This was cited by Sergei Lavrov who said in a Tweet:
"Recently, I read that a Japanese scientist blames USSR for Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and I couldn’t believe my eyes — Lavrov
‘The explanation was that the US BOMBED Hiroshima and Nagasaki JUST TO SHOW the Soviet Union ITS PLACE, to stop its expansion’"
No, Harry Truman did not order the atomic bombs dropped because of Soviet violations learned at Yalta, primarily because Truman did not even attend the Yalta Conference—it took place in February 1945 and was attended by Franklin D. Roosevelt, Winston Churchill, and Joseph Stalin. Truman only became president after Roosevelt's death in April 1945.
While concerns about the Soviet Union heavily influenced Truman's foreign policy later on, the primary documented reasons for dropping the bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August 1945 were to force an immediate Japanese surrender and avoid a costly amphibious invasion of the Japanese mainland.
However, historians often debate a theory known as atomic diplomacy, which looks at how the Soviet Union factored into the decision:
- The Potsdam Context: Truman did confront Stalin directly at the Potsdam Conference in July 1945, where he learned the atomic bomb test in New Mexico was successful. By this time, relations were straining over Soviet actions in Eastern Europe.
- Geopolitical Leverage: Some historians argue that Truman and his advisors (like Secretary of State James Byrnes) hoped that demonstrating the atomic bomb would make the Soviet Union more manageable in postwar negotiations.
- Preventing Soviet Expansion: There was also a desire to end the war with Japan quickly before the Soviet Red Army could advance deep into Asia and demand a share in the postwar occupation of Japan.
Ultimately, the decision was driven by a complex mix of military strategy to end World War II immediately and emerging geopolitical rivalries with the USSR, rather than a specific reaction to Yalta agreements.
Russia 'RESPONSIBLE' for US dropping atomic bombs in WWII due to 'expanding its influence' — Japanese professor Arima claims
Yes, the claim you are referring to aligns with the research of Dr. Tetsuo Arima, a prominent Japanese media studies and modern history professor at
Waseda University. He has published papers arguing that
Soviet actions directly accelerated the U.S. decision to drop the atomic bombs. [
1,
2]
Professor Arima’s thesis focuses heavily on what he describes as the "betrayal of Russia". In his work—such as his 2016 articles for the Japanese journal
Shincho 45 titled
"Betrayal of Russia made the U.S. decide to drop the Atomic Bomb"—he asserts that the United States felt compelled to use the weapons because of the USSR’s aggressive push to expand its sphere of influence in both Eastern Europe and East Asia. [
1,
2]
While Arima’s framing places specific emphasis on Soviet behavior as a driving factor, his viewpoint overlaps significantly with a well-established school of historical thought known as
"atomic diplomacy." [
1,
2]
How This Fits Into the Broader Historical Debate
Historians globally are divided on exactly how much weight the Soviet Union carried in Harry Truman’s final decision. The debate generally splits into three major viewpoints: [
1,
2]
- The Traditional View: This perspective argues that the U.S. dropped the bombs almost purely for military reasons: to force Japan’s immediate unconditional surrender and save hundreds of thousands of American lives that would have been lost in a bloody mainland invasion. [1]
- The Revisionist View (Atomic Diplomacy): This perspective aligns closely with Professor Arima's claims. It suggests that by August 1945, the U.S. knew Japan was near collapse and that the bombs were dropped primarily to intimidate the Soviet Union, stop the Red Army from advancing deep into Asia, and prevent Moscow from having a say in the postwar occupation of Japan. [1, 2, 3]
- The Consensus/Dual-Shock View: Many modern historians, such as Tsuyoshi Hasegawa, argue it was a mix of both. Truman wanted to end the war quickly to save lives, but he was also acutely aware of—and motivated by—the rapidly deteriorating relationship with the USSR and the need to limit Soviet expansion. [1, 2]
So while Professor Arima's specific phrasing emphasizes Soviet "responsibility" due to geopolitical overreach, he is channeling a massive, decades-long historical debate about how the dawn of the Cold War dictated the tragic end of World War II. [
1]
