Editorial: As Japan remembers Hiroshima bombing, louder call against nukes is needed

An annual memorial of the atomic bombing is observed in Hiroshima on Aug. 6, and will be marked in Nagasaki on Aug. 9.

In August 1945, atomic bombs dropped by the U.S. military instantly destroyed these two cities, claiming the lives of over 200,000 civilians.

The bombs’ searing heat, akin to the sun’s temperature, and the intense blast and ensuing fires wrought unparalleled destruction and brutality.

Yet, the tragedy of the bombings is not confined to history. Atomic bomb survivors, or hibakusha, who were exposed to radiation from the bombings, continue to suffer today, both physically and mentally.

Nuclear weapons, with their devastating damage and inhumane consequences, must never be used again.

A world without nuclear weapons is a goal that not only Japan, but international society as a whole should strive for. On this day, as we hope for peace, this is something we would like to reconfirm.

However, a harsh reality confronts us. Nuclear powers are strengthening their arsenals, spreading concerns of proliferation. The world stands in a new era of nuclear competition.

A new arms race era

There are over 12,000 nuclear warheads worldwide. The U.S. and Russia, which together possess 90% of the world’s nuclear weapons, have positioned them as the foundation of their military strategies, and are competing with each other to enhance their nuclear capabilities.

China is expected to attain an arsenal of 1,000 warheads by 2030, and North Korea, which has 50, is speeding up development. Iran is also poised to produce a nuclear bomb.

The risk of nuclear war is growing. Russia, which invaded Ukraine, has conducted drills envisioning the use of nuclear weapons on the battlefield, and is prepared to resume nuclear tests.

Many research institutes in the United States and Europe are sounding the alarm over a possible nuclear war between the United States and Russia. Princeton University predicts that if Russia launches even one missile, it could develop into a full-scale war within hours, killing or wounding over 90 million people.

How can highly volatile situations be averted? Diplomatic efforts that directly confront this crisis are essential.

The U.S. and Russia need to gain a foothold from the framework of the New START (Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty) negotiations to put the brakes on the use of nuclear weapons. Negotiations including China are also needed. Mutual understanding of the massive impact that armed conflict would wreak on the global economy could serve as a starting point for dialogue.

There are areas to take note of when pushing such a shift. The myth that nuclear deterrence is absolute is crumbling. U.S. public opinion surveys reflect this change.

Nuclear deterrence aims to discourage enemies from launching preemptive attacks by maintaining retaliatory nuclear power that would enable the country to strike back as many times as necessary.

When surveyed, 31% of the generation that lived through the Cold War said that nuclear deterrence is “very effective,” but among the younger generations born after the Cold War, just 15% gave the same answer. This may be a sign of their concern about the dangers of nuclear weapons.

Shizumi Shigeto Manale, a 75-year-old writer from Hiroshima who lives in the United States, said that the screening last year of “Oppenheimer,” a film depicting the “father of the atomic bomb” J. Robert Oppenheimer, has increased momentum toward antinuclear action. A documentary she had produced, based on real exchanges between a Hiroshima elementary school and an American church immediately after the atomic bombing, was rescreened, and she apparently felt interest in the subject was spreading.

Shigeto said that precisely because the history of war is now repeating itself, it is meaningful to appeal to children about the importance of peace.

Peter Kuznick, director of the Nuclear Studies Institute at American University, has also observed increasing awareness among young people regarding nuclear weapons. He stated that students were voicing concerns about their catastrophic consequences.

Concerns about the ‘myth of deterrence’

The budding skepticism toward nuclear weapons in the U.S. aligns with the Japanese public’s aim, led by hibakusha, to achieve a nuclear-free world. However, the Japanese government seems detached from these changes at the citizen level. We cannot say it has fulfilled its self-declared role of serving as a “bridge between nuclear and non-nuclear nations.”

Not only has Japan refrained from joining the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, it has also turned its back on the opportunity to participate as an observer, which would open the door to stating its position. This is tantamount to supporting the U.S.’s nuclear build-up. Japan is calling for nuclear abolition as the only country to have been attacked with nuclear weapons, but if it continues to engage in such contradictory behavior, it is betraying survivors of the bombings.

Kuznick points out that Japan was once a symbol of non-nuclear commitment, but has since turned into a promoter of U.S. military expansion, which is presenting a barrier to the antinuclear movement.

The Japanese government must reflect on the time 79 years ago when it started on a path as a peace-oriented nation, and reassess its increasing reliance on U.S. nuclear capabilities.

As an A-bombed nation, reducing the threat of nuclear weapons and making a full effort toward abolition is Japan’s responsibility.