◆ SpookStack

- - There are some who have criticized us for agree-— But we would not be satisfied to stop with these ing to a disarmament forum based on equal repre- sentation with the Communist bloc. However, the reasons for this are clear and, I think, substantial. The withdrawal of the Soviet Union from the ° UN. Disarmament Subcommittee in 1957 left us without an agreed forum for disarmament negotia- tions. We believed that no avenue should be left unexplored which might offer prospects for progress on this crucial problem. We were con- vinced that, although detailed disarmament nego- tiations would take place for the time being outside the U.N. by the establishment of the Committees of Ten,? this would not diminish the United Nations’ responsibility for general disarmament. As a matter of fact, if agreement can be achieved among the Ten in Geneva, it will contribute substantially to a fuller realization of the purposes and prin- ciples of the charter. This view was reflected by the General Assembly in a resolution unanimously adopted at its past session.’ The resolution expressed the hope that measures leading toward the goal of general and complete disarmament under effective interna- tional control would be worked out in detail and agreed upon in the shortest possible time. U.S. Objectives at Geneva We approach the disarmament problem with two basic aims: First, to try urgently to create a more stable military environment in order to curtail the risk of war. Second, to reduce national armed forces and armaments and to strengthen international peace- keeping machinery to the point where aggression will be deterred by international rather than na- tional force. To accomplish the first objective, we believe it is necessary to undertake measures to guard against surprise attack, to halt future nuclear weapons production, to reduce existing nuclear weapons stockpiles, to bring about balanced reductions in ~ conventional arms and armed forces, and to initi- ate measures to assure the peaceful use of outer space, * For background, see BULLETIN of Sept. 28, 1959, p. 488, ___* For a statement by Ambassador Henry Cabot Lodge and text of the resolution, see itd. Nov. 28; 1050,-p- 765. - May 23, 1960 -Nation Disarmament Conference. = _ achievements. "We want: to-move-on-toward_the__. . + Nt nto om Ot ae elimination of weapons of mass destruction and toward the reduction of national armed forces and armaments to levels required only for internal security purposes and to carry out obligations un- der the United Nations Charter. “At the same time we want to foster universally accepted rules of law, backed by a world court and an interna- tional armed force, which would prevent any na- tion from launching an aggression. This, in brief, sets the scene for the first round of negotiations which have taken place over the past weeks in Geneva. The Soviets thus far have not been willing to discuss the obvious and specific initial measures I have outlined. Without burdening you with the details, I should like to outline some of the basic differences in approach to the problem of disarmament taken by the Com- munist bloc and ourselves, The Mirage ot Agreement in Principle So far the Communist representatives at Geneva have refused to consider any proposals which do not endorse in principle the Soviet version of gen- eral and complete disarmament. This Soviet tac- tic in negotiation is all too familiar. All too often the Communists seem more interested in slogans than in serious negotiations. We have been exposed before to these tactics. “Ban the bomb,” “Stop all nuclear testing” —these are familiar slogans which have a certain super- ficial appeal. This time the Communists talk about “general and complete disarmament” as if this were a trade- mark which they had registered and as if its ac- ceptance constituted the only way to make progress in disarmament. During the first 3 days of negotiations at Geneva, the Communist dele- gates used the phrase “general and complete dis- armament” 135 times. They dodge the question of effective international controls, and thus the slogan is just as misleading and just as superficial as the earlier mirages. Even the Genera] Assembly resolution, which was cosponsored by all of the members of the United Nations and which expressed the hope for “general and complete disarmament under effeo- tive international control” becomes in Mr. Zorin’s ¢ “Vv. A. Zorin, chairman of Soviet delegation to the Ten- enn SIS orem Se AMT IE NET OCLC, FP RICE TE Te ER TE a TY FE I eT Tn aren Sane ' : Beh EM i