GRAVE DOUBTS HELD

Otago Daily Times, Issue 27196, 27 September 1949, Page 5

GRAVE DOUBTS HELD

Soviet Possession Of Atomic Bomb In 1947 SEEN AS PROPAGANDA MOVE New Zealand Press Association—Copyright Authoritative sources in Washington cast grave doubts, on Russia’s claim that she had the atomic bomb in 1947 and speculated that the statement may have been made for propaganda purposes. At the same time a State Department official expressed “ interest ” in the Soviet call for atomic energy control but he did not think it. meant any change in the Kremlin’s stubborn opposition to the complete international regulation demanded by the United States and other nations. There was no official comment on the Russian claim that the Kremlin knew the secret of the atomic bomb by November, 1947 and “ had this weapon at its disposal,” but the best-informed quarters in Washington said it was unlikely that the Russians could have had an atomic bomb without testing it and if they had exploded one earlier the United States almost certainly would have known about it. Officials said emphatically that delicate American instruments would have detected the explosion if one had occurred previously. Diplomatic quarters believe that Russia made the claim, to bolster her international bargaining position and strengthen her propaganda position in Europe.

Atomic weapons were dangerous in the hands of Communists, who believed that any means were justified to gain their ends, said Mr John Foster Dulles (Republican, New York), broadcasting to-day. He added, however, that “we must not get panicky. The Russians may feel they can blackmail us with threats of using atomic weapons. We must not give in. It ne.ver pays to blackmail, least of all to Communists.”

atomic research, said: “If peace ,1s preserved it will not be because we can prevent Western Europe from being attacked.” The scientists were agreed that Russia, 9 because of her vast territory and concealed war industries, will not need as many atom bombs as the United States to reach an atomic weapons par with the United States.

Mr Dulles, who was formerly United States delegate to the United Nations, said: “I have dealt with top Russian leaders almost continuously for over four years. We have had some rough encounters, but the wisdom and firmness of a bi-partisan foreign policy has made peace more likely. War is less likely now % than a year ago.” Any one of a‘dozen countries would have the power‘to threaten the survival of mankind in the not far distant future, declared the Canadian Minister of External Affairs, Mr Lester Pearson, to-night, in a broadcast from New York. He said the knowledge of the atomic explosion» in Russia should not come as a surprise or alter Western policies in any way.“It should not alarm us any more than we should be. alarmed by the very existence of the bomb itself.” If merely underlined the conclusion that atomic energy must brought under strict international controL This would mean making -absolutely sure that no bombs were being made by anyone, and that atomic energy was being developed for constructive purposes alone.

Dr Urey, Dr Leo Szilard, Hun-garian-born pioneer in atomic research, and Dr Samuel Allison, director of the University of Chicago Institute of Nuclear Studies, agreed that there can be no agreement with Russia on control of atomic armaments. “There is not the slightest use even discussing it with Russia naw,” they said. “We could not trust the Russians anyway.” Dr Urey said that the three men proposed as an alternative to war the establishment of a super Government of the North Atlantic nations. He said he could not see a defence assurance against the atom bomb within 50 years other than a political organisation. “ Even then we might .have war,” he added. French Apprehensive The Atlantic Treaty would have been good if America had been able to preserve' the monopoly of the atomic bomb, but if the atomic weapon was to be in the hands of both camps the

Tass Reiterates Claims

The official Soviet news agency, Tass, announced to-day that scientific circles of the United States took for bluff Mr Molotov’s statement of November 6, 1947, that the secret of the atom bomb was no longer a secret. They were mistaken, however, since the Soviet possessed the secret of the atomic weapon already in 1947. “ Yesterday,” said Tass, “ President , Truman announced that according to data of the United States Government there had recently occurred in the USSR an atomic explosion. The British and Canadian Governments made simultaneous statements. Following the publication of these statements there appeared numerous utterances which spread alarm among broad social circles. “In • this connection Tase is empowered to declare that in the Soviet building work on a large scale is in progress on hydro-electric stations, mines, canals and roads, which evoke of necessity large-scale blasting work with the latest technical means. ' In so far as this is taking place frequently in various parts of the country it is possible that this might have drawn attention beyond the confines of the Soviet.”

English-language Version An English-distributed version of the Tass statement differed slightly from the Russian version, and gave a different interpretation of whether Russia actually had the bomb in 1947. Thb Rlussian version referring to Mr Molotov’s statement of November 6. 1947, that “the secret of the atomic bomb was no longer a secret,”, said: “ This meant that the Soviet Union has already discovered the secret of the atomic weapon and has this weapon in its possession.” The English version read: “ The statement meant that the Soviet Union had already found out the. secret of the atomic weapon and had this weapon. at its disposal.” This would be taken to imply that the Soviet already had the atomic bomb—as distinct from the secret of the bomb, in 1947. British scientific and .political quarters treated with reserve Soviet explantations 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 that the Russians could make the atomic bomb. 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, a leading British scientist, doubted if Russia was putting atomic energy into building work on a large scale. He discredited theories that seismograph recordings had shown atomic explosions in Russia, and added: “Radiation is a simpler method of ascertaining atomic explosions. A radiation instrument the size of a fountain pen can do the work more simply." Possibility of Controls *

Observers in Moscow believe there is now a chance of arranging a meeting on the abolition of atomic weapons and the setting up of controls. Reuter’s Moscow correspondent says that some Russians consider that the Tass announcement “should help to bring the American atomic militarist hysterics to an end."

One widely-expressed view was that Russia, “ with other peace-loving nations, will be able to carry out her peace policy undeterred by threats from trans-ocean autonomists who wish to plunge the world into a new war.”

The Russians believe that the militarists, with Wall Street, control United States policy, and are intent on destroying the Soviet Union. According to these Russians the Tass announcement that Russia had the secret of the atom bomb since 1947 will make these Americans think twice. None of the Russian papers treated the Tass announcement spectacularly. All printed it as a routine official announcement under a two-column heading. “ Tass Announcement.” Radios repealed the news several times during the day. The United Press correspondent says that crowds gathered , round loud speakers in Moscow squares listening with obvious elation to the statement that Russian scientists had discovered the atomic bomb secret nearly two years ago. The statement brought a feeling in Moscow that the world is nearer peace now than it any time in the past few years. Western European Defence

A group of top scientists contend that . Russia’s development of atomic energy means that the United States no longer can prevent. Western Europe from being attacked. The scientists are also agreed that if the United States and Russia engage in atomic warfar% it will be at least a 10-year military struggle and will require occupation as the final step. The scientists, who have all been active in'' atomic research from the beginning, expressed their views at a press conference at Chicago. Dr Harold'Urey, Nobel Prize-winner and discoverer of the heavy water used in

treaty as now drawn up would lose a great deal of its efficacy for Europe, said General de Gaulle, speaking at an open air meeting in Bordeaux today. . - “The French people are feeling increasingly apprehensive,” he said. “ French economy ,is only bolstered up because of temporary imports under the Marshall Plan. Our Budget is only balanced by inflation. The franc has had to admit a fresh devaluation imposed from outside in disquieting and irritating conditions. The nation must be warned that nothing obliges the United States to take part in the immediate defence of our continent.

“So ’ long as Europe does not constitute a powerful bridgehead do not let us expect that armadas will arrive to disembark their armies. England would fight if the West were attacked, but because of air power she has strategically ceased to be entirely an island. She thinks first of her own defence, and would not risk the main part of her forces on the Continent. It is up to the French people to ensure French security. The immediate security of Europe and North Africa is in the first instance the responsibility of France.”