Lapas attēli

with his statement on the need to be "vigilant for opportunities for improving the hopes of peace." Our Government has agreed on principles and on certain procedures to further the implementation of these principles. We must therefore continue to put into practice that which has been agreed. The more we use the machinery of peace, the more others will be encouraged to use it.

Therefore, the National Council of Women of the United States would welcome the strengthening, expansion, and improvement of the peacekeeping operations and machinery within international institutions.


Nothing is of more vital concern to thoughtful Americans than the search for world peace with justice and with safeguards for freedom.

I am a mathematician working in a defense industry and living in a community whose economy is largely dependent on defense spending. However, it is becoming more and more apparent that in the longrun weapons cannot assure peace or justice or freedom.

Thousands of years of human experience have demonstrated that disputes will occur between individuals, groups, and nations; and, if uncontrolled, they frequently lead to violence. There seems little likelihood that the human race will change radically in this respect.

In our cities, in our States, and in our Nation, we depend upon enforceable law to preserve peace and to provide for the just settlement of disputes. We would not expect peace in most communities without law. However, at the international level (where the sources of friction are much greater and the potential consequences much more disastrous) we have no law, and it is not surprising that we have no peace.

The United Nations is in peril of collapse because it cannot take effective enforcement action (except against small nations by agreement of larger nations) and it cannot even collect the dues it assesses on its members. This, too, is not surprising. For the United Nations is not a world government but an association of sovereign states founded on an assumption of mutual trust and goodwill. This did not work when the American colonies tried it in the 1780's so it can hardly be expected to work at the international level.

If we recognize that stronger international institutions will be needed to preserve world peace, then it is important that we and other nations begin to think about the form that such institutions should take. For example, would we want a world organization based on the principle of Federal Union invented by our forefathers at Philadelphia in 1787? If so, what systems of representation would be equitable and what powers would we want to delegate to the international organization?

To initiate studies of these and countless other related questions, I sincerely hope that Senate Concurrent Resolution 32 will be approved by Congress and promptly implemented by the President.


Washington, D.C., May 12, 1965.

Chairman, Committee on Foreign Relations,
U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C.

DEAR SENATOR FULBRIGHT: The Council for a Livable World wishes to go on record to express its wholehearted support for Senate Concurrent Resolution 32 "relative to planning for peace."

While most of the work of our organization is directed in support of limited measures which will increase international security and reduce the risk of nuclear war, we recognize that a nation cannot effectively pursue the small steps toward a lessening of international hostility unless it has some greater vision in mind. We do not claim to know the precise nature of the "livable world" for which we strive, but we do believe that a nation committed to this resolution will be more effective in its quest for a just peace than would be a nation lacking great goals. The American commitment to "liberty and justice for all" is a commitment to a dream; yet this commitment is sincere and essential to the American way of life. Similarly, we do not know that general and complete disarmament is achievable in our time-or ever-but we do believe that a

sincere national commitment to this goal is a valuable ingredient in our quest for a safer and more livable world.

A nation not committed to such goals is a nation committed to international anarchy and to the rule by might instead of law. If the great powers deny a vision of a world in which there is rule of law, then it will be impossible to convince the smaller nations that there is wisdom in their restraint in the quest for nuclear arms. The vision of broad disarmament, accompanied by concrete steps to turn down the arms race, is essential if we are to halt the spread of nuclear weapons and take even the most elementary steps toward a world in which man has some control over his destiny.

We believe that greater emphasis on the development of international institutions is essential. The United States has been a pioneer in research related to arms control and this research should be made available to others. An International Disarmament Organization (IDO), versed in modern arms control theory and prepared to act on short notice in support of arms control agreements, should be created. Even in the absence of specific agreements which this IDO might help design and verify, it seems desirable to organize such an institution, educate its members and allow it to demonstrate its competence and to win the confidence of nations.

Existing international institutions which have already proved their value should also be strengthened. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has been an international forum in which the United States and U.S.S.R. have cooperated to encourage the orderly development of nuclear energy programs and to lessen the risk of diversion of fissile material to nuclear weapons programs. With the increasing use of nuclear reactors by many nations this institution will not be able to prevent the diversion of fissile materials unless it is substantially strengthened; in particular, countries not adhering to IAEA regulations regarding the sale of nuclear fuels threaten to undermine the work of this organization. The United States should explore the possibility of enlarging the role of the IAEA as a supplier of nuclear fuels. In order to maintain adequate safeguards over nuclear fuels the great powers should consider ways of making IAEA controlled nuclear fuels so attractive economically that those who would circumvent this organization will not find markets.

While strongly supporting Senate Concurrent Resolution 32 in its present form, we believe that it could and should be improved. There tends to be an enormous gap between the kind of short-run arms control and peacekeeping proposals which the United States can make for immediate adoption and those which are considered for the distant future under almost utopian conditions of general and complete disarmament. We believe that constructive thinking both about today's problems and about those of the more distant future would be greatly facilitated by a conscious effort to formulate some proposals for peacekeeping institutions under intermediate conditions-say 5 or 10 years hence, and assuming that nation-states retain significant amounts of armaments. We suggest the development of such proposals not as an alternative to those now requested in the resolution but in addition to them.

To implement this suggestion we would recommend the committee's considering amending the present first sentence of section 2 of the resolution to read as follows (new matter in italic) :

"The President is hereby requested to formulate as speedily as possible specific and detailed proposals for the implementation of the foreign policy objectives of the United States regarding the establishment of an international authority to keep the peace (a) under conditions of partial disarmament, say 5 or 10 years in the future, and (b) under conditions of general and complete disarmament effectively guaranteed by adequate inspection and controls."

We believe that hard and careful work on such intermediate proposals could improve the quality both of our long range plans and of the proposals which the United States will make in the immediate future. It may also help bring home to the people of this country that we need more effective peacekeeping machinery whatever level of disarmament we are able to attain.

Sincerely yours,

BERNARD T. FELD, President.

Chappaqua, N.Y., May 12, 1965.

It is herewith recommended that Senate Concurrent Resolution 32 be expanded to call upon the President for bold new dimension strategic planning for the peace of the world, utilizing breakthrough global war safety control capabilities which have never been available before in history. Without in any way weakening the national defense posture or determination to prevent aggression anywhere in the world, the President can now unleash great new American power initiatives to reverse the world's drift toward war, without having to first seek the political approval of the enemy which is committed to the domination of the world through utilization of power. If the American Government will plan for world peace with the strength and daring that it has planned for war, the tide of world crisis can be turned.


There will always be war and aggression between nations until there is created a world public authority capable of providing positive protection for every nation, large and small, from threats of war or domination by any foreign power. Planning for peace means planning for the control of war. The control of war is the most difficult and complex problem man has ever confronted, and will require new kinds and dimensions of power and new safety structures of world dimension. Such new safety power may now be within reach if a great new effort is made.


A generation of forced investment in defense development has produced unexpected new strategic capabilities without precedent in military or political science. Fully developed, this new strategic power may cause greater reappraisal of national strategy, and policy, and purpose than was caused by earlier breakthroughs into air power, and nuclear power, and space power. The President could unleash new strategic initiatives based on increasing national strength, to turn the tide of world crisis, except that the new strategic powers are beyond the current vision of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the National Security Council, and the Congress. Planning for global control of war requires a new echelon of strategic command reporting personally to the President, superior to the necessary emergency climate of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and National Security Council, now preoccupied with tactical problems fighting a global war against an oncoming enemy. Since no committee in the Senate or the House has authority broad enough to encompass the present strategic vacuum and paralysis, a higher echelon committee is required to integrate responsibilities of the different committees concerned with the military, technological, legal, economic, public opinion, political and moral aspects of this new strategic power, and its use.


No man can halt the relentless forward march of technology and knowledge. Man can only determine toward what goal this march will proceed. The President has such authority.

For the past generation the American people have been mobilized to create antihuman military force now capable of destroying the structures of world civilization. The U.S. Government has planned for the power of death for mankind, and we have created it.

If the Government will now plan for the power of life in the form of a worldsized security system to protect all nations, we can create it. If the President has strong bipartisan support in Congress, he now has the opportunity to mobilize the coming generation to plan, develop, build, test, and demonstrate to the world prohuman global war safety systems, and to provide leadership to the people of all nations for the difficult and dangerous transition out of the Age of Anxiety and into a new age in which men and nations will not live in dread of the threat of war.


Like a victorious football coach, for the coming generation the President of the United States must have full command of two kinds of superior power (1) superior defense power to contain the opponent and prevent him from reaching his goal of world domination, plus (2) superior forward power to move man

kind toward the quite different goal of a proper moral world order in which each nation will be secure, and independent.

A defense-only football team is under a great handicap. Initiative has been surrendered to the opponent. All energy is burned up in containment. The team can only hold the line, or lose ground.

Under a defense-only national strategic planning directive, for the last 12 years the American people have lived in greater potential national danger each year, than they lived in the year before, in a relentless retreat from positive national security. The national security this month is in greater jeopardy than it was last month.

We are fighting defensively in Vietnam, in a location chosen by the enemy, at a time chosen by the enemy, in terrain favorable to the enemy, with tactics in which the enemy excels. Failure of strategic planning is evidenced by the fact that we play the enemy's game, in the enemy's ball park, according to the enemy's rules, when and if the enemy wants to play. We have no great plan for peace in the world toward which we choose the times and places and impacts for the thrusts of power.

The defense-only football team would meet sudden disaster if it began disarming and weakening the half-strength it had. The game would soon be over. The hierarchy of defense policy and power in the United States knows that there can be no gradual disarmament agreement negotiated with the increasingly powerful enemy committed to world domination. * * * but the hierarchy encourages the small budgets for nonpower discussions of disarmament, (a) for reasons of international propaganda, and (b) to keep the domestic peace groups preoccupied and to let them feel busy.

If, by wild imagination, the nations of the world agreed to banish all nuclear power, all spacepower, all missile power, all airpower, and all naval power *** and to create an international enforcement agency with power to make this agreement stick * * * world civilization would then be back to the 13th century, when the Mongols killed 18 million Chinese in 10 years, without using or needing, nuclear power, spacepower, missile power, airpower, or naval power. The establishment of an international authority with inspection and controls to enforce general and complete disarmament even down to this fantastic level, would provide the strategic opportunity for Chinese and Russian masses to begin to move across the land, as the Mongols did, fighting among themselves, and capturing one nation at a time, across Scandinavia, Europe, Middle East, Far East, Asia, and Africa, to dominate the strategic land masses of the world. * * * while a disarmed and impotent United States sat by, helpless to prevent the world's bloodiest centuries ahead, and helpless to assure the future security of the United States.

For similar reasons of national defense calculation, the Kremlin also could never afford to allow its disarmament propaganda to materialize into reality. A disarmed Russia eventually would be overpowered by the land-and-people power of China. There can be not integrity in the disarmament propaganda or negotiations of either the United States or the Soviet Union, for basic military


Planning for peace must work in bold new dimensions with new vision and great new powers for the global control of war * * * and with integrity.


Without in any way disarming or weakening national defense posture or power, the President can create additional command and planning echelons operating from his office, and can issue directives to the National Security Council and the Joint Chiefs of Staff,, to plan and develop and demonstrate to the world new global war safety control systems strong enough (at some future date) to protect Israel people from the Arabs * * * protect Arab people from the Israeli *** protect European people from the Germans * * * protect German people from the Russians *** protect Russian people from the Chinese *** protect people of all nations, large and small, from threats of aggression or domination from any foreign power *** strong enough to prevent the export or import of military materiel across all national borders *** strong enough to prevent the preparation for war within any nation, within an entirely new world security system, or a vastly revised United Nations in which no nation will be able to veto the activities of the all-nation safety systems, or war control authority. Man can now develop nonviolent power, safety power.


The first International War Safety Year-1967?

The President can project a future yearlong open demonstration of man's emerging new powers to detect and forcefully stop any preparation for war, anywhere in the world. International War Safety Games will be held on the world stage for all mankind to witness. There is no precedent for a world security guard. There is no reason why the people of nations should have confidence in any such peace enforcement agency until after it has been created, tested, demonstrated, and proven for many years. No one today can predict how many years will be required to develop this peacekeeping agency to the point where it can assure the positive national security, and political independence, of the United States, and of every other nation in the world. No one can estimate how many additional International War Safety Years will be held until it can be proven that the world can be made safe from war, without having created a greater tyrannical power which could control the minds of men, or the governments of independent nations.


The President can invite all nations to cooperate, and to allow their citizens to freely cooperate in the design and testing of military and political safety systems for the yearlong international trials and demonstrations. No citizen will be involved in work which will threaten the existing security of his own nation, in this preliminary planning and pilot plant experimentation phase. The demonstration year will be held with whatever nations respond and desire to cooperate. No nation will be able to veto these experiments and demonstrations. But all communications channels will be utilized to see that the people of all nations, whether cooperating or not, learn the daily facts of man's new slowly emerging powers to create a proper moral warproof world, and a new kind of United Nations.


President Roosevelt reached far beyond the immediate needs and realities of World War II, to take personal command of the gigantic gamble to create an unprecedented new strategic power in the release of nuclear energy, through the Manhattan project. Today the President has the opportunity to reach far beyond the immediate needs of national defense and deterrence and worsening world crisis, to take personal command of a gigantic national commitment to create the new realities, around which men's visions of peace can begin to form to displace cruel dreams built on phantom propaganda images.

We can no longer continue to use the excuse that the Communists won't let us plan and work toward a peaceful world. Only our own reluctance stands in the way of powerful new initiatives.


The President stands before the world as the symbol and image of the American people. Holding the power of death for mankind in his hands, he casts a shadow of anxiety and fear across all men. Each bombing raid on North Vietnam, necessary as it may be, sends a chill of dread through the people of all nations who hear of it. Each bombing raid on an underdeveloped nation and people further tarnishes the moral character of the American image. Each bombing raid against Asian and nonwhite people, further turns the majority of the world's people against white man American image. Each bombing raid tends to draw the divided factions of the Communist enemy together again, to further jeopardize our own future national security. We have planned for the power to destroy ourselves along with the world. Our planning has been well done.

If the President launches the great new prohuman strategic power development commitment, the image of the American people and the President will change. Each year as global war safety control power is developed and demonstrated to the people of the world, anxiety will change to hope.

The Russian people will find better promise of protection for their Russian motherland in the war control authority of a revised United Nations, than in any program of protracted conflict and world domination the Kremlin may offer. The Russian people will see the emerging possibility of transforming their hard

« iepriekšējāTurpināt »