The hell bombLaurence, William L. (William Leonard)
Philosophy
The hell bomb
Laurence, William L. (William Leonard)
Hydrogen bomb
All the information so far has come from the United States. In fact, the
Smyth Report, the six volumes of technical information submitted to the
UN, the testimony by scientists at the Congressional hearings on the
McMahon Act, and much declassified information have been of invaluable
aid to Russia in developing her own atomic bomb. It is about time that
this one-way flow of information came to a stop. Not a trickle has so
far come out of Russia—not even an official acknowledgment that she has
exploded her first A-bomb—and until she shows her willingness to
co-operate fully, we must stop playing Santa Claus.
16. SHOULD A NEW PANEL OF EXPERTS ANALOGOUS TO THE ACHESON-LILIENTHAL
BOARD BE APPOINTED TO STUDY THE H-BOMB IN RELATION TO INTERNATIONAL
CONTROL?
It is now more than 4 years since the Acheson-Lilienthal Board made its
recommendations on international control. Their findings have since been
largely incorporated into the UN plan.
Do the events of the last 4 years make it desirable, for technical
reasons, to rethink the control problem? Are the technical data of
hydrogen bombs such, as to demand a recasting and change of emphasis in
the existing UN plan? Have the prospects of large-scale peacetime
applications of atomic energy sufficiently changed that a different
orientation in control measures is desirable?
If re-examination of the control question is indicated, should this
inquiry be undertaken in the first instance by a group of qualified
Americans? Or should the United States suggest that an internationally
constituted board initially take on this assignment?
Considering the strong Soviet opposition to the UN plan, is it useful to
consider the problem of control? Is the Soviet attitude at all likely to
change in the foreseeable future? Would a rethinking of the control
problem contribute to a solution unless Soviet representatives
participated? Would the appointment of a new “Acheson-Lilienthal Board”
raise false hopes?
AUTHOR’S COMMENT
As indicated in Chapter IV and in the preceding comments, the UN plan
for the international control of atomic energy is wholly out of date,
and the sooner we realize it, the better for us and for the world. It
was at best a noble ideal, which did not have the slightest chance of
realization from the very start. A re-examination of the entire problem,
even before the advent of the H-bomb, had been long overdue. Today it is
all the more imperative. Since such a re-examination requires, or at
least implies, the withdrawal of the plan, originally sponsored by this
country, it should be done by an international board, preferably at the
suggestion of some nation other than the United States.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account