Japan, in the mid-1930s following an economic depression, was heavily reliant on other countries such as China and the Unites States for natural resources, including petroleum and rubber. In a bid to expand its empire into South East Asia, Japan declared war on China in 1937 (Asia for Educators, 2009). At the time, China was already a colony to other states such as USA, France, and England. USA, not approving of Japan’s move on China, declared oil, steel and iron ore embargo on Japan to try to force Japan reconsider this declaration out of trade ties with China. The embargo left Japan in a deplorable state and was taken as an aggression. Japan relied on the USA for 80% of its oil (Asia for Educators, 2009). Leadership of the country was under Emperor Hirohito, while General Hideki Tojo headed the military. Prime Minister Konoe attempted to ease the tension and revive the oil deal with USA through diplomacy, but he failed. After Konoe’s diplomacy failure in 1941, General Hideki Tojo took over from Konoe and planned to attack the USA. Emperor Hirohito blessed General Hideki Tojo’s plan to attack the USA, which led to the December 1941 attack on the Pearl Harbor. In a desperate move against the USA, this attack declared war on USA and what is known as the Pacific war began (Asia for Educators, 2009).

            During WW2, the Japanese army employed the use of Kamikaze tactics that involved the use of suicide bombers who would fly their planes into American vessels under the command of the General. The emperor encouraged this approach saying “I praise the Army for cutting down like weeds large numbers of the enemy” (Wikipedia, 2014).

           

            The culture in Japan was the center of its actions during the World War 2 (WW2). Despite the knowledge that its chances of winning the war were slim, Japan went to war even so, owing to its undying hunger to colonize resources in South East Asia. In the Japanese military, death in service to the nation or the Emperor was considered an honorable cause. One of the most astonishing cases was that of Lieutenant Hiroo Onada, who fought in the Japanese army. On 9 March 1974, 29 years after the end of WW2, Onada was found in Lubang on the Philippine Islands. When he was found, he refused to surrender vowing to fight on to the last soldier standing (Powers, 2011).

            Morally speaking, according to Japanese culture, death in service to the country was justified and, in fact, honorable, if it meant that the death of one person would save another. The Samurai believed that one was only worthy of the Samurai title if he or she was willing to die in a noble cause for the lord, in this case, the Emperor (Powers, 2011). Death in the hands of the enemy was shameful in Japanese culture. They preferred to either fight to the death in service to the country or commit suicide while in battle. On the other hand, the certainty that death carried in such harsh circumstances was truly horrific, even though culture stated otherwise. Although service required a soldier to risk their own life, the truth was that some of the soldiers had hopes and dreams. From a humanistic point of view, it would be rightfully assumed that some of the soldiers were horrified at the knowledge that their service to their country meant that their hopes and dreams would be shuttered. Ethically, a burden of that magnitude would be heavy on anyone’s shoulders. The obligation to send oneself to certain death was both wrong and truly too much to ask.

            .

            General Tojo’s policy of death over surrender led several Japanese soldiers to certain death (Powers, 2011). The concept of pacifism proposes that violence is unjustifiable; any conflicts should be resolved peacefully, contrary to Tojo’s policy. Although Tojo did not directly kill his soldiers, he was indirectly responsible for their death, which was his greatest undoing against the very soldiers he was supposed to lead and protect, as should any other leader. The death of the soldiers was also against Emperor Hirohito’s known preference of peace over violence (Asia for Educators, 2014). Despite the death of the soldiers in battle being tremendously sacrificial on their part, it led to the redemption of the Japanese civilians under attack from the country’s enemies. One would also argue that it was an honorable deed for the General to suffer the loss of his soldiers to save the lives of innocent civilians. Harry S. Truman, the president of the United States made the hardest decision ever made which was ordering the nuclear bombs attack.

            The attack on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August 1945 was America’s biggest blow to Japan. The atomic bombs were dropped on Japan towards the end of hostilities in WW2 as a test hit for America’s nuclear weapon (BBC, 2012). It caused significant impact whose effects were experienced decades after the historic attack.

            Considering the fact that Japan had already lost the war by 1945, America’s actions were inhuman. Worse yet, the effects of the atomic bomb saw the Japanese suffer adverse health effects of radiation, ranging from cancer and body malformation to long-term illness that inevitably led to death. Weakened by the ending war, Japan had minimal defense systems in place to deal with an attack of that proportion. Fortunately, following the attack on Hiroshima, civilians in Nagasaki were evacuated, which helped to reduce the number of potential casualties (Lillian Goldman Law Library, 2008). Despite Japan’s defenselessness, the decision was right because Japan needed to learn a lesson in the dangers of greed and pride. Its insatiable hunger for resources that they had, through trade deals with other countries, saw it remain in ruins after the end of the war. Its inability to surrender and salvage the little it had, when it was clear that it was defeated, gave the US the right to avenge the attack on the 1941 Pearl Harbor attack and to save American soldiers.  

            War in itself is immoral, and from an ethical point of view, given the war was a fight over domination, not over values or beliefs, the decision to continue to fight was not right. The case of sparing more people to save others is simply a case of determining which of the two options is less evil.

Based on the choice of the lesser evil, the decision to proceed with the attack was right because of the numerous lives from both parties were saved. Estimates shows that at least 5 million would have been killed if these bombs were not engaged and Japan was determined in fighting to the last soldier. Although it was a morally tough decision to make, the choice to sacrifice thousands of lives to save millions of others was heroic. On the contrary, America would have simply chosen to go the pacifist’s way and refused to resort to violence (BBC, 2014). America had an upper hand, since it was winning against Japan. The US would have simply called for a truce to avoid further loss of lives. The choice to withdraw from the war would have been the honorable choice.

References

Asia for Educators. (2009). Japan’s quest for power and World War 2 in Asia. Retrieved 25 May 2014 from

<http://afe.easia.columbia.edu/special/japan_1900_power.htm>.

BBC (2014). Ethics guide. Pacifism. Retrieved 25 May 2014 from

<http://www.bbc.co.uk/ethics/war/against/pacifism_1.shtml>.

BBC (2014). WW2 people’s war. Fact file: Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Retrieved 25 May 2014 from

<http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/ww2peopleswar/timeline/factfiles/nonflash/a6652262.shtml>.

Lillian Goldman Law Library. (2008). The atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki: The attacks. Retrieved 25 May 2014 from

<http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/mp07.asp>.

Powers, D. (2011). Japan: No surrender in World War 2.

Retrieved 25 May 2014 from <http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/worldwars/wwtwo/japan_no_surrender_01.shtml>.

Wikipedia. (2014, 6 1). Pacific War. Retrieved 6 1, 2014, from wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacific_War