The attack of Japanese army on Pearl Harbor was a turning point in the history of World War II. In fact, the attack led to the active involvement of the USA in World War II and made the war truly global. In this respect, it is important to emphasize that the USA’s entry into World War II influenced consistently the balance of power in the world and, to a significant extent, predetermined the outcome of the war. At the same time, the involvement of the USA in World War II was provoked by the growing aggression from the part of Japan as well as Germany which threatened to the strategic ally of the USA in Europe, Great Britain. The involvement of the USA in World War II strengthened consistently the allies. In such a context, the role of Pearl Harbor and its outcomes can hardly be underestimated. At the same time, views of specialists on causes, which led to the Japanese attack as well as causes of such unexpected and extremely high casualties among Americans, vary consistently.
First of all, it is important to understand causes of the attack and motives of each party involved in the conflict, in order to understand causes of numerous casualties, success of Japanese and unexpected failure of Americans. Traditionally specialists (Miller, 1991) argue that Japan tended to the domination in the Asia-Pacific region and it attempted to establish its total control over the region. Hence, the attack of Japanese on Pearl Harbor was rather a question of time than a question of international diplomacy or relations. What is meant here is the fact that Japan was not interested in the presence of a powerful state, such as the USA in the region. Instead, Japan’s strategic goal was the domination in the region. Naturally, such domination could not be achieved as long as the USA opposed to Japanese efforts to gain the dominant position. Obviously, the USA was a threat to Japan because Americans would not allow Japanese grew in power since the latter would be a threat to the national interests of the USA. As a result, Japan decided to attack the USA and destroy its main naval base because Japan expected that the USA would not recover after Pearl Harbor.
The USA, in its turn, apparently underestimated the threat from the part of Japan and, what is more, Americans failed to foresee the attack. This was not only a tactical failure of the US navy commandment, but it was also a failure of American intelligence. As a result, the US navy was not really prepared for the attack that actually caused numerous casualties. At the same time, the USA could also count for diplomatic resolution of existing conflicts and tension between the USA and Japan.
Such a traditional view on causes and effects of Pearl Harbor are quite convincing since they are grounded on logical evaluation of consequences of the attack and the balance of power in the region prior to the attack. On the other hand, such an interpretation of Pearl Harbor is a one-sided interpretation of events, in which the USA is depicted as a victim of aggressive Japan, while Japanese position is practically ignored, while it is obvious that the USA was another dominant power in the Asia-Pacific region and it would be quite logical to presuppose that Americans also desired to maintain their control over the region.
In this respect, it is possible to refer to a different view on Pearl Harbor. Some specialists (Hakim, 1995) suggest quite unusual cause of Pearl Harbor. According to this view, the formal cause of the USA’s entry into the war was the attack of Japanese military forces on Pearl Harbor, which led to numerous casualties in the US army. In addition, this attack was a direct aggression of Japan against the USA that made the involvement of the USA in World War II practically inevitable (Weinberg and Gerhard, 2005). At the same time, the USA could not ignore the development of German power in Europe, because Germany was the ally of Japan and, as Germany threatened to Great Britain, it also threatened to the national interests of the USA in Europe. Obviously, the loss of Great Britain would lead to the dominance of Germany, while the USA was likely to face its opponents face-to-face without any external support. Moreover, it was likely that the USA had to oppose to both Japan and Germany, if it failed to assist to its allies in Europe (Weinberg and Gerhard, 2005). The US military involvement in Europe undermined the position of Germany and forced Germans to concentrate their military forces on both fronts, Western and Eastern that proved to be fatal to Germany and led to its downfall.
The war influenced not only Europe but also the USA itself because women and African Americans, which were traditionally viewed as secondary-class citizens, had proved their importance for the country (Weinberg and Gerhard, 2005). For instance, women had to do male jobs, while many African Americans fought together with white Americans in the battlefield.
Such a view on Pearl Harbor also seems to be quite convincing, but this view puts Pearl Harbor in a larger context of global policies at the epoch. In fact, this view on Pearl Harbor interprets the events not only in the context of Japan-USA relationships and struggle for the domination in the Asia-Pacific region, but it presents the attack in the context of the global politics of the World War II era. Therefore, such a view on Pearl Harbor is more extensive and correct.
Thus, the USA had to enter World War II after Pearl Harbor that led to the defeat of Japan, Germany and its allies, but it also influenced the USA as well. The main causes of Pearl Harbor were: the growing aggression of Japan and its desire to get rid of the main rival in the Asia-Pacific region; the failure of the US commandment and intelligence; the US expectations of diplomatic solution of the conflict and underestimation of Japan, its ambitions and power. As a result, the US naval base proved to be unprepared to the attack that caused numerous casualties.

References:
Fukudome, S. (December 1955). “Hawaii Operation”. United States Naval Institute, Proceedings, 81, pp.1315-1331.
Hakim, J. (1995). A History of Us: War, Peace and all that Jazz. New York: Oxford University Press
Miller, E. S. (1991). War Plan Orange: The U.S. Strategy to Defeat Japan, 1897–1945. Annapolis, MD: United States Naval Institute Press
Stinnett, R. (1999). Day of Deceit: The Truth About FDR and Pearl Harbor. Chicago: Free Press.
Toland, J. (1986). Infamy: Pearl Harbor and Its Aftermath. New York: Berkley.
Weinberg, S. M. and Gerhard L. (2005). A World at Arms: A Global History of World War II. New York: New Publishers.

Custom essay writing service Essay-911.com. Buy essays online!