The UNESCO World Heritage List includes a huge number of cultural monuments of various nations, they can be large or small, but they are still very important for mankind. There is a very special place among them, the so-called 'Atomic Bomb Dome' – the most famous symbol of Hiroshima. This is a house dedicated to memory of the first atomic bombing, which greatly damaged this building. In terms of architecture, this building, perhaps, is not so remarkable, especially for the World Heritage List. But this is the only building in the city's center that somehow managed to survive after the atomic bombing by the United States in August of 1945. 140 thousand people were killed as a result of the explosion and its aftermath in Hiroshima.
In April of this year, right before the 71st anniversary of this meaningless and barbaric act committed by the Americans, US Secretary of State John Kerry visited the Hiroshima Peace Memorial Park and Museum. He became the highest-ranking US official to ever visit the Memorial. And at the end of May, US President Barack Obama visited Hiroshima. The media called this visit "historic". Many people in Japan expected that the president of the country that was the first to use nuclear weapons would at least apologize. Especially since after Hiroshima, another Japanese city, Nagasaki, suffered the same fate. But he did not do it, unfortunately.
Barack Obama said the following: "My goal is not to simply address the past, but to confirm that innocent people from all sides die in wars, and we must do everything possible to ensure peace and dialogue throughout the entire world. We must continue to fight for a world without nuclear weapons. We have a unique moral responsibility, as the only country that used nuclear weapons, to prevent it in the future." And right after that the US National Nuclear Security Administration announced the beginning of production of upgraded V61-12 bombs with nuclear warheads. What a great repentance.
If you carry out barbaric atomic bombing of Japan, if you burn down everything with napalm, if you carry out herbicidal warfare in Vietnam using Agent Orange, then it is just a moral responsibility. If you create a coalition, bypassing the UN, and bomb a sovereign UN member state, disintegrate it, violating the UN Security Council resolution, as was done in Yugoslavia and Kosovo, then you promote freedom and democracy. If you openly lie from the UN tribune (just remember Mr. Powell's famous test tube with a white substance – evidence of the fact that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction), invade it and basically destroy it and its cultural values, plunge it into the abyss of endless terror, resulting in many victims, the number of which, by some estimates, exceeded a million, it is just a mistake. There are many other examples. At the same time, it should be noted that all the examples above, as well as others that could be mentioned, are associated with events that took place many thousands of miles away from the United States itself.
The international community, to which people like to appeal, did not condemn the US, did not impose international sanctions, did not demand an apology.
But when Russia takes any actions to protect its interests in close proximity to its borders, as happened, for example, in South Ossetia, when Russia, in response to the war waged by the Saakashvili regime, defended the South Ossetians, the West immediately calls Russia an aggressor. After a coup took place in Ukraine, a real threat to the lives of all those who disagree with the actions of the Kiev authorities appeared. It was probed by the events in Odessa and the south-east of Ukraine. Russia supported the will of the Crimean people and demonstrated that it will make sure that no harm comes to the LPR and the DPR. The international community, instead of demanding to follow the agreement of February 22nd 2014 signed between Yanukovych and the opposition, which could have prevented those tragic events, has decided to impose international sanctions against Russia.
A Latin proverb says: Quod licet Jovi, non licet bovi – the gods may do what cattle may not. Those who see themselves as "gods" and even democratizers, do not want to recognize the fact that there are not so many people who still wish to be "cattle" in the modern world. And this role does not suit Russia even more so.
Modern Russia has a lot of problems. But the West does not want to acknowledge the fact that this is not the Russia of the 1990s, which "bends" under sometimes openly imposed values that it cannot understand. The Cold War, which ended with the collapse of the Soviet Union, is returning once again. Now they require repentance and an apology from Russia. They demand this, even though their own closets are filled with skeletons.
There are a lot of comments, analytical articles and assessments on this matter, both serious and depressing...
They show just how different the views of our Western opponents are. We have a different perception of the events we witness, or in which we even participate sometimes. They show just how far we are from each other even in the perception of old events. And that happens even after the declassification of archives. Not all archives, of course, but important documents, thanks to which many mysteries of the past are not mysteries today.
In this connection, I would like to draw attention to an article by the American journalist Michael Bohm, who positions himself as an independent journalist, which he dedicated to the anniversary of Japan's capitulation. He expressed the position, very characteristic for the American establishment, about the necessity of using nuclear weapons in August 1945.
By the way, Mr. Bohm regularly participates in various talk shows on the Russian federal channels, some days he appears on several channels simultaneously. He has the opportunity to express his position on the most pressing issues, whether it concerns events in Ukraine and Syria, Russian-American and Russian-Chinese relations, topics of sanctions and the deployment of US missile defense systems in Europe. However, he almost always agrees with the position of official Washington.
The aforementioned article appeared on the website of the popular 'Echo of Moscow'. The first thing that I thought after reading the article was: is there any Russian journalist that expresses an opinion alternative to Washington's point of view, and appears in the leading media, electronic or printed, with the same frequency as Mr. Bohm? I don't think there is anyone like that. Speaking of freedom of speech and media bias.
Michael Bohm's article was written as a response to the State Duma chairman Sergey Naryshkin's proposal to create a tribunal for the US military crimes committed by Washington in Hiroshima and Nagasaki (the motives of this initiative are a topic of another discussion). Mr. Bohm called this proposal "politically rigged and hypocritical."
Michael Bohm quoted the speech of Japanese Emperor Hirohito during a radio broadcast. He described it as a key justification of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings, saying that Japan surrendered only thanks to them: "Our enemy started to use a new and terrible bomb, which could cause incalculable damage to innocent people. If we had continued to fight, it would not only lead to the collapse and complete destruction of the entire Japanese nation, but the end of human civilization as well." Bohn stressed that "these phrases emphasized the dominant role played by the US atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, in Hirohito's final decision to accept the conditions of America and its allies and surrender."
And it would have been alright if he had not added: "It is noteworthy that there was not a single word about the invasion of Soviet troops into Manchuria and, after that, about the new upcoming large-scale war with the Soviet Union as an additional factor in his decision to surrender."
"In other words, the US atomic bombing was the only way to force the Japanese authorities to accept a peaceful settlement," Michael Bohm claims.
The topic, discussed by Mr. Bohm, is important for understanding many of the crucial events that determined how the second half of the 20th century would look.
To be continued…
