ATOMIC CONTROL PROPOSALS DISCUSSED BY U.N.

Gisborne Herald, Volume LXXV, Issue 22761, 6 October 1948, Page 5

ATOMIC CONTROL PROPOSALS DISCUSSED BY U.N.

(N.&.P.A. -Reuter—Copyright.) (10 a.m.) PARIS, Oct. 5. When the United Nations political committee resumed its debate on atomic energy. General MeNaughton, the Canadian delegate, asked M. Vyshinsky whether the latest Soviet proposal for simultaneous conventions for the control of atomic energy was “sincere.” General McNaughton said that if M. Vyshinsky meant what he said, then the choice between the two conventions —the Soviet proposal and the majority proposal—would be a drafting matter and would present no political importance- If the Russians really meant to establish international control in the sense of the majority proposal, then all was plain sailing. If not, then two and a half years’ work of the Atomic Commission must be discarded and it must start work again. The Czech Foreign Minister, M. dementis, stated he did not accept the Soviet proposal because is country possessed some of the world’s oldest uranium mines, but because the Soviet plan gave greater expectation of effective atomic energy control in the interests of mankind.

Mr. Hodgson, Australia, said he could not accept the Soviet proposal as it now stood. Nevertheless, the Soviet plan showed some step forward had been made He suggested that the Atomic Energy Commission be directed to continue its work along the lines of the majority report. Dr. Hector Castro, El Salvador, stated: “It is most encouraging that the United States, Britain and Canada, working in complete harmony, are willing to give up their secret in return for the complete certainty that no nation will use atomic energy for warlike purposes. They will to this end accept far-reaching international control.” Dr. Castro criticised the Soviet stand, principally on the grounds of the Soviet insistence on applying the veto to controls.

Mr. Kysselev, Byelorussia, stated that an unbiassed study of the facts showed the United States was responsible for the impasse in the Atomic Energy Commission. He added that the evidence of the American’s ambitions was American bases abroad, the Marshall plan and the Truman doctrine. General Carlos Romulo, Philippines, said the Soviet resolution constituted a “chink in the wall, letting through a ray of light to dispel, to some extent, the gloom which has hitherto prevailed.” General Romulo said that If the resolution meant what he took it to mean, it was an act of courage. “There can only be pride, not humiliation, in any steps which bring us closer to compromise based on truth.”