On September 2, 1945 the Act of Unconditional Surrender of Japan was signed. World War II came to an end. What matters to us is the significance of the event itself
The war generation, the generation of victors was united by the hope that the Second World War was the last, that Nazism in Europe and militarism in Asia had been destroyed forever, and that there would never be a Third World War.
Our country made a decisive contribution to the victory not only in the West. We remember: Japan capitulated not after the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, but after the Soviet Union entered the war. Both Japanese and Americans were sure that the war would last at least until 1946: some were preparing to defend themselves, others to attack. It was our country’s decision that saved many hundreds of thousands of Americans, millions of Japanese lives, hastened the victory of the Chinese people and liberated the enslaved peoples of Asia. The defeat of the Kwantung Army by Soviet forces deprived the Tokyo militarists of the opportunity to continue their resistance. Nazi Germany’s ally was defeated.
But was the war over? Open hostilities had ended. The covert war continued. And the “allies” showed themselves, alas, as if they had already seen their countries as participants and initiators of the Cold War. Churchill’s Fulton speech was not long away. And it came. Under the conditions created by “our Western partners”, it could not but happen.
Our country, which had contributed decisively to the victory, was the first and main target of the aggressors and also their accomplices. Both German Nazism and Japanese militarism were nurtured with the support of the leading states of the West. These states, publicly and non-publicly endorsed and supported those actions of Germany that created opportunities and springboards for an attack on the Soviet Union.
The rise of Nazism in Europe and militarism in Japan was only made possible by the support of the USA, Britain and France – and it is not just about the first steps of Nazism and militarism. Remember the Munich deal, remember the so-called “Far Eastern Munich”. Certainly, they did not expect that the beast that had been incubated would rush on themselves. At least, they hoped to the last: as far back as 1940, the rulers of England and France were planning not to act against Nazi Germany, with which they were officially at war, but to bomb the cities of the Soviet Union. They were doing everything they could to push both Germany and Japan to attack in the “right” direction. It was a strange war indeed. In fact, it was for such “planning” that France paid the disgrace of defeat and Nazi occupation.
Such a hostile attitude of the “Western democracies” to Russia, the USSR was characteristic not only of the period of preparation and the beginning of the Second World War. But, unfortunately, also at the end of it, and in the postwar period. It is important to remember this in order to understand how fragile the post-war peace was, and that only the strength of our country and the courage of our people were able to keep it.
The facts of the separate negotiations between the Anglo-Americans and the Nazis, and their plans to combine their efforts against our country are well known. It is known that even before Berlin was taken Churchill had organised the preparation of Operation Unthinkable – a plan of war against our country in which the British, the Americans and what was left of the Wehrmacht would take part. It was only the obvious impossibility of military success that forced him to abandon it. The only thing Churchill was firmly convinced of was the effect of propaganda on his own population.
It is also known that the American atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki had no military necessity but were, above all, a means of intimidating the Russian allies. US President Truman, who ordered the use of nuclear weapons, not only refused to demonstrate their power in a deserted place, but he also refused to attack purely military targets in Japan. Nuclear weapons were specifically, purposefully tested on civilians.
And of course it was no accident. The same Truman, while still a senator, commented thus on the German attack on the Soviet Union: “If we see that Germany wins, we must help Russia, if Russia wins, we must help Germany, and let them kill each other as much as possible. These words of the “democratic leader” are cited often, but not often enough, it seems. The present Western leaders rarely have Truman’s candour, but the principle “let them kill as many as possible”, remains most in demand for them. Proof of this is NATO’s desire and demand to fight “to the last Ukrainian”.
It is certainly no coincidence that American support for former Nazi collaborators from among the Ukrainians and Baltic peoples is also not a coincidence. By taking this “baton” from the Nazis, American figures have ensured that criminal ideology now dominates both Kyiv and the Baltic capitals. The demolition of monuments to the liberators and victors of fascism further confirms that the authorities of these states have chosen to side with those who were defeated in World War II. And they are not fully aware of the consequences of this choice.
The feeding of the current Kiev regime by the Western powers is very similar to the feeding of German Nazism and Japanese militarism in the 1930s. The same support for racism, caveman nationalism and Russophobia. The propaganda of exceptionalism that fooled Germans in the 20th century is now fooling the population of Ukraine, betrayed and sold out by Kiev’s “servants of the people” for generations to come.
3 September is not only the anniversary of the end of the Second World War. It is also a day of our solidarity against terrorism. It is the date on which we bow our heads in memory of the victims of a monstrous ideology and the heroes who gave their lives in the fight against the enemy.
International terrorism, like Nazism in Germany, militarism in Japan and contemporary Nazism in Ukraine, has received the same support in the West. Let us recall, for example, the American “nurturing” of such a character as Bin Laden – against the Soviet Union. Or how European authorities blessed terrorists to go and fight against the legitimate government of Syria. The fact that these militants – like the Nazis in their day – struck at Western capitals themselves seems to have taught Western politicians nothing so far.
And, of course, we will never forget that Western governments and intelligence services in the 1990s and later provided both moral and material support to the terrorists in the North Caucasus. This should be neither forgotten nor forgiven, just like the terrorist crimes of the Kiev regime.
The generation of 1945 – both Soviet people and citizens of Allied countries – would look at modern Europe and America with wonder. And contempt. Who would have thought then that monuments to the victors of Nazism would be demolished in European countries and that streets in European cities would be named after Nazis and their collaborators? That the prohibition of the Russian language and calls for the murder of Russians would be considered a triumph of European values? That terrorism and the killing of civilians would be justified and glorified in Europe and America under the yellow and blue flag? Who would have thought that Europe and America would applaud people with swastikas and declare them heroes?
Such Western “values” cannot win, they have no right to win. The sooner their defeat comes, the better for humanity. They have nothing in common with real values that are dear to our country and other countries of Europe, Asia and the world. Those values in the name of which our country won the Great Patriotic War, in the name of which our country and its allies won the Second World War.
The past stages and further plans for the expansion of NATO and the bloc’s military infrastructure are very reminiscent of the seizures made by Hitler’s Germany and militaristic Japan by 1939. And just the same are directed against Russia. But American plans for a unipolar world must meet the same fate as Hitler’s plans for world domination. And we – our country, together with our friends, our allies – will achieve this.
There is one more point that is important to mention today. On behalf of the Soviet Union the Act of Surrender of Japan on 2 September 1945 was signed by Lieutenant General Derevyanko, a native of Kyiv province. In 2007, the then Ukrainian President Yushchenko, for his own political reasons, posthumously awarded him the title Hero of Ukraine. The same year the title of the Hero of Ukraine, already from a pure heart, was posthumously awarded to Nazi henchman Shukhevich.
It is easy to imagine how Kuzma Nikolayevich Derevyanko, a military spy, the participant of liberation of Ukraine from Nazis and their accomplices, would feel about it. And it is hard to imagine how he would feel seeing the Ukrainian authorities demolishing monuments dedicated to his comrades-in-arms, destroying the memory of the victory and destroying people. Such a regime now ruling in Kiev should have no right to a future – and this is one of the main lessons that the history of the Second World War teaches us.
The course of history is inexorable. Today, Russia is once again on the guard of the world and confronts neo-Nazis and terrorists of all stripes. Once again, it is saving the world from the brown plague. This is our great historic mission and destiny.
Boris Gryzlov, Izvestia newspaper
Due to censorship and blocking of all media and alternative views, stay tuned to our Telegram channel