The Wilmington morning star., 1946-06-24
MORE ABOUT
LIPPMANN
FROM PAGE ONE

his own country and in every other
country.
Now our plan differs from the
Russian in that we do not propose
to abolish atomic weapons but to
give the International authority
the monopoly of such weapons.
But this difference, which will
have to be explored carefully, is
less important than the agreement
of the two plans. For in our plan
it would be a serious crime for \
government or any private person
to produce, own, or use an atomic
weapon. The Russians would make
it a high crime for anyone to have
atomic weapons, whereas we
would make it a high crime for
anyone but the authorized inter-
national authority to have them.
The Russians stipulate that we
should destroy all our atomic
bombs three months after the
agreement comes into force. Since
it cannot come into force without
our agreement Chat is to say I'm
less we do not veto~it) the door is
wide open to us to propose rules
and regulations that should be
embodied in the treaty and in the
domestic legislation which Mr..
Gromyko proposes il order to sup
port the treaty.
While the proposal a W e
cease making atomic bombs and
destroy those we have is n that
we cannot accept off-hand, we
should not reject it in principal.
From a strictly military point of
view the Russian proposal is, l
think, more favorable to the
United States and less favorable to
the Soviet Union than is the
American proposal. For under the
American plan the international
authority would develop atomic
energy plants outside the United
States, and there is no doubt that,
using American know : how, the
international a thority could
build them much sooner than any
other country car hope to- build
them by itsef.
The Russian proposals would
leave us with a monopoly for
quite some time to come, and a
great head start for a much longer
time, in the facilities necessary to
make atomic weapons. For my
own part l do not believe that the
Russians have really understood
the problem of atomic energy well
enough to realize how much they
are %conceding to us and how little
they are getting for themselves.
When they do, they viii shut the
loud mouths of THE Daily Work
er" and their other foolish friends.
and take a very different view OF
the extraordinarily radical pro-
posal which Mr.. Baruch has made
to them.
For the situation in atomic en-
ergy today is as if the United
States had the only steel plants in
tae world. With that steel are
made the only guns in the world.
Along come the Russians and say:
Destroy the guns you have, cease
making new guns, but keep your
steel plants, and keep the dies.
jigs, blueprints, machine tools, and
whatever else it takes to make
guns out of steel, We Russians. on
the other hand, having neither
guns nor steel plants, expect
some day to have steel plants as
good as yours" We, on the other
hand. have said that. if we can
agree on a plan for it, we will not
only stop making guns for our
selves but will participate II build
ing steel plants as good as our own
in other parts of the world.
The objection to the Russian
plan is not that it would deprive
us Of a winning weapon OF war. 1t
leaves us with all the means OF
making these weapons. and this
immense military potential would
continue to be a great element IN
the balance of power in the world.
The objection is that while it still
leaves us pre-eminent in atomic
power, it offers nc guaranty, and
not even a plan, against national
rivalry in the development OF de-
structive atomic power.
For the Russians do not seem
to have understood the funda-
mental conclusion of the Ameri-
can scientists that any country
which has the facilities for max
ing atomic energy in large guam
titles has practically all the faclll-
ties for waging atomic war. IN
less all the important develop
ment of atomic energy is firmly
under international control, the
threat of atomic war will be I'M
minent and persistent.
The more we examine the
Baruch and the Gromyko state
ments the more we have reason
tn feel. l believe, that this is as