By Chan Shi Yun, TIME
Published: 18 Mar 2019 - 08:49 PM
The General Assembly was carried out to discuss the prominent and rising issue of Hitler’s return and Japan’s promise for a nuclear war.
‘Bellum Omnium Contra Omnes’, which means ‘a war of all against all’ in Latin, serves as a perfect description of the crisis that took the world by storm in 1952. In the aftermath of the defeat of Germany in May 1945, the terms of peace were set by the Allied Powers which caused much uproar within the German society as the treaty enforced harsh rules on Germany much like the Treaty of Versailles. In the same year of 1945, the United States detonated the first nuclear bomb ‘Little Boy’ over Hiroshima and another, ‘Fat Man’ was dropped on Nagasaki. Both bombings led to thousands of casualties and left a deep scar in the memory of the Japanese.
Now, Adolf Hitler has returned. The antagonist of World War 2, the man who innocently killed millions of Jews and man who formed the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany, is back. With his return, he demanded that all countries must support the reunification of Germany and that those who once used Germans as forced labour must compensate for Germany’s losses. Moreover, he demanded the return of former German territories and for all countries to support the end of German war reparations to all states that suffered Germany’s attacks. In the Pacific Narrative of events, Lieutenant-General of Japan’s National Safety Force (NSF), Keisatsukan, announced in a resentful and incensed speech to the world of Japan’s intentions for a nuclear war which can cause long-term catastrophic impacts to our global security.
Following the events that have occurred, a question has emerged - ‘With Hitler’s threat of a Third World War, and Japan’s desires to pursue a nuclear war, how should countries best go about in diffusing this volatile situation?’ This was a question posed during the General Assembly of the United Nations that brought all the countries in for negotiations on what is the best step forward on a global scale.
In the General Assembly that occurred earlier today, three groups of countries can be clearly identified - those who were against Germany and Japan, those who supported Japan and Germany but against the United States and last but not least, those who neither support each side but support a peaceful settlement.
Firstly, the majority of the countries, including the United States, who were present during the Assembly were against both Germany and Japan as they felt that both parties were largely responsible for the devastating events that have occurred. Some delegates have expressed their views on Hitler - ‘Adolf Hitler is a war criminal and therefore should be incarcerated for his inhumane crimes’. Others remarked that ‘Japan poses a more prominent threat with their nuclear arms, ready to fire at any time’. America remains firm on their stand that Hitler should be prosecuted for his sins of anti-semitism. They believed Germany should not be granted the conditions that Hitler demanded.
Secondly, a small number of countries supported Japan and Germany, comprising mainly of the minor countries that feared the immense power of both these Great Powers. Japan had been in the midst of building its formidable nuclear arms that could pose a vital threat to global security
Thirdly, the remaining countries chose a neutral stance whereby they felt that both countries were equally responsible and had a part to play for the devastation they brought upon the world. Therefore, the remaining countries supported the stand that both countries were at fault and both should not be spared for their actions against the world that have caused millions of casualties.
As the Assembly closed, all countries remained firm on their stances and were unable to compromise on a concrete solution to tackle the rising power of Hitler as well as Japan’s prominent promise of a nuclear war.