DOCSLIB.ORG

The Atomic Bombs and the Soviet Invasion: What Drove Japan's Decision to Surrender?

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Atomic Bombs and the Soviet Invasion: What Drove Japan's Decision to Surrender? Volume 5 | Issue 8 | Article ID 2501 | Aug 01, 2007 The Asia-Pacific Journal | Japan Focus The Atomic Bombs and the Soviet Invasion: What Drove Japan's Decision to Surrender? Tsuyoshi Hasegawa The Atomic Bombs and the SovietFrank, have recently confronted this issue Invasion: What Drove Japan’s Decision to head-on, arguing that the atomic bombing of Surrender? Hiroshima had a more decisive effect on Japan’s decision to surrender than did Soviet Tsuyoshi HASEGAWA entry into the war.[4] This essay challenges that view. It argues that (1) the atomic Almost immediately following the end of World bombing of Nagasaki did not have much effect War II, Americans began to question the use of on Japan’s decision; (2) of the two factors—the the atomic bomb and the circumstances atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Soviet entry surrounding the end of the Pacific War. More into the war—the Soviet invasion had a more than half a century later, books and articles on important effect on Japan’s decision to the atomic bomb still provoke storms of debate surrender; (3) nevertheless, neither the atomic among readers and the use of atomic weapons bombs nor Soviet entry into the war served as remains a sharply contested subject.[1] As the “a knock-out punch” that had a direct, decisive, 1995 controversy over the Enola Gay exhibit at and immediate effect on Japan’s decision to the Smithsonian’s National Air and Space surrender; (4) the most important, immediate Museum revealed, the issues connected with cause behind Japan’s decision to surrender the dropping of the bombs on Hiroshima and were the emperor’s “sacred decision” to do so, Nagasaki continue to touch a sensitive nerve in engineered by a small group of the Japanese Americans. Among scholars, disagreement ruling elite; and (5) that in the calculations of remains no less heated. But, on the whole, this this group, Soviet entry into the war provided a debate has been strangely parochial, centering more powerful motivation than the atomic almost exclusively on how the U.S. leadership bombs to seek the termination of the war by made the decision to drop the bombs. accepting the terms specified in the Potsdam Proclamation. Further, by posing There are two distinct gaps in thiscounterfactual hypotheses, I argue that Soviet historiography. First, with regard to the atomic entry into the war against Japan alone, without bombs, as Asada Sadao in Japan correctly the atomic bombs, might have led to Japan’s observes, American historians havesurrender before November 1, but that the concentrated on the “motives” behind the use atomic bombs alone, without Soviet entry into of atomic bombs, but “they have slighted the the war, would not have accomplished this. effects of the bomb.”[2] Second, although Finally, I argue that had U.S. President Harry historians have been aware of the decisive Truman sought Stalin’s signature on the influence of both the atomic bombs and the Potsdam Proclamation, and had Truman Soviet entry into the war, they have largely included the promise of a constitutional sidestepped the Soviet factor, relegating it to monarchy in the Potsdam Proclamation, as sideshow status.[3] Secretary of War Henry Stimson had originally suggested, the war might have ended sooner, Two historians, Asada Sadao and Richard possibly without the atomic bombs being 1 5 | 8 | 0 APJ | JF dropped on Japan. “Togo extracted from the American statements about the ‘new and revolutionary increase in 1: The Influence of the Hiroshima Bomb on destruct[ive]’ power of the atomic bomb a Japan’s Decision to Surrender reason to accept the Potsdam Proclamation.”[6] In order to discuss the influence of the atomic If these arguments are correct, there was bombs on Japan’s decision to surrender, we indeed a fundamental change of policy, at least must examine three separate issues: (1) the on the part of Togo, if not the entire cabinet, effect of the Hiroshima bomb; (2) the effect of and the Hiroshima bomb had a decisive effect the Nagasaki bomb; and (3) the effect of the on Togo’s thinking, since until then he had two bombs combined. been advocating suing for peace through Let us first examine the effect of the Hiroshima Moscow’s mediation before considering the bomb. In order to prove that the Hiroshima acceptance of the Potsdam Proclamation. In his bomb had a decisive effect on Japan’s decision, memoirs, however, Togo does not portray this Asada and Frank use the following evidence: cabinet meeting as a decisive turning point. (1) the August 7 cabinet meeting; (2) the The following is all he says about the cabinet testimony of Lord Keeper of the Privy Seal Kido meeting: “On the afternoon of the 7th, there Koichi concerning the emperor’s statement on was a cabinet meeting. The army minister and August 7; and (3) the emperor’s statement to the home minister read their reports. The army Foreign Minister Togo Shigenori on August 8. appeared to minimize the effect of the bomb, without admitting that it was the atomic bomb, insisting that further investigation was necessary.”[7] The only source that makes a reference to Togo’s insistence on the acceptance of the Potsdam Proclamation was the testimony given by Cabinet Minister Sakomizu Hisatsune under postwar interrogation. Citing Sakomizu’s testimony, Oi Atsushi, who interviewed Togo in preparation for the Tokyo trial, asked him about his alleged proposal to accept the Potsdam terms. Togo replied: “I reported that The atomic bombing of Hiroshima the United States was broadcasting that the atomic bomb would impart a revolutionary The Cabinet Meeting on August 7 change in warfare, and that unless Japan accepted peace it would drop the bombs on According to Asada and Frank, the cabinet other places. The Army… attempted to meeting on August 7 was a crucial turning minimize its effect, saying that they were not point. Asada argues that, judging that “the sure if it was the atomic bomb, and that since it introduction of a new weapon, which had [had] dispatched a delegation, it had to wait for drastically altered the whole military situation, its report.”[8] The picture that emerges from offered the military ample grounds for ending this testimony is that Togo merely reported the the war,” Foreign Minister Togo Shigenori U.S. message. Perhaps he merely conveyed his proposed that “surrender be considered at once preference to consider the Potsdam on the basis of terms presented in the Potsdam Proclamation by reporting Truman’s message. Declaration [Proclamation].”[5] Frank writes: But when met with stiff opposition from Army 2 5 | 8 | 0 APJ | JF Minister Anami Korechika, who dismissed the Hirohito had told him: “Now that things have American atomic bomb message as mere come to this impasse, we must bow to the propaganda, Togo, without a fight, accepted inevitable. No matter what happens to my Anami’s proposal to wait until the delegation safety, we should lose no time in ending the submitted its official findings. According to war so as not to have another tragedy like Sakomizu’s memoirs, Togo first proposed, and this.”[11] Citing Kido’s account as the decisive the cabinet agreed, that Japan should register a evidence, Asada concludes: “The Emperor strong protest through the International Red was… from this time forward Japan’s foremost Cross and the Swiss legation about thepeace advocate, increasingly articulate and American use of the atomic bomb as a serious urgent in expressing his wish for peace.”[12] violation of international law prohibiting Frank, however, does not share Asada’s poisonous gas. Sakomizu further wrote: “There description of the emperor as the “foremost was an argument advocating the quickpeace advocate,” viewing him as wavering at termination of war by accepting the Potsdam times over whether or not Japan should attach Proclamation,” but in view of the Army’s more than one condition to its acceptance of opposition, the cabinet merely decided to send the Potsdam Proclamation.[13] the investigation team to Hiroshima.[9] In other words, neither the cabinet nor Togo himself believed that any change of policy was necessary on the afternoon of August 7, one day after the atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima, although the majority of the cabinet members had already known that the bomb was most likely an atomic bomb, and furthermore that unless Japan surrendered, many atomic bombs might be dropped on other cities in Japan. In fact, far from entertaining the possibility of accepting the Potsdam terms, the cabinet was blatantly more combative against the United States, deciding to lodge a formal protest against the use of the atomic bomb. What Did the Emperor Say on August 7? The news of the dropping of an atomic bomb on Hiroshima had already been brought to the emperor early in the morning on August 7, but Kido learned of it only at noon. Kido had an unusually long audience with the emperor that lasted from 1:30 to 2:05 in the Imperial Library. Kido’s diary notes: “The emperor Kido Koichi expressed his august view on how to deal with the current situation and asked variousKido’s description of the emperor’s reaction to questions.”[10] But Kido’s diary says nothing the Hiroshima bomb must be taken with a grain about what the emperor’s view was and what of salt. As Hirohito’s closest adviser, Kido questions he asked. Later, Kido recalled that worked assiduously to create the myth that the 3 5 | 8 | 0 APJ | JF emperor had played a decisive role in ending [with the Allied powers, Asada the war.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Potsdam Declaration from Lisa Bastien
    TEACHING AMERICAN HISTORY PROJECT Lesson Title - Potsdam Declaration From Lisa Bastien Grade: 9-12 Length of class period: 86 minute block period Inquiry: (What essential question are students answering, what problem are they solving, or what decision are they making?) Why would the terms of the Potsdam Declaration deter the Japanese from giving an unconditional surrender? Objectives: (What content and skills do you expect students to learn from this lesson?) Students will be able to: • explain the events leading up to the dropping of the atomic bombs • provide examples as to why Japan refused to except the unconditional surrender presented to them prior to the use of the atomic bombs Students will: • analyze a primary source to use as support in response to a given question Materials: (What primary sources or local resources are the basis for this lesson?) Potsdam Declaration (see attached) Activities: (What will you and your students do during the lesson to promote learning?) • Start class by doing a class lecture/discussion on the war in the Pacific (WWII) including specifics on: the Philippines, the battle of Midway, Island Hopping, Guadalcanal, Kamikazes, Iwo Jima, Okinawa and ultimately the Manhattan Project. • Ask the class "what are some ways the US could have warned the Japanese of the nuclear bomb and/or it’s affects without dropping it on a city?" (students may make many suggestions including staging a demonstration so that Japan could understand what the bomb was capable of doing.) • Discuss with the students that staging a demonstration was a consideration that was made. Have them analyze through discussion why it was decided against.
    [Show full text]
  • Manchuria Documents to Examine
    Source 1 Source Information: The Legacy of the Soviet Union Offensives of August 1945 https://amti.csis.org/the-legacy-of-the-soviet-offensives-of-august-1945/ ____________________________________________________________________________ THE LEGACY OF THE SOVIET OFFENSIVES OF AUGUST 1945 BY JEFF MANKOFF | AUGUST 13, 2015 JAPAN, RUSSIA, UNITED STATES The Second World War was an unparalleled calamity for the Soviet Union. As many as 27 million Soviet soldiers and civilians died as a result of the conflict that started with the German invasion of Poland in September 1939 and ended with the Japanese surrender in August 1945. Consumed by this existential struggle along its western border, the Soviet Union was a comparatively minor factor in the Pacific War until the very end. Yet Moscow’s timely intervention in the war against Japan allowed it to expand its influence along the Pacific Rim. With the breakdown of Allied unity soon heralding the onset of the Cold War, Soviet gains in Asia also left a legacy of division and confrontation, some of which endure into the present. By the 1930s, Stalin’s Soviet Union and Imperial Japan both viewed themselves as rising powers with ambitions to extend their territorial holdings. In addition to a strategic rivalry dating back to the 19th century, they now nursed an ideological enmity born of the Bolshevik Revolution and the ultraconservative military’s growing hold on Japanese politics. In 1935, Japan signed the AntiComintern Pact with Hitler’s Germany, laying the foundation for the creation of the Axis (Fascist Italy would join the following year). The two militaries engaged in a series of skirmishes along the frontier between Soviet Siberia and Japanese-occupied Manchuria (Manchukuo) during the late 1930s.
    [Show full text]
  • Japanese and Chinese Cultures Facing the Legacy of the Nanjing Massacre
    Sternberg, P. & Garcia, A. (2000). Sociodrama: Who’s in your shoes? Westport, CT: Prager. Volkas, A. (1999) ” Healing the Wounds of History: Drama Th erapy in Collective Trauma and Intercultural Confl ict Resolution” in Current Approaches in Drama Th erapy. Johnson, D.R. and Emunah, R. (eds) Charles C. Th omas, Springfi eld, Il. HEALING THE WOUNDS OF HISTORY: Japanese and Chinese Cultures Facing the Legacy of the Nanjing Massacre Armand Volkas, MFA, MA, MFT, RDT/BCT Associate Professor, California Institute of Integral Studies Clinical Director, The Living Arts Counseling Center Director, Living Arts Playback Theatre Ensemble Introduction I stood gazing at the banks of Yangtze River in October 2009 watching an old, wrinkled Chinese man casting a line into the quickly moving muddy water. Clearly a witness to the time of the Nanjing Massacre, I fantasized that the old man might be fi shing for historical memory from the wide span of the majestic waterway, hoping to retrieve another missing piece of the story of Chinese victimization during the Sino-Japanese War. Seventy-two years earlier in 1937, tens of thousands of civilians were reported slaughtered by the invading Japanese army on this very spot. Th ey say the river ran red with blood during those days of carnage. Bound together with rope in large groups by the river for easy disposal, the victims were machine gunned en masse. 130 第Ⅱ部 セミナーを終えて Th e corpses then fl oated through the heart of the city of Nanjing further terrorizing the already traumatized populace. Th ousands of Chinese men, women and children were murdered and up to 20,000 women and girls brutally raped and kept in sexual bondage in an event that has come to be known as “Th e Rape of Nanjing”.
    [Show full text]
  • Primary Source Document with Questions (Dbqs) the POTSDAM DECLARATION (JULY 26, 1945) Introduction the Dropping of the Atomic Bo
    Primary Source Document with Questions (DBQs) THE POTSDAM DECLARATION (JULY 26, 1945) Introduction The dropping of the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki remains among the most controversial events in modern history. Historians have actively debated whether the bombings were necessary, what effect they had on bringing the war in the Pacific to an expeditious end, and what other options were available to the United States. These very same questions were also contentious at the time, as American policymakers struggled with how to use a phenomenally powerful new technology and what the long-term impact of atomic weaponry might be, not just on the Japanese, but on domestic politics, America’s international relations, and the budding Cold War with the Soviet Union. In retrospect, it is clear that the reasons for dropping the atomic bombs on Japan, just like the later impact of nuclear technology on world politics, were complex and intertwined with a variety of issues that went far beyond the simple goal of bringing World War II to a rapid close. The Potsdam Declaration was issued on July 26, 1945 by U.S. President Harry Truman, British Prime Minister Winston Churchill, and President Chiang Kai-shek of the Republic of China, who were meeting in Potsdam, Germany to consider war strategy and post-war policy. Soviet leader Joseph Stalin also attended the Potsdam Conference but did not sign the Declaration, since the Soviet Union did not enter the war against Japan until August 8, 1945. Document Excerpts with Questions From Japan’s Decision to Surrender, by Robert J.C.
    [Show full text]
  • Lawsuit Seeks Japanese Government Compensation for Siberian Detention
    Volume 7 | Issue 48 | Number 1 | Article ID 3261 | Nov 30, 2009 The Asia-Pacific Journal | Japan Focus Lawsuit Seeks Japanese Government Compensation for Siberian Detention: Who was Responsible for Abandoning Japanese Soldiers and Settlers in Mainland Asia After World War II? 連載特集 法廷で裁かれる日本の戦争責任４０。賠償起訴の 始まり シベリア抑留国家賠償請求起訴日本政府の棄兵、棄民政策を問 う。 Murai Toyoaki Lawsuit Seeks Japanese Government Declaration—August 15, 19453—the Soviet Compensation for SiberianUnion declared war against Japan on August 8, Detention: Who was Responsible for 1945, renouncing the Japan-Soviet Neutrality Treaty of 1941. The USSR immediately crossed Abandoning Japanese Soldiers and the borders of northeast China (Manchuria), Settlers in Mainland Asia After northern Korea, and southern Sakhalin (which World War II? were all Japanese colonies), and the Kuril Islands. They engaged in combat with the Japanese army in these areas. Even after the Murai Toyoaki Potsdam Declaration’s de facto ending of World War II, fighting between Japan and the Soviet Nobuko ADACHI translator Union continued through early September until Why Compensation? a cease fire was declared. 4 We submitted a “Request for Compensation for Joseph Stalin, the leader of the Soviet Union Siberian Detention” to the Kyoto Local Court and the Head of the National Defense on December 26, 2007, seeking redress from Committee of the USSR, on August 23, 1945 the Japanese government. We are asking for issued the top secret order “Regarding the ¥30,000,0001 for each plaintiff as compensation Arrest of Half a Million Japanese Soldiers: How (and accepting ¥10,000,0002 compensation as and Where to Detain Them, and How to Utilize partial settlement).
    [Show full text]
  • Downloads of Technical Information
    Florida State University Libraries Electronic Theses, Treatises and Dissertations The Graduate School 2018 Nuclear Spaces: Simulations of Nuclear Warfare in Film, by the Numbers, and on the Atomic Battlefield Donald J. Kinney Follow this and additional works at the DigiNole: FSU's Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected] FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF ARTS AND SCIENCES NUCLEAR SPACES: SIMULATIONS OF NUCLEAR WARFARE IN FILM, BY THE NUMBERS, AND ON THE ATOMIC BATTLEFIELD By DONALD J KINNEY A Dissertation submitted to the Department of History in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy 2018 Donald J. Kinney defended this dissertation on October 15, 2018. The members of the supervisory committee were: Ronald E. Doel Professor Directing Dissertation Joseph R. Hellweg University Representative Jonathan A. Grant Committee Member Kristine C. Harper Committee Member Guenter Kurt Piehler Committee Member The Graduate School has verified and approved the above-named committee members, and certifies that the dissertation has been approved in accordance with university requirements. ii For Morgan, Nala, Sebastian, Eliza, John, James, and Annette, who all took their turns on watch as I worked. iii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to thank the members of my committee, Kris Harper, Jonathan Grant, Kurt Piehler, and Joseph Hellweg. I would especially like to thank Ron Doel, without whom none of this would have been possible. It has been a very long road since that afternoon in Powell's City of Books, but Ron made certain that I did not despair. Thank you. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract..............................................................................................................................................................vii 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Japan Signs Surrender Agreement
    Japan Signs Surrender Agreement Continuative and postiche Stuart dub: which Marcellus is defeasible enough? Trusty Jonathan still decussates: unbroke and whate'er Gordan deciphers quite disaffectedly but reinters her spherocyte barely. Ferdie overdramatized pontifically. But usually about human rights activists? An uncle to carry under the cart's order of surrenderThe Army will be in. In japan signs an exhaustive or military. These reports that japan pulls back against japan began a japan signs surrender agreement. Japanese surrender agreement between japan sign one who is a secured. This surrender signed in japan signs of surrender signing of them to plans for permanence on our resolve was an attempt to win. German surrender agreement that japan sign in two of. The surrender signed an important to estimate of surrendering in his real reason why malenkov hears about america is refused to those depositions to japan? And kaiser wilhelm keitel and. Desperate to avoid writing with Japan Churchill agrees to let Japan execute the. Selectively borrowed rhetoric and symbols of the Japanese past to re-envision a. Full light The Japanese Surrender in Tokyo Bay September. Their object down to reorganize the state, get out criticism of the lay, and silence liberals and socialists. He incur a deficient to the official surrender indeed the Japanese on Sept. Chapter 20 Decision to Surrender. Woman capable and her son look and picture of Hiroshima Peace Memorial, commonly called the Atomic Bomb Dome while the Hiroshima Peace Memorial Museum on. Enroute to discourage military agreement on life of book includes an evolving the signs surrender agreement.
    [Show full text]
  • America's Decision to Drop the Atomic Bomb on Japan Joseph H
    Louisiana State University LSU Digital Commons LSU Master's Theses Graduate School 2007 America's decision to drop the atomic bomb on Japan Joseph H. Paulin Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_theses Part of the Arts and Humanities Commons Recommended Citation Paulin, Joseph H., "America's decision to drop the atomic bomb on Japan" (2007). LSU Master's Theses. 3079. https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_theses/3079 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at LSU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in LSU Master's Theses by an authorized graduate school editor of LSU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. AMERICA’S DECISION TO DROP THE ATOMIC BOMB ON JAPAN A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College In partial fulfillment of the Requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in Liberal Arts in The Inter-Departmental Program in Liberal Arts By Joseph H. Paulin B.A., Kent State University, 1994 May 2007 TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT……………………………………………………...………………...…….iii CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION……………………………………...………………….1 CHAPTER 2. JAPANESE RESISTANCE………………………………..…………...…5 CHAPTER 3. AMERICA’S OPTIONS IN DEFEATING THE JAPANESE EMPIRE...18 CHAPTER 4. THE DEBATE……………………………………………………………38 CHAPTER 5. THE DECISION………………………………………………………….49 CHAPTER 6. CONCLUSION…………………………………………………………..64 REFERENCES.………………………………………………………………………….68 VITA……………………………………………………………………………………..70 ii ABSTRACT During the time President Truman authorized the use of the atomic bomb against Japan, the United States was preparing to invade the Japanese homeland. The brutality and the suicidal defenses of the Japanese military had shown American planners that there was plenty of fight left in a supposedly defeated enemy.
    [Show full text]
  • The Issues of War with Japan Coverage in the Presidential Project «Fundamental Multi-Volume Work» the Great Patriotic War of 1941 - 1945 «»
    Vyatcheslav Zimonin Captain (Russia NAVY) Doctor of Historical Sciences, Professor of Military University, Honored Scientist Of The Russian Federation and Academy of Natural Sciences The issues of war with Japan coverage in the Presidential project «Fundamental multi-volume work» The Great Patriotic War of 1941 - 1945 «» Fundamental multi-volume work «The Great Patriotic War of 1941-1945» is being developed in accordance with the Decree № 240-рп of May 5, 2008 of the President of the Russian Federation. The work is developed under the organizational leadership of the main drafting committee headed by the Minister of Defense of the Russian Federation Army General Sergey Shoigu. Major General V.A. Zolotarev, well-known Russian scientist, Doctor of Historical and Legal Sciences, Professor, Academician of the Academy of Natural Sciences, State Councilor of the Russian Federation Deputy Chairman of the GRK is appointed as scientific director of the multi-volume work. Fundamental structure of a multivolume work: Volume 1 - «The main facts of the war,» Volume 2 - «The origin and the beginning of the war» Volume 3 - «Battles and actions that changed the course of the war,» Volume 4 - «Freeing of the USSR, 1944 « Volume 5 - «The final victory. Final operations of World War II in Europe. War with Japan « Volume 6 - «The Secret War. Intelligence and counterintelligence in the Great Patriotic War « Volume 7 - «Economy and weapons of war» Volume 8 - «Foreign policy and diplomacy of the Soviet Union during the war» Volume 9 - «Allies of the USSR in the war» Volume 10 - «The power, society and war» Volume 11 - «Policy and Strategy of Victory.
    [Show full text]
  • Timeline for World War II — Japan
    Unit 5: Crisis and Change Lesson F: The Failure of Democracy and Return of War Student Resource: Timeline for World War II — Japan Timeline for World War II — Japan Pre-1920: • 1853: American Commodore Matthew Perry arrived in Tokyo harbor and forced the Japanese to allow trade with U.S. merchants with threat of military action. • 1858: Western nations forced Japan to sign the Unequal Treaties. These articles established export and import tariffs and the concept of "extraterritoriality" (i.e., Japan held no jurisdiction over foreign criminals in its land. Their trials were to be conducted by foreign judges under their own nation's laws). Japan had no power to change these terms. • 1868: Japan, in an effort to modernize and prevent future Western dominance, ousted the Tokugawa Shogunate and adopted a new Meiji Emperor. The next few decades saw rapid and successful industrialization during the Meiji Restoration. • 1899: With newly gained power from recent industrialization, Japan successfully renegotiated aspects of the Unequal Treaties. • 1899–1901: The Boxer Rebellion led China to a humiliating defeat by the Eight-Nation Alliance of Western powers including the United States and Japan, ceding more territory, and dealing one of the final blows to the struggling Qing Dynasty. • 1904–1905: The Russo-Japanese War began with a surprise attack and ended by an eventual Japanese victory over Imperial Russia. The Japanese took control of Korea. • 1914: During World War I, Japan and other Allies seized German colonial possessions. • 1919: Japan, as a member of the victorious Allies during World War I, gained a mandate over various Pacific islands previously part of the German colonial empire.
    [Show full text]
  • August 20, 1945 Cable from Aleksandr Vasilevsky to Stalin
    Digital Archive digitalarchive.wilsoncenter.org International History Declassified August 20, 1945 Cable from Aleksandr Vasilevsky to Stalin Citation: “Cable from Aleksandr Vasilevsky to Stalin,” August 20, 1945, History and Public Policy Program Digital Archive, Library of Congress, Manuscript Division, Dmitriĭ Antonovich Volkogonov papers, 1887-1995, mm97083838, Reel 5, containers 7 through 9. Also published in V.P. Galitskii, V.P. Zimonin, “Desant na Khokkaido Otmenit’,” Voenno-Istoricheskii Zhurnal, No. 3 (1994), pp. 7-8. Translated by Sergey Radchenko. https://digitalarchive.wilsoncenter.org/document/122336 Summary: Vasilevsky reports on the progress of the Soviet invasion of Manchuria and the surrender of Japanese forces. Original Language: Russian Contents: English Translation Scan of Original Document Moscow. Cde. Stalin Copy: General Staff Cde. Antonov Reporting on the situation on the Far Eastern front at the end of 19.8.45. 1. On 19.8.45 on all fronts in Manchuria the resistance of the Japanese forces ceased and our forces began planned disarmament of the forces of the enemy. During the day of 19.8.45 about 65 thousand Japanese-Manchurian forces were disarmed. 2. During the day the forces of the Transbaikal Front deployed air troops with responsible representatives of the command of the Front to Changchun and Mukden [Shenyang], 250-300 people in each city. Our forces in the aforesaid cities were met with warm welcome on the part of the Japanese command and representatives of the Japanese authorities. All demands of our representatives are being fully implemented. During the night of 20.8.45 these cities are being approached by our forward mobile detachments.
    [Show full text]
  • The Manchurian Incident
    Part 1 - The Manchurian Incident Chronology 1911 October 10 - Xinhai Revolution 1922 February 6 - Nine-Powers Treaty (Washington Naval Conference) 1931 September 18 - Manchurian Incident 1932 March 1 - Manchukuo is founded September 4 - Lytton Report is released 1933 March 27 - Japan withdraws from the League of Nations (effective 1935 March 27) May 31 - Tanggu Truce 1935 June 10 - He-Umezu Agreement 1936 December 12 - Xian Incident 1937 July 7 - Marco Polo Bridge Incident July 11 - Local ceasefire agreement July 29 - Tongzhou Massacre August 9 - Murder of Sublieutenant Oyama August 13 - Battle of Shanghai August 15 - Chiang Kai-shek issues general mobilization order August 21 - Sino-Soviet Non-Aggression Pact October 2 - Landing of Japan's 10th Army at Hangzhou Bay leads to the collapse of the Chinese Army in Shanghai November 5 - Japan makes peace offer through German Ambassador to China Oskar Trautmann December 1 - Order to capture Nanking is issued December 13 - Fall of Nanking, the Japanese Army enters Nanking December 22 - Japan reissues its peace terms through Trautmann 1938 January 16 - First Konoe Statement cuts ties with Chiang Kai- shek's regime November 3 - Second Konoe Statement declares a new order in Asia December 22 - Third Konoe Statement enunciates the principles of friendly relations with neighbors, anti-communism, and economic cooperation 1940 March 30 - Establishment of the Republic of China in Nanking 1943 November 5-6 - Greater East Asia Conference is convened in Tokyo 1 How did 10,400 Japanese soldiers occupy Manchuria? On September 18, 1931, a line of the South Manchuria Railway at Liutiaogou, about eight kilometers north of the city of Mukden, was blown apart.
    [Show full text]