Evening star., 1947-02-01
u. N. Charter Provides
Right Of Self Defense
Article 81 Examined in Relation
to Atomic Pact Violations
Bp Georee FieIdins Eliot

Art1cle ol Examined IN neldtion
to Atomic Pact Violations
By George Fielding Eliot
The United Nations Charter provides
for the right OF self-defense In case OF
armed attack. This is the much-dis-
examined in Its possible relation to vio-
lations Of the proposed atomic agree
ment. Its role in such circumstances is,
in principle. precisely that which it
would fulhll in any other emergency case
involving armed attack-it gives the en-
dangered nation the right to use force
to meet force, in cases where interna-
tional action might not get under way
in time.
All that is needed to make this clear
is q recognition, in the atomic agree
ment itself, OF any serious violation
(seizure by national forces of an inter-
national atomic plant, or secret manu-
facture of atomic weapons) as being in
fact an armed attack against all law
abiding states. This is perfectly reason
able Let us suppose that in the days
before air power foreign feet ap-
peared OF Sandy Hook and began
bombarding the forts Would this be an
armed attack? OF course it would. Yet
in point of time. of imminence of danger,
the actual peril to the city of New York
would be farther removed than if
potential enemy were to be discovered,
today, to be building secret atomic
bomb plant in the fastnesses of-let US
say-Central Africa.
Evidence Of Evil Intent.
Any such action is evidence of evil in
tent and involves the security of every
law-abiding state. To define such an act
as an armed attack within the mean
ing of Article 81 is therefore entirely
logical. The compulsions which would
then lie upon the nonoffending powers
to deal drastically with the situation
thus revealed would be of an imperative
nature-and since Article 81 specifically
establishes the right both of individual
and collective self-defense, there is no
reason why nations which desire to sup
port the atomic agreement cannot en-
gage in consultation as to what common
action they would take in case any such
violation were reported. .r
Thus, always provided that the in-
spection system Is fully adequate to all
emergencies, the law-abiding nations
would by no means be left helplessly
awaiting the action of the Security
Council in case of any real danger, and
IS - yr,.
be involved in any situation involving
a really serious violation of the atomic
agreement.
To reason thus is not, as Mr.. Arthur
Krock contends in the New York
Times of January 28, to excise the
heart of" the Baruch plan for atomic
controls, or even to water 1t down." No
one is proposing, as Mr.. Krock appears
to believe. that "all protection should
be left" to Article 81. The existence
of an Atomic Development Authority,
with the powers of control and inspec.
tion which have already been agreed to
in principle. would in itself be some
protection. The atomic agreement GER
tainly would provide for referring any
violations to the Security Council for
action; there is no need to anticipate
that the Security Council will be false
to its duty. The one possibility which
seems to worry the public mind the most
our atomic weapons, and that then
some other power will secretly manufac-
ture them. The inspection system Is
supposed to be able to inform us well
in advance of any such attempt; We
shall certainly not enter any agreement
which does not provide for an inspec-
ton system as nearly air-tight as human
ingenuity can contrive.
Imminent Danger.
If a major violation is discovered, the
existence Of Article 81 plus definition
of secret atomic activity as an armed at
tack merely permits us to take care Of
OUR security with our own forces II
need be- 1t does not mean that the
matter need not be taken to the Security
! Council, and there dealt with under the
forms of Charter legality. 1t does mean
that if the danger appears to be of such
imminence that we cannot wait for the
Council to act, we can act ourselves.
Mr.. Krock is right when he says that
Article 81 is IAN anchor to windward, an
insurance policy to run for the period
| in which the u. N. and the Council must
prove their ability to maintain interna-
tional peace and security by collective
means" But that is precisely the period
in which we are now living. The Security
Council has no military forces at its
disposal. It has no means Of enforcing
its will against armed malefactors.
Moreover, the whole structure of the
U. N. was never devised-as so many
people mistakenly insist-to restrain one
~ fl,A nraat r,ourarr Ias, thu ssnilitn eu