THE NORTHERN ADVOCATE Registered tor Transmission through the Post as a Newspaper. MONDAY SEPTEMBER 26, 1949. Russia's Atom Bomb Repercussions

Northern Advocate, 26 September 1949, Page 4

THE NORTHERN ADVOCATE Registered tor Transmission through the Post as a Newspaper. MONDAY SEPTEMBER 26, 1949. Russia's Atom Bomb Repercussions

The dramatic announcement that Russia possesses the atom bomb has very naturally relegated into the background subjects which were regarded as of paramount importance a few days ago. Though it was to be expected that the Russians would not rest content until they had solved the means by which atomic ehergy had been harnessed as a military weapon of destruction, and thus placed themselves on equality with British and Americans, (here always existed a lurking hope that the spy ring employed to obtain the working plans evolved by the scientists of Britain and America, had, after all, failed to secure the key required to unlock the coveted secret.

It was this hope, or belief, which Jed many British and American leaders to express the opinion that fear of the atom bomb was one of the dominating reason why the Soviet did not press more pugnaciously when the Allies’ airlift was used to break the Russian blockade of Berlin. That belief has now been weakened by the Tass Agency's declaration that Russia has had the atom bomb since 1947. This discovery has once again revealed the stoicism and the patience of the Russian people, who have traditionally put up with hardships and what they regarded as injustice, buoyed up by the spirit expressed in the phrase, "Nichevo, the wheel will turn a full circle." However, the situation as it exists today must be considered realisticaliy—the atom bomb is clearly no longer a United Stales - British monopoly. What is to be done about it? Two schools of thought have already become vocal, one 'urging that Russia must not be allowed to take the lead in a race for atomic supremacy, the other holding that a fresh start should be made to secure the cooperation of Russia in a movement to abolish the use of atomic energy as an implement of war. It is noteworthy that a group of top scientists, who took an active part in the research which produced

Ihe atom bomb, are reported to have said that if peace is to be preserved it will not be because the Allies can prevent Western Europe from being attacked.

They hold ihat Russia, with its vast territory and concealed war industries, will not need as many atomic bombs as the United States to reach Van atomic weapons par with the United States.

One of the leading scientists declares that it is useless to talk about attempting to reach an agreement with Russia, for the reason that the Soviet is not to be trusted, while three others suggest that as an alternative to war with Russia there should be established a super-Gov-ernment of the North Atlantic nations, whose defence system should be widely distributed. At the moment military Chiefs of Staff are considering stations in the Arctic, in Greenland and in the chain of islands which form stepping stones between North-East Asia and the American Continent. In the meantime, M. Vyshinsky, Russia's representative at the United Nations General Assembly, now in session at New York, is calling upon the Assembly to ban atomic weapons and other means of mans destruction as ‘‘incompatible with the conscience and honour of nations.”

That this description is appropriate when applied to the use of the atomic bomb in warfare nobody will

dispute. Russia has now a unique oppoitunity to prove the genuineness of M. Vyshinsky’s appeal to the United States, Britain, China, France and the Soviet to “join their efforts to ward off the threat of a new war and conclude a pact for strengthening peace.” Much is being said about the peaceful aspirations of Russia, but Russia's reiteration of statements about American militarists and Wall Street conspiring to destroy the Soviet Union is hardly calculated to produce the atmosphere required for the establishment of peaceful relationships between the nations.