Generate an appropriate single-sentence summary for the given text such that it includes the main topic of the text.

They were two of five preventable errors - recorded as "never events", because they are so serious they should not happen - at West Suffolk Hospital. The incidents all took place in the last five years, the hospital in Bury St Edmunds said. It said action was always taken which aimed to prevent further never events. The details were released in response to a Freedom of Information Act request. Between 2009 and 2012, NHS trusts across England recorded 750 'never events'. 'One too many' In 2010, West Suffolk Hospital recorded one case of a misplaced naso- or oro-gastric, where a feeding tube has been inserted in the wrong position. The operation on the wrong part of the body took place in 2012. In 2013, there were two never events - a wrong implant/prosthesis was fitted and the foreign object error. This year, there was a failure to monitor and respond to oxygen saturation in the blood when a patient was undergoing anaesthesia. A hospital spokeswoman said further details could not be released, to protect patient confidentiality. The hospital said it had had an average of 335,878 patient admissions a year over the five-year period. Jon Green, executive chief operating officer at West Suffolk Hospital, said: "We take any incidents which compromise safety extremely seriously. Although never events are rare, one is one too many. "As such, we work closely with our clinicians to thoroughly investigate any incidents which do arise so that we can take action to prevent a recurrence in the future."
Surgeons operated on the wrong part of a patient's body and a "foreign object" was left inside another patient, a hospital has revealed.

By Dr John Swenson-WrightHead, Asia Programme, Chatham House It signalled Japan's capitulation and the end not only of the war in the Pacific, but also of Japan's colonial rule of the Korean peninsula, its influence in South East Asia and its attempt to dominate China and the Asian mainland. With Japan's conservative Prime Minister Shinzo Abe planning to issue an official statement reflecting on the past, this year is a particularly sensitive anniversary. Progressive critics, inside and outside Japan, worry that Mr Abe's statement may downplay past apologies in favour of a "revisionist" historical interpretation that will antagonise Japan's neighbours, most notably China and South Korea. How were Hirohito's words received at the time? Hirohito's remarks that day were unprecedented. Pre-recorded on a phonograph and delivered in rarefied, classical Japanese, they shocked a Japanese populace, which was unprepared for the possibility of surrender or defeat and had almost certainly never heard their divine head of state speak in public. The country was still on a war footing. That was despite the near total destruction of Japan's navy by July 1945, a policy of economic strangulation that had imposed massive material hardship on ordinary citizens, the firebombing of major cities, and the atomic devastation of Hiroshima and Nagasaki on 6 and 9 August. The cathartic impact of the emperor's words allowed the public to embrace the once alien concept of defeat. The statement was also a necessary means of forcing consensus on a fractious Japanese political and military elite, some of whose members were determined to fight to the last. Hirohito's acceptance of defeat, which was backed by his senior ministers, almost failed in the face of an abortive coup by young army officers who were trying to stop the imperial broadcast from going ahead. For an emperor mindful of the impact of America's "new and most cruel bomb", surrender (even if he chose not to use the term) was a means of avoiding the total destruction of Japan and further civilian casualties, and revealingly, the possible "total extinction of human civilisation". What happened next? The end of the war prompted jubilant celebrations in Europe and the US. In Korea it led to a similar outpouring of optimism as Koreans experienced their liberation from 35 years of Japanese colonial rule. Koreans also saw the brief establishment of a progressive Korean People's Republic in the south of the country. However, such optimism was short-lived, as US forces intervened to establish an American-led military government in September 1945, while Soviet forces created their own dependent government in the north of a peninsula increasingly divided along geographical and ideological lines. Ironically, the Americans turned to former Japanese colonial administrators to handle the civilian administration of Korea, a decision that made Koreans deeply sceptical of US intentions, reinforcing the belief (still present to this day) that Korea's interests take second place to those of more powerful states. What were the consequences for Japan and regional rivalries? Japan's defeat had profound and in some ways contradictory consequences for the East Asian region and the wider post-war world. It facilitated a US-led seven-year occupation of Japan that, in its first two years, promoted democratisation and demilitarisation. Japan established a new identity of anti-militarism, aversion to nuclear weapons and a focus on economic development that ultimately produced the high-speed miracle years of the 1960s. More controversially, the continuing occupation, especially from 1948, reflected the onset of the Cold War in East Asia. US policy makers worried about ideological divisions within Japan, the growing ascendancy of Mao's communist forces in mainland China and the Soviet presence in Japan's "northern territories" (the Kurile islands occupied by the Russians in the closing days of the war and still held by Moscow to this day). Japan, as America's most important emerging ally in the region, became bound into the strategic and ideological conflict between the communist and Western blocs, but in a manner that, some critics contend, fatally limited its autonomy and policy-making independence. How has strategic balance in the region changed since then? From the vantage point of 2015, the 15 August anniversary is a reminder that Japan under Prime Minister Abe is still confronting difficult strategic challenges that echo those of 70 years ago. These include a Russia that is unwilling to cede territory to Japan, and a still-divided Korean peninsula but one in which North Korea is now a de facto nuclear state and therefore a more threatening power. Compared to 1945, China is a much more powerful actor able, through its more assertive maritime presence, to challenge the territorial possessions of its neighbours in the South China and (in the case of Japan) East China Seas. What is the contemporary significance of Hirohito's comments announcing Japan's surrender? Hirohito characterised Japan's decision to go to war as an attempt to "ensure Japan's self-preservation and the stabilisation of East Asia". Controversially, he also pointed out that there was no intention "to infringe upon the sovereignty of other nations or to embark on territorial aggrandisement". While past Japanese prime ministers have acknowledged the suffering that Japan caused its neighbours during the Pacific War and expressed their "remorse", there are some conservative voices in Japan who identify with the sentiment embodied in Hirohito's August 1945 statement. To them, Japan's past actions were neither aggressive nor illegitimate, and they have been lobbying Mr Abe to reflect this alternative interpretation in his own, contemporary statement. It remains unclear to what extent the prime minister shares these views. What balance will Mr Abe need to strike? Given the historical sensitivities involved, any expression of such conservative views would invite condemnation from China and South Korea, as well as from progressive opinion within Japan, at a time when the Abe administration is seeking to pass new legislation to enhance the strategic flexibility of its self-defence forces. For these reasons, as well as the need to avoid antagonising its US ally, which has called on Japan to avoid inflaming historical tensions, the government is likely to tread carefully. History, it seems, is anything but an academic matter. Mr Abe will need to be agile in pursuing a pragmatic foreign policy agenda while maintaining the support of his more conservative allies at home. Dr John Swenson-Wright is head of the Asia Programme at the Chatham House think tank. Chatham House will host the conference The Future of Capitalist Democracy: UK-Japan Perspectives on 21-22 September 2015.'
This Saturday it will be 70 years since Japan's Emperor, Hirohito, publicly accepted the surrender terms of the key Allied countries in World War Two.

The opposition, Cambodia National Rescue Party, says it rejects the result of Sunday's poll, citing "serious irregularities". Names were missing from voter lists and some voters found others had used their ballots, reports claimed. Here voters share their experience of casting their ballots. Socheata, a 30-year-old office worker from Phnom Penh My village is far away and it would have taken me the whole day to travel there from the capital. My employer gave me the option to vote in the election or volunteer to become an election monitor. I have voted many times before and I was interested in seeing the process for myself, so I chose to become an observer. I was very disappointed. I visited three polling stations and a central office. A lot of people who turned out to vote could not find their names on the register. People were shouting and crying. Last time in 2008 when people couldn't find their names on the register they just walked off. This time they stayed and shouted and cried. There's more momentum this time, you can feel it. I was impressed by how engaged young people are. Last time they were mainly interested in entertainment and hobbies and doing fun things. This time, when the opposition leader gave a speech in the run up to the elections, so many young people wearing campaign T-shirts and caps and waving posters turned out on the street, in the heat, and waited to hear him. I think there was almost a million young people. The ruling party thought young people would vote for them, but they underestimated young people and their desire for change. Although young people said they would vote for the ruling party, in reality they cast their vote in contrast to what they had said. The election was a success from the perspective of being peaceful, mainly, but there were a lot of irregularities and fraud. I think the flaws were deliberate because this has been a recurring problem. The ruling party was meant to reform the election process but that is just one more thing they have failed to deliver. You are meant to have formal ID with you to vote, but if you don't have any ID then you can apply in advance for registration papers. The forms can easily be manipulated because you only need to get two witnesses to say they know you to be issued with a form, whereas your national identity card, family book and other forms of ID are much more solid forms of ID. Last election there were 500 of these registration forms issued, this time 1.5 million forms were issued. That is much less secure. Jean, a French literature undergraduate from Takeo province This is the first time I was eligible to vote. There were five rooms and I had to go into one room and my mother had to go into another. Each room has a list of names. I found my name on the list then I found her name on my list too so I shouted to her, you're supposed to be over here. She said, 'No, I'm supposed to be here,' so we found an official to talk to and they said there must have been a mistake as her name was printed on two lists. I know of three people from my village who tried to vote except someone else had been there before them and they were told, 'no you can't vote, you have voted already'. I don't think it was very well organised. The days before the election people were excited and happy, but then when the results came in I felt so disappointed, I couldn't accept it and I felt like I couldn't breathe. The next morning when I went to the market to buy food, there was no noise, it was silent. I think everyone was disappointed. Dalis from Phnom Penh My experience was that everything went smoothly. I was in and out in about 10 minutes or less and I found my name really easily. One problem though, that didn't happen to me, but my friend and my cousin said their ink washed off pretty easily. They give you ink on your finger to show that you have voted, so that you can't go round again, but they found their ink was very easy to wash off, which is a bit worrying, but as I said, I had no problems. If there have been voting irregularities though, then I will not accept the result of the election. Doeur, a recent psychology graduate and election observer I worked as an election observer and received information from many different centres. There were many problems. The biggest complaint was people's names had been lost from the register. Another problem was with intimidation. Members from the Communist People's Party gathered about 100 metres away from the polling station and people were afraid to vote for anyone else. In one place security didn't allow us inside to observe. Bunthai from Phnom Penh I didn't notice any problems. I was in and out of the election poll within 5 minutes and it took no time all for the officials to find my name on the registry list, once I had handed them my national ID card and my registration receipt. I didn't notice anyone with ID and their receipt who was denied entry. Baby Sangha, an economics professor from Kandal province This is the first time I have voted. Last time I didn't think anything would change but now there is a very strong Western-educated opposition candidate. People are sick of the corruption, there's a lot of injustice here and people don't want to stand for it any more. This election is very important and a lot of people I know had to travel a long way from their work place to vote. There is corruption at every level of society. If you want to sell your house you have to pay under the table to officials, as well as paying the estate agents. When I got married and wanted to have my marriage certificate I had to pay an official, even though it is meant to be issued for free. It took me three hours to find my name on the voter registration list but I didn't give up and finally I found my name. When they started counting the ballots there were a lot of people excitedly running from room to room as the number of CNPR votes far outweighed the CPP votes. We were so excited. I was at home when the official results were announced though and they were so different from what we had seen. We couldn't believe it. Interviews by Sitala Peek

Cambodia's People's Party has claimed victory in national elections by 68 seats to the opposition's 55 seats.

