Unconditional Surrender and the American Case Against the Modification of a Controversial Policy (1943–1945)

Abstract

The decision to employ nuclear weapons at Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August 1945 is arguably one of the most thoroughly investigated subjects in American history. Notably revisionist historians have repeatedly faulted the Truman administration for too easily discarding alternative options, arguing that a simple guarantee to retain the Japanese Emperor would have sufficed to make the Japanese government lay down arms almost immediately. In contrast to that position, the present article, however, maintains that American authorities did indeed have legitimate grounds not to expect that such concessions would in any way lead to a swift conclusion of the Pacific War, particularly since regardless of the Emperor issue there still remained the question of the appropriate moment and manner in which to exact a full surrender from the Imperial Army itself by decisively breaking its considerable military and political clout.