The New Zealand Herald AUCKLAND, WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 31, 1945 ATOMIC BOMB'S EVIL POWER

New Zealand Herald, Volume 82, Issue 25347, 31 October 1945, Page 6

The New Zealand Herald AUCKLAND, WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 31, 1945 ATOMIC BOMB'S EVIL POWER

This atomic bomb shattered more than two Japanese cities, it has shattered the confidence of ordinary men and women in the preservation of peace by power politics. But uiiiDrtunaiely the government of the United Slates, for reasons which are understandable, but none the less dangerous, is pursuing power polities. It is retaining the secret of the make-up of the atomic bomb because, it seems clear, it does not trust Russia. Compelling reasons exist for the mistrust of Russia. But although they may convince many Americans, they Will not prevent the Soviet Union from entering a race to learn the secret guarded in the United States. Nor does the existence ol reasons judged so cogent in the United States and, let it be admitted, in the British Empire, too, obviate the fact that the Russians honestly believe they have many reasons for distrusting the United States and Great Britain. Jn this state of mutual mistrust, there is room for apprehension of an atomic age in which civilisation will be wiped out. The safety oi mankind demands the establishment of confidence between the three Great Powers. The alternative is _ ruin. America's decision has reinforced Russian isolationism. German miscalculations taught the value of keeping the outside world guessing about Russian armaments, the world is now likely to see every effort directed in Russia to the elaboration of atomic weapons behind a heavier and heavier veil of secrecy. Ihe evidence of the scientists is that Russia will succeed. Therefore the advantages now held by the United States will be temporary. They can also be illusory.

If is not merely the retention of the secret of the atomic bomb which disturbs Russia and the other Powers striving to keep her within the family of nations. The tone of the discussions concerning the bomb and the armed might of the United States in the post-war world arouses suspicions. General Marshall, in his recent report, advised the Secretary for War that "the world does not seriously regard the desires of the weak." Therefore the United States must enforce its will for peace with strength. "We must make it clear to the potential gangsters of the world that, if'they dare to break our peace they will do so at their great peril." There is no expression of confidence in the goodwill of the nations in such official remarks. Nor is there much to inspire confidence in the paragraphs preceding them. In these General Marshall disclosed some of the new weapons developed in the United States and others which will proceed from them. lie mentions as a certainty that the United States will soon have stratosphere bombers travelling faster than sound and carrying bomb loads of more than 100,000lb. These aircraft will have sufficient range to attack any spot on earth and return to a friendly base. Bombs weighing 45,0001b, more than twice the weight of the largest bomb dropped during the war, were being made to keep pace with bombers already under construction which will carry such a load. United States ordnance experts had also prepared the blueprints of a bomb weighing 100,000lb.

There is more of a like nature. General Marshall speaks of rockets drawn unerringly to the heart of big factories by the heat of the furnaces. His chief defence against them and the ultimate in bombers is the power of attack. It can be argued these are merely the views of a professional soldier. They are certainly those of an eminent soldier. Their force lies in the fact that it was on such counsel that President Truman decided to make the atomic bomb an exclusively American secret. The Americans undoubtedly have the best intentions concerning the use of the great power now concentrated in their hands. It is unfortunate for the acceptance of those intentions that the world has had sad experience of power going to the head like new wine. Similar remarks may be applied to the Soviet Union. There is a case for realistic diplomacy that tries to keep supreme power in the hands of one nation. There is also a case for a policy of genuinely trustful co-operation. But, as the Economist has pointed out, there is no case at all for combining the reality of the one with the appearance of the other. That is a point both the United States and the Soviet Union must grasp. Mr Attlce's projected visit to President Truman cannot be devoted exclusively to the atomic bomb, to British intentions to pursue research or to what Russia may do about it. These are merely symptoms of a grave disorder, to be cured only by confidence which comes from goodwill and mutual trust. Britain has often played the role of honest broker. At the moment she appears in the role of international physician. The need for such intervention is grave and urgent.

UPHEAVAL IN BRAZIL A political upheaval is occurring in Brazil, but so far the trend of events is by no means clear. The situation can be regarded as serious if the words of the War Minister are taken at full value when he speaks of the "approaching wave of anarchy." Political excitement has been growing since President Vargas announced five months ago that a general electioi to elect a President and Congress would be held on December <2. Lately there have been reports of high tension in Itio de Janeiro and threats of revolutionary coups. These are inevitable manifestations on (lie resumption of political life in a country that has lived under the virtual dictatorship of President Vargas since 1930. Tic himself seized power by a military coup and the last popular ballot was held 12 years ago. In 1!)37 he confirmed himself in office by promulgating the constitution of the New State. It suppressed all political parties, the government taking on a rigidly authoritarian character comparable

with that of Portugal. After so long an interval, the resumption of political life in Brazil has naturally been uneasy anil inclined to be violent and bitter. That is one of the penalties following upon a dictatorship. Usually a fierce struggle develops over the succession. What has caused Dr Vargas to resign over a month before the verdict ol the electorate is obtained is nob clear, lie may be practising some stratagem to secure his own return to ollice, relying on popular clamour organised by the Labour Party, and possibly by the Communists, for his reinstatement. While ostensibly the main election issues are concerned with the high cost of living and the low educational standards of the masses, the real contest is for the presidential prize and the power that goes with it. NO LONGER YOUNG

The Chancellor of the Exchequer does the Dominions too much honour in describing them as "young and vigorous." They are no longer so very young and vigour usually declines with advancing years. Take their Prime Ministers —the Chancellor is younger than the youngest. Air Attlee at t>2 should feci positively youthful in conferring with Field-Marshal Smuts, aged 75, and Mr .Mackenzie King, aged 71. His contemporaries are Mr Chillev, recently turned GO, and Mr Eraser, born in 1881. Nor do youth and vigour apply correctly to the New Zealand Cabinet, whose two babies have reached the middle forties. Most of the Ministers arc tired old men. At least two have passed the allotted span. With such elderly leaders, it is not surprising to find that the Dominions' outlook can no longer be described as young and vigorous. These qualities make for adventure, enterprise and progress. but such youthful ebullience is today frowned on and often actively discouraged. Instead the emphasis falls always and heavily on security. Safety first is the motto of the unadventurous, the unenterprising; if is the motto of the elderly and the aged. Dr Dalton speaks of Britain as the Old Country but, if the age of the population be taken as the eriterici, NewZealand is also an Old Country, and growing older. The proportion of children and young people is falling ; that of the elderly and old is rising. Jn 1874 children under ten years formed 32 per cent of the population and in 1936 only 10 per cent. Over the same period the proportion aged 60 years and over rose from 2 to 10 per cent. Truly these are vital statistics, commanding the thoughtful to pause and ponder.