Stop polemics on Hiroshima
It is rather shocking and alarming to read the somewhat crude and cynical letters from some readers commenting on the sensitive issue of the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and the related interwoven story of foregone cruelties. I am afraid that such polemics can be harmful and that racist overtones will ensue, inasmuch as members of the succeeding generations of different nationalities are involved in the unexpected controversy.
This would change the popular -- to some readers perhaps beloved -- column into a hotbed of biased writing, prejudiced propositions or outright brawls.
As eloquently suggested by Gareth Evans, the Australian Foreign Minister, in spite of the understatement exposed in the opening passage of his article (UN must shift focus to preventing war; The Jakarta Post, Sept. 2, 1995), the arguments about whether the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were necessary to bring World War II to a speedy end will continue for at least another 50 years.
As it will be very regrettable to allow the popular readers' forum of The Jakarta Post to degenerate into a far from useful brawl, especially for Indonesian senior high schools students learning English composition, I propose that the Hiroshima bombing argument be closed. Enough has been said about the topic.
To prove Gareth Evans' article right, it can be noted that no less than General MacArthur, who was briefed about the atomic bombing of Hiroshima by Dr. Karl T. Compton in Manila on Aug. 7, 1945, said using the atomic bomb was completely unnecessary from a military point of view for compelling Japan to capitulate.
Said Clay Blair, Jr., author of the book MacArthur: "This may well have been true, as by that time Japan was certainly on the point of total collapse."
A Myanmarese schoolmate in Hiroshima, U Thet Thon during a recent re-union of former Southeast Asian Students in Japan was quoted by me on Aug. 3, 1995, to have said that the bombing of Hiroshima was unnecessary.
Three 70-year-old Indonesians who miraculously survived the smoke and horrible fire in an annihilated school dorm after the atomic bombing, surely have their own stories to tell as living witnesses to the horrors and suffering they experienced.
So what Gareth Evans suggests must be true: The debate will go on for at least another 50 years. This can be interpreted as meaning the debate is futile. It will never end.
Name and address
known to editor