Pearl Harbor the Sacrificial Lamb for the Good of the Many

Pearl Harbor the Sacrificial Lamb for the Good of the Many

            The controversy over whether FDR was aware of the Japanese attack on December 7, 1941 on Pearl Harbor has existed since the attack culminating to the Pearl Harbor advance-knowledge debate. The controversy relies on the unpreparedness of the US navy during the attack. Many scholars argue that a few high-ranking officials of the British and American government possessed prior knowledge of the attack and might have even encouraged it to push America into war with Germany through the back door[1]. A lot of evidence about the controversy has been unearthed and is still being collected up to date. Before the attack, many believed that an attack on Pearl Harbor could not be successful due to its depth, a theory that was negated by Navy Secretary Knox who believed that it could be attacked after they had conducted successful mock attacks on the harbor.

President Roosevelt had fired Admiral James O. Richardson before the attack because of his refusal to situate the Pacific Fleet on the harbor because he felt that there the fleet would not be safe from attacks[2]. The Admiral felt that the reasons for his dismissal were more personal than official. In the attack, the Japanese only commissioned two attacks, which was unusual because if they had commissioned the third strike, then the harbor would have been destroyed. Scholars depicted that at that time, FDR was ready to steer America into the First World War but he knew that his objectives would not be realized because of the opposition from both the Americans and the congress. He tried all the legitimate ways he could to build Americans sentiment towards the war but after their failure, he decided to use the back door method. He reasoned that due to the alliance of Germany, Japan and Italy if US waged war with the Japanese definitely Germany will be involved thus achieving his objective.

After the attack, he received overwhelming support from the people as well as the congress on his war declaration against Japan. After waging war against Japan, Germany and Italy in turn waged war against US giving him more reason to involve US in the war[3]. Though many people pledged their support many questions were asked based on if the disaster could have been avoided, the accountable people of the disaster, the reasons for the attack, whether the US had provoked the attack, the reasons why the army and navy commanders were caught off-guard and the reasons for their unusual retirement. To remove doubts in the minds of the people FDR commissioned ten inquiries on the matter leading to many inconsistencies, due to the secretiveness of most witnesses the president in this case was happy because he knew that the inquiries would not interfere with the people’s unity towards the waging of the war.

Many scholars were not satisfied with the evidence propounded thus they decided to carry out their own research on the matter and came up with incriminating evidence, which could not be disputed though some other people affiliated to the president came up with evidence to counter the evidence collected. Most of the inconsistencies experienced during the inquiries were based on the cryptography. Henry Stimson who was the secretary of state at that time had ordered the shutting down of the MI-8 cryptographic operation thus disabling Americas ability for breaking the crypto traffic of other nations including the Japan one. This was unusual because no other reasons except ethical reasons were given for the action[4]. However, the navy and the army cryptanalytic work moved on until some of the Japanese codes were cracked though the operation was highly secretive. The first code to be cracked was PURPLE but other codes could not be cracked due to the over working of the cryptanalysts as they were few in numbers.

The analysts involved in the work however mostly relied on summaries rather than the real messages cracked leading to inconsistencies. These messages were not even shared between the army and the navy and even after receiving some Dutch decrypted messages; the US could not share theirs with them though they were allies. PURPLE was Japanese Foreign Office highest security system. Its cracking was a triumph but did not provide any information about the military’s plans this was because the military did not trust the office thus gave them no information. The information received in this case was not well analyzed due to the competition between the crypting groups. The obsession with security necessitated the destroying of the messages thus no one could retain them showing that not all PURPLE messages were provided as evidence.

Evidence is provided that some radio signals about the Japanese striking force before the attack were detected as it advanced towards the harbor. Nevertheless, this was negated by the surviving Japanese soldiers because they said that the radio signals from thief force were protected by a silencing machine, which would make it impossible for others to detect the transmissions[5]. Witnesses close to FDR provided information that the president knew about the attack because the efforts that had been made before to wage war against Germany had failed and at the same time, they asserted that the magnitude of the attack was higher than anticipated but it served it purpose of gaining consent for war. McCollum memo was another form of evidence used to show that there was knowledge of the war. It contained eight ways in which Japan could be provoked into war as asserted by the president of that time.

A good source of the prevailing debate was the fact that some documents on the harbor were never released to the public thus raising suspicions among the people. Another reason why most people believe that the president had prior knowledge is because of the speech that he made immediately after the day of the attack. It was a speech to force the people to feel that they had been wronged and the best way they could pay back was by wagging war against Japan. In real sense, he knew that if America waged war against Japan, then Germany would be interested with saving them as they did to Italy during their war with Libya[6]. The debate also came from the fact that some of the evidence provided by the people was inconsistent though it supported the fact that the president knew about the attack. The quote used by many people to show that the British had information about the attack was not authentic because most of the analysts felt that the quote was banking more on the British involvement with their allies not with the fact that they knew about the war.

Many scholars on the other hand were interested with knowing why the British Minister of War Production said that the Japanese were provoked into attacking the harbor showing that there were sinister reasons behind the provoking of the Japanese into war at that time. This debate was significant at this time because many theories had come to show that there were underlying factors behind the attack, as many people could not believe why the Japanese would try to attack the US, yet they did not possess the amount of power that the US had at that time. During that period it was common knowledge that though the US was neutral during the war, the president was really interested with breaking the power of the Germans by defeating them thus he was willing to find any means that would ensure the peoples’ and congress support to his waging the war against the Germans[7]. Though the attack was perpetrated by the Japanese, there was some evidence, which pointed to the US provocation of the Japanese such that they were enticed to attack the harbor as a mode of revenge.

The debate was specifically a way of assuring the people on what really happened on that fateful day. This is because there were so many theories based on that topic though there was no conclusive evidence provided to explain what really happened[8]. The debate has helped many people to come to terms with the fact that this attack was used as a way of attaining consent from the people for America to wage war against the Germans through using Japan as the bait. A lot of evidence about the controversy has been unearthed and is still being collected up to date.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Bibliography

Institute for Historical Review. The Journal of Historical Review, Volume 20. Raleigh, NC: Institute for Historical Review, 2001.

Kimball, Warren. The Juggler: Franklin Roosevelt as Wartime Statesman. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1994.

Rosenberg, Emily. A Date, which will Live: Pearl Harbor in American Memory. Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2003.

Stinnett, Robert. Day of Deceit: The Truth about FDR and Pearl Harbor. Delran, NJ: Simon & Schuster, 2001.