Category: World War 2

Introduction

The period following the end of World War II was characterized with a great deal of technological development, probably as a consequence of the victories achieved by the Allied forces. The aftermath of World War II set in motion a wave of innovations that proved to be greatly beneficial in improving the living standards of the global population.

Such advancements in technology were a direct consequence of the experiences gained during the several years of the War. An urgent need was felt to innovate in order to have more technologically advanced weaponry that would allow having the much required edge in winning the war. The potential for technological development had been thus created during the Second World War itself.

After it ended in 1945, the available resources and technology could be gainfully used in the development of consumer goods that led to improved standards of living on a global basis. The technological innovations in this regard were made in several fields such as Linguistics, Medicine, Weaponry, Intelligence and Communication in addition to the technological progress made in manufacturing and service industries (Castells 45).

The rapid advancement in technology during World War II was primarily inspired by the propensity to research and devise military strategies that would allow penetration and sabotage of enemy forces and supply lines respectively.

In addition, innovation in technology was also inspired by the enhanced ability of the military to use technology in gathering intelligence, which was gainfully used in obtaining the much needed information about military capabilities and movement of enemy forces.

After the World War II ended, the technology developed till that time could be further innovated in creating a virtual technological revolution that transformed the lives of humanity in the coming decades (Gray 36). World War II heralded noteworthy technological innovations in the areas of nuclear technology and information technology that revolutionized ways of living in the 21^st century.

Nuclear Technology

Invention of Nuclear Reactor

The invention of the atomic bomb by the United States and its allies eclipses any other innovation made during World War II. Named as the Manhattan Project during World War II, the nuclear program of the Allies led to catastrophic consequences for the Axis forces, particularly in the context of the bombings on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, which led to the death of millions of people.

Although the initial objective of the Manhattan Project was to use nuclear technology in establishing reactors for the generation of electricity under the auspicious leadership of Italian physicist Enrico Ferni, the need to annihilate German, Italian and Japanese forces during World War II made the Allied leadership to focus on developing the first atomic bomb.

It was under the leadership of Enrico Fermi, who is recognized as the father of the atomic bomb because of his exhaustive research and positive outcomes in developing nuclear power, that the US made use his technology in establishing several nuclear power plants across the entire country (Russell 93).

Further innovations in nuclear technology were made by Enrico Fermi after the end of World War II, leading to major breakthroughs in reducing dependence on electricity generated through coal fuel and hydro power. This was made possible because of the innovation that led to the availability of cheaper, environmentally friendly and reliable nuclear generated electric power.

Innovation of Radiology Medicine

Besides its significant role in leading the green revolution through generation of environmentally clean energy, innovation in nuclear technology during World War II allowed wider application in medicine, especially in radiology therapy and imaging.

The use of nuclear technology in medicine can be traced back to the campaign initiated by the Polish Physics and Chemistry Nobel Prize laureate Marie Curie just before the beginning of World War II. Marie Curie embarked on a campaign to collect radium for use in radiology medicine.

She is credited with the establishment of globally recognized research institutes of radiology medicine, including the Curie Institutes in Paris and Warsaw. Nuclear medicine finds wide application in radiology treatment of different cancerous malignancies with the use of techniques such as neoplasm and radiology imaging.

Radar Technology

The innovations in radar technology during World War II helped in making improvements in the aviation industry and its associate role of uplifting the living standards of the global population. Such innovations also helped in enhancing national security from the perspective of external and internal aggression. Radar technology involves the use of radio waves in the detection of far-off objects.

Such objects may include ships, aircrafts, submarines and a wide-range of missiles and rocket weaponry. Innovation of radar technology during World War II led to improvement in bombsights and radar capabilities, which were inspired by their increased use in World War II. Radar technology is even regarded as the defining innovation that tilted the balance in favor of the allied forces during World War II.

Later, it also heralded the revolution in both military and civil aviation in the contemporary world. Radar technology was invented immediately after World War II began, but significant improvements in the technology were made during the war through research and development, mainly for military purposes.

This new technology allowed the use of applications with which approaching enemy aircraft and ships could be detected.

Vaccines

Collaborative arrangements were made between the military and academia in efforts to prevent war-exacerbated diseases, particularly pneumococcal pneumonia and influenza and such initiatives led to the innovation of disease prevention vaccines.

Wartime research programs on preventable disease are recognized for having led to the improvement and innovation of 10 new vaccines for treatment of a series of virulent preventable diseases (Godin 121). Besides, wartime research in health and medicine science and technology led to innovations relative to substitute blood samples such as plasma, antibiotics such as penicillin and insecticides such as DDT.

Nevertheless, the innovation of vaccines stands out as the most important achievement in the area of medical and health technology during World War II. Such vaccines involved development of highly effective, safe and licensed antibiotics and microbial preventative therapy for immunization against several diseases, which did not exist before the War began.

Electrolysis Chemistry, Digital Technology & Military Technology

Other notable innovations during World War II having significant impact on the lives of human beings in the 21^st century include the demagnetization of ships to prevent them from torpedo and mines attacks. This technique also helps in detection of submarines. Demagnetization technology was developed during World War II and is particularly useful in exploration of mineral and ore deposits.

Research is currently underway to come up with innovations that will help the ship building industry to use corrosion free material that prevents ships from the harmful impacts of corrosive sea water. This is possible through the application of cathode electrolysis technology, which was developed during World War II.

World War II also spearheaded the digital revolution of the late 20^th century and early 21 century through robust research in information transmission, electronics and intelligence. Amongst these was the development of the encryption machine by Germans, which heralded the large scale application of digital encryption in information technology.

Conclusion

It is apparent that in contrast with World War I, the Second World War featured both military and scientific methods of warfare as the two opposite camps tried to outmaneuver each other through the use of technologically advanced, updated and state-of-the-art military equipment and techniques, which could not have been made possible without the support of science and technology.

Innovations in both military combat weapons and military technology have led to the improvement of standards of living in the 21^st century. People feel more secure now because there are lesser risks of aggression and the military is very well equipped with the latest technology in doing away with security threats.

This has been made possible because of the use of science and technology, which has led to innovations that have improved defense capabilities as also the living standards of people.

Many hold that the innovations in nuclear technology have enhanced fears of another world war, which will lead to the destruction of the world. However, such fears do not have a strong basis because the global community understands the consequences of a nuclear war and recognizes that nuclear technology is best used for the welfare of human societies.

Works Cited

Castells, Manuel. Technopoles of the World The Making of 21st Century Industrial Complexes. Hoboken: Taylor and Francis, 2014. Print.

Godin, Benoit. Measurement and statistics on science and technology 1920 to the present. New York: Routledge, 2005. Print.

Gray, John. Reconstructions of secondary education: theory, myth and practice since the second world war.. S.l.: Routledge, 2012. Print.

Russell, James. Innovation, Transformation, and War Counterinsurgency Operations in Anbar and Ninewa Provinces, Iraq, 2005-2007. Palo Alto: Stanford University Press, 2010. Print.

Bombing of Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941, remains in the history of the United States of America. Numerous studies and investigations have been done in order to ascertain whether Franklin Roosevelt had information on the attack or not. After many decades since the incident occurred, questions on why and how America was caught unprepared still exist (Hanson 236).

Roosevelt and some high officers in the government could have been aware of the attack. United States Intelligence managed to decode information from radio broadcasts, which were used by the Japanese in their plan to attack Pearl Harbor (Jacobsen 695). The messages were sent to Washington. However, Roosevelt kept the messages to himself. In addition, United States intelligence was able to arrest the spy used by Japan to provide information regarding Pearl Harbor.

The spy informed Japan on exact geographical grids of the Harbor. The Intelligence informed Roosevelt, but he might have not shared the information with others in Washington (Jacobsen 695). It is believed that Roosevelt wanted to engage Japan in war and the only way to achieve this was by allowing Japan to attack the Harbor. It is argued that there was no reason which could have allowed the United States of America to participate in war.

In addition, Britain and Netherlands were aware of the attack by Japan on the harbor. The Intelligence of these nations might have informed Roosevelt because they had an alliance with United States of America (Hanson 237). Therefore, it can be concluded that, Roosevelt knew about the attack and he allowed it to happen so that his country can be involved in the war.

A memo written from Naval Intelligence Office outlined 8 actions to be done which by the government States of America. It is believed, Roosevelt began implementing the steps in the memo and by the time Japan attacked Pearl Harbor all 8 steps had taken place.

The two main areas of the memo were; manning the trade and economy of Japan and preparedness of the military men because there were signs of an attack (Bratzel1343). It is believed that Roosevelt knew about the attack because he began preparing for war by joining hands with Britain to acquire supplies and use of military services from Indonesia and Singapore.

It is also believed that Roosevelt personally deployed a division made of heavy cruisers. He also deployed two other divisions of submarines. Roosevelt said that he was setting up the divisions to keep Japan guessing (Bratzel1343). Moreover, lack of military services and geographical location of Pearl Harbor, made it more vulnerable.

Commander in chief, Richardson, informed Roosevelt on the issue of lack of military services in the harbor (Bratzel1343). It is believed there was a confrontation between Roosevelt and Richardson and the latter one ended up loosing his job four months later. Husband Kimmel replaced Richardson and is believed to have been manipulated by Roosevelt to a point of overlooking dangers of the attack.

Manning the economy and trade of Japan was important for Roosevelt. He wanted Japanese to be denied their oil demands from Dutch. All these actions by Roosevelt show that he was aware of the attack. However, in order to be involved in the war, he had to let Japan attack the Harbor.

Lately, Toland was unable to find the evidence on the steps the federal government took (Bratzel1343). He believes the records could damage the image of some officials in United States of America and that could be the reason the documents are missing.

At the end of the Second World War, President Truman used atomic bombs on Japan. The reasons for his decision have been debated for years. Critics believe that, Truman used atomic bombs on Japan in order to intimidate Soviet Union.

However, Winston Churchill argued that, the bomb was dropped in order to bring to an end the war (Giangreco 602). He believed it was the only way to bring peace in the world. Truman argued that, the bombs were dropped to prevent further loss of lives; both Americans and Japanese. He also argued that, dropping the bombs was the only way to ensure peace prevails.

However, some historians argue that, the bombs were dropped to create a certain impression to soviets and make them loose their grip on the eastern part of Europe. At this time, there was a scramble on being the world super power. It is argued that, when the bombs were dropped, Stalin was furious because the title of being world power after defeating Japan was taken away by United States of America (Giangreco 602).

Somehow, the bomb was a show of an exceptional possession that Soviet Union did not posses. Moreover, in order to protect his feelings, Stalin pretended that there was no impression created by Truman. Dropping of the bombs played a political role more than just saving lives (Giangreco 602).

Some historians argue that, close to half a million lives of Americans were saved when the bomb was dropped. The argument is based on the plan of invasion which was to be made on Japan. In order to stop the invasion, the bombs were dropped. As a result, it is claimed that the bombs were used to save lives and end the agony caused by the war (Alperovitz 408).

The bomb had adverse effects, but according to Truman, it was the only way to bring peace. However, some historians claim that, the dropping of bombs had little to do with world peace and saving of lives (Alperovitz 408).They claim that, United States of America overlooked the fact that Japan had surrendered.

Already Japan was seeking peace, which meant that there was a great possibility of war coming to an end. However, some historians argue in support the Truman’s actions. They argue that, Japanese had not agreed on the issue of surrender; somehow they were divided and war could have continued (Giangreco 603).

Cold war emerged at the end of the Second World War which was characterized by exchange of words. The exchange was characterized by frustration, passion and hatred. So far, no research has been done to show the invasion plans which led to dropping of the bombs.

Also, revisionists argue that, Soviet Union did not intend to use bombs as weapons in the war (Giangreco 602). Moreover, the use of atomic has not been justified even by those who experienced the war and do not believe that dropping of atomic bombs saved their lives. Most of the American families believe that the atomic bombs attack was unnecessary and cruel (Alperovitz 408).

In conclusion, great percentage of historians believes that, Roosevelt was aware of the attack on Pearl Harbor. His desire to be involved in the Second World War, made him allow the attack by Japan. In addition, until today the issue still remains controversial. Also, controversies regarding the dropping of bombs prevail with traditionalist historians supporting the act while the revisionists rebuking the act.

Works Cited

Alperovitz, Gar. “Dropping the Atomic Bomb Was Neither Necessary Nor Justifiable.”Major problems in the history of World War II: documents and essays 2003: 408. Print.

Bratzel, Joel. “Pearl Harbor, Microdots, and J. Edgar Hoover.”The American Historical Review 1982: 1342-1351. Print.

Giangreco, Dominic. “Operation Downfall: The Devil Was in the Details.” Technical Report 1995: 600-603. Print.

Hanson, Victor. Carnage and Culture: Landmark battles in the rise of Western power. New York: First Anchor books, 2002. Print.

Jacobsen, Paul. “Radio Silence and Radio Deception: Secrecy Insurance for the Pearl Harbor Strike Force.”Intelligence & National Security 2004: 695-718. Print.

The Second World War was a complicated time for both the general public and the authorities since while the former worried for their safety, family, and homeland, the latter needed to maintain the national spirit and support the soldiers at the front. For such purposes, posters were implemented involving colorful images with strong words. However, while some might think that posters from the 20th century served as inspiration or plea, they were aimed to influence people psychologically.

The first propaganda poster Every minute counts! represents the influence of lost time on the battlefield failures of their soldiers. The technique used in this poster involves fear, through which the authorities strive to scare individuals working at manufacturing factories, urging them to work harder. In this sense, the poster incorporates statistics and figures, implying that every ten minutes that are lost will lead to less ammunition and weaponry, which will, in turn, postpone the victory.

Another poster, Air defense is home defense uses the technique of connecting with the audience. In their attempt to recruit as many individuals into air defense, the authorities aim to incorporate a heart-warming illustration of a family that looks in the sky and admires the national military plane. In a way, stereotypes in posters were common during wartime (Brewer 26). Here, the objective is to emphasize the pride in national defense and show the general public endorsement of the air forces.

The last poster, England expects, incorporates the technique of calling to action via bright colors, illustration of the national flag, and words. The phrase national service is written in bold red color that is contrasted by the dark blue background, which is used to catch the attention of the audience. Moreover, the number of people illustrated in the poster serves to show the national spirit, urging others to join the forces.

Hence, while some individuals might mistakenly believe that 20th-century posters acted as calls to action or acts of inspiration, their true purpose was to affect the audience psychologically. Every minute counts! is a propaganda poster that employs the technique of fear to illustrate the impact of wasted time on their soldiers’ failures on the battlefield. Another poster, Air defense is home defense, employs the audience-connection strategy. The final poster, England expects, employs the strategy of urging action via the use of bold colors, an image of the national flag, and text.

Work Cited

Brewer, Susan A. To Win the Peace: British Propaganda in the United States During World War II. Cornell University Press, 2019.

Introduction and background of the study

The World War II was a result of national tension among the superpowers of the World War I (Duiker & Spielvogel 24). There are numerous explanations about what caused the World War II. Historians and scholars link the World War II with the unsolved disputes of World War I.

However, modern research on history shows that the major causes of World War II were political imbalance, economic stress and the need for military supremacy (Hart 43). Lack of political agreement among the victors of World War I in Europe is explained as the main cause of World War II.

The World War I had left many countries in Europe helpless and they relied on the victors for their political and economical survival. During that Germany, Britain and France were very influential in Europe and controlled both political and economic activities in the region and other parts of the world (Henig 22).

After the World War I, several political and economic issues were left unsolved and countries in Europe continued to compete for political, economic and military supremacy. This was as a result of the superpower’s desire to extend their territory and acquire more resources to replace what was lost in the World War I.

Additionally; Europe was experiencing hard economic times after the 1930s Great Depression (Roberts 88-89). Consequently, countries ignored the political structure established after the World War I and started invading the weaker ones making them their territories. Although there are several factors that directly and indirectly contributed to the rise of the World War II, lack good political structures was the major cause (Conrad Stein 89).

Statement of the problem

Immediately after the World War I, most of the countries in Europe were left disorganized both politically and economically. The influential ones such as France, Germany and Britain did not make effective political agreements that could unite all the survivors of the World War I (Conrad Stein 115).

Each of them struggled alone to re-establish itself and become the leader of the others. Although some of the countries in Europe tried to unite the victors of the World War I so that they can maintain global harmony, countries like Germany and Japan failed to support the move and went ahead attacking other countries in order to increase their economic and military superiority. For instance, in Europe Germany invaded Poland while in Asia Japan invaded China.

On September 1^st 1939 the German troops led by Hitler invaded Poland contrary to the warning given by France and Britain. Consequently Britain and France declared war on Germany after failing to address the matter politically with Hitler (Conrad Stein 127).

Major causes of World War II

Lack of global political balance among the World War I victors was the major factor the led to the rise of the World War II. After the World War I, the global community did not establish effective political strategies that could regulate the superior from exploiting the inferior ones (Plowright 62).

On the contrary, all the victors of World War I embarked on invading the less powerful countries in order to extend their territories and improve their economic abilities and military superiority. On the other hand, some countries such as France, Britain and Italy were not in support of superior countries invasion of the inferior ones and were ready to do everything possible to stop such moves.

This was the reason why Britain and France declared war against Germany and Japan thereby propelling a war among them and their supporters (Gruhl 117). Therefore the desire by the Germans under Hitler to conquer other countries and the desire by the Japanese to expand their territory was the key cause of the war in Europe and subsequently the World War II.

The idea of political imbalance among the leading nations after the World War I was also a contributing factor to the World War II. After the World War I, the superpowers from Europe established a political agreement that all nations, regardless of their political, military and economical abilities, should respect the sovereignty of every nation.

However, severe sanctions were put on countries such as Japan and Germany to prevent them from cruel activities witnessed during the World War I. Countries such as Britain and France ensured that the peace agreement signed treated the Germans harshly in order to put their brutal leader, Hitler, in control.

For instance, the agreed peace treaty restricted the German military, reduced its territory both in Europe and in oversea colonies. Worst of all, Germany was required to pay a penalty of over $33 billion as war damages. Following the great depression in Europe,

The sanctions put on Germany in a severe situation and Hitler was not ready to adhere to the demands of the treaty. He therefore re-organized his country and Germany was ready for the war (Plowright 115).

One of the political agreements that were formed after the World War I is the League of Nations. However, there was a problem of appeasement and isolation among the member nations that made the agreement unsuccessful in preventing another war to occur. The truth is that after the World War I, the peace treaty made was unfair to the Germans and this made it even worse because the Germans believed that they were never defeated during the World War I.

Although the Germans were the ones who introduced the idea of the peace treaty after the World War I, they their leaders made the people believe that they had not lost in the battlefield (Finney 45). On the other hand the super Powers failed to make the League of Nations a success. This allowed the likes of Germany to re-organize themselves and declare war on other countries. There was no political support from the superpowers to push through the peace treaty (Henig 80).

The political system that existed in Europe after the World War I was based on the ideologies of few leaders who valued their personal interest and that of their individual nations before those of the international community. Every country in Europe had its own political interests in the treaty and this made individual like Hitler to break the treaty.

Consequently, Britain and France declared war on countries that failed to respect the treaty and the end result was the World War II. Some countries in Europe had also given in to the political requirements of the superpowers whereby they weakened their military hoping that there could be no more war in the future. This made it easier for Germany and other countries that were ready for the war to invade them (Finney 116).

Formation of the League of Nations after the World War I to solve international disputes is also another major factor that led to the rise of the World War II. The league was formed on political grounds and most of the leaders involved in its formation had national goals in mind and very few had international interests.

The league was also formed by the superpowers of the World War I in order to protect their own interests and avoid further invasions. Some of the influential countries such as the USA isolated themselves from the league and this made it to lack political support that could make it effective.

The process of admitting members of the league was also made on political grounds and this made it to lack international support. Countries like the US embarked on the politics of isolation after the World War I. Leaders in the US did not bother much with the international politics and this made it possible for countries in Europe and Asia to continue with the war (Dowswell 73).

The politics of the time were based on nationalism, totalitarianism, and Fascism. The fascists supported the use of military in order to achieve national goals and international cohesion. These included the likes of Italy, Germany and Japan among others. Leaders such as Hitler, Mussolini, Italy and the Japanese imperialists were based on expansionism. They wanted to conquer many territories as possible countries and expand their power and territory (Finney 146).

Conclusion

It is evident from the study that most of the causes of World War II were politically driven (Eubank 98). Although some economic and military factors also contribute to the war, it is the lack of proper international political systems that allowed some leaders to use their military against other nations. Consequently, countries that felt invading other nations was unfair opposed the move using military means and this graduated to the World War II.

Works Cited

Conrad Stein, R. World War II in Europe: From Normandy to Berlin, NJ, United States: Enslow Publishers, Inc., 2011 print.

Dowswell, P. The Causes of World War II, New York, NY, United States: Paw Prints, 2008 print.

Duiker, W. J, & Spielvogel, J. World History: Since 1500, New York, NY, United States: Cengage Learning, 2008 print.

Eubank, K. World War II: Roots and Causes, New York, NY, United States: San Val, Incorporated, 2006 print.

Finney, P. Remembering the Road to World War Two, New York, NY, United States: Taylor & Francis, 2010 print.

Gruhl, W. Imperial Japan’s World War Two: 1931-1945, NJ, United States: Transaction Publishers, 2010 print.

Hart, C. The Second World War: 1939 – 45, CA, United States: Evans Brothers, 2007 print.

Henig, R. B. The Origins of the Second World War: 1933-1941, KY, United States: Taylor & Francis Group, 2005 print.

Plowright, J. Causes, Course and Outcomes of World War Two, New York, NY, United States: Palgrave Macmillan, 2007 print.

Roberts, P. World War II: The Essential Reference Guide, CA, United States: ABC-CLIO, 2012 print.

Causes of World War 2

The World War 2 began in 1939. This is when France and Britain declared war on Germany. This occurred when Germany invaded Poland and therefore, this is what triggered the outbreak of war. However, the causes of the war are more complex.

The major causes of this Great War were the unresolved issues that resulted from the World War 1. Another reason was due to the effects of the Great Depression. This occurred in the 1930s. Another reason is the interwar period in Europe. Several events accumulated and led to the outbreak of the war.

One of the events that contributed to the series of events includes the invasion that occurred in Poland in 1939. Soviet Russia and Germany were responsible for this invasion. Another event that had a great effect was the invasion into Republic of China. The Empire of Japan was responsible for this and this occurred in 1937.

Several European powers such as the United Kingdom, Russia and France expanded their territories using force and aggression. This is a process that was referred to as expansionism or imperialism. Germany and Italy were not as successful as the other nations when it came to gaining territory under colonial rule.

When Germany lost land to the other nations, it led to their relocation. This cause the Germans to get bitter and this interfered with their relations with their neighbors. This contributed to the feeling of revanchism. Under Nazism, Germany started a program that would lead to the restoration of the country’s rightful boundaries.

These were the boundaries that were in place before World War 1. This lead Rhineland to reoccupied. When Hitler saw the success of this action, he believed that he could further invade Russia and Poland without causing any major war.

Another leading cause is the failure of appeasement. The actions by Germany were thought to be reasonable since they thought that Germany had the right to re-arm herself in order to be ready to defend itself.

Therefore, the Munich Agreement was signed. This was between Germany, Italy, Britain and France. Czech was not invited and this made them feel betrayed.

However, Hitler went ahead to break the terms and conditions of the Munich Agreement. He invaded the rest of Czechoslovakia. It was evident that the policy of appeasement had failed. Another thing that led to the World War 2 was the failure of the League of Nations.

The reason why the U.S. was involved in the war

The United States had remained neutral in the war but they were provoked into it. This was when the Japanese bombed the U.S. Naval Base at Pearl Harbor. This made the Japanese official enemies of the United States.

The Japanese later bombed the U.S. fleet in the Philippines. This then agitated U.S., which decided to declare war on the Japanese. A few days later, Hitler decided to declare war against the United States. This led the U.S. to respond with fire. This then led to the full involvement of the United States in World War 2.

FDR also wanted the United States to be involved in the war. He made public statements about Germany’s attacks. The Germans had made three separate attacks on U.S. vessels that had carried civilians. The U.S. pressured the Japanese with embargoes and caused their economic fall.

It was after that when Hitler did what has been referred to as the ‘greatest military blunder in history’. This was when he declared war against the United States. He also wanted the Japanese to attack Russia on the eastern side. However, this did not happen.

Since the Japanese were not involved, Germany had to fight on both sides and this is the main reason why Germany did not succeed. Hitler tried to help the Japanese because he was not aware how badly off they were. He believed that Japan had an army that had not seen defeat for more than a century.

Since the Japanese were misguided, they made a mistake of attacking Pearl Harbor. This gave the Americans an incentive.

The reason why Japan attacked Pearl Harbor dates back to the time when the U.S. banned any form of trade with the Japanese. This was because the Japanese had been aggressive towards the Chinese. As the U.S. embarked fully in the war, it ended up spending 42 billion dollars towards the war.

Why the allies in Europe and the Pacific won

The allies included the U.K., U.S., France, Soviet Union, Republic of China and Poland. The emperor of Japan had underestimated the abilities of the U.S. to make war in the Pacific. However, the Japanese army did not have sufficient resources to go ahead with the war.

The British, on the other hand, pushed the Japanese killing all those who appeared on their path. As a result, almost a half a million of them were killed. The U.S. also continued to capture the islands and drew closer to the Japanese territory. China, Russia and Britain then liberated the portions of China that had been occupied by the Japanese.

The attempts of the Italians and Germans to greedily capture and expand their empires were not successful. This was because they had bad strategy and morale. The Russians came in from the east and killed more than half of all the German soldiers. This led the allies to land in Normandy and they liberated France.

Consequences of the war

World War 2 had diverse effects throughout the world. The consequences included both positive and negative effects. Firstly, millions of lives were lost as a result of the war. Millions more were left homeless. Another consequence was the division of Germany.

It was divided into four and each was governed by the allied powers. These included the United Kingdom, United Nations, Soviet Union and France. These were the direct effects.

However, there were indirect effects and consequences of the war. One of the direct effects was that the war acted as a catalyst for various local, regional and global phenomena. This included the redrawing of the borders of Europe. U.K.’s welfare state was also born as a result of the war.

Another result of the war was the creation of Israel. Various organizations also rooted as a result of the world war. Such organizations include the World Bank, the United Nations, World Trade Organization and the International Monetary Fund.

The war also led to the emergence of new technologies. One of such technologies was nuclear fission. This was necessary for the nations to produce nuclear weapons in order to protect themselves from future attacks. Another technology was the invention of the jet engine and electronic computer.

Introduction

People like to communicate and share their thoughts in a variety of ways. Still, it is hard to believe that interpersonal communication could be organized in a wrong way and result in a number of deaths. Sometimes, people could identify their mistakes and admit that miscommunication takes place. Sometimes, people do not want to accept the fact that they make a mistake. There are also the situations when a misunderstanding in communication occurs and cannot be identified in time. One of such tragic examples could be taken from the history when the Potsdam Declaration was offered to the Japanese government as a warning to “surrender or face annihilation” (Ham 204).

The Japanese responded to that offer with one word, “mokusatsu”. That response was translated by the Americans as “to reject” or “to ignore” instead of being interpreted as “no comments at the moment” (Gamble and Gamble 133). The result was fatal for Japan and helped people underline the necessity to deal with miscommunication in a proper way. Communication errors occur because of different reasons, and people have to consider each word spoken and each idea written because the example of miscommunication between the representatives of the United States and Japan proved that one poorly chosen word could activate an atomic bomb and take so many lives in a moment.

Historical Background

The evaluation of the historical events shows that Japan, as well as the United States, had enough chances to avoid the situation when the atomic bombs were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945. Of course, nowadays, people like to make a guess and suggest their personal interpretations of the event. However, there is one truth that cannot be ignored. At that moment, the United States already got the bombs. The only thing the current President of the United States, Harry Truman, needed was a good reason for taking a serious step and using the bomb. For a certain period of time, the United States planned to drop the bomb on other places, and such cities as Kyoto, Yokohama, Hiroshima, and Kokura were at the top of the list (Ham 148). However, Stimson, the current Secretary of War, had spent his amazing honeymoon in Kyoto and admired the beauty of the city. He supported the idea to change the list and removed Kyoto from that list replacing it with Nagasaki.

At the beginning of 1945, the leaders of such countries as the United States, the United Kingdom, and China offered the document that outlined the conditions of the Japanese surrender under which Hirohito could stay as the head of the state with no powers, and the Japanese people could not be destroyed as a nation (Ham 204). The Soviet Union participated in the development of the draft. Still, there was no signature of the Soviet Union’s leader in the official document. It was proposed that Japan wanted to discuss its dramatic situation with Stalin.

However, there were not enough reasons to prove that fact. Anyway, the conclusions introduced in the Declaration were not appropriate for the Japanese leaders. Therefore, they did not want to demonstrate their true intentions and tried to keep silence as long as possible. What they chose was to say that they preferred the “mokusatsu” ultimatum in that situation (Barash and Webel 220). The answer was interpreted as the rejection of the Declaration, and the United States decided to use their atomic bombs without even notifying the enemy about the possibility of the threat. Such decision was explained by the Japanese possibility to gather enough air forces and be able to interfere. The United States could not allow that happen. The bombs were dropped on Hiroshima on August 6, 1945, and on Nagasaki on August 9, 1945 (Johnson and Berkowitz par. 6).

Importance of Communication

Communication between people is a crucial activity that cannot be ignored and poorly analyzed. However, communication between nations is a more serious activity that has to be weighted properly. When it is the time of war, people cannot forget that one look or move could lead to the results that could destroy nations and change the history. Therefore, communication in a war period is a significant topic, and leaders, as well as their representatives, should possess a number of skills and abilities to share the information, to introduce personal and national positions, and to make the decisions that are expected. One communication error could break all rules and turn a fruitful conversation into a “dialogue of the deaf” (Barash and Webel 220). The point is that people could not think of each word used in their speeches or believe that people could comprehend a true message in the words offered. However, personal hopes and beliefs should not be overestimated when the war happens. It seems that such a professional political figure as Prime Minister of Japan, Suzuki Kantaro, could not make such tiny mistakes but use the words that were appropriate and clear.

In the discussions that took place between the United States, Japan, the United Kingdom, China, and the Soviet Union played a very important role in the history and the development of the events. Still, one error could not be taken into consideration, and the results turned out to be fatal.

False Translation

The main problem of miscommunication between Japan and the United States was the impossibility to speak similar languages. Therefore, the speech of Prime Minister was translated to the American leaders. In general, his speech was clear enough, and the Truman administrated understood that the Japanese government was not ready to accept the conditions of the Potsdam Declaration. However, the main decision of Japan was “mokusatsu”.

This word is polysemantic by its nature. One of the translators from the Truman administration used the explanation of this word as “to reject”. However, there was another meaning, “no comments”. Many people, theorists, historians, and researchers believe that if the word “mokusatsu” was translated in another way, people could avoid the consequences of the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. In fact, the meaning of the word was lost in its translation (Graves par. 1). The investigation of the word “mokusatsu” could be organized in two ways. On the one hand, “moku” means “silent”, and “satsu” means “kill” (Graves par.6).

The combination of these two words could be interpreted as the intentions to reject the idea and kill those, who proposed it. On the other hand, the same words could be combined and have an idiomatic meaning that was “no comments”. Prime Minister was not ready to pronounce the decision, and his inability to formulate a thought lead to the events that could not be forgotten or forgiven. The translator was not able to check the guesses and focus the President’s attention on the possibility to interpret the same word in another way. The United States was not eager to wait or ask for the explanation but demonstrate its power and intentions to end the war and prove its ultimatum.

Miscommunication Problems

Taking into consideration the analysis of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki situation, the false translation of the word “mokusatsu”, and the inabilities to spend more time on investigating the decisions, it is possible to say that miscommunication could be the reason for a human death. Miscommunication during a war period could be the reason for a number of deaths, traumas, and destructions. Therefore, it is important to clarify the main reasons for miscommunication and identify the problems people could have during a communication process. Miscommunication problems could occur in different fields including marketing, politics, and management (Wilson 82).

Miscommunication influences human relations, determines the quality of life, and even predicts working conditions. People could suffer from miscommunication because of the lack of knowledge, inabilities to investigate and interpret, unawareness of language, or unwillingness to listen. All these reasons and problems could be observed in the situation with the USA and Japan. However, such historical examples should not be used just in order to prove the possibility of miscommunication at such levels. This situation could be used to prove that people have to be careful with words and phrases used in conversations and consider the abilities of their interlocutors to understand what is said and what is people want to say.

In many dictionaries and online sources, miscommunication is the lack of understanding or a failure to communicate in a proper way. Japanese leader could find the required portion of understanding with the American leaders, and the American leaders failed to communicate with Prime Minister of Japan in a proper way. Two parties could not understand that it was not enough to recognize personal needs and the needs of the opponents. It was more important to clarify what methods of communication could be more effective in their situations.

Miscommunication problems have a number of roots, and people, who decide to be the participants of communication, should understand their role and obligations in a process. On the one hand, they have to formulate their thoughts properly, choose the words and even punctuation marks in order to make the required pauses in a proper way. On the other hand, there are the rules and norms that should be taken into consideration when people start communicating. Miscommunication could be caused by an inappropriate understanding of traditions, cultural preferences, religion, etc. Such problems may lead to not only some personal offenses but to the inabilities to comprehend the essence of the offense, make the correct conclusions, and correct the situation. Besides, miscommunication problems could result in unnecessary conflicts and affect the relations between people or even between countries.

Nowadays, many people believe that open communication and the absence of ethical or cultural boundaries could be a chance for people to be united. People demonstrate their independence and strive to be free from any kind of obligation. However, under such conditions communication could be a serious threat to people and the reason to stop the relations. Miscommunication problems could also be observed in the form of personal discomfort, the inability to formulate a new idea, and tension development. Some people cannot even understand the reasons for such changes and continue to develop miscommunication not paying attention to the fact that they and their words are the main reasons for their discontent.

Miscommunication problems between the United States and Japan lead to the atomic bombs being dropped on two Japanese cities. These problems included the fact that the representatives of both countries used different languages and could not set the priorities in their words. Instead of thinking about the ways of how to improve the relations and reduce the number of death, the United States wanted to protect its people and take the first step when Truman decided to attack the two cities with thousands of innocent people in there. It is hard to believe that one false translation and the inability to interpret the message of the leader in a proper way lead to such catastrophic results.

Conclusion

In general, the analysis of the situation between the United States and Japan in 1945 helps to understand that, even being smart and educated enough, people could not help but make a number of mistakes in their communication. Miscommunication is one of the main problems for people in the past and the representatives of the modern world. Many current politicians could not talk to each other on a proper level. Therefore, wrong interpretations, unwillingness to wait and analyze, and personal concerns promote miscommunication that leads to inappropriate decisions like the one made by the United States in regards to Japan and its people in 1945.

Works Cited

Barash, David P. and Charles P. Webel. Peace and Conflicts Studies. SAGE, 2013.

Gamble, Teri Kwal and Michael W. Gamble. Interpersonal Communication: Building Connections Together. SAGE Publications, 2013.

Graves, LeAnne. “Misunderstood Word May Have Led to Catastrophic Outcome.” The National. 2014. Web.

Ham, Paul. Hiroshima Nagasaki: The Real Story of the Atomic Bombings and Their Aftermath. Macmillan, 2014.

Johnson, Richard and Bonnie Berkowitz. “An Illustrated History of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki Nuclear Bombings.” The Washington Post. 2015. Web.

Wilson, Randal. Mastering Project Management Strategy and Processes: Proved Methods to Meet Organizational Goals. FT Press, 2014.

Introduction

It all started on 1^st September 1939 when Germany attacked Poland without warning and that was when the world entered into war with itself. For a period which lasted 6 years, manhood was under the threat of extinction as men slaughtered fellow men like goats and destruction of property worth billions took place (Bachrach 4).

The World War 2 began in the year 1939 and ended in the year 1945 after the United States of America dropped two atomic bombs in the two Japanese islands of Hiroshima and Nagasaki killing more than 120000 in the two islands and leaving thousands of others suffering from the radiation effects. Surprisingly, some Japanese soldiers, who were on the isolated islands in the pacific who never got the message that the war had ended or thought it was just but a trick, continued fighting even after the war had ended.

The war was the deadliest conflict ever experienced in human history with the figures of the possible lost lives being estimated at 50 to 60 million people around the world. Most of these people were civilians who were either killed, maimed or were left homeless by the aerial bombings. With most of the soldiers having gone to the war as young and energetic people, on their return time most of them came missing limbs and also suffering from several diseases.

The Effects Of The 2^nd World War:

The fall of world major powers: The war did not just end, but it had some positive and negative effect to the countries both involved and those that were not involved with the main actors in the war suffering enormously.

To the Germans, with the defeat of Hitler and collapsing of the Nazi regime, its leaders were arrested and tried for crimes against humanity though Hitler, the leader, did not go through the trial as he committed suicide to escape the trial and the execution. Germany was then divided into four zones by the victorious ally sides.

Japan, another casualty of the war, was also in ruins due to the numerous bombings. The leaders were tried and the country was placed under the US rule for some years.

For England, having been bombed severally by its neighbors (Germany), the country economy relied heavily on the aid by the US to develop and prosper to its previous economic level. Centrally to the losses countries like England, France and Germany among others experienced, the Russians in the process of defeating the Germans had established a powerful army which now occupied most of the Eastern part of Europe.

The country’s vast resources made sure that the USSR along with the USA could emerge the superpowers. For the USA, the war stimulated the economy, new industries were built all over the United States of America due to the fact that the country had escaped the physical destruction that many other countries went through thus rather than building a nation it was increasing investments.

Struggle For National Independence

With the main colonial powers coming from Europe, the 2^nd World War left many weak and unable to manage their colonies due to the scarcity of resources. Many of them were preoccupied with own problems and the rise of anti- imperialist sentiments back at home easened the process of decolonization. The weakness of England and France and the defeat of Germany greatly encouraged the struggle for independence as these countries concentrated on rebuilding their economies.

War soldiers who had participated in the war came back enlightened and bearing the fact that they had seen white men also die in the war, the belief that whites were immortal was erased and the struggle for independence began. Colonies were not ready to be colonized again after what they saw during the 2^nd World War.

Colonies that had helped their colonial masters during the war were granted independence after the war ended. For example countries that regained their independence were the Philippines from the United States of America in 1946, India from Britain followed in 1947, Ceylon and Burma in 1948 among others (Linter 1). The technologies on fighting diseases were advance and this reduced mortality cases leading to soaring populations.

Upon Science and technology, the World War II brought enormous technological changes for example the English developed the radar, there were also advancements in the world of electronics. The development of the atomic bomb not only did it transform the potential in future wars but also opened up the world of nuclear power industry.

The World War II also resulted in the use of women for comfort, especially in the Asian region. To reduce the stress and depression of the soldiers involved in the war, women as young as eleven years old were abducted and imprisoned where they were raped in the war camps. It is estimated that a single comfort lady could serve about 50 soldiers in a day.

Not only were these women harassed but they were also forced to procure abortions as they were not allowed to get pregnant. The small proportion that survived endured physical and emotional breakdowns through out their lives.

The disproportionate death of mostly young men who were involved in the World War II resulted in changes in sex ratios among the people left behind. This resulted in reduced number of marriages as well as low fertility rate with children born out of wedlock increasing.

With the war ending and human race threatening itself, the world swore never to fight against itself and in 1945, an international organization to oversee peace in the name of the league of nations was formed, which later transformed to the United Nations that had the full support of the world major powers. The World War II also led to the formation of the International Monetary Fund and also for the formation of international tariffs, which were to be regulated through the General Agreement on Trade and Tariffs (GATT).

Conclusion

The World War 2 had both its positive and negative repercussions. Though human losses cannot be equated with any economic or technological empowerment it is advisable to note that the world also got some benefits from the war. For example, the economies of countries such as the USA expanded and there was also technological advancements and exchange between countries.

Trade relations were also improved by the end of the war as there was formation of the body GATT to guide and ensure there was free trade, colonies gained independence due to the weakening of their colonial masters and there was also the emergence of United States of America and USSR as the world super powers and finally the increased investments in the field of nuclear energy not only for war but also for economy purposes.

One thing that should remain clear is that as the countries develop and compete with others never again should the world ever fight against itself? We should always find alternative ways of solving our problems other than fighting with fellow humans.

Works Cited

Bachrach Susan. “History Of The Holocaust: An Overview.” Ushmm, 1994. Web.

Linter Bertil. “How World War II Shaped Burma’s Future.” Asiapacificms, 2005. Web.

Recent decades saw the publishing of a number of historical books, the authors of which promote essentially a revisionist outlook on the history of WW2.

Omer Bartov’s Hitler’s army: Soldiers, Nazis, and war in the Third Reich represents a good example of such a literature, because in it, the author had made a point in trying to reveal the conceptual fallaciousness of an idea that, during the course of Germany’s campaign in Eastern front, Wehrmacht had fought in a gallant manner and that it is namely the Waffen SS, which should be solely blamed for the atrocities, committed against Soviet civilians through 1941-1944.

According to Bartov, throughout the course of hostilities, German soldiers were becoming increasingly committed to Nazi ideology, which in its turn, had naturally predisposed them towards conducting the ‘war of annihilation’: “Unable to rely on its hitherto highly successful Blitzkrieg tactics, the Wehrmacht accepted Hitler’s view that this was an all-or-nothing struggle for survival, a ‘war of ideologies’ which demanded total spiritual commitment” (p. 4).

Author strives to substantiate the soundness of this idea by pointing out to the fact that, throughout campaign’s initial stages, the representatives of ‘primary groups’ within German army (consisting of Prussian aristocratic officers) had been effectively eliminated due to a high atrocity rate.

Therefore, through years 1942-1943, Wehrmacht had ceased being the army of professionals, in traditional sense of this word.

Instead, it became the ‘army of civilians’, who compensated for their lack of military training with the sheer extent of their commitment to the Nazi cause: “Nazi propaganda did its utmost to convince the troops (Wehrmacht) that they were defending humanity against a demonic invasion” (p. 9).

Hence, Bartov’s thesis – Wehrmacht used to indulge in genocidal actions against civilians in Russia to the same extent as it used to be the case with Waffen SS. Apparently, author implies that the very fact that German soldiers considered Russians sub-humans, had motivated them to fight to the bitter end.

Nevertheless, even though Bartov’s book contains a number of legitimate suggestions, as to the manner in which German army had fought the Soviets, it appears that in many cases author deliberately tried to misrepresent these suggestions’ actual significance.

For example, unlike most contemporary historians, Bartov had proven himself being intellectually honest enough by dispelling the myth that in the summer of 1941 Wehrmacht enjoyed a complete technical and numerical superiority over the Red Army: “In June 1941 the Ostheer’s troops attacked with 3648 tanks. Facing it in Western Russia were… no less than 15,000 tanks out of a total armored force of 24,000 – more than all the tanks in the rest of the world put together” (p. 15).

Yet, author never bothered to come up with an explanation as to why, as of June 22, 1941, Soviets concentrated these tanks within 50-100 kilometers wide strip, along German border. The reason for this is simple – as it was being revealed by Suvorov (1990), Stalin himself was planning to invade Germany and consequentially the whole Europe as early as July 6, 1941.¹

Therefore, Germany’s attack on Soviet Union in the summer of 1941 was essentially preventive. Had Bartov mentioned the true reason for Hitler’s attack on USSR, his academic reputation would have been damaged – after all, as we are being well aware of, British most prominent historian David Irving had spent three years in Austrian jail due to being charged with ‘historical revisionism’.

In its turn, this explains why, despite Bartov’s intention to provide readers with rather unconventional insight onto the actual realities of Germany’s war against Soviet Union, his book’s discursive suggestions appear utterly conformist.

As we have mentioned earlier, Bartov claims that it was German soldiers’ ideologically inspired hate of Russian ‘sub-humans’ that motivated them to indulge in genocidal activities: “Because they were fighting against Untermenschen (sub-humans), the troops were allowed to treat them with great brutality” (p. 71).

Moreover, just as it has traditionally been the case with Communist historians, Bartov also refers to Germany’s war against USSR as the classical war of conquest, instigated by Hitler’s intention to expand his country’s ‘living space’: “The German invasion of Russia, intended to create a vast new Lebensraum for the Aryan race” (p. 73).

Apparently, while working on his book, author remained quite ignorant as to the fact that the term Untermenscben has never been applied to Russians en masse, but only to Communist officials, Commissars and to their puppets among locals.

Otherwise, there would not be more then million of former Soviet subjects fighting along the side with Germans in Russian Liberation Army and as volunteers in Waffen SS divisions.

Also, the expansion of Lebensraum (living space) has never been Hitler’s priority – had he been truly concerned with the expansion of Lebensraum, he would have proceeded with occupying Southern France, instead of embarking upon the conquest of Russia’s snowy plains.

The same can be said about Bartov’s treatment of the subject of ‘atrocities’. According to the author, it was due to German soldiers being ideologically brainwashed that they used to deal with Soviet partisans rather harshly.

Yet, the actual explanation to is more banal – according to the Geneva Convention of 1927, partisans were never considered a legitimate combatants, which is why, upon being caught shooting at Germans from behind without wearing the uniform of an opposing army, they used to be treated as spies.

After all, Americans, British and Soviets acted in essentially similar manner, while addressing the issue of armed resistance, on the part of German civilians in Germany’s occupied territories.

Thus, unlike what Bartov would like readers to believe, it was namely German soldiers’ rationale-driven considerations of protecting their homeland, which had motivated them to fight Soviets on Eastern front – not their ideological commitment to the Nazi cause.

After having captured the huge amounts of Soviet military equipment, located right along the border, and after having been exposed to the actual realities of how Soviet citizens lived in ‘workers’ paradise’, even those German soldiers with Communist past became instantly convinced that Germany’s cause in the war against USSR was absolutely just.

In his book, Bartov quotes from the letter of a German soldier Egon Freitag, dated August 28, 1941: “We were never mercenaries, but – to use the hackneyed phrase – defenders of the Fatherland” (p. 34). As author had rightly pointed out: “For him (Freitag)… Germany’s invasion of the Soviet Union was a defensive operation” (p. 34).

Therefore, the overall thesis of Bartov’s book as to the fact that Wehrmacht soldiers’ willingness to fight to the bitter end in Russia came as the result of these soldiers being continuously subjected to Nazi propaganda, does not stand much of a ground.

The actual explanation for is much simpler – German soldiers did not want Communist Commissars to be allowed to do in Germany what they had done in Russia – pure and simple. Nazi propaganda had very little to do with it.

References

Bartov, O. (1992). Hitler’s army: Soldiers, Nazis, and war in the Third Reich. Oxford, Oxford University Press.

Suvorov, V. (1990). Icebreaker: Who started the Second World War? London, Hamish Hamilton.

Footnotes

¹ Suvorov, V. (1990). Icebreaker: Who started the Second World War? London, Hamish Hamilton. 82 p.

Nowadays, it became a commonplace assumption that the defeat of Nazi Germany in 1945 represented one the 20th century’s greatest accomplishments. Therefore, it does make a perfectly good sense for those countries that actively participated in WW2 on the side of the Allies, to take a great pride in having contributed towards the victory.

What is utterly peculiar, in this respect, is that the strong anti-Nazi sentiment is now also being shared by the countries, which during the course of WW2 (or for the most part of it) remained neutral, such as Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, Spain, Portugal, Ireland and Argentina. After all, this particular stance, on the part of the mentioned countries, appears rather illogical. The reason for this is quite apparent.

Despite the formally neutral status of these countries, they nevertheless used to contribute rather substantially to the Germany’s war-effort – especially through the war’s initial phases.

In this paper, I will explore the validity of the above-stated at length, while promoting the idea that there is indeed a good reason to think that in WW2, the mentioned countries acted as nothing short of culprits, which should be held partially responsible for the affiliated atrocities.

When it comes to discussing the subject matter in question, it is important to understand that, contrary to what it is being commonly assumed, the neutral position of a number of countries in WW2, had very little to do with these countries’ intention to remain de facto neutral.

Rather, it came because of their realization that it is namely by maintaining neutrality in the war, that they will be able to take practical advantage of the concerned hostilities. In other words, the declaration of neutrality, on the part of these countries, was driven by essentially utilitarian considerations.

After all, as history indicates, this has always been the case, during the course of just about any war in the 20^th century, that the antagonized parties used to experience a need in having a ‘neutral ground’, for ensuring the possibility of diplomatic transactions with the enemy, in case the circumstances call for it.

This also explains why, as it was mentioned earlier, the majority of neutral countries (through the initial phase of WW2) used to act in the manner clearly supportive of the Germany’s cause – at that time, Germany’s eventual victory appeared to be only the matter of time. The validity of this suggestion can be illustrated, in regards to what historians know about the influences of the mentioned countries on WW2:

Sweden – Up until the year 1944, Sweden used to be in the state of a close economic cooperation with Nazi Germany. For example, it being estimated that by the year 1943, the volume of Swedish iron-ore, exported to Germany, has reached 60%. It is needless to mention, of course, that this came as a great asset, within the context of how Germany was trying to sustain its war-effort.

The same can be said about the significance of the Swedish exports of wheel-bearings to Germany – during the war, 60% of Swedish-made wheel-bearings (produced by the SKF corporation) used to be shipped directly to Germany.¹

The representatives of this corporation in the U.S. are now known to have indulged in the industrial espionage against America, on behalf of Germany. Thus, there is indeed a certain rationale in believing that, despite the Sweden’s formally neutral status in WW2, it acted as if being nothing short of a Germany’s ally.

Switzerland – Throughout the entirety of WW2, this particular country played the role of the Germany’s ‘vault’ – it is estimated that the amount of gold that the Nazis ended up storing in Swiss banks, was no less than $40 billion (in today’s equivalent).²

Even though that at the war’s beginning, Switzerland was selling arms to both: the Nazis and Allies, by the year 1941 this country’s military industry became solely focused on producing weapons for Germany. Swiss firms also used to represent the interests of German corporations around the world – even in those countries that were in the formal state of war with Germany.

We can also mention the fact that, as it has been revealed, some of the Swiss insurance-companies used to pass sensitive information about the American convoys with weapons (insured in Switzerland) to Germans – hence, contributing to the early successes of the German naval warfare.

Turkey – Throughout the course of WW2, this country tried to remain thoroughly observant of its obligations, as a neutral state. The validity of this suggestion can be shown, in regards to the fact that, until the war’s very end, Turkey resisted both: The Nazi and Allied pressure to join either of the causes at clash.

Nevertheless, as it was the case with Sweden and Switzerland, Turkey’s sympathies laid with Germany. In its turn, this can be explained by the Turkey’s century-long fear of Russia.³

For example, until the year of 1944, Turkey remained the Germany’s largest supplier of chrome. Nowadays, we can be quite sure, as to the fact that, had Hitler succeeded in ceasing the city of Stalingrad in 1942, Turkey would have declared war on the USSR, as well.

Spain – in WW2, despite being formally neutral, this country nevertheless never ceased providing Hitler with much-need diplomatic and even military support. For example, the Spanish government allowed the formation of the so-called ‘Blue Division (consisting of volunteers), which fought on the side of the Germans in the East.⁴

Because of the Spain’s ‘neutrality’, the Nazis were able to buy oil from the U.S. until quite late in the war – American tankers (belonging to the Standard Oil corporation) used to deliver oil to the Canary islands, in order for it to be reloaded into German tankers and transported to Hamburg. Spanish seaports also played an important role, within the context of Germany’s economy being continually supplied with such strategically valuable materials as cooper and natural rubber.

Portugal – the most peculiar aspect about the neutrality of this country in WW2 is that, due to having refrained from siding with either the Nazis or Allies, Portugal was able to benefit rather immensely, in the monetary sense of this word. For example, through the years 1939-1946, the country’s reserves of gold have increased from $43 million to $648 million.⁵

In its turn, this can be explained by the fact that, due to its strategically important geographical location, in WW2 Portugal was acting as a ‘trade mediator’ between the Nazis and Allies – much like it used to be the case with Spain.

Portugal was interested in having the WW2 sustained for as long, as possible, because it was allowing this country (which happened to possess the Europe’s largest deposit of tungsten/wolfram), to keep on charging the Nazis and Allies ever-higher prices for this natural resource (used by the manufacturers of weapons).

Ireland – in WW2, this country strived to live up to its self-assumed obligations of neutrality, while resisting the attempts of Germany and Britain to change the status quo, in this respect. For example, in full accordance with these obligations, Ireland made a deliberate point in interning German and British pilots, which had made a forced landing in Ireland, during the Battle of Britain.

Nevertheless, it will not be much of an exaggeration to suggest that, during the course of this war, Ireland remained rather sympathetic to the specifically Nazi cause, which can be well explained by the legacy of British colonialism in this country.⁶

The latter also explains why a good half of the Nazi spies, who operated in the UK, were of Irish descent. In this respect, we can also mention the fact that, in the April of 1945, the President of the Executive Council of Ireland Eamon de Valera offered the German ambassador in Ireland official condolences over the death of Adolf Hitler.

Argentina – despite the fact that on March 25, 1945, this country did declare the state of hostilities with Germany, it nevertheless remained neutral, throughout most of the war. Nevertheless, while maintaining the position of neutrality, Argentina tried to provide a diplomatic assistance to Germany – especially early in the war.

One of the reasons for this is that, prior to the outbreak of WW2, the community of German immigrants in Argentina used to exercise a strong socio-political influence, which continued to be the case well after the war’s end.⁷ Partially, this explains why, during the course of WW2, Buenos-Aires was considered the center of German espionage in Latin America.

As it was mentioned in the Introduction, there is a certain logic in considering many of the world’s countries, which during WW2 remain neutral, as such that contributed towards the war’s elongation.

After all, the earlier provided accounts of the mentioned countries’ positioning in the war expose the de facto erroneousness of the very concept of neutrality, in the classical sense of this word. The reason for this is that these accounts point out to the following:

1. In WW2, the neutral stance of the mentioned countries was essentially formal, as they did take advantage of a number of commercial opportunities, which came about due to the war’s outbreak.
2. It is namely the utilitarian considerations, on the part of the countries in question, which were the main motivational factors behind the phenomenon of many world-nations having decided to refrain from becoming involved in the war – not these nations’ strong adherence to the very principle of ‘neutrality’.
3. Despite the formally neutral status of the discussed countries, they nevertheless used to act in the manner clearly sympathetic to the Germany’s cause. This raises certain questions about whether some of these countries (especially Switzerland) should be required to pay a contribution to the war’s actual winners (Russia, Britain and the U.S.), on the account of having indirectly helped Hitler.

I believe that the conducted study indeed represents a certain value, as a research-piece that implies that the assumption that WW2 was concerned with the struggle between the Nazis (evil), the West (good) and the USSR (lesser evil), does not make much of a sense.

After all, in light of what has been said earlier, (within the exception of the U.S. and Britain/its colonies), the rest of the Western ‘neutral’ countries appear to have been unofficially allied with the Nazis, throughout most of the war. The same can be said about the formally occupied (by Germany) countries, such as the Vichy’s France and Czechoslovakia, which continued to collaborate with the Nazis until the end of the war.

What is also valuable about the conducted study, is that shows that it is specifically the paradigm of Political Realism, which defines the dynamics in the arena of international politics.

In other words – regardless of what happened to be a particular country’s status, during the time of war, the continuous existence of this country never ceases being solely concerned with: a) political/economic expansion, b) maintenance of a political stability within, c) destabilization of competing states. Therefore, there can be no factually ‘neutral’ countries, by definition.

I believe that the validity of this suggestion can be further illustrated, in regards to what account for the most unknown aspects of WW2, upon which the historical inquiries (concerned with WW2) should focus in the future.

This allows us to formulate suggestions for the further study’s possible topics: a) What was the significance of Rudolf Hess’s flight to Britain in May of 1941? b) What was the role of Swiss banks in helping the Nazis with the extermination of the Jews? c) What was the role of the Vatican and Sweden, within the context of how the Nazi criminals used to be provided with the Red Cross passports and shipped to Argentina?

Bibliography

Alvaredo, Facundo. “Top Incomes and Earnings in Portugal 1936–2005,” Explorations in Economic History 46, no. 4 (October 2009): 404-417.

Atkins, George and Larry Thompson. “German Military Influence in Argentina, 1921-1940,” Journal of Latin American Studies 4, no. 2 (November 1972): 257-274.

Bowen, Wayne. “The Ghost Battalion: Spaniards in the Waffen-SS, 1944-1945,” Historian 63, no. 2 (Winter 2001): 373-385.

Cakmak, Cenap. “Turkey in the Second World War: ‘Evasive’ or ‘Active’ Neutral?” Journal of Academic Studies 7, no. 26 (August-October 2005): 61-78.

Cowell, Alan. “Switzerland’s Wartime Blood Money,” Foreign Policy 107 (Summer 1997): 132-144.

Douglas, R. M. “The Pro-Axis Underground in Ireland, 1939-1942,”The Historical Journal 49, no. 4 (December 2006): 1155-1183.

Lidgley, Harry. “How Damaging to the Nazis was the Shetland Bus Between 1940 and 1944?” Historian 116, no. 1 (Winter 2012/2013): 28-30.

Footnotes

¹ Harry Lidgley, “How Damaging to the Nazis was the Shetland Bus Between 1940 and 1944?” Historian 116, no. 1 (Winter 2012/2013): 29.

² Alan Cowell, “Switzerland’s Wartime Blood Money,” Foreign Policy 107 (Summer 1997): 135.

³ Cenap Cakmak,“Turkey in The Second World War: ‘Evasive’ or ‘Active’ Neutral?” Journal of Academic Studies 7, no. 26 (August-October 2005): 71.

⁴ Wayne Bowen,“The Ghost Battalion: Spaniards in the Waffen-SS, 1944-1945,” Historian 63, no. 2 (Winter 2001): 376.

⁵ Facundo Alvaredo, “Top Incomes and Earnings in Portugal 1936–2005.” Explorations in Economic History 46, no. 4 (October 2009): 409.

⁶ R. M. Douglas, “The Pro-Axis Underground in Ireland, 1939-1942,” The Historical Journal 49, no. 4 (December 2006): 1162.

⁷ George Atkins and Larry Thompson, “German Military Influence in Argentina, 1921-1940,” Journal of Latin American Studies 4, no. 2 (November 1972): 261.

Summary of the articles

Article 1: Heinrich Himmler Speech to the SS

This article is a speech presentation by Heinrich Himmler, an army leader and a commander of the Schetzstaffel also known as the “SS” group of Nazi Germany. This particular speech was a motivational talk made to the members of the group to empower them for future preparations concerning their activities towards the implementation of what they called the “final solution of the Jewish question” (Reilly 943).

The main theme of the entire speech made by SS in which we shall be analyzing in this section of the paper is about this group’s mission and strategies towards the implementation of orders handed to them by their chief commander, Hitler which expressly required the total destruction of the Jewish community living in the country.

According to this speech it is clear that the SS unit were unanimous in their agreement of killing all Jewish as it states that “the Jewish people are going to be annihilated” (Reilly 944).

In a nutshell the main idea that this speech intended to communicate is that extermination of the entire Jewish people should be hastily undertaken and concluded through means which the speech details and describes as historical and necessary if the SS group is to achieve its mark of “integrity” and bring grandeur to them (Reilly 945).

In order to maintain their integrity, the SS group demands that orders must be strictly followed after they have been approved by the commander and in particular addresses the issue of Jewish wealth that they intend to confiscate and acquire in the process of persecuting the Jews.

In this speech the SS commander categorically warns of the consequences of soldiers hoarding wealth confiscated from the Jew by stating the punishment that will be meted out in what would appear to be orders the orders given by Hitler. As a matter of fact, the commander is very specific on this issue as he states in the speech “whoever takes so much as a mark of it for himself is a dead man” (Reilly 945).

In the same speech the commander finishes by justifying the reasons of wanting to have all the Jews annihilated by stating that it is not so much for their wealth but for the fact that the Jews at one time also wanted to have them exterminated.

It is in this regard that we encounter one of the major classic propaganda that Hitler had architecture during this period in order to whip Germans towards hating Jews and therefore supporting his devilish campaign.

In fact during this speech the commander states that accomplishment of this task is a mark of love “towards our people” which is one of the principal duties and responsibilities they can ever achieve and a present to themselves, their relatives, and to their country (Reilly 946).

This is not only propaganda but a clear indication of strategies used by Hitler to brainwash the masses as well by thinking that extermination of Jews is their patriotic duty that will enrich them.

Article 2: Steiner, François Jean. Treblinka

This article describes in detail and depicts the process that was put in place by Hitler implemented by the SS group in the extermination of the Jews, Romans and prisoners. The author describes a series of events which are followed during the killing process in a camp known as Treblinka in Poland; the activities of this particular camp are under the supervision of the commandant Kurt Franz who has been nick-named Lalka (Reilly 956).

First the process starts with people being deported from different places and ferried by trains to this camp of death which Lalka himself has cleverly designed in order to dupe those arriving into thinking that it was an ordinary train station instead of what you will call a human slaughter house and thereby achieve what he describes as “restore a minimum hope” (Reilly 956).

This article gives a detailed account of the actual process that was used in this camp when exterminating people; first, men and women are instructed to enter what was described in the camp as the “production line” (Reilly 957).

The men and women are then separated and they go through each stage one at a time while they get offloaded of their personal belongings and even their clothes. In the fourth and fifth stage for instance there is a sign that requires the people to leave their “trousers and in the fifth his shirt and underwear” (Reilly 957).

All the processes are meant to reduce the burden of the personal belongings before they can be brutally murdered in cold blood.

The process leading to death as described appears to have been planned in detail with utilization of great “innovations” by commander Lalka, where they are literally hacked off just before they become aware that they are about to die (Reilly 957). After they die they are disposed in another place where the oncoming people would not be able to see them before they too get to face the same fate.

Reading this article I felt a surge of emotions, rage, sadness, pity, fear and disbelief all at once since this article gives a depiction of the actual events that took place during that time.

This was cold blood murder with so much inhumanity even worse than how animals are killed in a slaughter; in fact at some point the victims appears to have already known that death was imminent as captured in this statement by one of the women just before she was killed “a young lady admitted in small brave voice that she was little afraid and wished it were all over” (Reilly, 957).

Comparison of the two documents

It is clear that both articles have a common theme of extermination of the Jews; the first article details the background events orchestrated by Hitler to jumpstart this process while the second article describes the actual events of the holocaust itself. In both articles also, we see how propaganda is used for the purpose of killing the Jews since in both cases lies are used to achieve the intended goals.

The articles are also similar in that they describe a common event of destruction of the Jewish community by the Nazi that was taking place in Germany. Finally, in both articles we can also see that the two commanders Heinrich Himmler and Kurt Franz diligently discharge their responsibilities as instructed by Hitler. Thus, they are acting as representatives of the Hitler administration with a single mandate to destroy the Jewish race.

Contrast between the documents

There is a difference between the two articles in the way they focus on the events that took place in Germany at the time. In the first article, “speech to SS” the focus is on brainwashing the soldiers and advancing Hitler’s propaganda of hate against the Jews while the second article focus is on the actual events of the holocaust that took place.

As such the second article describes the killing process of the victims, how they are deported and actually killed. Another difference is that the first article is entirely focused on Jews alone while the second one describes a range of other communities that were being targeted by Hitler during this time for annihilation such as Romans and prisoners in addition to Jews.

Finally, the first article is a speech directed towards the SS soldiers meant to motivate them and brainwash them while the second article is a general discussion of the annihilation events that were taking place at the time. Conclusion

The two documents describe a common event of persecuting Jews in Germany during the reign of Hitler. Based on the historical accounts of these two articles one is able to gain a better insight into the activities that were taking place in Germany, the central players in those activities and the real planners behind such actions who are Hitler and his commanders.

It is evidently clear that human rights abuses and great loss of life took place and this is certainly the only recorded holocaust that has ever taken place in the world history where it is estimated 6 million Jews perished.

Works Cited

Reilly, Kevin. “Worlds of History, Volume Two: Since 1400: A Comparative Reader.” New York. Bedford/St. Martin’s. 2010. Print.