More on the Morality of the Atomic Bombing of Japan

The Issue of Unconditional Surrender.

“Only the direct intervention of Emperor Hirohito broke the logjam, and even that provoked an attempted military coup.”

In my earlier essay on the morality of the US’s dropping of atomic bombs on Japan eighty years ago, there was one issue I did not address. This was raised in a letter published by the the London Times newspaper on August 12th:

Sir, Alan Stanley’s justification for the deployment of atomic bombs on the civilian population of Japan 80 years ago seems to rely on the argument that more lives were saved than would have been extinguished had a ground offensive been required (letter, Aug 9). However, the issue here was the Allies’ policy of insisting on the unconditional surrender of their adversaries. This cruel and unusual policy, which is now being resurrected by Israel, needlessly prolonged the Second World War — the most destructive conflict in history. It also helped create the Cold War. There is abundant evidence that Japan would have surrendered earlier had it been given the opportunity, removing the need for a ground offensive. Whatever the number of freedoms America`s benign hegemony has bestowed on our world, “freedom from fear” is still a work in progress.

Peter Winters

Was Mr Winters correct? Is there “abundant evidence” that Japan would have surrendered earlier, had the US (and Britain with her Commonwealth allies) not insisted on unconditional surrender?