Monroe W. Hatch, Jr.
Executive Director

September 27, 1994

Dr. Martin Harwit  
Director  
National Air and Space Museum  
Smithsonian Institution  
Washington, D.C. 20560

Dear Martin:

            I am writing in response to your letter of September 21. While your August 31 script was an improvement over the May 31 script, there are serious lingering structural, contextual and ideological issues that still must be addressed.  

            As you know, I presented our main concerns in a detailed letter dated August 24, 1994. I am enclosing that letter as an attachment to this, since most of the problems I outlined there in reference to the May 31 script still exist. I also want to restate that I believe you would be better served if you expanded the charter of the military curators you have assigned to work on the new addition to the exhibit and let them help you modify the entire exhibit.  

            I believe by now it is evident that veterans’ groups, including the Military Coalition, members of Congress, military historians, and many others are not satisfied with your August 31 script. I am not their spokesman, but I believe all would agree that your new addition fronting the exhibit will help add balance, although using the “American Perspective” in the title of this section is an obvious mistake. A number of your critics believe that sections 100, 200, and 300 are salvageable with detailed line-in, line-out work (refer to my August 24 comments). However, sections 400 and 500 must be changed significantly. The lighting change in section 400 is welcome, but the section itself should be subdivided as described below. In the remaining “Ground Zero” portion, another 25 photos should be deleted to meet your original direction to reduce this section by two-thirds. Section 500 also needs to undergo major change. We recommend discarding everything beyonhd page 16 and replacing it with the material described below.  

            Let me summarize again our broad structural, contextual and ideological comments as they apply to your August 31 script revision.  

• Begin the War in the Pacific section with 1931 instead of 1937 and chronicle the Japanese march from Manchuria onward and the drive to establish the Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere.  
  
  
• Eliminate the anti-American speculation, including material from the previous “Historical Controversies” that is now camouflaged under new subheadings. In both sections 200 and 500, the curators continue to cast doubt upon and question American decisions while taking Japanese actions at face value.  
  
  
• Present the casualty issue in greater context. The casualty toll in the Pacific was rising at the rate of 900 a day. There are many credible estimates of the casualties of a lnad invasion of Japan put forth by prominent historians that are far higher than those cited by your curators.  
  
  
• Present military actions as such. The curators tend to emphasize sociological versus military aspects of warfare. The B-29 bombing campaign (conventional and nuclear) was military in nature. It should be portrayed in that context.  
  
  
• Reduce and subdivide section 400. We recommend the following:  

        Imperial Japan: Definant

Return to the Chronology of Controvery