Francis J. Gavin: Hiroshima -- An Uncertain and Contested LegacyRoundup: Talking About History
Dr. Francis J. Gavin is Tom Slick Professor of International Affairs and Director of the Robert S. Strauss Centerfor International Security and Law at the University of Texas. This article is drawn from a series on the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, "Perspectives on Hiroshima," published by the Federation of American Scientists. Read the full series here.
Sixty-seven years ago, an American B-29, the Enola Gay, dropped a gun-fission weapon made with U-235 on the city of Hiroshima, Japan, killing upwards of 100,000 people. Three days later, a plutonium device was dropped on the city of Nagasaki that may have killed as many as 80,000 people. That these two detonations transformed the world of politics and international affairs forever is universally accepted. The precise meaning and consequence of this legacy, however, is deeply contested.
Why have these terrible weapons not been used since 1945, and how can we ensure at least another sixty-seven years without a nuclear attack?...
...Do nuclear weapons make the world safer or more dangerous? It is hard to imagine a more important question. The uncomfortable truth, however, is that despite bold assertions from scholars, advocates, and policymakers, we simply don’t know.
What is rarely commented upon in the voluminous and often shrill debate is how consistently abysmal our record of explaining and predicting nuclear politics has been since the start of the atomic age. After the Soviet Union replaced the defeated Imperial Japan and Nazi Germany as America’s main foe, as early as 1947 a third world war involving nuclear weapons was considered all but inevitable. Once fears of a thermonuclear war between the superpowers abated (somewhat), concerns turned from “cascades of proliferation” to dozens of smaller, “less responsible” states that were unlikely to imitate the superpowers’ restraint. In time, non-state actors, including terrorist groups, would get their hands on these weapons, and some of our leading experts saw a detonation on American soil as a near certainty....
comments powered by Disqus
- Rubio Surges Into Second In New Hampshire
- Branstad Says Cruz Ran ‘Unethical’ Campaign
- Christie Highlights Santorum’s Endorsement of Rubio
- Portman Comes Out Against Trade Deal
- Megyn Kelly Gets a Book Deal
- A Big List of the Bad Things Clinton Has Done
- An Unambiguous Sign Sanders Won Last Night’s Debate
- Still Friends at the End
- Quote of the Day
- Trump Still Leads as Clinton Slips
- Clinton Can’t Shake Image as Wall Street’s Friend
- Maddow Doesn’t See Sanders Winning
- Why Does the Media Still Shield Chelsea Clinton?
- Bush Jokes His Mother May Have Abused Him
- Rubio Closes the Gap in New Hampshire
- Newly released interactive map shows images of destroyed monuments of Mosul
- How the Rise of the Post Office Explains American Innovation
- These Americans are reliving history and don’t mind repeating it
- Britain largest home is saved for the nation
- Shelter and the slums: capturing bleak Britain 50 years ago
- Mary Beard, herself a bestselling author, wonders why more women historians aren't
- Princeton U. historian Imani Perry claims mistreatment in parking ticket arrest
- Retired historian George Dennison remains on the payroll at the U. of Montana while faculty are cut
- The Atlantic profiles exciting ways to teach history
- LDS Church has gone from 0 to 4 historians specializing in women’s history