely, they saw themselves, in opposing western activity in Asia, as fighting a battle against imperialism ... In December 1940 the American government, disturbed by the increasing warlike tone of Japan, placed a ban on the sales of scrap iron and war materials to Japan. This action was an attempt to halt Japan's military activity against China. In July 1941, when the Japanese extended their political control of Indo-China from the north to the south, Roosevelt responded firmly - he froze Japanese assets and announced a ban on Japanese trade in oil and steel.
Source: P. Calvocoressi and G. Wint, Total War (Allen Lane/Penguin, 1972, adapted extracts)
Source B
By Howard Zinn, an American historian
Pearl Harbor was presented to the American public as a sudden, shocking, immoral act. Immoral it was, like any bombing, but not really sudden or shocking to the American government ... In initiating economic sanctions against Japan, the USA undertook actions that were widely recognized in Washington as carrying grave risks of war ... One of the judges in the Tokyo War Crimes Trial after World War II, disagreed with the general verdict against Japanese officials and argued that the USA had clearly provoked the war with Japan and expected Japan to act. The records show that a White House Conference two weeks before Pearl Harbor anticipated a war and discussed how it should be justified. A State Department Memorandum, a year before Pearl Harbor, did not talk of the independence of China or the principle of self-determination [as reasons for American action].
Source: Howard Zinn, A People's History of the United States (Longman, 1980, adapted extracts)
Source C
American State Department Memorandum, December 1940 (referred to in Source B above)
Our diplomatic and strategic position would be weakened - by our loss of Chinese, Indian and South Seas markets (and by the loss of Japanese markets for our goods, as Japan would become more and more self-sufficient), as well as insurmountable restrictions on our access to the rubber, tin jute and other vital materials of the Asian and Oceanic regions.
Source: quoted in Howard Zinn (as above)
Source D
And then on August 6, 1945, came the lone American plane in the sky above Hiroshima, dropping the first atomic bomb, leaving perhaps 100 000 dead, and tens of thousands more slowly dying from radiation poisoning. Three days later a second atomic bomb was dropped on the city of Nagasaki, with perhaps 50 000 killed ... The justification for these atrocities was that it would end the war quickly, making unnecessary an invasion of Japan. Such an invasion would cost a huge number of lives - a million according to Secretary of State Byrnes; half a million Truman claimed.
Source: Howard Zinn (as above)
Source E
Statements by two American admirals soon after the war
Admiral King: The naval blockade alone would have starved the Japanese into submission, through lack of oil, rice and other essential materials, had we been willing to wait.
Admiral Leahy: The use of this barbaric weapon at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material assistance in our war against Japan. The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender because of the effective sea blockade and the successful bombing with conventional weapons ... The scientists and others wanted to make this test because of vast sums that had been spent on the project - two billion dollars.
Source: quoted in B.H. Liddell-Hart, History of the Second World War (Cassell, 1970)
Source F
The view of a British military historian
Stalin's demand at Potsdam to share in the occupation of Japan was very embarrassing, and the US government was anxious to avoid it happening. The atomic bomb might help to solve the problem. The Russians were due to enter the war on August 6th. As Churchill wrote, [if the war ended in a few days] 'we should not need the Russians. The end of the Japanese war no longer depended upon the pouring in of their armies. We had no need to ask favours of them'.
Source: B.H. Liddell-Hart, History of the Second World War (Cassell, 1970, adapted extracts)
Source G
Remarks of President Truman.
If this bomb explodes, as I think it will, I'll have a hammer on those boys [the Russians] ... Force is the only thing the Russians understand.
Source: quoted in D.S. Clemens, Yalta (Oxford University Press, 1970)
(a) (i) 'Pearl Harbor was presented to the American public as a sudden, shocking, immoral act' according to Source B. Using evidence from Sources A, B and C, why do you think the American government acted in this way?
(ii) Do these three sources prove that the American government was deliberately giving a wrong impression?
(b) Using Sources D to G, make a list of possible motives behind the dropping of the atomic bombs on Japan. Put the ones you think most important at the top, and the least important at the bottom.
(c) According to Source D, the government said that the atomic bombs had been dropped to end the war quickly. How far do you think Sources D, E, F and G prove that the American government was lying?
