resumed discussion of the right of reprisal allowed to victims of the illegal use of chemical weapons. In the view of the United Kingdom delegation considerable delay might be involved in establishing the fact of the use by the attacking country of such weapons. Other delegations expressed the opinion that the use of chemical weapons should be prohibited even as a measure of retaliation. The delegation of France emphasized once more the necessity for strict collective sanctions to enforce the prohibition of chemical warfare and of preparation for this warfare.

95. This discussion of Part IV (Chemical Warfare) of the United Kingdom draft Disarmament Convention on 30 May 1933 was the last one. No further action was taken by the Conference in the matter.

31. WORKING PAPER SETTING FORTH A SUMMARY OF PROPOSALS MADE BY THE REPRESENTATIVE OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA IN THE DISARMAMENT COMMISSION, AUGUST 15, 1952 1. A comprehensive programme for the regulation, limitation and balanced reduction of all armed forces and armaments should provide for the elimination of all major weapons adaptable to mass destructoin, including bacterial, and for the effective international control of atomic energy to ensure the prohibition of atomic weapons and the use of atomic energy for peaceful purposes only.

2. Bearing in mind that all Members of the United Nations have agreed to refrain not only from the use of germ warfare but from the use of force of any kind contrary to the law of the Charter, the programme envisaged in paragraph 1 must be approached from the point of view of preventing war and not from the point of view of regulating the armaments used in war or of codifying the laws of The programme as a whole should ensure that armed forces and armaments are reduced to such a point and in such a thorough fashion that:

war.

(a) No State will be in a position of armed preparedness to

start a war;

(b) No State shall be in a position to undertake preparations for war without other States having knowledge of such preparations long before the offending State could start a war.

3. Safeguards must be devised to ensure the elimination of bacterial weapons and facilities and appliances for their production and use along with the elimination of all armed forces and armaments not expressly permitted to States to maintain public order and to meet their Charter responsibilities. The principal safeguards to ensure the elimination of bacterial weapons are to be found in an effective and continuous system of disclosure and verification of all armed forces and armaments such as that suggested in the working paper submitted by the representative of the United States on 5 Apr 1952, entitled "Proposals for progressive and continuing disclosure and verification of armed forces, and armaments" (DC/C.2/1). It is proposed that, at appropriate stages in an effective system of disclosure and verification, agreed measures should become effective providing for the progressive curtailment of production, the progressive dis mantling of plants and the progressive destruction of stockpiles of

1 UN document DC/15, 4 September 1952.

bacterial weapons and related appliances. Under this programme, with co-operation in good faith by the principal States concerned, all bacterial weapons and all facilities and appliances connected therewith should be completely eliminated from national armaments and their use prohibited.

INTERNATIONAL CONTROL OF ATOMIC ENERGY

Control of Atomic Energy

Proposals Approved by the UN General Assembly

32. UNITED STATES PROPOSALS FOR THE INTERNATIONAL CONTROL OF ATOMIC ENERGY: STATEMENT OF UNITED STATES REPRESENTATIVE (BARUCH) TO THE UNITED NATIONS ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION, JUNE 14, 1946 1

MY FELLOW MEMBERS OF THE UNITED NATIONS ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION, and

MY FELLOW CITIZENS OF THE WORLD:

We are here to make a choice between the quick and the dead. That is our business.

Behind the black portent of the new atomic age lies a hope which, seized upon with faith, can work our salvation. If we fail, then we have damned every man to be the slave of Fear. Let us not deceive ourselves: We must elect World Peace or World Destruction.

Science has torn from nature a secret so vast in its potentialities that our minds cower from the terror it creates. Yet terror is not enough to inhibit the use of the atomic bomb. The terror_created by weapons has never stopped man from employing them. For each new weapon a defense has been produced, in time. But now we face a condition in which adequate defense does not exist.

Science, which gave us this dread power, shows that it can be made a giant help to humanity, but science does not show us how to prevent its baleful use. So we have been appointed to obviate that peril by finding a meeting of the minds and the hearts of our peoples. Only in the will of mankind lies the answer.

It is to express this will and make it effective that we have been assembled. We must provide the mechanism to assure that atomic energy is used for peaceful purposes and preclude its use in war. Το that end, we must provide immediate, swift, and sure punishment of those who violate the agreements that are reached by the nations. Penalization is essential if peace is to be more than a feverish interlude between wars. And, too, the United Nations can prescribe individual responsibility and punishment on the principles applied at Nürnberg by the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, The United Kingdom, France, and the United States-a formula certain to benefit the world's future.

In this crisis, we represent not only our governments but, in a larger way, we represent the peoples of the world. We must remember that the peoples do not belong to the governments but that the governments belong to the peoples. We must answer their demands; we must answer the world's longing for peace and security.

1 Department of State publication 2702, pp. 138-147.

In that desire the United States shares ardently and hopefully. The search of science for the absolute weapon has reached fruition in this country. But she stands ready to proscribe and destroy this instrument-to lift its use from death to life-if the world will join in a pact to that end.

In our success lies the promise of a new life, freed from the heartstopping fears that now beset the world. The beginning of victory for the great ideals for which millions have bled and died lies in building a workable plan. Now we approach fulfilment of the aspirations of mankind. At the end of the road lies the fairer, better, surer life we crave and mean to have.

Only by a lasting peace are liberties and democracies strengthened and deepened. War is their enemy. And it will not do to believe that any of us can escape war's devastation. Victor, vanquished, and neutrals alike are affected physically, economically, and morally.

Against the degradation of war we can erect a safeguard. That is the guerdon for which we reach. Within the scope of the formula we outline here there will be found, to those who seek it, the essential elements of our purpose. Others will see only emptiness. Each of us carries his own mirror in which is reflected hope-or determined desperation-courage or cowardice.

There is a famine throughout the world today. It starves men's bodies. But there is a greater famine-the hunger of men's spirit. That starvation can be cured by the conquest of fear, and the substitution of hope, from which springs faith-faith in each other; faith that we want to work together toward salvation; and determination that those who threaten the peace and safety shall be punished.

The peoples of these democracies gathered here have a particular concern with our answer, for their peoples hate war. They will have a heavy exaction to make of those who fail to provide an escape. They are not afraid of an internationalism that protects; they are unwilling to be fobbed off by mouthings about narrow sovereignty, which is today's phrase for yesterday's isolation.

The basis of a sound foreign policy, in this new age, for all the nations here gathered, is that: anything that happens, no matter where or how, which menaces the peace of the world, or the economic stability, concerns each and all of us.

That, roughly, may be said to be the central theme of the United Nations. It is with that thought we begin consideration of the most important subject that can engage mankind-life itself.

Let there be no quibbling about the duty and the responsibility of this group and of the governments we represent. I was moved, in the afternoon of my life, to add my effort to gain the world's quest, by the broad mandate under which we were created. The resolution of the General Assembly, passed January 24, 1946, in London reads:

"Section V. Terms of Reference of the Commission

"The Commission shall proceed with the utmost dispatch and inquire into all phases of the problem, and make such recommendations from time to time with respect to them as it finds possible. In particular the Commission shall make specific proposals:

"(a) For extending between all nations the exchange of basic scientific information for peaceful ends;

!

"(b) For control of atomic energy to the extent necessary to insure its use only for peaceful purposes;

"(c) For the elimination from national armaments of atomic weapons and of all other major weapons adaptable to mass destruction;

"(d) For effective safeguard by way of inspection and other means to protect complying States against the hazards of violations and evasions.

"The work of the Commission should proceed by separate stages, the successful completion of each of which will develop the necessary confidence of the world before the next stage is undertaken * * *"'

Our mandate rests, in text and in spirit, upon the outcome of the Conference in Moscow of Messrs. Molotov of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, Bevin of the United Kingdom, and Byrnes of the United States of America. The three Foreign Ministers on December 27, 1945 proposed the establishment of this body.

Their action was animated by a preceding conference in Washington on November 15, 1945, when the President of the United States, associated with Mr. Attlee, Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, and Mr. MacKenzie King, Prime Minister of Canada, stated that international control of the whole field of atomic energy was immediately essential. They proposed the formation of this body. In examining that source, the Agreed Declaration, it will be found that the fathers of the concept recognized the final means of world salvation-the abolition of war. Solemnly they wrote:

"We are aware that the only complete protection for the civilized world from the destructive use of scientific knowledge lies in the prevention of war. No system of safeguards that can be devised will of itself provide an effective guarantee against production of atomic weapons by a nation bent on aggression. Nor can we ignore the possibility of the development of other weapons, or of new methods of warfare, which may constitute as great a threat to civilization as the military use of atomic energy."

Through the historical approach I have outlined, we find ourselves here to test if man can produce, through his will and faith, the miracle of peace, just as he has, through science and skill, the miracle of the

atom.

The United States proposes the creation of an International Atomic Development Authority, to which should be entrusted all phases of the development and use of atomic energy, starting with the raw material and including

1. Managerial control or ownership of all atomic-energy activities potentially dangerous to world security.

2. Power to control, inspect, and license all other atomic activities.

3. The duty of fostering the beneficial uses of atomic energy. 4. Research and development responsibilities of an affirmative character intended to put the Authority in the forefront of atomic knowledge and thus to enable it to comprehend, and therefore to detect, misuse of atomic energy. To be effective, the Authority must itself be the world's leader in the field of atomic knowledge and development and thus supplement its

legal authority with the great power inherent in possession of leadership in knowledge.

I offer this as a basis for beginning our discussion.

But I think the peoples we serve would not believe-and without faith nothing counts-that a treaty, merely outlawing possession or use of the atomic bomb, constitutes effective fulfilment of the instructions to this Commission. Previous failures have been recorded in trying the method of simple renunciation, unsupported by effective guaranties of security and armament limitation. No one would have faith in that approach alone.

Now, if ever, is the time to act for the common good. Public opinion supports a world movement toward security. If I read the signs aright, the peoples want a program not composed merely of pious thoughts but of enforceable sanctions-an international law with teeth in it.

We of this nation, desirous of helping to bring peace to the world and realizing the heavy obligations upon us arising from our possession of the means of producing the bomb and from the fact that it is part of our armament, are prepared to make our full contribution toward effective control of atomic energy.

When an adequate system for control of atomic energy, including the renunciation of the bomb as a weapon, has been agreed upon and put into effective operation and condign punishments set up for violations of the rules of control which are to be stigmatized as international crimes, we propose that

1. Manufacture of atomic bombs shall stop;

2. Existing bombs shall be disposed of pursuant to the terms of the treaty, and

3. The Authority shall be in possession of full information as to the know-how for the production of atomic energy.

Let me repeat, so as to avoid misunderstanding: my country is ready to make its full contribution toward the end we seek, subject, of course, to our constitutional processes, and to an adequate system of control becoming fully effective, as we finally work it out.

Now as to violations: in the agreement, penalties of as serious a nature as the nations may wish and as immediate and certain in their execution as possible, should be fixed for:

1. Illegal possession or use of an atomic bomb;

2. Illegal possession, or separation, of atomic material suitable for use in an atomic bomb;

3. Seizure of any plant or other property belonging to or licensed by the Authority;

4. Wilful interference with the activities of the Authority;

5. Creation or operation of dangerous projects in a manner contrary to, or in the absence of, a license granted by the international control body.

It would be a deception, to which I am unwilling to lend myself, were I not to say to you and to our peoples, that the matter of punishment lies at the very heart of our present security system. It might as well be admitted, here and now, that the subject goes straight to the veto power contained in the Charter of the United Nations so far as it relates to the field of atomic energy. The Charter permits penalization only by concurrence of each of the five great powers