Evening star., 1953-10-08

It does mean the capability
Of the Nation to survive-to pre-
Third Of q Series
serve the essential population
morale and physical plant tt
carry on the struggle that viii
follow the first onslaught.
This is the job of civil defense
And assuming a more or les!
equal military capacity between
the United States and Russia
this is the factor that will make
the difference between victory
and defeat if war comes.
Change in Concept.
Within this framework, the
concept of civil defense in the
United States has undergone
some profound changes in the
last three years.
| At the beginning, Civil Defense
planners set their sights high
The problem, as it was seer
then, was to preserve the physi-
cal plant and the productive
capacity of the country. 1t was
this capacity that had always
been the American ace-in-the-
hole in winning past wars.
! Cities-the big population anc
industrial centerS-were to bt
manned and defended like mill
tary positions. Huge amounts o1
money were to be spent to pro.
tect vital plants and their en-
ployes. The emphasis was or
bomb-proof shelters, fire con-
troll and the grim determination
to stick it out.
No Longer Possible.
This concept is in the process
of being scrapped. If it wa
ever a really feasible approach
to the problem, it is not con
sidered so today. New develop
ments in the national defenS'
picture. newly discovered wea'
ponS in the Russian arSenal-ant
failure to take the protective
steps called for in the origina
plan-all these have all forcee
a radical revision of Civil De-
fenSe thinking.
Today, to put it bluntly, there
is no hope of protecting th'
great cities of the United States
There is no hope either, giver
the present pattern of industria
concentration, of keeping up
production lines under atomic
attack. Today, the leaders are
forced to the conclusion thai
the Russians can not only dam
age our cities, but can complete.
ly destroy them. AS Civil De-
fense Director Val Peterson puts
it, the cities now are considered
dependable" ....
! At this point, the concentra-
ton is centering much more or
the idea of protecting people by
the simplest and cheapest meth
cd possible-by seeing to it that
they are not around when the
bombs fall. The idea of evacuat-
ing as many people as possible
from target areas before an at.
tack starts, and of dispensing the
rest from the heart of the target
areas before the bombs drop, il
the latest idea being talked ur
by top civil defense planners.
Depends on, Warning.
Evacuation and dispersal, o1
course, depend on warning. II
would take days or weeks tt
move any significant part ot
urban populations to safer areas
as was done in England during
the last war. It would take con-
siderably more than the present
maximum guarantee of Is min
utes warning to clear the areas
where total destruction can be
expected.
The feasibility Of any evacua-
tion plan, in other words, de-
pends entirely on the hope that
the present warning system car
be substantially improved in the
near future.
It depends also on the train
ing of the whole city popula-
ton. From the official point-of-
view, there are few prospects
more frightening than an unor-
ganized scramble for the exits
of several hundred thousand
people faced with the threat Of
imminent vaporization. If tht
new idea takes hold, it can be
expected that the major job Of
the organized civil defense will bt
that of directing and channeline
floods of people. And the prac-
tice air raid in the future will
take on more of the aspects o1
a gigantic school f1re-drill.
Question of Survival.
Assuming that evacuation anC
dispersal can be made to work
the question remains: Does thi!
new concept, which virtually
writes off our cities and oul
productive plants. offer a rea.
sonable hope of survival and vic
tory in an atomic war? Where
does it leave us, for instance
compared to the Russians?
The simple fact is that, com
pared to the United States
Russia does not offer nearly a
profitable a target for atomic at
tack. If atomic weapons ar
considered as primarily designed
for destroying people, thei
morale and their will to resist
the Russians have the advantage
of smaller concentrations o
population. less regard TO