Road to Surrender: Three Men and the Countdown to the End of World War II

Road to Surrender: Three Men and the Countdown to the End of World War II by Evan Thomas is a gripping and meticulously researched account of the crucial decisions that resulted in the use of nuclear weapons against Japan, marking a pivotal moment in global history. The book’s immediacy and depth immerse readers in the agonising choices faced by key leaders during this epochal event. The author of the book, Evan Thomas, born on April 25, 1951, is an acclaimed American journalist, historian, and author. During his career that spanned over several decades, he wrote 11 books, which include two New York Times best sellers. Thomas’s extensive expertise in journalism and history is evident in his in-depth analysis and precise writing. This background allowed him to deal with the complex interplay of personal and political factors, providing readers with a comprehensive understanding of the events.
The theme of the book revolves around the final weeks and days of the Pacific war that witnessed some of the most morally complex decisions and dilemmas as the American leadership struggled with bringing about “unconditional surrender” by Japan. As opposed to numerous historical accounts that majorly analyse the military strategies and geopolitical rivalries of the nations, Evan Thomas focuses on the significant role played by individual actors, not just as political or governmental figures, but as moral and ethical forces who actively shaped the decision that forever altered the course of history. Therefore, the author sheds light on the internal decisions and the underlying thought processes behind the decision to drop atomic bombs on Japan. In doing so, the author extensively cites primary sources, including declassified documents, personal diaries, and historical records. By grounding his narrative in these sources, Thomas avoids solely relying on secondary sources or his own conjecture.
Thomas’s narrative focuses on three main individuals: Henery Stimson, the American Secretary of War; General Carl Tooey Spaatz, head of strategic bombing in the Pacific;
and Shingenori Togo, the Foreign Minister of Japan. He portrayed Stimson and Spaatz as men grappling with consciences over the devastation caused by the bombing campaigns they directed, even before the use of atomic bomb. For example, Stimson raised a moral objection, arguing against the indiscriminate destruction of cultural and civilian centres like Kyoto in spite of their potential strategic significance. Moreover, he was gravely concerned about the ethical implications of technological advancements in war, fearing humanity’s capacity for destruction might outpace its ability to act morally. Likewise, Thomas highlighted Spaatz’s leadership style through his insistence on written orders for the atomic bomb mission despite having verbal orders from key figures like General Marshal and President Truman. His quote, “If I am going to kill 100,000 people, I am not going to do it on verbal order,” depicted the weight of responsibility he felt at that time.
On the other side of the conflict, Togo stood as a solitary voice, advocating for peace negotiations with the Allied powers. He recognised the dire situation of Japan and the dire need to avoid further devastation. Nevertheless, Togo faced significant internal resistance, especially from the hardliners with Japan’s Supreme Council for the Direction of the War, who viewed surrender as dishonourable. Emperor Hirohito eventually announced Japan’s surrender, but even that was nearly thwarted by a last-minute and desperate coup attempt. Therefore, Togo faced the challenge of balancing national pride amidst imminent defeat, where cultural norms and societal pressures significantly shaped leadership decisions.
Throughout the book, the author acknowledges the wider ramifications of the atomic bomb as a doomsday warning for humankind. However, his interpretation and analysis of the dropping of bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki seem to resonate with the traditional viewpoint of American leadership of that time. Thomas writes: “The atomic bombs not only saved many thousands and possibly millions of Japanese lives, they saved the lives of even more Asians beyond Japan…[A]t admittedly terrible cost, the atomic bomb averted a far greater catastrophe…” This implies that the Americans perceived the Japanese as being highly determined and prepared to fight to the very
end, making a conventional invasion of the Japanese home islands a daunting prospect.
Military strategists anticipated that a conventional invasion would result in hundreds of thousands of US casualties, along with substantial losses in Japan. Additionally, a prolonged campaign carried the risk of eroding public support for the war effort in the US. Therefore, the bomb was viewed as a necessary prerequisite for overcoming Japan’s intransigence and compelling it to an eventual surrender. The authors drew parallels with events, such as the firebombing of Dresden and the Battle of Okinawa, to highlight the immense scale of devastation already inflicted, thereby providing a context for deploying atomic bombs.
The author tries to balance his justification of the use of bombs by presenting an alternative perspective, such as American geopolitical motives behind the decision, aimed at demonstrating military superiority to the USSR and shaping a post-war balance of power in the region. However, as a reader, I find such a justification deeply flawed for several reasons. First, the grave humanitarian impact of atomic bombings is indefensible. The immediate loss of more than 200,000 lives, along with long-term suffering caused by radiation, led to severe illness and environmental damage. The ethical principle of proportionality in warfare condemns the indiscriminate killing of civilians. Additionally, there existed several other viable alternatives to drooping bombs, such as the continuation of conventional bombing campaigns, naval blockade, or demonstration of the bomb’s prowess in an inhibited area. Therefore, in spite of the complexities and dilemmas faced by American leadership, the human, moral, and ethical cost of the bombs far outweighs the argued benefits in the book.
While the book’s primary shortcoming is its definitive stance on a subject that is highly uncertain, there are several strengths of the book that deserve recognition. First, as a piece of popular history, the book reads with a fast-paced and present-tense style. Therefore, unlike traditional narratives with detached and objective tones, Thomas’s style emphasises personal engagement. His use of present tense and vivid descriptions creates a sense of urgency and drama, inviting the reader to experience the historical
events as they unfold. Moreover, the character-centric approach of the book brings history to life, where readers can relate to the emotions, struggles, and decisions of the key personalities of the time. Lastly, the books arrived at a timely moment, coinciding with the renewed interest sparked by the release of the film “Oppenheimer.” This confluence of events has sparked significant public interest in the subject at hand.
In conclusion, Evan Thomas’s The Road to Surrender offers a compelling examination of the complexities surrounding Japan’s surrender at the end of WWII. Through vivid character portrayals and an exploration of moral dilemmas, the author navigates the nuanced terrain of history with clarity and insight. While the book’s definitive stance on contentious issues may invite debate, its engaging narrative style and timely relevance ensure it remains a valuable addition to the literature on this pivotal historical moment.