Was the 1941 Pearl Harbor attack avoidable? – Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Article | Bite-Size History
A day of infamy. Analysing the evidence of Japan’s declaration on war on the US.

Where were you when the Twin Towers were attacked? Where were you when American President J.F. Kennedy was assassinated? Do you know where you were when Princess Diana tragically died?

For certain generations, that pivotal seismic event was the Japanese bombing of the US Naval Station at Pearl Harbor on 7 December 1941. And in its wake, and retaining a similar place in historical conscience, was the speech delivered by US President Franklin Delano Roosevelt to a Joint Session of Congress on 8 December 1941.

Yesterday, December 7, 1941 a date which will live in infamy the United States of America was suddenly and deliberately attacked by naval and air forces of the Empire of Japan…I believe that I interpret the will of the Congress and of the people when I assert that we will not only defend ourselves to the uttermost but will make it very certain that this form of treachery shall never again endanger us…Hostilities exist. There is no blinking at the fact that our people, our territory, and our interests are in grave danger…I ask that the Congress declare that since the unprovoked and dastardly attack by Japan on Sunday, December 7, 1941, a state of war has existed between the United States and the Japanese Empire.

Over 80 years have passed since one of the most significant events in US history. Historians have analyzed the causes and fallout from this attack from every perspective, with the benefit of hindsight and mountains of research, all available records, and personal accounts.

This begs the question —

Could anything have been done to prevent the Pearl Harbor attack, or was it an inevitable consequence of the geopolitics of this dark period in human history?

Let’s examine the political, military, and intelligence dimensions that shaped the tragic events of 7 December 1941.

The “Opening up Japan” Theory

The most important events in history seldom occur “out of the blue” but are the culmination of years of factors finally coming together to devastating effect.

In the case of the historical build-up to Pearl Harbor, the “opening up Japan” theory speculates that Japan’s route to its eventual flash point with the US began on 8 July 1853. At that time, Japanese society had been feeling the cultural and religious influences of the Portuguese, Spanish, and Dutch in their attempts to “civilise” the country according to Western values. In July 1853, American Commodore Matthew Perry arrived in Tokyo Bay with his four ships on a mission to re-establish trade routes between Japan, the US, and the Western world.

Japanese aversion to and rejection of Western influences in the years to follow sowed a legacy that would fully find its form less than 100 years later. The Japanese army and navy grew, using established Western military doctrine and using international advisors to advance their offensive capabilities.

Successful offensives against their geographical neighbours led to the Japanese colonial acquisitions of Taiwan and Korea. In 1904–05, this emerging power defeated the might of Imperial Russia in the Russo-Japanese War following a surprise attack on the Russian Navy at Port Arthur.

Trade routes and the imposition of Western values on the “small and insignificant” nation of Japan may have been the intention of international relations, but this theory claims a far more menacing outcome that the world felt on 7 December 1941: the vicious attack on Pearl Harbor. This was the catalyst America needed to join the Allied cause in the Second World War.

The route followed by the Japanese fleet to Pearl Harbor

The Trade Embargoes, Geopolitics, and Political Decisions Theory

The role and actions of the political leaders in the United States and Japan are a critical factor in this debate. With both Japan and the US looking to exploit the commercial potential of China and regional resources in general, the situation changed in 1931.

Attempts to expand the Japanese empire grew with the invasion of Manchuria, and access to the resources of the northern Chinese province. The Empire of the Rising Sun quickly installed a puppet government and renamed the province Manchukuo.

The Stimson Doctrine of 1932 made the US position clear — there would be no recognition of the new regime or “any treaty or agreement between Japan and China that violated U.S. rights or agreements to which the United States subscribed”.

Yet despite this stance against Japanese military expansion, US companies continued to supply the raw materials that Japan needed, such as steel and oil, even after the commencement of the Second Sino-Japanese War in 1937.

With the growing strength of the Axis powers in Europe, culminating in the Second World War in Europe from 1939, and the signing of the Tripartite Pact in Berlin on 27 November 1940 between Germany, Italy, and Japan, the political decisions of President Franklin D. Roosevelt now became a determining factor.

 

—— Read the full article on Medium ——

*at the top of the article is a FREE link for non-Medium members*

« Do Images of the Past Influence our Perception of the Present?