REACTIONS TO DISARMAMENT

Wanganui Chronicle, 1 November 1946, Page 5

REACTIONS TO DISARMAMENT

Will There Be Full Safeguards? Recd. 9 p.m New York, Oct. 30. There have been immediate reactions to the speech made yesterday in the General Assembly of the United Nations by the leader of the Russian delegation (Mr. Molotov), when he moved a motion advocating disarmament and that, as a primary move toward that objective, all atomic energy for military purposes be banned. The American attitude is that while all want disarmament, it must not be a unilateral affair, and there must be proper safeguards and proper facilities for inspections.

Yugoslavia has expressed full support for the Russian motion.

Former Senator Warren Austin, leader of the United States delegation, deplored Mr. Molotov’s speech, but he said the United States endorsed the Russian proposal for immediate action on disarmament if safeguards were provided.

Mr. Austin reminded the Assembly, however, that after the first World War they made the mistake of disarming unilaterally. “We shall not repeat that mistake,’’ he said. “The United States is prepared to co-operate fully with all other members of the United Nations in disarmament. It advocates effective safeguards for inspection and other means against the hazards of violation and evasion.” Mr. Molotov’s speech, he said, indicated “distrust and misunderstanding' of American and other United Nations’ motives. Mr. Austin did not believe in recriminations, and he hoped the struggle for peace henceforth could be conducted without them. The United States believed Mr. Molotov s disarmament proposal, including the demand for ending atomic homo manufacture, should be fully discussed by the Assembly. The United States interpreted Mr. Molotov's demand for a report on troops in nonenemy countries, plus the statement that Russia was willing to co-operate, as meaning that Russia was now prepared to report on the strength 01 Its armed forces in Germany, former enemy Balkan States and Poland, or any other place. Therefore, the United States urges the prompt fulfilment of this policy. The United Slates had nothing to hide regarding aimed forces at home or abroad, The proposed inquiiy should include all mobilised armed forces, whether home or abroad (the Associated Press notes that this major statement of policy was approved beforehand by Mr. Byrnes and presumably by President

Truman). The United States objected to any immediate eradication of veto in the Security Council, but hoped, some time in the future, that the "Big Five” would agree unanimously to remove veto from the peaceful settlement of disputes. Meanwhile, veto did not relieve the permanent members of any responsibilities and obligations they had assumed under the Charter, ana the Security Council’s voting system should bd interpreted to carry out the Charter's spirit as well as its letter.

He added: "This is the United States policy.’’ Mr. Austin said the Soviet’s Initiative in urging armament reduction was appropriate, because of its mighty armies. Similarly, the United States’ initiative was appropriate in proposing measures lor the prevention, manufacture and use of atomic weapons. Mr. Austin said: "The whole world knows where the United States stands and always stood. For twenty years before the war, and 15 months since, the United States has consistently been in the forefront in striving to reduce the armement buiden upon the peoples of the world. Since the end of the wars in Europe and the Pacific the United States progressively and rapidly, has reduced its military establishment.” In a speech supporting Mr. Molotov, the Yugoslav Foreign Minister, Mr. Stanoje Slmich, accused Britain ano America of repeated violations of the United Nations Charter. He declared that certain circles were attempting to use the atom bomb “as a means or intimidating the world.” He said both Britain and America were violating the Charter by maintaining troops on the territory of friendly nations, and by voting against the admission of Albania to the United Nations. He accused the United States of holding Yugoslav vessels Illegally on the upper Danube, and of refusing to turn over to Yugoslavia thousands of the • Quislings” now in displaced persons’ camps.

Mr. Simich strongly opposed the United States plan tor atomic energy ccntrol and claimed the whole responsibility for handling this question should rest with the Security Council. He agreed with Mr, Molotov that the first step of atom control should be the outlawing of production ot atomic weapons. Mr. Simich said Mr. Molotovs proposal for the limitation of armaments corresponded with the true desires, hopes and aspirations of the peoples ol the world, who would regard it as the first ray of hope that mankind one day would be free of the constant fear of armed conflicts, and of the present nightmare of war psychosis and intimidation.