REGULATION OF ARMAMENTS


Tion weapons for such deterrent-retaliatory value as they might have.
This is of caurs the centrel question in the whole, international con-
trol probleL; and impressive arguments can be advanced on both
sides,.
   It is my Own: view that arrangements based on any or all of the
suggestions contained in the second section. of this report, above, :while.
quite possibly inferior to the, present, U.N. proposals from the strict.
standpoint of t hwretical atowemic security, ,would still be preferable to
a siOuation in which both sides would be retaining atomic weapons, and
presumaWbly ther ýweapls o mass destruction, for purposes of re-
tliation, with no- agreement existing concerning theidr control or 'pro!
hibitio., I base this conelusion onmy conviction that it woldb
dificult-for us, if we are -to ,hold and develop such weapons at all,
to ,kep them iin their proper place as -an instrument of national policy
and to iarrive at, the delicate. judgments which would have to be made
curetly abot theh money and effort which should be devoted to their
cultivation mand the role which should be allotted to them in our
military plan ing. I believe that the peculiar psychological overtones
by which these weapons will6always be accompanied will tend to give
them a certain top-heaviness .as instruments ofour national policy,
and that this :top-heaviness, in turn, will inevitably impart a certain
eccentricity to our military planning, where there should be
equilibrium.
   I fear, mareover, that this ,tedency to eccentricity vmay not be
limitsed to our military planning but may tend to affect our concept
.of what it is that we, .ould ,achieve by the conduct of war against
the Soviet IUn*in, Whether or not war on the grand scale can achieve
pitive aims for an aggressive totalitarian power, it, is my belief that
it cannot achieve suc   j.ais for a demmocracy. It would be useful, in
My opinio, if we were, to recognize th4at the real purposes of the
demoratic socity canAot be ach-ieved by large-scale vioence and
destruction; that even in the most favorable circumstances war be-
tween great powers spells a dismal deteriora-tionh of world ,onditions
from the standpoint of the liberal-democratic tradition; and that the
only positive function it can fulfill for us -- function, the necessity
and legitimacy of which I do notý dispute--is to assure that we survive
physically as an independent nation when our existence and independ-
ence might otherwise be. jeopardized and that the catastrophe which
we and our friends suffer, if cataclysnm is unavoidable, is at least less
than that suffered by our enemies. For such 'positive purposes as we
Wish to pnrsui, we must look to other -things than war: above all, to
bearing, to examplp, to persuasion, and to the judicious exploitation
of our strength as a deterrent to world conflict. The best that -war can
do is to _keep o-ur nation intact, n order that :we may have an'oppor-
     496-362 77-4


37'