US role in nuclear bombings omitted at commemoration events
Speeches by Japanese and international officials focused on the destruction caused by the bomb and calls for nuclear disarmament, but avoided naming the US as the country that carried out the attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in the final stage of World War Two.
'We must pass down as memories what unfolded here in Japan 80 years ago — the reality and the tragedy of war, and the brutal impact of the harm wrought by the atomic bombings,' Japanese Prime Minister Ishiba Shigeru said.
UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, in remarks delivered by his disarmament chief Izumi Nakamitsu, urged nations to 'move from words to action by strengthening the global disarmament regime,' with the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) at its core.
Nagasaki Mayor Shiro Suzuki called on world leaders to present a 'specific course of action for achieving the abolition of nuclear weapons.'
The US remains the only nation to have used nuclear weapons in warfare – a fact that was also left unacknowledged during Wednesday's commemoration of the Hiroshima bombing.
The attacks killed an estimated 200,000 civilians and have been defended by US officials as necessary to avoid a costly invasion of Japan. However, a 1946 US Strategic Bombing Survey concluded that 'Japan would have surrendered even if the atomic bombs had not been dropped.'
Last month, the US carried out airstrikes on three Iranian sites tied to Tehran's nuclear program. Washington said the attacks were aimed at preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons, a goal Tehran denies pursuing.
Under the NPT, signatories, including the Islamic Republic, are entitled to use nuclear technology for peaceful purposes. Several nations, including Russia and China, have accused the US of seriously undermining global non-proliferation efforts with its strikes on the Iranian facilities.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Russia Today
2 days ago
- Russia Today
North Korea dismantling loudspeakers at border — Seoul
North Korea has begun dismantling some of its border loudspeakers, according to South Korea's Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS). It appears to be a reciprocal step after Seoul removed around 20 of its own devices earlier this week. Pyongyang had installed roughly 40 loudspeakers to transmit a mix of unsettling noises, from metallic scraping to eerie, ghost-like sounds, toward the South. These broadcasts had been a persistent irritant for residents in border areas such as Paju, Gimpo, and Yeoncheon for nearly a year. North Korea halted the noise campaign at midnight on June 12, hours after South Korea stopped its own loudspeaker broadcasts following an order from newly elected President Lee Jae-myung. Lee, who took office in June after a snap election, has sought to reverse years of escalating tension under his predecessor, Yoon Suk Yeol. Shortly after his inauguration, Lee suspended the South's cross-border propaganda campaign, which had featured K-pop, news, and political messages. He also urged civic groups to stop sending anti-North propaganda leaflets and signaled an openness to talks without preconditions. In 2018, the two Koreas dismantled all loudspeakers under the Panmunjom Declaration, but the agreement unraveled. The South had resumed loudspeaker operations in mid-2024 in response to Pyongyang sending thousands of trash-filled balloons across the border in retaliation for South Korean activists launching leaflets into the North. The broadcasts, capable of traveling more than 20 kilometers, were framed by Seoul as a way to deliver 'messages of light and hope' to the North's people and military. The new South Korean president has promised to end both the propaganda broadcasts and the leaflet campaigns. His predecessor, Yoon, was impeached in December and indicted on insurrection charges after briefly imposing martial law, citing a looming 'rebellion' by pro-Pyongyang forces in the opposition. Seoul and its key ally, Washington, have technically remained at war with Pyongyang since 1953. North Korea has repeatedly denounced joint military drills between South Korea and the United States over the past years, calling them rehearsals for an attack.
Russia Today
2 days ago
- Russia Today
US role in nuclear bombings omitted at commemoration events
The United States' role in the atomic bombing of Nagasaki 80 years ago went unmentioned during the city's commemoration events on Friday, continuing a long-standing practice at such memorials. Speeches by Japanese and international officials focused on the destruction caused by the bomb and calls for nuclear disarmament, but avoided naming the US as the country that carried out the attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in the final stage of World War Two. 'We must pass down as memories what unfolded here in Japan 80 years ago — the reality and the tragedy of war, and the brutal impact of the harm wrought by the atomic bombings,' Japanese Prime Minister Ishiba Shigeru said. UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, in remarks delivered by his disarmament chief Izumi Nakamitsu, urged nations to 'move from words to action by strengthening the global disarmament regime,' with the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) at its core. Nagasaki Mayor Shiro Suzuki called on world leaders to present a 'specific course of action for achieving the abolition of nuclear weapons.' The US remains the only nation to have used nuclear weapons in warfare – a fact that was also left unacknowledged during Wednesday's commemoration of the Hiroshima bombing. The attacks killed an estimated 200,000 civilians and have been defended by US officials as necessary to avoid a costly invasion of Japan. However, a 1946 US Strategic Bombing Survey concluded that 'Japan would have surrendered even if the atomic bombs had not been dropped.' Last month, the US carried out airstrikes on three Iranian sites tied to Tehran's nuclear program. Washington said the attacks were aimed at preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons, a goal Tehran denies pursuing. Under the NPT, signatories, including the Islamic Republic, are entitled to use nuclear technology for peaceful purposes. Several nations, including Russia and China, have accused the US of seriously undermining global non-proliferation efforts with its strikes on the Iranian facilities.
Russia Today
3 days ago
- Russia Today
No more crutches: Russia's neighbors must now stand on their own
As global instability deepens, Russia's role in Eurasia – and the nature of its ties with neighboring states – is once again in sharp focus. Moscow is not driven by a mission to dominate its neighbors or enforce a privileged position over them. But it must ensure that future dependencies – economic, political, or security-related – do not come at the expense of its own national interests. This delicate balance is now being tested. The summer of 2025 has brought fresh tension to Eurasia. The worsening crisis surrounding Iran could easily spill over, affecting international cooperation and security throughout the region. Meanwhile, relations between Russia and long-standing partners such as Armenia – both a formal military and economic ally – are showing visible strain. Even frictions with Azerbaijan, though less dramatic, signal that the geopolitical fabric of southern Eurasia is shifting. Amid this turbulence, Russia's neighbors face a new set of choices. The ongoing standoff between Russia and the West, combined with uncertainty in the global economy, presents both risks and openings. These smaller states now must navigate a rapidly changing landscape – one where traditional alliances feel less reliable and new poles of influence emerge. Despite these pressures, Russia's influence remains evident. In July, Moscow formally recognized the Taliban government in Afghanistan, a move reflecting both realism and strategic calculation. While the United States still holds significant global clout, particularly through its Western military alliances and presence in the Middle East, Russia, China, and India continue to shape the regional dynamics of Eurasia. This is especially clear in the South Caucasus and Central Asia. These nations, already established as independent and sovereign players, are adapting to new realities – economic integration, demographic change, and environmental pressure. A notable example is the growing cohesion among Central Asia's five republics. Their cooperation may well enhance their regional agency in the years to come. Russia views this development positively. A more resilient Central Asia – capable of solving its own challenges – contributes to overall regional stability and makes cooperation more effective. Nonetheless, new challenges are on the horizon. First, the Middle East will remain volatile. The outcome of the Israel-Iran confrontation remains uncertain, but its destabilizing effects are already rippling outward. Türkiye's foreign policy, often unpredictable, adds further complexity. For countries like Armenia and Azerbaijan, these dynamics will pose a constant strategic test. Second, the energy economies of Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan remain vulnerable to global market shocks. A sustained drop in oil and gas prices – or the depletion of reserves – could threaten both countries with domestic turmoil. Managing this risk will demand careful economic planning and diversification. Third, climate change is poised to hit Central Asia hard. Rising temperatures and water shortages, paired with demographic pressures, may evolve into a genuine crisis within the next decade. Fourth, and perhaps most profoundly, Russia's neighbors are not insulated from the deepening instability of global politics and economics. Larger powers may weather volatility thanks to reserves and institutional strength. Smaller states may not be so lucky. They are aware of these vulnerabilities – and they are preparing for them. This, in turn, raises the question: what kind of relationship should these countries build with Russia? Geography, history, and shared infrastructure mean that Russia remains a central power in the former Soviet space. But the nature of this 'space' is evolving. The past three decades have seen the emergence of distinct, sovereign states with their own political trajectories. The idea of a unified 'post-Soviet' region is fading. Cooperation now depends less on shared ideology or past structures, and more on pragmatic interest. Russia does not seek to impose its will on these nations. But it must avoid any arrangement that allows others to benefit from Russian support – economic, security-related, or political – without reciprocity. This would be not only unfair, but strategically dangerous. In this light, the political regimes of neighboring countries are not of primary concern. What matters is that their partnerships with Russia do not undermine its sovereignty or long-term stability. Moscow welcomes genuine cooperation – built on mutual interest and equality – but cannot allow itself to become a crutch for governments unable or unwilling to manage their internal affairs. That principle applies across the board: in the South Caucasus, in Central Asia, and in Eastern Europe. What's required is a consistent, firm, and future-oriented approach to regional policy – one that encourages integration where possible but is unafraid to protect Russian interests when necessary. Of course, breaking away from old habits and assumptions will not be easy. The legacy of the Soviet Union still shapes expectations on both sides. Many governments in the region continue to treat Russia as a default provider of security and economic support – even while forging closer ties with other powers. This dual approach is unsustainable. It's time for a new model – one where Russia is not the guarantor of regional balance but a stakeholder among equals. A partner, not a patron. In such a system, cooperation would no longer rest on sentiment or historical inertia, but on clearly defined, reciprocal benefits. To succeed in this, Russia must act with strategic patience and clarity of purpose. It must support its neighbors where doing so serves mutual goals. But it must also draw clear boundaries – ensuring that its resources, prestige, and geopolitical position are not squandered on arrangements that yield little in return. In a world tilting towards greater uncertainty and multipolar competition, Russia's role in its own neighborhood remains vital. But it must be a role shaped not by nostalgia or charity, but by realism, prudence, and a firm defense of national interest. Only then can lasting, balanced partnerships emerge in the vast, shifting space of article was first published by Valdai Discussion Club, translated and edited by the RT team.
