UNCERTAINTY OVER SOVIET ATTITUDE ON ATOMIC QUESTION

Grey River Argus, 11 October 1948, Page 5

UNCERTAINTY OVER SOVIET ATTITUDE ON ATOMIC QUESTION

PARIS, Oct. 4 Ai the United Nations Assembly, the United States delegate, Mr Warren Austin, made a request to M. Vyshinsky to say exactly what the new Soviet proposal on atomic energy meant, rle said: "If we cannot agree on what it means, then we win iiui Uv ciuie tu agree on what to do about it.

Mr Austin interpreted tne nrst pail oi me soviet proposal to mean that eilorts to erect international control ui atomic energy should not only be continued, but also should be continued in the direction which had been xuiiuwed tor tne last 3(1 months —in vhe airectioii laid aown by tne three reports of the Atomic Energy ComiiiieiiUll.

i-ie continued: “However, the Soviet has indicated that it does not accept the commission’s three reports, that it does not wish to advance in the direction laid down by me reports, anu that it mtenus toil., and convince this great committee to ieverse me direction.

“There has been so much violent disagreement over the meaning of the General Assembly’s atomic energy resolutions that it is hard to believe that the Soviet Union is recommending continued work towards international control in the direction pursued Dy the majority. But, if the Soviet proposals mean what they undoubtedly say, then we are certainly ..... me xutiu to trie gaol which the whole of humanity responds to. Mr Austin continued: “On reading the resolution, the whole world would have hope, but the debate does not show that the Russians mean effective international control. Ihe words we have heard from M. Manuilsky show that the Soviet suU ad^‘ as nationalism and to the veto that they win apply to international control. “There is a chasm to be bridged, and it is still possible that some wise man here will propose a resolution that will bridge this chasm. We will go quite a long way to achieve unammiße'fore Mr Austin spoke, M. Manuilsky told the committee that he was prepared to show proof that the atom pomb was not an American monopoly. “If necessary, we will bring these proofs, which will be uncomfortable to those who think they have the uppei hand,” he declared. The Western Powers’ delegates welcomed Sweden s endorsement of the United Nations majority plan for international atomic control.’ They thought that Sweden s stand was a good indication or the general attitude in the Assembly towards the control plan. The debate was adjourned until tomorrow 7 .