The H-Bomb

New Zealand Listener, Volume 30, Issue 767, 2 April 1954, Page 14

The H-Bomb

ET’S suppose we pack the Hbomb round with, say, cobalt so that when the bomb explodes the radio-active dust is distributed in the atmosphere at such heights that it must inevitably blanket the earth-blanket the whole earth and destroy all life upon it. But is such a horror possible? Possible? It’s not even unduly difficult. Then why should it ever be developed? Why? Because if we don’t the others will. But then, whoever would actually use it... when it means his own annihilation? Think, if you were Hitler in that bunker at the Chancellory, all lost, an hour or two at most to live, and you had this bomb. Think that one over. But doesn’t that mean that no power would dare push another power to such a strait that this bomb became the last bargaining counter? Oh, yes, but who decides what pressure will lead to a decision to use it? . .. This H-bomb isn’t an instrument of policy any more. Of the type I’ve described only one will ever be exploded. It is not a weapon of retaliation. And there’s no safety, anywhere. An A-bomb exploded over Japan is of academic interest to us. An H-bomb packed with cobalt exploded anywhere would be of the same interest-for a very different treason. And why this grisly race to extinction? Clearly men are not consciously bent on self-exterm-ination. It all arose out of the quest for . . the weapon which would secure for us, without loss, whatever we cared to demand of the enemy. A super A-bomb or an ordinary H-bomb is in this class, The new H-bomb is not. You see, this H-bomb isn’t a remedy for anything at all. It’s merely a measure of how far technology has outrun politics. But peril doesn’t necessarily mean panic. The production of the H-bomb strains the resources of the greatest industrial powers in the world. At once the race to perfect the H-bomb falls into place as one aspect of the great struggle which we in New Zealand watch from the side-lines. In essence, of course, it’s a struggle for men’s minds, Their bodies are incidental. So regarded, possession of the cobalt H-bomb is no guarantee of victory, but it is an insurance against defeat-it is the ultimate blackmail. Then let’s suppose both sides have it, What then? Neither uses it. But wait a moment, who decides this point? Curiously enough, though, when both sides have the cobalt H-bomb there will, there must, be a speeding up of the campaign for men’s minds. The best guarantee against not using this bomb is not to need to. If the contest for the minds of men is won, victory is obtained and there’s no point in any kind of bomb. Now, how is this campaign to be conducted? The best way to look at that, I suppose, is to look at it where it is being conducted now. A couple of years ago I wandered at random over Europe, living with the folk, sharing their lives as well as I was able. The talk was all of war which no one wants but everyone expects. Very few talked of the war being

waged in their midst, right as we talked. Occasionally one ran into active agents of one side or the other, but that was rare. Yet there was not the slightest dearth of devoted political workers-on one side, anyway. The struggle interested me, in one particular aspect. Many of my American friends later asked me to account for the one in three voters in France and Italy who votes the Comrounist line. It was difficult for me to explain once I'd left Europe that a vote for Communism is often really a vote against something else, something quite different-the local rates, the state of the drains, the bad season for the grapes, In sum this vote looks formidable but it isn’t really so. It is more statistically impressive than significant. The struggle for men’s minds is not won-nor is it, eyen, a one-sided struggle. And that is where we come in, The evils of democracy misused are the weapons of Russian Imperialism. (And, by the way, do let us use words that really mean something. Russian Imperialism is not Communism any more than Formosa is China.) Now the protest against these abuses is usually led by good and earnest men-frequently brave ones, too. They vote Communism. It is their gesture of protest. That is as true in Indo-China as it is in the town council elections of Ferrara. And of course they’re used for Communist ends. If the people could see democracy really work, clear of the back-room bargains between political parties and the pious attempts at election rigging, they’d be on our side. And they are the natural leaders, too. Now, how is this to be done? That is where New Zealand comes in. Recently in Europe I’ve been looking, not at how governments work but how the governed feel they work. I’ve been passed from hand to hand through some of the poorest homes I'd ever bear to see again. And everywhere, under the shadow of the imminent war, people told me indignantly of the breakdown of justice, the whittling away of freedoms; they spoke with contempt, or rage, of their governments. I could always secure an audience when I spoke of how we managed our affairs. Our role in the great struggle is a small one, but it is important. We are a laboratory demonstration. Our immense advantages in our high level of general education, our high standard of living and the like, are lost at the distance of European or Asiatic observation. If they see us at all, we appear as a folk who manage their affairs most extraordinarily well. However smug that may sound, it has the virtue of truth... We in New Zealand, a little detached by reason of distance, see clearly that time is on our side, for us and for a!l the world’s folk. If only some militaryminded fool doesn’t provoke a crisis. In time, if we are allowed time, politics will catch up with science. It isn’t beyond man’s wit to handle this problemhe just hasn’t applied his wits to it...

J. D.

McDONALD

March 13 7954.

Extracts from a recent commentary on the International News, broadcast from the Main National Stations of the NZBS