Has Peace Plan

Northern Advocate, 24 September 1949, Page 5

Has Peace Plan

NEW YORK, Fri. (1.20 p.m.)—The Soviet Union’s Foreign Minister (M. Vyshinsky), in a United Nations Assembly speech today, proposed that the Assembly should ban atomic weapons and, at the same time, call on the Big Five to sign “a pact for the strengthening of peace.” At no time during the speech did he refer to the atomic explosion in Russia reported earlier today by President Truman, and he said nothing about Russia possessing the atomic bomb.

M. Vyshinsky preceded his proposal with an attack on Britain and the United States for “preparing for a new war.” He suggested a three-point programme for peace. This was: (1) The Assembly should condemn “the preparation for a new war which was being conducted in a number of countries, particularly the United States and Britain.” (2) The Assembly should ban atomic weapons and other means of mass destruction as “incompatible with the conscience and honour of nations and with membership of the United Nations.” (3) The Assembly should unanimously express the wish that the United States, Britain, China, France and the Soviet Union should “join their efforts to ward off the threat of a new war and conclude, between themselve, a pact for strengthening peace.” WAR REPARATIONS M. Vyshinsky, referring to the first proposal, said preparations for war found expression in Government-en-couraged war propaganda; in the armaments race; in inflated war budgets, which were heavy burdens on the populations; in establishment of numerous military, naval and air bases on other countries’ territories; in the formation of military blocs of states pursuing aggressive aims against

the peace-loving democratic countries; and in the execution of other measures aimed at aggression. He argued in support of the second proposal that me United Nations should act against atomic weapons in the same way as the civilised nations condemned the military use of poison gas and bacteriological weapons as the heaviest crime against mankind. | ATOMIC WEAPONS I The Assembly should consider inadmissible further delay in adoption of practical measures for unconditional prohibition of atomic weapons, and establishment of rigid international control. Explaining the third proposal, M. Vyshinsky said the Assembly should call on all nations to settle disputes and differences peacefully without force or threats of force. The Big Five, as permanent members of the Security Council, bore primary responsibility for maintenance of international peace and security. M. Vyshinsky attacked the Atlantic Pact, which, he said, was nothing but an undermining of the United Nations. Explanations that the pact was formed in conformity with the United Nations’ Charter were merely an attempt to veil the pact’s actual political significance, and deceive public opinion. The Marshall Plan, which split Europe into two camps, had not only failed to improve West Europe’s economy, but had undermined it completely. The Soviet Union and the countries of the “people’s democracies," in contrast, were successfully fulfilling plans for rehabilitation and development of their national economies. IMPOSING VIEWS M. Vyshinsky said the Anglo-Ameri-can policy of weakening the United Nations was the principal reason for the unsatisfactory state of affairs in the Security Council Atomic Energy and Conventional Armaments Commissions, the Military Staff Committee, and the Economic and Social Council. The United States and Britain continuously had tried to impose on the Atomic Energy Commission their plan for international control, to which no independent, sovereign state would agree. Improvement was only possible if all United Nations members observed the Charter and its principles. “FREE HAND WITH ATOM" M. Vyshinsky said the United States, Britain and members of aggressive blocs were now drawing up plans for a new war, giving a prominent part to atomic weapons. “Is it surprising that the United States and Britain refuse to conclude conventions prohibiting atomic weapons, preferring to have a free hand?” he demanded. Banging his fist on the rostrum, M. Vyshinsky declared: “Such is the policy of the United States, and Britain, designed to achieve world domination.”: On the other hand, he said, the Soviet Union was faithful to the principles of international cooperation. It opposed formation of military blocs and aggressive military groups. • Its policy was to maintain peace and strengthen trade relations with all countries. The Soviet Union was not thinking of threatening anyone, but was not afraid of threats and was ready to answer warmongers blow for blow. JUSTIFIED The Netherlands . oreign Minister (M. Stikker) speaking earlier, said the lack of understanding between the powers explained that justified regional cooperation agreements. The United Nations had contributed to lessening east-west tension, but it was unrealistic to attribute it -exclusively to that organisation. M. Schuman, Foreign Minister of France, said the United Nations had been called on to intervene in Greece’s internal conflict because a third country had ventured, and was still venturing to endanger international peace and security. Referring to disarmament and atomic energy control, M. Schuman said as long as such questions as Germany and Japan and relations between east and west remained unsettled, it was useless to reopen inconclusive debates which could only turn into politics and propaganda.