REGULATION OF'ARMMENTS


  reason tha.t. the greategs/t threat that atomicý weapons pose.to
the world
  is the threa't of an atomic Pearl tHarbor. Now,. obviously, democracies
  do not launch such surprise attacks. Whatever the Soviet propaganda
  may say,.they must fully realize this;fact The same does not hold true
  for a totalitarian state. Hitler's attacks on Poland, Norw ayi enmark,
  Holland and the Soviet Union itself, and the, Japanese attack against
  US, fully bear out:this latter conclusion. The Soviet Union is not with-
  Out guilt in this regard, as witness their actions against Poland and
  Finland in 1939. So long as the Soviet Union finds'thaft the ler-
  native to no agreement on effective control is an acceptable s,'ituation
  to them, there is little prospect that we can find any real basis for
  negotiation with them in this field. This is all the more true since they
  do not have-to"meet the pressure of any public opinion within their
  own country.
    We are, therefore, forced to the conclusion that agreement in this
 field cannotý pave the way for agreement in all the other areas of
 differences between the ,free world and the Soviet Union. Now: this is
 not a-new or a recent conclusion. It was reached as long ago as May,
 1948 not only by the United Sitates, but- by ten of the twelve members
 of the United Nations Atomic Energy Commission, when, in its Third
 Repo6rt, they stated that "in the.field of latomic energy, the majority
 "of the Commission has been unable to secure the agreement of the
 Soviet Union to even those elements of effective control-considered
 essential from the tchnical point of view, let alone their acceptance
 of the nature and extent of the participation in the world community
 required of all nations in this field by the First .and Second .Reports
of
 the Atomic Energy Commission. As a result, the Commission has been
 forced ,to recognize that .agreement on effective measures for the con-
 trol of atomic energy is itself dependent on cooperation in broader
 fields of policy."..
   Although this conclusion ,was reached two years ,ago, we 'have not
 ceased our efforts to find some basis for agreement. A th-e request
 made on .two occasions by the -General Assembly of .the United Na-
 tions, we have participated in a new and smaller forum composed of
 the six permanent members of the United Nations Atomic Energy
 Commission. These are Canada, China, France, the UIJS, theU.K. and
 the U.S.S.R., who had originally sponsored .the General Assembly reso-
 ilution which created t he United Naions Atomic Energy Comission
 in January, 1946. Totpermit freer discussion,-these meetings were
held in closed session. The first meeting was on August-9, 1949. On
October 25, ,an interim report, to the General Assembly was submitted
on ~the results of the consultations. I regret to state th: tabsolutely
no Progress was made toward reaching a basis for agreement. On the
same date, five of the powers submitted a statement to the General


1