The 2024 Hiroshima-Nagasaki Boycott: A Reckoning with Unrepentant Aggressors

Khalidu Adewale AFOLABI

On August 9, 2024, Japan commemorated the tragedy of 1945 in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, marking the 79th anniversary of the USA atomic bombings that claimed over two hundred thousand lives and left successive generations grappling with radioactive poisoning and severe health complications. This annual commemoration has evolved into a solemn platform where world leaders gather to reflect on the catastrophic consequences of lethal conflicts and the possession of nuclear weapons. However, this year’s event was marred by a significant geopolitical controversy that highlighted the global community's deep divisions over issues of war crimes, justice, and the principles of international diplomacy.

Civilian Massacres and the Struggle for Global Sustainability

The bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki stand as stark reminders of the devastating impact of war on civilian populations. The sheer scale of the destruction and the long-term suffering inflicted on the survivors serve as a grim warning about the dangers of nuclear armament and the moral imperatives of seeking sustainable peace. In recent years, the global community has increasingly recognised the importance of addressing the root causes of conflicts and promoting sustainable development as a means of preventing such atrocities.

In this context, the massacre of civilians in Gaza has become a focal point of international concern. Israel’s relentless military offensive in Gaza, which has led to the deaths of almost 40,000 Palestinians, according to Gaza’s health ministry, starkly contrasts with the principles of global sustainability and human rights. The international community's response to these atrocities has been varied, with some nations condemning the violence while others remain conspicuously silent. The boycott of the 2024 Hiroshima-Nagasaki commemoration by several Western nations underscores the selective application of moral outrage and the politicisation of human suffering.

The Politicization of War Crimes

The decision by Nagasaki to exclude Israel from the commemoration was a bold and controversial one, driven by the dire humanitarian situation in Gaza and prospects of demonstrations against Israel’s presence at the event. Nagasaki’s Mayor, Shiro Suzuki, made it clear that the decision was not politically motivated but rather a reflection of the city’s commitment to peace and its desire to avoid disruptions to the solemn ceremony. After all, Nagasaki had called for an “immediate ceasefire” in Gaza in a letter it sent to the Israel embassy in June and even invited the Israel ambassador to Japan, Gilad Cohen, to a memorial ceremony that preceded the commemoration. Despite this, the move was met with sharp criticism from Israel and its allies, who viewed the exclusion as a politically charged act.

Seeing that Japan was resolute in its decision, the ambassadors of the UK, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, the US, and the European Union had expressed their disapproval in a letter to Nagasaki in mid-July, hinting at a potential boycott of the event if Israel was excluded. This reaction highlights the extent to which war crimes and issues of international justice have become politicised. Rather than focusing on the humanitarian impact of the conflicts and the need for accountability, the response from these nations suggests a prioritisation of political alliances over the pursuit of justice.

The selective application of international norms is not new, but it becomes particularly glaring in situations where the victims are predominantly from marginalised or oppressed communities. The decision by these Western nations to boycott the event, led by US Ambassador to Japan Rahm Emanuel, reveals a troubling double standard in the global response to war crimes.

European Egalitarianism: A Facade of Hypocrisy

The boycott by several European ambassadors of the Nagasaki event also sharply focuses on the hypocrisy of European egalitarianism. Europe has long positioned itself as a bastion of human rights and democracy, yet its response to the exclusion of Israel from the Hiroshima-Nagasaki commemoration exposes the limitations of its moral stance. By aligning itself with Israel despite the overwhelming evidence of war crimes in Gaza, Europe is effectively undermining its own claims to be a champion of human rights.

This hypocrisy is not limited to the Nagasaki event but is emblematic of a broader trend in European foreign policy. European nations have often been quick to condemn human rights abuses in countries that are politically or economically isolated from the West, yet they frequently turn a blind eye to similar abuses committed by their allies. This selective application of moral principles erodes the credibility of Europe’s commitment to egalitarianism and reveals the self-serving nature of its foreign policy.

The exclusion of Israel from the Nagasaki event, alongside Russia and Belarus, who have been omitted since 2022 due to their involvement in the Ukraine war, highlights the inconsistency in Europe’s approach to international justice. While Russia and Belarus are rightfully condemned for their actions, Israel is shielded from similar scrutiny despite the parallels between the situations in Gaza and Ukraine.

Gaza Genocide and Europe's Complicity in Oppression

The ongoing genocide in Gaza, and Europe’s complicity in supporting the oppressor is perhaps the most damning indictment of the West’s moral failure. The Israeli government’s actions in Gaza, including the deliberate targeting of civilian infrastructure, the blockade of humanitarian aid, and the indiscriminate bombing of densely populated areas, constitute clear violations of international law. Yet, these actions are not only tolerated by many European nations but are actively supported through military aid and diplomatic backing.

The boycott of the Hiroshima-Nagasaki commemoration by European ambassadors is a symbolic gesture that reflects this complicity. By refusing to participate in an event that excluded Israel, these nations are effectively endorsing Israel’s actions in Gaza and sending a message that the lives of Palestinian civilians are less valuable than the political relationship between Israel and the West. This stance is not only morally indefensible but also counterproductive, as it fuels resentment and anger in the Muslim world and undermines the prospects for lasting peace.

Last Reflections

The 2024 Hiroshima-Nagasaki commemoration, intended as a moment of reflection and a call for global peace, was instead overshadowed by political controversy and moral compromise. The rightful decision to exclude Israel from the event, while rooted in a genuine concern for the humanitarian crisis in Gaza, exposed the deep divisions within the international community and the selective application of justice.

The boycott by Western nations highlights the extent to which war crimes and issues of international justice have become politicised, with powerful nations using their influence to shield their allies from accountability. This hypocrisy, particularly on the part of European nations that pride themselves on their commitment to human rights, undermines the global struggle for peace and justice.

As we reflect on the lessons of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, it is crucial to recognise that true global sustainability and peace can only be achieved when all nations are held to the same standards of justice and accountability, regardless of their political or strategic importance. The world must move beyond selective outrage and work towards a truly equitable and just international order where the lives of all civilians are valued equally and where the powerful are not allowed to act with impunity.