Connect with us

East Asia

The third ‘atomic bomb’ that convinced Japan to surrender: The Soviet Union



The ironical and poetic conclusion of Japan’s war was that the force of the sun, as Truman put it, would deal the final blow to the people led by the descendent of Amaterasu, the sun goddess. However, upon further study, this widely accepted historical reality twists in an unexpected manner: the decisive blow may have been dealt by Big Bear’s claws – the Soviet Union.

Far from attempting a revisionist account of history, the present article seeks to emphasize a little-known fact from the hectic days when Imperial Japan’s leaders were running around their offices trying to get their country a honorable retreat.

It seems that Japan’s decision to surrender was greatly impacted as much by the atomic bombings at Hiroshima and Nagasaki as by the unforeseen event that took place on August 9th, 1945: The Soviet Union’s decision to declare war on Japan and enter Manchukuo. This thesis was initially proposed by Tsuyoshi Hasegawa in his exceptional 2005 book, ‘Racing the Enemy: Stalin, Truman, and the Surrender of Japan’. However, the present article will focus more on the accounts of Japanese officials that witnessed the confusion that took over Imperial Japan’s ministries during these vital days prior to Nagasaki, accounts mostly based on Japan’s the Pacific War Research Society ‘Japan’s longest day’.

As such, it is useful to know that state-of-mind of Japanese militaries prior to the atomic bombings. Edward Drea’s 1992 book, ‘MacArthur’s Ultra: Codebreaking and the War Against Japan’, shared a ground-breaking report on how the Allied intelligence managed to track the Japanese military’s buildup in Kyushu. This suggested that the Japanese were determined to continue fighting until the very end. Furthermore, given the large following of the ‘orthodox’ argument of the atomic bomb, many more suggest the same. This account perfectly fits the mindset of the Japanese soldiers who closely followed the model of the bushido, and who were more than willing to sacrifice their lives in kamikaze attacks. In support of this observation, it must be noted that efforts to overthrow the government and continue the war were realized by rogue soldiers until the last minute before the Emperor broadcasted Japan’s surrender.

Still. On the 27th of July, 1945, news reached Tokyo that a declaration has been signed at Potsdam by the United States, Great Britain, and China, and the object of the declaration was an ultimatum addressed to Japanese Armed Forces to surrender unconditionally. While MOFA state-secretary, Shunichi Matsumoto, was quite thrilled to draft a preliminary response, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Shigenori Togo, immediately understood that the declaration in its current form could not be accepted by the Imperial Army, and thus, if Japan was to accept it, she risked plunging into a civil war. Nonetheless, when compared with the wording used in the first Cairo Declaration, which urged ‘Japan’ to surrender unconditionally, the current one was directed at the Armed Forces, which suggested a softer tone. According to Japan’s the Pacific War Research Society, this adjustment in wording convinced Togo that there was room for negotiation.

Then and there, a race against the clock to win over the ‘good offices’ of the Soviet Union had started. The main objective was to get the Soviets to mediate the conditions of surrender and have the Allied Powers accept their two most important conditions. First and foremost, keep the Imperial structure and, secondly, to have their troops disarmed by Japanese militaries, not foreign occupants. According to this plan, Japan was going to continue fighting until she could obtain a promise that these conditions were to be met(having the Soviet Union mediate the whole process). Togo managed to convince the Prime Minister, Kantaro Suzuki, that the best course of action was to ignore (mokusatu) the Potsdam Declaration for the time being and wait for an answer from Moscow.

Then again, Japanese-Soviet relations during the Second World War were indeed strained, as they were carrying the burden left by the Russo-Japanese war from 1904-05 (in its aftermath large public campaigns of hate speech and propaganda were launched in both countries). Nonetheless, the Soviet-Japanese Border War (1932-39) offered a blessing in disguise, as far the World War went, thought the Japanese: The Soviet–Japanese Neutrality Pact was signed. According to this pact, during the World War II hostilities, the two states could freely attack each other’s allies, but not each other. This, of course, did not mean that Japan fully trusted the Soviet Union. In fact, Imperial troops were constantly keeping their eyes on Soviet activity to the East of Manchuria, and according to their estimates, they had nothing to fear until the spring of 1946. However, little did they know that at Teheran U.S.S.R. has promised the Allies to declare war on Japan, once Germany was defeated, and that at Yalta Stalin received generous concessions in the Far East as long as he would enterthe war with Japan.

Furthermore, previous Japanese efforts to have the U.S.S.R. support her cause bear no fruit. Kremlin ignored the Emperor’s initiative to send Prince Konoye to Moscow as a special representative, and according to Japan’s Ambassador to Moscow,Naotake Sato, there was no way to convince the Soviets to argue on their behalf or mediate. Togo asked him to follow instructions nonetheless. Despite knowing that such endeavour may lead nowhere, Togo also knew that the Japanese Military would not accept direct negotiations with the Americans or British. But even the military, lead by War Minister, Korechika Anami, was not so optimistic about the Soviet Union. Still, the Supreme Council and the Emperor himself continued to put their hopes in U.S.S.R.’s answer.

On August 6th, 1945, they received an answer from the United States. The Japanese witnessed a destructive power that went beyond the imagination of any mad scientist, and their first reaction was to wait. Soon, on August 8th, the Emperor and the Minister of Foreign Affairs, agreed that Japan was facing total destruction and that hostilities must be stopped as soon as possible. At the same time, at Moscow, Sato was invited in Vyacheslav Molotov’s office. As stated by Japan’s the Pacific War Research Society, the Japanese Ambassador tried to adopt a friendly demeanour, but his attempt was cut short – ‘(…) the Soviet Government declares that from tomorrow, that is from Aug. 9, the Soviet Government will consider itself to be at war with Japan.’

Up until this point, the Supreme Council entertained the idea of continuing the war in hopes of a better agreement. Yet, this final slap convinced almost all Cabinet members that if they were not to accept the terms of the Potsdam Declaration, Japan was most certainly facing total destruction. The Soviet decision is especially significant, since being at war with the Soviet Union had a discouraging effect on dissenting military groups within Japan as well. The strategic coordination of the Allied Forces, and the smart decision to encourage U.S.S.R. to declare war at the perfect time, caught the fierce Imperial Japan in a check-mate.

The irony of this account lies in the fact that, up to this day, the Russian Federation remains the only state that is still officially at war with Japan.

Former Asia-Pacific Researcher at the Romanian Diplomatic Institute and current advisor at the Parliament of Romania, Committee on Defense, Public Order and National Security.

Continue Reading

East Asia

Behind the Rise of China is the Centenary Aspiration of the CPC for a Great China



Image source:

On July 1st, China celebrated the Communist Party’s centenary with a grand ceremony in Beijing where Chinese President Xi Jinping who is also the General Secretary of the CPC made a key-note address to the public. Recalling the “intense humiliations” China suffered for a century before the CPC triumphed against foreign aggression and domestic chaos, Xi vowed that the CPC has and would never permit China to lose its raison d’etre again. One week later, on July 6th, Xi held talks with more than 500 political parties from over 160 countries and the entities to discuss the questions over “how to enhance the responsibilities of political parties to advance the people’s wellbeing.” On both occasions, echoing China’s rapid rise to a global power over the past four decades since 1980, he reiterated that the historic achievements the CPC and the Chinese people have made would not have been possible without the generous support of world peoples.

 What Xi has tried to speak out is more than a political token. China has formally realized the first centenary goal—to build a moderately prosperous society, and Xi’s sincere gratitude were also conveyed to political parties, peoples and friends all over the world who have supported and helped the CPC and the cause of revolution, development and reform in China. Given this, the CPC is expected to continue associating the future of the Chinese people with that of other peoples all over the world and advancing China’s development in line with common interests and prosperity of all countries concerned. Accordingly, it is necessary to grasp the essential role of the CPC during its centenary aspiration for a great China.

Historically when the CPC was founded in 1921, China had been humiliated for 80 years by foreign powers of the world—all major powers of Europe, the United States and a rapidly-rising Japan. In reality, China was subjugated under a system of the unequal treaties which could be abrogated by revolutionary means only. Chinese political elites, either the reformed-minded republicans or the conservative monarchists, were all inspired to regain national independence from foreign domination and political freedom out of domestic chaos and poverty. Yet, their efforts failed from time to time. Consequently, the Communists of China grew out of the context and determined to take up the mission. Although the ideology of communism by itself was introduced into China then from the Soviet Russia and Japan as well, it was necessary to try it as the last resort.

Built up on the model of the Soviet Union, the CPC opined three elements as its essential tasks to be achieved for China and its people by all means including forces. As one of the key founders of the CPC, Mao argued for the significance of armed force as he said, “political power comes from armed forces and strategic wisdoms rather than the ideological rhetoric.” Under CPC strategic guidance, the People’s Republic of China (PRC) was founded in 1949 when Mao declared that China stood up, referring to political independence from foreign domination. Yet, the PRC was soon trapped into the Cold War since the world system was featured by the co-domination of the United States and the Soviet Union which remained to the early 1990s. China’s line with the Soviet camp was based on Mao’s words of “leaning toward the one-side” referring to China’s alliance with the Soviet Union. Yet, the ideological allies between China and the Soviet Union became the strategic reality only after the breakout of the Korean War in which China and the United States were engaged into direct fighting.

In fact, Beijing never lost the chances to have contacts with the West including the USA. Since 1955, China and the U.S. began the longest diplomatic talks for 16 years. In addition, China made all efforts to cultivate good relations with the non-allied states while maintaining its strategic links with the Soviet-led bloc. Yet Mao also admitted that the Soviet model was not an ideal one for China to follow economically and socially. In addition, China diplomatically approached all countries as long as they recognized the Beijing government as the only legal one of all China. By the last years when Mao and his senior colleagues had disappeared one by one from the politics of China, the country gradually became a major power such as nuclear weapon, veto power in the UN Security Council, and a relatively huge industrial system. Yet, according to the GDP in general and GDP per capital in particular, China was still a developing country although it has huge potentials—human resources, natural resources and a nation-wide educational echelon—to become a strong power in the near future.

Yet, the dilemma was obvious. On the one hand, China was one of the five nuclear powers in the world, on the other hand, it was also the only developing country among the “Big Five”. Given this, Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping argued in 1978 that poverty could not be associated with China since its people had rights to enjoy the decent, comfortable and affordable lives like those of any country. Followed was the ambitious reform and openness of China to the world. Since then, the CPC has steadily advanced its second mission of national economic modernization which clearly aims to alleviate the poverty of the grass-rooted people of China and enhance its economic strength to the world level, referring to “making China stronger economically and socially”. By 2010, it is widely held that China has achieved its second mission when it was ranked as the second largest economies in the world.

For sure, among the reasons behind the rapid development of China is that the CPC insists on Chinese government to have intervened in the economy since the early days of the PRC. In addition to its famous five-year plans, the first of which started in 1953, the government developed several discrete plans explicitly focused on advancing its technological capability. To that end, the central government has issued a series of industrial policies that function as aspirational goals and combined targets as well. The turning point surely came with the implementation of China’s “medium- and long-term development plan for science and technology” in 2006. In stark contrast to its lackluster execution of previous industrial policies, the central authority has devoted substantial financial and administrative resources to the plan, including a development of 16 “megaprojects,” each under the mandate of a designated ministry, and directed $5 billion to $6 billion to these efforts every year. In 2010, China further unveiled another initiative which designated emerging technologies, such as electric vehicles and next-generation computing, as the drivers of economic growth.

The centerpiece of the Chinese state’s industrial planning apparatus is the “Made in China 2025” plan, which has sine 2015 highlighted ten high-tech industry segments in which Chinese firms should make breakthroughs, and it sets self-sufficiency targets in striking detail. One advisory paper specifies that Chinese semiconductor production ought to reach between 49.10 and 75.13 percent of the domestic market size in 2030. Such specific targets bring to mind the days of China’s planned economy, when the state micromanaged all industrial output. As a result, Made in China 2025 triggered a fierce backlash among many industrialized countries, which were wary of China’s efforts to dominate advanced technology. Having failed to anticipate this reaction, Chinese leaders subsequently tried to dismiss Made in China 2025 as an aspirational planning exercise developed by overly confident academics. But by then, the state had already released a stream of plans focused on advancing select technologies—such as semiconductors and artificial intelligence—as well as enormous proposals for direct subsidies, cheaper access to capital, and investments from public-private funds. Beijing has already showed its keen interests not only in catching up on the technologies but also beyond that. As Xi called on during the two major events: China, under the leadership of the CPC, has brought about a historic resolution to the problem of absolute poverty, and is now marching in confident strides toward the third mandate goal of making China into a great modern socialist country in all respects.

In sum, the historic changes discussed above have made a powerful and far-reaching effect on the development of China. The CPC has acted in response to the evolution of the principal contradiction in the Chinese society, and has promoted coordinated economic, political, cultural, social, and ecological advancement. It has also shown firm resolve in implementing a wide range of strategies for invigorating China through science and education, the innovation-driven development, the rural vitalization agenda in terms of the sustainable development, and the military-civilian integration. This is the Chinese Dream which means a centenary journey towards economic prosperity, national rejuvenation, and peoples’ wellbeing. In light of this, any attempt to divide the CPC from the Chinese people or to set the people against the CPC is bound to fail.

Continue Reading

East Asia

The Taliban seek cooperation with China?



image source:

How to deal with Afghanistan after the removal of US forces has become a subject that many countries are grappling with. And because Afghanistan and China are linked through Xinjiang, the Afghan Taliban aspire to cooperate with China. According to sources, on July 28, Baradar, the head of the Taliban’s Political Committee, visited China and met with Foreign Minister Wang Yi.

During the meetings, Foreign Minister Wang Yi made a personal plea to the Taliban in Afghanistan, expecting that the Taliban would draw a line with terrorist organizations like the East Iraqi Movement and actively battle them, removing barriers to regional growth and cooperation. Since the United States made it apparent that it intends to withdraw its troops, China’s position toward Afghanistan and the Taliban has become the center of all countries’ attention.

Prior to that, China simply repeated its long-standing foreign policy of non-interference in domestic matters, — in other words, China does not intervene in Afghanistan’s internal problems and expects Afghans to handle their own internal affairs. China, on the other hand, is very concerned about the situation in Afghanistan. China has not only made substantial investments in Afghanistan, but it has also sponsored several dialogues in China between Afghan parties.

Only because of the complexities of the situation in Afghanistan does China lack a clear answer. China has stated its particular needs more explicitly this time than in the past. China has far too many considerations when it comes to Afghanistan. However, in comparison to the behavior of many other nations, China’s demands for the Taliban this time have been well thought out, fair, and controlled.

First, China has maintained its previous favorable policy. Despite the fact that the Afghanistan problem is unique, China has not broken its foreign policy of non-interference in internal matters. On the basis of this strategy, China has had interactions with all parties in Afghanistan, ensuring that participation is not only voluntary, but also sufficient to ensure that all parties understand China’s position in order to avoid misunderstandings.

Second, China has stated its opinion on the subjects that most worry it. China has no space for compromise when it comes to national security. China has not raised this matter in the past, but it still needs to voice its viewpoint at the proper moment. As a result, China has the guts to demonstrate its stance, which will aid in the resolution of the situation.

Only when this issue is settled will future collaboration between China and Afghanistan be simple. The Taliban further said that no troops will be allowed to utilize Afghan territory to conduct activities that harm China. Atta regards China as a reliable ally and thinks that China would contribute to peaceful rebuilding.

Furthermore, China has not permitted certain ill-intentioned groups throughout the world to flourish. Following the withdrawal of the US troops, there was speculation in Western culture that China might become engaged in this issue and become the next growing power to enter the “empire’s tomb.” The Indian army’s recent intervention in Afghan politics appears to demonstrate that, as a powerful country around Afghanistan, it is hard to stay out of the issue.

China avoided the urge to intervene and managed its interactions with all sides sensibly, laying the ground for the next phase in the development of China-Afghan relations. So far, China has not fallen into the West’s trap, nor has the deterioration of the situation in Afghanistan harmed its relations with all parties.

As China expands its global presence, it will eventually come into contact with nations with very difficult political and economic situations, such as Afghanistan. However, China will not flee because of obstacles, because the majority of the world’s developed countries are Western countries with strong biases against China, and those wanting to have good relations with China are frequently developing countries with varied challenges. nation. As a result, China has no option.

Continue Reading

East Asia

Will US-China Tensions Trigger the Fourth Taiwan Strait Crisis?



Half a century ago, the then-National Security Advisor Henry Kissinger flew to Beijing in the hope of seeking China’s alliance to contain the Soviets. His visit culminated in the U.S. agreement to recognize Beijing as the only legitimate government of China instead of Taipei, going back on the promise he had made to the president of the Republic of China, Chiang Ching-kuo, merely one year previously that Taiwan would never be abandoned by the US. The realistic American diplomat may have never thought that one day Taiwan, once ruthlessly forsaken by the US, would become the latter’s most important strategic fortress in East Asia to contain a rising China.

In 2018, the passage of the Taiwan Travel Act encouraged more high-ranking American government officials to visit Taiwan and vice versa1. The US Undersecretary of State Keith Krach landed in Taiwan two years later, rendering him the highest-level State Department official to visit the island since 19792. The Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo, announced the cancellation of all restrictions on official contacts between the U.S. and Taiwan in January 20213 – an action that was vehemently denounced by the Chinese government as Trump’s “last-ditch madness” that would “push the Taiwan question deeper down the road of no return”4.

Just when the world thought of Joe Biden’s ascension to power as a harbinger of softer attitudes toward Beijing, especially regarding Taiwan issues, the diplomatic muscle flexed by the newly elected US president is as eye-tingling as his aviator shades – first, his Secretary of State, Blinken and Secretary of Defense, Austin made an explicit announcement of the U.S. support for Taiwan; second, he sent former Deputy Secretaries of State Richard Armitage and James Steinberg and former senator Chris Dodd to Taiwan in honor of the 42nd anniversary of the Taiwan Relations Act.

America’s incremental interest in the island is not confined to actions from its executive branches, but it has permeated its legislative system. The introduction of the confrontational “Strategic Competition Act of 2021” in April signals the anti-Soviet-style containment of China which was backed by The Senate Foreign Relations Committee. This bill echoes the “Interim National Security Strategic Guidance” released by the Biden Administration in March, and it emphasizes the urgent need to “achieve United States political objectives in the Indo-Pacific” and back closer ties with Taiwan5. With strong bipartisan support, the bill is expected to be signed into law by President Biden and to serve as a legislative compass to counter China at all levels. In that respect, Taiwan Strait is more likely than ever to become “ground zero” by the U.S. and China.

On the other hand, the crackdown on Hong Kong’s democracy movement under the new National Security Law by Beijing proved to be successful due to the limited backlash received from the West. On top of that, Beijing’s handling of Xinjiang cotton issue seems to have managed to incite nationalism among Chinese people on a short notice to boycott “anti-China forces”6. With a record of 380 incursions into Taiwan’s airspace by Chinese air force during 2020, there is reason to believe that Hong Kong and Xinjiang were “guinea pigs” used by Beijing to test its capability for the fourth Taiwan Strait Crisis, the probability of which has been enhanced by Xi Jinping’s attempt to seek reappointment and Beijing’s need to divert domestic attention away from the escalating social conflicts brought about by the stagnant economy.

So, the pertinent question is: if the fourth Taiwan Crisis does break out, when will it happen? It could be sometime after the 2022 Beijing Winter Olympic Games7 as it is unlikely for China to discard the opportunity to showcase its image and test its comprehensive strength8. This could be déjà vu in light of Russia’s successful Blitzkrieg-style invasion of Ukraine in 2014, which occurred only three days after the end of Sochi Winter Olympics. However, China is not the only one who can learn from history. When the rest of the world anticipates China’s intent with regard to Taiwan, preemptive precautions will be taken. The game-theory-type strategic interaction may hence spur China to launch its attack before the upcoming international sports gala.

Another critical timing could be prior to the 20th National Party Congress of the Chinese Communist Party in October 2022. Xi Jinping’s abolishment of term limits through constitutional amendment may pave the legal foundation for his reappointment, but the “widespread opposition within the party”9 renders the legitimacy of his extended tenure unlikely. That is why some may find it hard to conceive of Xi’s attempt to “start an unnecessary war with Taiwan” before his re-appointment10, but his insatiable desire for a 3rd term may push him over the edge. For the time being, Xi seems to be seduced by his burgeoning self-confidence that China is charging into an epoch of opportunity where “the East is rising and the West is declining,”11 and what time is better than now to consolidate his authority in front of dissidents with a military show-off targeting Taiwan?

As Henry Kissinger12 said, “The historical challenge for leaders is to manage the crisis while building the future. Failure could set the world on fire.” When the leaders of the two greatest powers both see their own countries as the future “Leviathan” of the world, the definition of failure can no longer be merely confined to internal mismanagement, but being surpassed by international competitors. Kissinger may have overestimated some leaders’ senses of honor to bear the responsibility of the “historical challenge”, but he can be right about the catastrophic consequences of their failures. But this time, failure is not an option for either side across the Taiwan Strait nor across the Pacific Ocean


  1. Chen, Y., & Cohen, J. A. (2019). China-Taiwan Relations Re-Examined: The “1992 Consensus” and Cross-Strait Agreements. University of Pennsylvania Asian Law Review, 14(1).
  2. Mink, M. (2021). The Catalyst for Stronger US-Taiwan Ties.
  3. Hass, R. (2021). After lifting restrictions on US-Taiwan relations, what comes next? Brookings.
  4. Global Times. (2021). Pompeo may toll the knell for Taiwan authorities.
  5. Zengerle, P., & Martina, M. (2021). U.S. lawmakers intensify bipartisan efforts to counter China. Reuters.
  6. Cui, J., & Zhao, Y. (2021). Boycott of Xinjiang cotton use opposed. China Daily.
  7. Everington, K. (2021). Former US security advisor says Taiwan in “maximum danger” from PLA. Taiwan News.
  8. China Daily. (2021). Preparing for Winter Olympics promotes quality development – Opinio. China Daily.
  9. The Guardian. (2020). China’s Xi Jinping facing widespread opposition in his own party, insider claims.
  10. Roy, D. (2021). Rumors of War in the Taiwan Strait. The Diplomat.
  11. Buckley, C. (2021). Xi Maps Out China’s Post-Covid Ascent. The New York Times.
  12. Kissinger, H. A. (2020). The Coronavirus Pandemic Will Forever Alter the World Order.

Continue Reading



Economy50 mins ago

The Politico-Economic Crisis of Lebanon

Dubbed as a failed state. The Middle Eastern country, also known as the ‘Lebanese Republic’, is already leading towards a...

East Asia3 hours ago

Behind the Rise of China is the Centenary Aspiration of the CPC for a Great China

On July 1st, China celebrated the Communist Party’s centenary with a grand ceremony in Beijing where Chinese President Xi Jinping...

taliban afghanistan taliban afghanistan
South Asia5 hours ago

Why Strategies of Stakeholders in Afghanistan Failing Against Taliban?

Taliban is increasingly gaining ground in Afghanistan, on daily basis, for considerable period. US may have declared ending its military...

Human Rights7 hours ago

COVID-19: Education replaced by shuttered schools, violence, teenage pregnancy

A culture of “safety, friends and food” at school has been replaced by “anxiety, violence, and teenage pregnancy”, with remote...

Human Rights9 hours ago

Six months after coup, Myanmar’s political, rights and aid crisis is worsening

It’s been six months since the military coup in Myanmar where there’s grave concern over the widening impact of the...

Green Planet11 hours ago

Sink or swim: Can island states survive the climate crisis?

Small island nations across the world are bearing the brunt of the climate crisis, and their problems have been accentuated...

Health & Wellness13 hours ago

Delta variant, a warning the COVID-19 virus is getting ‘fitter and faster’

Cases and deaths resulting from COVID-19 continue to climb worldwide, mostly fuelled by the highly transmissible Delta variant, which has...