The Gisborne Herald. IN WHICH IS INCORPORATED “THE TIMES." GISBORNE, FRIDAY, MAY 2, 1947. AGREEMENT ON ATOMIC BOMB VITAL

Gisborne Herald, Volume LXXIV, Issue 22319, 2 May 1947, Page 4

The Gisborne Herald. IN WHICH IS INCORPORATED “THE TIMES." GISBORNE, FRIDAY, MAY 2, 1947. AGREEMENT ON ATOMIC BOMB VITAL

are building castles on the sand which wall be swept away w it]i the first blast of the atomic bomb,” stated the Archbishop of York, Dr. Garbett, during the House of Lords discussion on international control of atomic energy. “Man has made immense advances in scientific knowledge, but has not made a corresponding advance in moral stature.” He added that all plans for the future would come to nought unless this matter were dealt with. People who have tried to follow progress in the Moscow talks or the lack of it—must have been convinced long since that an agreement on the control of this fearsome new power must be regarded as Priority No. Iby the leaders of the nations. Without a friendly understanding on the issue and perhaps on the. entire gamut of armament questions it is hard to visualise the. attainment of full co-operation on any problem involving the policies of the major Powers. The Archbishop of York is not alone in his opinions. Writing in one of the latest numbers of the Christian Science Monitor to hand, Mr. Joseph Ilarsch says: “Unless this new force (atomic energy), which obsesses the thinking of mankind, can be internationalised, then no other diplomatic moves matter very much.” ' The main difference in viewpoint between these two men is that, whereas Dr. Garbett would appear to put the onus, or a large share of it, on to the Western Allies by asking whether everything was being done to reach agreement with Russia, Mr. Harsch sees as one of the main chief difficulties the attitude of the Soviet Union as illustrated by M. Gromkyo’s objections at the last meeting of the United Nations Security Council to the American plan for internationalisation. Certainly it seemed that as though the Russian attitude was hardening at that time. Previously there had been signs of compromises and concessions on various other issues, which led to the hope that a real peace foundation was in sight. The outcome now feared is that, if M. Gromyko’s answer was decisive, it might mean that Russia is accepting an atomic race with the United States. This in turn would mean the acceptance of atomic bombs as the ultimate deciding weapon in a new power struggle. Small wonder it is that, in the words of the Archbishop of York, the British people would feel hanging over them the shadow of doom if, in present circumstances, the bomb passed into the hands of other nations besides the United States. Clearly the urgent call is for a reshuffling of the United Nations agenda and immediate action in trying to reach an understanding on international control of this force. If only mankind tries to reach swiftly the moral stature for which Dr. Garbett appeals and at the same time realises that the spirit of friendly compromise was never more urgently needed there is still every hope for the future. It should not overstrain human acumen to arrive at the conclusion that there could he no \ictois in a war fought with weapons so terrible.