Debating the Decision to Drop the Bomb

The decision to use atomic bombs on Japan is one of the most debated questions in modern history. The 'traditional' interpretation, set out by Secretary of War Henry Stimson in 1947, holds that the bombs ended the war quickly and saved the lives that an invasion would have cost, including many Japanese lives. 'Revisionist' historians, such as Gar Alperovitz, argue that Japan was close to surrender and that the bomb was used partly to impress the Soviet Union.

Historian Tsuyoshi Hasegawa argues that the Soviet declaration of war shocked Japanese leaders as much as the bombs, while others, such as Sadao Asada, see the bombs as decisive. Many scholars take a middle position, seeing several motives at work and recognizing that alternatives, such as a demonstration or clarifying the emperor's status, were considered but rejected. The debate also raises moral questions about targeting cities and civilians.