How nuclear war has failed in achieving diplomacy and social stability globally

 

"If Truman's broadcast turns out to be true, then I think this is the time that all of us [working on the atomic bomb] should literally cut our stomachs... the Americans have achieved a great victory over us"

These were the words of Nishio Yoshio, the leader of the Imperial Japanese Army's atomic bomb project said after Harry Truman announced the dropping of a bomb on Hiroshima. While security and status within global systems of power on a military level are frequently adopted as means of furthering nations' influence as sovereign nation states and seen as means by which to preserve diplomacy and relations with other powers, through this further ability to effectively maintain control of geo-strategically important regions. However, this authoritarian and war-mongering mentality only proves to have hindered these outcomes, and only serves the interests of the already influential colonial and neo-colonial superpowers who thrive off of the abuse and exploitation of warfare to further exacerbate underdevelopment and the flaws observed within a society ruled off of failing socio-economic and political modes of governance. It is for these reasons that, in the light of Hiroshima Day last week, that we must reflect not just on the ongoing tragedies observed with Hiroshima and their enduring legacy, but the importance of all nuclear disarmament as an instrumental means of achieving peace and freedom globally (as well as in seeing society beyond their means of investing into unwinnable and unnecessary warfare as opposed to supporting the needs of the people).The harsh and brutal reality described by Yoshio aptly presents the feelings of defeat and powerlessness faced by many under threat posed by unprovoked violence initiated purely as a means of demonstrating superficial strength and influence, and to further instil rivalries and tensions between regions globally, this being made further apparent through the competition between them to produce the most effective nuclear weapons and see this as an identifier of social advancement and its role in economic expansionist agenda. 

However, it was more than just this when discussing Japan's relations to nuclear war, thus making it something of a controversial and widely debated question as to whether the US' dropping this bomb on Hiroshima or the relation of this to the activities of the Soviet Union considering they intervened with this conflict two days later that were the true causes for Japan's continual struggles. However, one thing  that is certain is the ongoing tensions between the Eastern and Western worlds having constantly been apparent to varying degrees in some form or other, the focus and reasoning behind this having shifted over time. These tensions between the East and West had been influenced by President Truman's instigation of the Marshall Plan, by which the US' individualist neo-colonial expansionist agenda would be made to take centre stage globally, and that they could further redevelop and restructure European economies so as to mitigate against supposed threats posed by the Soviet Union, and prevent communism. This caused conflict regarding the interests of, not just the European advocates for the  Soviet Union, but with much of South East Asia as well.

Equally, another core dimension to the military orientated relations between the Eastern and Western worlds is the social, cultural and soft power related reasons for the continual politically unstable dynamic observed with these regions. This can be observed through, even within the US military, highly Westernised perspectives on Christianity appear to have had a significant presence within their agenda to recolonise, westernise and christianise Japan so as to declare greater control over them. This could be seen with the military distributing a million Bibles, and having converted almost 2 million Japanese people to be Christians. This would, in turn have potentially had some degree of influence on the influencing the role of individual religious institutions in society as either functioning in conjunction with the role of the government and influencing the politics of the Eastern World, or developed its own new economic and political models of how a rapidly expanding and globalising Western society. This is what Max Weber reflects on when he looks at not just the rising advancement in understanding of Buddhist, Hindu and Taoist economic principles and the class related socioeconomic factors that might influence the population's understanding and access to these, with a sense of class consciousness and empathy having been the main reason that could potentially have caused this shift, as well, in contrast pave the way for an alternative nihilistic mindset and supposed scepticism of traditional values, and assist the growth of modernist approaches and the view that systems outside of the existing and understood world bore responsibility to issues beyond human influence and ability to reverse. This may, in turn, have thus influenced fear and powerlessness in the face of rapid neo-colonial expansionism and have led to increased attention to preserving military influence within the East and using this to respond to and outcompete that for the West. This, therefore, also proves important in effectively evaluating the root causes of tensions in relation to the US, and explained the reasons for nuclear war acting as an increased threat and deterrent against future conflict, and remaining a reminder of continual instability and imbalance in patterns of power having led to governments' failure in being able to effectively support the needs of the people due to continual economic concern and financial failings, also having knock on effects of reducing peace, diplomacy, and good international relations (also important in a stable global political economy in which nations are able to intervene to support and work alongside each other in periods of crisis.