IS EUROPE NOW VULNERABLE TO RUSSIAN ATTACK?

Grey River Argus, 27 September 1949, Page 5

IS EUROPE NOW VULNERABLE TO RUSSIAN ATTACK?

NEW YORK, Sept. 25 A group of top scientists contend that Russia’s development of atomic energy means that the United States can no longer prevent Western Europe from being attacked. The scientists also agreed that if the United States and Russia engage in atomic warfare, it will lead at least to a ten-year struggle requiring occupation as the final step. The scientists, who are active in atomic research, expressed these views at a press conference in Chicago. The scientists agreed that Russia, because of its vast territory and concealed war industries, will not need as many atom bombs as the United States to reach parity with the United States. Scientists Claim to Foresee Effects of New Development NEW YORK, Sept. 25 At a press conference in Chicago, Dr Harold Urey, a Nobel Prize winner and discoverer of heavy water, said: “If peace is preserved, it will not be because we can prevent Western Europe from being attacked.’’ D x ' Urey, Dr Leo Szilard, the Hun-garian-born atom pioneer and Dr Samuel Allison, director of the University of Chicago Institute of Nuclear Studies, agreed that there can be no agreement with Russia on the control of atomic armaments. “There is not the slightest use even of discussing it with Russia now,’’ they said. “We could not trust them anyway.” Dr Urey said that the three men proposed the establishment of a super-Government of the North Atlantic nations. He could not see a defence assurance against the atom within 50 years, other than by political organisation. He added: “Even then we might, have war.” British Scientists Have Their Doubts LONDON, Sept. 25 British scientific and political quarters treated with reserve the Soviet explanations of the atomic explosion that occurred in Russia recently. Their attitude was that even if atomic energy had been used for blasting in building operations, it still meant the Russians could make the atomic bomb. The scientists said the destructive force of the atom could be used for blasting, because used that way the principle was the same as that of the bomb, but they pointed to the expense of the process. Professor A. M. Low, leading British se’entist, doubted if Russia was putting atomic energy into building work on a large scale. He discredited the theories that seismograph recordings had shown atomic explosions in Russia, and added: “Radiation is a simpler method of ascertaining atomic explosions.”