92 FOREIGN ‘RELATIONS, 1950, VOLUME I

explanation of why some changes are not involved due to the Russian
discovery of the bomb. He thought the idea of stages now required
further study. He had not seen any official or unofficial answer to some
of the problems which Barnard raised, and he believed that the Dele- .
gation should have the answers to any questions and doubts, even
though those with such questions might still vote with us. We had
been put at a disadvantage, insofar as . public understanding was con-
cerned, when the Russians had desired to put the two problems of
conventional armaments and atomic energy together, and we had not
agreed. He wondered whether we could not do something to show
that we had plans for balanced armaments in the world, once current
problems were settled. He thought we lost some advantage by not hav-
ing our ideas in this field worked out more concretely. Perhaps a panel
might be set up in this country, as was the case before, even though
this’ time the report probably could not be made public. He felt a
more constructive effort was definitely needed. So far as other coun-
tries making suggestions was concerned, he believed they were in doubt
and did not wish to make any proposal which might embarrass us.

4, Conventional Armaments. (SD/ A/CA /33'7)® oe

Mr. Shooshan #° explained that the conventional armaments prob-
lem was something ofa stepchild. Primary attention had been focused
on atomic weapons. However, in the first Assembly the Soviet repre-
sentative took occasion to attack the United States proposals on
atomic energy and suggested immediate : steps be taken ito reduce arma-
ments and to prohibit the manufacture and use of atomic weapons. As
a result, the Commission on Conventional Armaments had been estab-
lished; it had decided upon a plan of work: (1) definition. of con-
ventional armaments and field of competence ; (2) general statement of
principles governing armaments; (8) general system of safeguards;
(4) development of actual plan for regulation and reduction “of con-
ventional armaments; (5) extension of plan to non-United Nations
members; (6) actual drafting of a treaty. The Soviets had submitted
a, separate plan of work, but the Security Council had adopted the
United States-sponsored plan, the Soviet representative abstaining.
The Conventional Armaments Commission had then begun work on the
first two items. of its program. However, at the third Assembly. the
Soviet Union submitted.a proposal calling for a reduction of arma-
ments by one-third. Out of this resolution had developed a French-
Belgian proposal for an arms census. The United States had supported
this. step. Proposals had been adopted. but were vetoed by the Soviet
representative i in the Security Council. Last year the Commission had

® Supra. | | .
10 Harry M. Shooshan, Jr., of the Office of United Nations Political and Security
Affairs.