Obama at Hiroshima: A Voice of Humanity

On May 27th, President Obama, standing alongside Prime Minister Shinzo Abe of Japan, laid a wreath at the Hiroshima Peace Memorial, becoming the first sitting U.S. president to visit the site of the first atomic bombing. After the ceremony, Obama gave a seventeen-minute address that started with a brief overview of the conflict-ridden history of mankind, continued with a recap of the factors leading to existence of more and more destructive weapons, and ended with a call for humanity to work toward a world without weapons of mass destruction. But while Obama’s visit was an immensely powerful step toward reaffirming the U.S.-Japan security alliance, the U.S. president has drawn criticism both for being too conciliatory toward Japan and for not having any substance to back up his “nuclear-free world” rhetoric.
Many of Obama’s domestic critics have condemned his recent Hiroshima speech, claiming it came off as an “apology” for the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki during World War II. These critics would note that while Obama did not specifically use the word “apology” in his speech, he also did not seek to justify America’s use of nuclear weapons or provide a background behind the decision to use such a deadly force. His tone was more mournful and empathetic to the hibakusha, as survivors of the bombings are called, and he lamented the terribly destructive power that mankind possesses. His critics would also say that the lack of discussion on the culpability of Japan in WWII was a critical misstep in Obama’s address.
Obama was further criticized by analysts who noted that his call for a “nuclear-free” future has little substance behind it, as his administration has not done much to actively reduce America’s own nuclear stockpiles. Many don’t see the purpose of his peace rhetoric if Obama himself has done nothing to support it.
But these critiques have disregarded a fundamental element within this particular speech by Obama, a speech that was not rooted in the political considerations that envelop so many of his other speeches. What is missing is a discussion of the purpose of the address and the character who delivered it. Obama’s speech was not a policy-setting declaration and certainly was not intended to be. Indeed, after shaking Prime Minister Abe’s hand and walking up to the podium, Obama began to speak, not as President of the United States or leader of the most powerful military in the world, but as a human being. His solemn tone and quiet cadence paid tribute to the innocents who died. He called for the world to remember the lesson of how tribal instincts of conquest and power can cause untold horrors to men and women from all walks of life. He spoke of how the world can change for the better and how old attitudes of realpolitik can morph into alliances built on diplomacy and mutual trust. Alongside his description of how human history is marked by the ravages of violent ambition and twisted rhetoric, Obama spoke of the need to recognize the common humanity among all peoples, in hopes that violent aggression can be curbed in the future. And while Obama was still diplomatic and aware of the political implications of his visit, his language showed that the true purpose behind his moving remarks was to describe how he carried the lesson of Hiroshima and how that shaped his worldview—not to shake hands, lay a wreath, and leave once the political job was complete.
In fact, the lack of emphasis throughout the speech on the politics of his visit allowed for a more personal narrative to emerge, a narrative where Obama could talk without feeling the full weight of the responsibilities of his office. Speaking at the Hiroshima memorial, for a moment he shed those responsibilities and spoke plainly of how the shadow of destruction the Hiroshima bombing left still looms over all mankind in the present day.
It was neither an apology speech nor an empty gesture of rhetoric. President Obama went to that podium unburdened by the need to speak of his definitive policies for the future, nor by the pressure he feels at home among the vitriol of ultra-patriotic Americans. He wasn’t there to justify American actions in World War II, and he wasn’t there to discuss the politics of the war. He was there to strike a common tone which viewers from any country, from Japan to the United States, could understand: the loss of any innocent life due to the destructive power of mankind is a tragedy. The time to discuss the role of Japan in WWII and the power of American heroism in the war was not at the Hiroshima Peace Memorial. Obama spoke as a father, a husband, a son, and an individual who could feel the pain of the all fathers, mothers, sons and daughters who died on August 6, 1945. Obama’s speech was not the speech of a leader. It was the speech of a human being who felt sorrow and empathy for the tragedies of the past, and held bright hopes and dreams about a nuclear-free future.