Evening star., 1950-02-25
Mr.. Tydings and the Atom

In effect in demanding that atomic control
be made an inseparable part of general dis
armament, Senator Tydings has asked for
basic change in the policy followed by the United
States ever since the so-called Baruch Plan was
first presented to the United Nations. In effect,
too, he has asked for the same kind of change
on the part of the overwhelming u N. majority.
1t has long been Mr.. Tydings' belief that
what the world needs is special conference on
general disarmament, and within recent days
in his capacity as chairman of the powerful
Senate Armed Services Committee-he has been
vigorously appealing to the President to summon
one. What he wants is an international meeting
that will result in the outlawry, reduction or
regulation of all kinds of military power, con-
ventional and unconventional. He is against
giving separate priority attention to the atom.
He insists that every type of orthodox weapon
and war-making force-grenades, rifles, artillery,
tanks planes armies, navies, etc.-muSt be
placed under rigid control simultaneously with
the control of the A-bomb and kindred instru-
ments of mass destruction
In fact, Mr.. Tydings is so emphatic in his
inSistence that he has backed it up with kind
of threat. The threat is this: That if the
Kremlin should suddenly agree to the atomic
plan fathered by the United States and over
whelmingly approved by the United Nations, he
would then do everything possible to block Senate
ratification of that plan unless it provided at the
same time for the regulation of all armed force.
In justification of his position he has made the
following points, among others: Cd We now
have favorable status in the balance of power
only because our stockpile of A-weapons is far
ahead of the Soviet Unions; CD if international
control of the atom were established without
accompanying action on general disarmament,
our surrender of that stockpile would deprive us
of the one advantage that enables us to Offset
Russas vastly greater strength in terms of things
like artillery, troops and air squadrons; and CD
such a course would imperil the entire free world.
But this argument, though plausible and i'm
pressive in some respects, is an old one long
since heard and rejected in the United Nations.
The British gave voice to it more than three
years ago at the beginning of the U. MS atomic
deliberations. Like Mr. Tydings, they wanted an
all-in-one- package type of disarmament, but
they soon reversed themselves after having been
convinced that unless the uniquely deadly atom
were dealt with separately, and with special
urgency, no diSarmfng progress OF any kind could
be made. As Bernard Baruch declared at the
time, If the world could agree on the control Of
A-weapons, the control of arms in general would
then be relatively easy. On the other hand, an
effort to achieve everything at once would almost
certainly result in the achievement of nothing
whatever
As for the security and balance of power
factors, If genuinely effective atomic plan were
established, 1t would become operative by stages,
during which action on conventional weapons
could be agreed upon. Mr.. Tydings' misgivings
on that score seem as exaggerated as his idea for
a world conference seems unrealistic and ILL
timed. Actually, as long as the Russians adhere
to their present policy, this whole subject will
be academic. Until they change, we will be up
against stone wall that has no ears for talk
about disarmament of any sort.