Introduction
The Pearl Harbor attack is one of the most monumental historical incidents that shaped the United States’ position in global politics. This surprise attack was executed by the Japanese troops on Pearl Harbor, located in Honolulu, Hawaii, targeting the United States’ naval base. The attack that happened on December 7th, 1941, was motivated by the ongoing attempts by Japan to seize part of the Pacific and Asian territories. The United States had, during this period, taken a neutral stand amidst Japan’s attacks on Asia and the Pacific.
However, the United States supported European countries in countering Japan’s efforts. The growing tension and conflict caused Japan to strike Pearl Harbor, which provoked the United States to participate in World War II actively. Therefore, this paper hypothesizes that Pearl Harbor was a pivotal moment in U.S. history, marking the nation’s entry into World War II, changing the course of the war, and profoundly affecting American foreign policy and national security strategies.
Marked Entry to World War II
The most profound impact of the Pearl Harbor attack was that it marked the U.S.’s entry into World War II. Before the attack, the United States Army had been a bystander in the conflict between Great Britain, Germany, and China. Its participation in the multilateral conflict entailed continuously warning Japan to stop invading the Asian and Pacific territories (Wintrobe 275). The United States had also supplied Great Britain with weapons and loans to facilitate the counterattack on Japan. Amid this distant support for the conflict, Japan was aware of America’s stance in World War II, hoping that one day it would receive America’s support against the European nations.
However, America has not wavered in its support for European countries over the years. This forced Japan to strike Pearl Harbor, an event that triggered the United States to take an open stance in World War II. While assessing this impact, it is clear that the immediate losses provoked the United States to participate actively in World War II. For one, Japan launched its attack with 350 aircraft from four heavy carriers.
The Japanese army also deployed five submarines, two heavy cruisers, two light cruisers, nine oilers, and two battleships. Given that the U.S. was not prepared to counterattack, Japan’s troops overpowered America’s armies and weapons (D’Angelo 28). In addition to the lives that were lost, the United States lost eight battleships and nineteen Navy ships. With this enormous loss of life and armaments, the United States found a strong reason to take a proactive stance in World War II.
In the immediate aftermath of the attack on Pearl Harbor, Germany applauded Japan’s move, indicating that it was a great way to get America to take a position. To make matters worse, Adolf Hitler declared war against the United States, compelling it to become a full participant. To many Historians, Hitler’s declaration is one of the most erroneous judgments in the global relations paradigm (Holler 276). This applause further ignited the United States Army, and America declared war on Japan.
The United States was immersed in the war by sending troops to fight German forces in North Africa. America proceeded at full speed to destroy German troops across Europe and Asia. In light of this, the Pearl Harbor attack fueled increased conflict between states. It provided the U.S. with a reason to take a firm stance and enter World War II to defend its people and resources against its enemies.
America’s move to retaliate by declaring war on Japan was motivated by the fact that if it did not take action, then Japan would have accomplished all its intentions for the attack. A careful examination of the aims of the attack reveals that Japan wanted to weaken the U.S. influence in four ways. One was by destroying America’s fleet, which had been the region’s source of supply. This would provide it with ample time to achieve the expansion.
Second, Japan attacked Pearl Harbor to destabilize the United States and thus mobilize forces from other countries amidst the confusion with promises to give back to them (Wintrobe 278). Third, the attack aimed to buy time for Japan to consolidate its ships and naval strength and appear more powerful and deserving of territorial expansion. Given the high likelihood of achieving the three goals, the United States had to act swiftly to defend its position and destroy Japan’s growing power. It had no other way to reinstate its position but to express its power through World War II.
Implications for National Security Strategies
The Attack on Pearl Harbor revolutionized America’s national security strategies due to the growing number of enemies at the time. As noted, America suffered the deaths of its people in the attack. There was also a loss of war equipment through the attack. In hindsight, the government realized its mistake in failing to prepare for potential attacks. Theodore Roosevelt united Americans by commanding the war mercenaries to continuously wave America’s flag across Pearl Harbor (D’Angelo 28).
Firstly, the government worked to ensure the full involvement of the public and its army in protecting against enemies. A notable change post the attack was a heightened patriotism among the United States citizens. After the attack, Americans united on the lookout for threats, assembled efforts to keep the territories safe, and took the front row in the communication of security threats.
After the attack, President Franklin Roosevelt delivered a State of the Union address that appealed to the public’s patriotism. He stated that the attack was directly targeted at the U.S. military, aiming to kill them without any cause. In the emotive speech, the citizens felt a deeper connection to their country and sought to participate in national security strategies grounded in preparedness and support for their army.
The ongoing financial frustrations from the Great Depression united Americans even more against the attack (Barry). Although these slogans did not entail an active role in World War II, they united citizens by supporting the government in countering the enemy. The national security strategies, henceforth, ensured public participation and commitment to the security of its borders.
The National Security Strategy also aligned with the United States’ new position on the war. For the most part, America had taken mild measures to keep the war and conflict at bay. Its national security strategies before the Pearl Harbor attack entailed sanctions and trade embargoes.
Although America sought economic supplies from the Axis powers, it would not out-power Japan’s supplies for the war (Barry). With the Pearl Harbor attack, America resolved to hit back using weapons and not spare its enemies. Although there have been attempts at diplomacy to resolve the conflicts, this approach has not worked. America reinforced its military mercenaries, thus gearing up for a severe war against Japan and Germany.
Implications on Foreign Policy
The Pearl Harbor attack set the United States on its path to becoming the world’s global superpower and a determinant of foreign order. Although contentious debaters argue that the United States would have become a superpower with or without the attack, they also opened America up to global conflicts. After the attack, the United States expanded its commitment overseas.
By 1945, America had made a name for itself as the world’s most significant fighting force. Gradually, as the war subsided, the world order formed into three defined units: The Soviet Union, Britain, and France (Hayashi 165). As a result, America adopted an interventionist foreign policy aimed at resolving conflicts rather than pursuing isolation and neutrality.
There was also a shift in the global balance of power, leading to the emergence of superpowers. Evident actions that showed shifts in global power include the Soviet Union’s establishment of control over Eastern Europe. The European Union partnered with Poland and Czechoslovakia to create a dominating power (Hayashi 165).
The United States demonstrated its commitment to foreign policy by intervening to prevent the expansion into Moscow. This way, Western Europe and the Middle East were protected from the expansionist movements. With these adjustments, America gained a voice in directing other countries’ efforts in boundary setting, bilateral engagements, and political security.
In the 1950s, containment of communism became the foundation of America’s foreign policy. Throughout the centuries, the United States and other countries have thrived on a culture of communism. In this culture, people were not keen on owning space or material things, but they were open to sharing regardless of prevailing circumstances. As nations began acquiring territories and resources, wars became the norm worldwide.
America’s entry into World War II marked the division of powers and the rise of capitalism in the American and European countries (Hayashi 165). As these changes began to take effect, the United States shifted its foreign policy toward the containment of communism, aiming to prevent its spread and preserve the status quo. Under contained communism, America, Japan, Germany, China, and other powers were to keep their power within their own boundaries. This policy served well, as it prevented the more powerful nations from asserting their authority and influence over the less powerful nations.
The post-Pearl Harbor world has been one in which the U.S. has continuously faced compelling reasons to remain dominant in foreign policy. In any case, there was nothing unavoidable or ardent about this internationalist agreement. Neutralist inclinations on both the right and left of U.S. legislative issues will undoubtedly reemerge at last.
Today, the U.S. has been fighting against Islamic psychological oppression beginning around 1983 when 240 Marines were killed in a bombing in Lebanon (O’Neil 24). Many years later, there has still not been progress in resolving this conflict. The political framework is split among reds and blues, and the nation is broadly blamed for a wide range of social maltreatment, sexism, and bigotry, among others.
Eventual Defeat of the Axis Powers
In line with communism, America began to appreciate and implement a liberal internationalist foreign policy. Before the attack on Pearl Harbor, America’s economy had benefited from liberal trade relations with other countries. For example, China and Japan were the primary consumers of the millions of tons of oil produced in America. However, amid heightened tensions in the war, the economy was hit hard, forcing the government to take action to prevent a recession (O’Neil 33).
In the aftermath of the war, America focused on restoring its power and influence as a superpower. While this went so far as to cut off trade links, governance noted a grave economic impact. In response, the United States began to embrace liberalism as the guiding principle for its foreign policy. With liberalism, countries would examine trade and security concerns independently. Moreover, critical decisions were made about the economic and political ramifications.
While the United States’ involvement in World War II elevated it to the world’s number one superpower, the attack significantly contributed to the collapse of the Axis powers. The Axis Powers were the coalition of Japan, Italy, and Germany formed to advance their selfish, expansionist aims. These three countries sought to expand their territories into Asian and African countries to exploit and colonize them.
The power axis also caused a power imbalance, as the structure meant that power ran only along the Japan-Berlin axis. The United States’ active involvement in a liberal foreign policy and a containment approach inspired other states’ confidence to take part in the war (O’Neil 27). As more states lent their voices, the Axis powers were diluted. Countries that could have been captured gained the United States’ support, thereby strengthening them. This move improved the United States’ foreign policy, which other superpowers and countries worldwide have since emulated.
Conclusion
The Pearl Harbor attack of 1941 had a long-term impact on the global power landscape. This attack that resulted in the loss of lives of Americans, along with war mercenaries, transformed how the country interacted with other countries across the continents. Historical evidence shows that the attack propelled the United States into World War II, making it a crucial moment in U.S. history.
As a result, the United States immediately declared war against Japan, which meant rivalry with countries that supported Japan. Before the provocation of the attack on Pearl Harbor, the country’s military acted as a bystander in the war. However, the United States had formed meaningful alliances with countries like Great Britain, with which it supplied weapons during the war and gave loans to finance their victory over Japan. The divisions among countries equally fueled the war, but they reframed the power structure of the world’s most influential states.
Besides joining World War II, the attack shaped the United States’ foreign policies and national security strategies. It was exciting that such a vast state could be caught unprepared for an incident of this scale. The shock of the incident cultivates national unity, patriotism, and public involvement as national security strategies. The United States quickly transitioned from neutrality and isolation to liberal and contained communism as its foreign policy principles. These impacts define international public relations between superpowers and developing countries globally.
Works Cited
Barry, M. “Changing Opinion: America’s Isolationism and Its Path to War by Mitchell Barry.” Council of Australian Librarians, 2023.
D’Angelo, James M. Pearl Harbor Declassified: The Evidence of American Foreknowledge of the Attack. McFarland, 2021.
Hayashi, B. M. “American Isolationists: Pro-Japan Anti-Interventionists and the FBI on the Eve of the Pacific War, 1939–1941, by Roger B. Jeans.” Pacific Historical Review vol. 93, no. 1, 2024, pp. 165-166.
Wintrobe, Ronald. “Why Did Japan Attack Pearl Harbor?” Power and Responsibility: Interdisciplinary Perspectives for the 21st Century in Honor of Manfred J. Holler. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2023, pp. 273-285.
O’Neil, William D. “Pearl Harbor in Context.” Open Military Studies Volume 2, no1, 2022, pp. 22-38.