THE GUILT DOGGING THE GREATEST GENERATION
Over
the last few years, a regular cottage industry has sprung up in
publishing and Hollywood to celebrate what Tom Brokaw dubbed ''the
greatest generation.'' Mr. Brokaw's 1998 book by the same name
is only one of numerous works hailing the generation of Americans
who led the nation through the Great Depression and World War
II. Others include Mr. Brokaw's sequel, ''The Greatest Generation
Speaks,'' Stephen Ambrose's ''D-Day: June 6, 1944,'' James Bradley's
''Flags of Our Fathers'' and the Steven Spielberg movie ''Saving
Private Ryan.'' It has even led to the establishment of a D-Day
museum in New Orleans.
It
was perhaps inevitable that Congress would join what has become
a wave of national nostalgia. Besides their recent vote to erect
a monument to World War II veterans in the middle of the Washington
Mall, lawmakers have fallen over themselves to propose a host
of new measures either honoring or compensating the wartime generation.
These have included a ''Rosie the Riveter'' monument to women
who worked on the home front, indemnities to American and Filipino
veterans, the commemoration of interned Japanese-Americans, demands
for Japanese apologies for war crimes and even an investigation
into whether Italian-Americans suffered civil-liberties abuses
during the war.
Few
would quarrel with such accolades or demands for redress. Yet
the recent rush to honor has included a more contentious tribute—an
attempt by Congress to essentially rewrite history and enshrine
the main tenet of a widely discredited conspiracy theory in legislation.
As part of a defense bill approved on Oct. 30, 2000 Congress called
on President Clinton to exculpate the commanders at Pearl Harbor
of any responsibility for the devastating surprise attack that
pushed America into World War II. A section of the bill claims
that Pearl Harbor's commanders at the time, Adm. Husband E. Kimmel
and Gen. Walter C. Short, ''were not provided necessary and critical
intelligence that would have alerted them to prepare for the attack.''
It asks President Clinton to posthumously give both men back their
highest wartime ranks, which they lost upon their forced retirement
after the battle.
But
what the bill also does, by implication, is pass on responsibility
for American unpreparedness at Pearl Harbor to the high command
in Washington at the time—the most prominent of whom were
President Franklin D. Roosevelt and Gen. George C. Marshall. It
thus gives credence to an old and discredited conspiracy theory—that
Roosevelt and others maneuvered America into the war by deliberately
keeping the Pearl Harbor garrison in the dark about the impending
attack.
The
measure, which is still awaiting a decision by Mr. Clinton, was
sponsored by Delaware's senators, William V. Roth Jr. and Joseph
R. Biden, and backed by a broad coalition of senators from both
parties. Its supporters seemed largely ignorant of the enveloping
conspiracy theories and disavowed any intention of passing the
buck to anyone. ''I am not interested in shifting blame,'' Senator
Roth said in a statement. ''Pearl Harbor was a systemic failure
in which the gravest mistakes were made by the Washington authorities.
This amendment is a matter of justice and fairness that goes to
the core of our military tradition and our nation's sense of military
honor.''
It is also the culmination of a tenacious effort by Edward R.
Kimmel, son of the late admiral, to restore the reputation of
his father and General Short. Mr. Kimmel, 79, a retired Delaware
lawyer and World War II veteran himself, does not believe in any
conspiracy but insists, ''There was ample information in Washington
in hands of the high command that the attack was going to be on
Pearl Harbor.''
Yet
if critical knowledge was withheld from the Pearl Harbor commanders—intentionally
or not—isn't someone to blame for the loss of 2,403 American
lives on Dec. 7, 1941, the ''date which will live in infamy''?
A
long series of Army and Navy inquiries and Congressional hearings
in the 1940's all declined to restore Admiral Kimmel and General
Short to their highest ranks. A 1995 Pentagon review concurred,
finding that responsibility for the attack ''should be broadly
shared'' but that ''the intelligence available to Admiral Kimmel
and General Short was sufficient to justify a higher level of
vigilance than they chose to maintain.'' The vast majority of
historians seem to agree, and many are outraged over what they
see as an attempt to change the historical record by legislative
fiat. ''In the end, no, historical facts should not be decided
by legislation,'' said Richard Snow, editor of American Heritagemagazine,
who says the officers were ''absolutely not'' missing information
critical to the base's defense.
William
J. vanden Heuvel, chairman of the Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt
Institute, said ''Congress did its job in 1942,'' referring to
the earlier hearings. ''There should be new hearings if there
is new evidence.''
Indeed,
others are concerned that using official venues to advance dubious
history is becoming a trend. Last December, for example, relatives
of the late Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. used an uncontested
wrongful death suit to press their belief that Dr. King was assassinated
not by James Earl Ray but by a much wider government conspiracy,
perhaps orchestrated by President Lyndon Johnson.
With
the cooperation of the defendant—an obscure Memphis bar owner
who claimed to have played a role in the assassination—the
Kings' lawyer was able to fill the court record with speculation
about the civil rights leader's murder, thereby preempting a thorough
new Justice Department inquiry that found no evidence of a conspiracy.
''What
a perversion of history, to pass a resolution that effectively
endorses an Oliver Stone-type conspiracy about withheld critical
information about Pearl Harbor,'' said Gerald L. Posner, whose
book Killing the Dream(Random House, 1998) debunked a number
of conspiracy theories about the King assassination. ''It fits
with our national obsession to absolve anyone of any responsibility
for their actions.''
Perhaps
this is the sharpest irony surrounding the Pearl Harbor legislation.
After all, ''the greatest generation'' has been lauded above all
for its intestinal fortitude, its willingness to accept responsibility
and to lead. Now it may be that Congress has officially transformed
the greatest generation into the blameless generation.
©
Copyright The
New York Times
