Evening star., 1947-03-07
Mr.. Gromyko's S Latest

Through Mr.. Gromyko's latest
speech to the Security Council, the
Russians now have made clear that
it probably will be years, if ever, be-
fore they agree to our atomic-con-
troll plan. They are for rigid" in
ternational superyision-but. They
favor vetpless inspection system
but. They do not dispute that vio-
lators should be punished-but. AS
for outlawing the bomb, they insist
that that must be done right away.
Our plan calls for a powerful
world authority; for effective inspec-
ton unhampered by the veto; for
vetoless and swift punishment for
violations; and for a timing pro-
cedure under which we would sur
render our present exclusive advan-
tages only as the control machinery
went into effect. Rather than go
into the tedious details, suffice it to
say that the Russians would extract
most of the teeth from the system
We have in mind and substitute
completely inadequate alternative.
In MIR. Gromykos words, only
people who have lost the sense of
reality can seriously believe" in the
American plan. Mr.. Gromyko says
this even though all members of
the twelve-nation Atomic Energy
Commission-with the exception of
Russia and satellite Poland-haye
voted in favor Of the plans essen
tials. Why this illogic? Why this
insistence that everybody is out of
step but the Russians? Mr..
Gromyko's speech seems frank
enough to suggest at least part of
the answer. Leaving aside his un-
warranted bitterness and sarcasm,
his arguments strongly indicate
that the Soviet Union is afraid that
the rest of the world, led by Amer
lea, could employ our control pro-
posals to undermine Soviet inde-
pendence.
Why the fear? If the situation
were reversed, If the Russians were
in our place and we in theirs, how
would we react? Suppose Russia
were democratic and had exclusive
possession Of the A-bomb and pre-
sented the same plan as ours. Sup
pose America were a Communist
dictatorship without the bomb. Sup
pose great numbers of freedom-lov-
ing Russians were openly hostile to
and fearful of our totalitarian sys-
tenn. Suppose, finally, that they and
peoples politically and economically
akin to them were consistently and
heavily outvoting us in the United
Nations. What would be our atti-
tude then? Would we insist on
immediate outlawry of A-weapons?
Would we oppose powerful world
atomic authority as a menace to
our "sovereignty"? Would we insist
on maintaining the veto to offset the
majority usually voting against us?
Would we be reluctant to permit un-
limited inspection behind our iron
curtain?
These questions are not cited to
make the present Russian position
seem less discouraging or ominous
than it is. They are cited simply
to emphasize what the free world
is up against in seeking to control
the atom. If we were the Russians,
it is not improbable that we would
react pretty much as they, out of
a sense Of fear. We would do so be-
cause of deep theological and eco
nomic differences. There is a vast
gulf between them and us, and we
cannot bridge it by beating them
over the head for failing to see eye
to eye with us. The only construc-
tive course to follow is to keep on
trying to convert them to our view.
The alternative is to give up in de-
spair and let civilization prepare
for its suicide in the deadliest arms
race Of all time,