Defense chief quits in Japan
By Norimitsu Onishi
Published: July 3, 2007

TOKYO: Four weeks before a crucial parliamentary election that could decide Prime Minister Shinzo Abe's political fate, his gaffe-prone defense minister was forced to resign on Tuesday after making comments apparently justifying the United States' use of atomic bombs against Japan during World War II.

Abe, who a day earlier had said that he would retain his minister, Fumio Kyuma, immediately accepted his resignation, in a clear attempt to quell the uproar before the July 29 election.

The latest trouble came at the worst possible moment for Abe, who had extended the parliamentary session in a bid to dampen public anger over previous scandals and who over the weekend recorded his lowest approval ratings since becoming prime minister last September.

Abe said he was responsible for Kyuma's appointment and added, "It's regrettable it had this result."

Kyuma, 66, whose job had seemed secure as late as Tuesday morning, resigned in the afternoon, saying he did not want to be a burden to his party in the election and acknowledging that he may have "already had a negative effect."

Hours after Kyuma's resignation, Yuriko Koike, 54, the prime minister's national security adviser and a former minister of the environment, was appointed as the new defense minister.

In a public appearance on Saturday - the unofficial start of the campaign for the upcoming election - Kyuma said that dropping the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945 "ended the war," adding, "I think that it couldn't be helped."

Otherwise, Kyuma said, the war would have dragged on and the Soviet Union would have ended up occupying northern Japan.

The attack on Hiroshima on Aug. 6, 1945, killed at least 140,000 people. The second atomic bomb, three days later in Nagasaki, killed about 74,000. Japan surrendered on Aug. 15.

The comments by Kyuma, who represents Nagasaki in the lower house, caused widespread anger by apparently treating lightly Japan's status as the only country ever targeted by nuclear weapons. Although the debate over the use of nuclear arms is not the taboo it once was, Japan's self-image as a special victim of World War II remains deeply rooted, even as revisionist politicians like Abe have tried to minimize Japan's militarist past.

On Sunday, Kyuma defended his remarks and received Abe's backing. On Monday, Kyuma apologized and was warned by Abe to be more careful with his statements.

But the furor did not die down Tuesday as calls for his resignation came not only from the opposition, but also from the governing Liberal Democratic Party's coalition partner, the New Komeito Party. Meanwhile, Liberal Democrats expressed anger that the comment would hurt them on the campaign trail.

"From the point of view of someone fighting an election, it's like being shot in the back," Yoichi Masuzoe, a Liberal Democrat leader in the upper house of Parliament, said publicly. "I am not ordering him to resign, but he should take proper responsibility."

After a strong start, Abe has declined steadily in popularity because of a series of scandals and perceived poor leadership, registering around 30 percent in recent polls - a figure not seen since the unpopular Yoshiro Mori was prime minister early this decade.

A loss by Abe's Liberal Democrats later this month in the upper house of Parliament would not directly mean that Abe would have to step down, since the Liberal Democrat-controlled lower house chooses the prime minister. But a big loss would put pressure on Abe to step aside for a more popular party leader, who would then automatically become the next prime minister.

In contrast to his popular predecessor, Junichiro Koizumi, Abe has often seemed incapable of exercising leadership over his own cabinet and party. He appeared politically tone-deaf in sticking by unpopular ministers, including a health minister who called women "baby-making machines" and a scandal-ridden agricultural minister who ended up committing suicide.

In January, Kyuma himself called the United States' war in Iraq a mistake, angering Vice President Dick Cheney, who pointedly refused to meet him during a visit to Japan in February.

http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/07/03/news/japan.php

I guess that's the Japanese equivalent of saying the U.S. was asking for 9/11.

Haha this increased my national self-identity lol.. Maybe US should drop atomic bombs on Georgia, Estonia, Poland and other countries who are waiting for russian invasion..? :)

Here is a simulated video of the day Nagasaki got bombed. Take a look at THIS (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x9lwvImJqT0&mode=related&search=) and tell us what you think. :(

Haha this increased my national self-identity lol.. Maybe US should drop atomic bombs on Georgia, Estonia, Poland and other countries who are waiting for russian invasion..? :)Most Americans believe the Japanese surrendered because of the atomic weapons dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. I am not altogether sure that's the case. Other cities, most notably Tokyo, had been firebombed by conventional means and these attacks did not compel surrender. Nor were the effects of radiation understood by the Japanese (or by us, for that matter) at the time so that wasn't a factor either. What I think tipped the scales was the Soviet Union's entry into the Pacific war. There was legitimate concern amongst the military and political leadership of Japan that a communist revolution might ensue if the war continued. Such an event would spell the end of the Imperial House -- and that was a consequence even worse than defeat. It was preferable, once the inevitability of defeat was realized, to surrender to the United States than it was to endure a revolution or a Soviet occupation.

Yuriko Koike, who is new Defense Minister, is beautiful.:)
She is logical, but having a characteristic of that can't see the forest for the tree a little.

About atomic bomb?
I think Japan had to surrender before Atomic bomb(or before battle of Okinawa.)

Most Americans believe the Japanese surrendered because of the atomic weapons dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. I am not altogether sure that's the case. Other cities, most notably Tokyo, had been firebombed by conventional means and these attacks did not compel surrender. Nor were the effects of radiation understood by the Japanese (or by us, for that matter) at the time so that wasn't a factor either. What I think tipped the scales was the Soviet Union's entry into the Pacific war. There was legitimate concern amongst the military and political leadership of Japan that a communist revolution might ensue if the war continued. Such an event would spell the end of the Imperial House -- and that was a consequence even worse than defeat. It was preferable, once the inevitability of defeat was realized, to surrender to the United States than it was to endure a revolution or a Soviet occupation.
I agree, but that man said it like "Thank you for the victim that United States made for Japan, setting it free of communist danger and 200 thousand innocent people". To me it seemed like some kind of fanatism: better nuclear war, but never soviet power..

I don't think the dropping of the Atom bombs on Japan had anything to do with ending the war. At the time the bombs were dropped Japan was already exploring ways to surrender with honor and dignity.

The bombs were dropped as a message to the Soviet Union. Truman was showing the Soviets what we could do to their cities if they ever got too far out of hand.