The scientists
refuse

The inside story of the West German

scientists who won t make nuclear weapons

By PHYLLIS
ROSNER

HE madmen of

hardly wait until they
have atomic.weapons. This is
being made terrifyingly clear.

The Conservative Sued-
deutsche Zeitung (in its Easter
issue, reported the discussions
recently held between West
German government and mili-
tary leaders, and five of the
18 nuclear physicists who
warned against the atomic
danger.

What transpired at the six-
hour talks on April 17 and
the communique issued. after-
wards indicate that neither
the Adenauer government nor
the scientists budged an iota
from their standpoint.

Bonn is determined to push
ahead with plans to equip the
Federal Republic with nuclear
weapons.

The scientists remained com-
pletely unshaken in their view
that such a,step would im-
measurably increase the war
danger, and they maintained
their refusal to work on the
development, production or
testing of such weapons.

Last November a group of
renowned physicists (all mem-
bers of the West German
atomic commission) addressed
a letter to-the West German
Defense Minister Strauss and
Atomic Minister Balke, stress-
ing they wished to have no
part in the development of
atomic weapons. They asked
that a reply be sent to their
communication.

During January of this year
a discussion took place be-
tween Strauss and a number
of the scientists during which
Strauss arrogantly declared:

“You have not been asked
whether you wish to play a
role in the development ‘of
atomic weapons, and there-
fore you’ve no need to say
anything about it.”

The discussion was quite
fruitless. Professor Weizsaeker
told Strauss that the scientists
would have to consult once
more-if no reply were forth-
coming to their letter.

However, no further step
was taken until the scientists
read Chancellor Konrad Ad-
enauer’s statement of- April
5 that “tactical atomic wea-
pons are basically nothing but
a further development of ar-
tillery,” and that is was “self-
evident” that the Federal
Republic troops should be
equipped with these weapons.

Of all those present at the
talks in Adenauer’s villa,
Speidel, Heusinger and Strauss

Bonn can.

Three of the We

st German sci

entists are shown arriving

at Schaumburg Palace, Bonn, for their talks with Chancellor
Adenauer. They are (left to right): Prof. Otto Hahn, Nobel
prizewinner, Prof. Walter Gerlach and Prof. Karl Freidrich

von Weizsaecker.

were most openly and un-
ashamedly insistent that Wes-
tern Germany must have
atomic weapons, with Aden-
auer supporting this viewpoint
in a somewhat less aggressive
manner.

Heusinger went so far as

to try to compare the resis-
tance now existing to atomic

weapons to that in the First
World War against the ma-
chinegun. It was absolutely
necessary for the whole of
NATO to be equipped with
atomic weapons, he claimed.

Speidel propounded the
theory that these weapons
were necessary as a deterrent.

In answer, Professor Weiz-

saecker drew a parallel with
a game played by American
students in which two students
drive full speed ahead toward
each other in their cars. The
one using his brakes first is
the loser. If neither does so,
then both are killed.

This said Weizsaecker, just
about seems to summarise
military thinking.

Time and again Strauss
aggressively attacked the
scientists, and repeated his al-
legations made during his
Munich television talk of a
“sentleman’s agreement” be-
tween him and the scientists
that they would do nothing
without first consulting him.
This allegation was energetic-
ally denied by all the scien-
tists present.

One of the scientists quietly
pointed out that it was useless
appealing for disarmament
when one did not disarm
oneself.

“We cannot speak for all
our colleagues,” he told the
Bonn. political .and military
leaders, “but it is certain there
is unbreakable unity among
us that we do not wish to
work on atomic weapons.”

After lunch-break Aden-
auer commented that it would
be good if a joint decla ration
were issued, and suggested
that the scientists might like
to confer. They, withdrew an
adjoining room.

A few minutes afterwards
the government’s press officer,
Von Eckardt, approached
them and suggested it might
ease matters if he were to
read them a rough -draft.

The scientists agreed and
returned to the conference
room, whereupon a lively dis-
cussion on the draft took place.

It was Strauss who tried —
unsuccessfully — to force the
scientists to agree to the in-
clusion of a sentence in .the
communique that they wished
to establish connection with
their colleagues in the rest
of the world. This was reject-
ed by the scientists who under-
lined that in any case they
hoped to establish such ties.

If this were included in the
communique it would appear

as if they were acting on be-
half of the ‘overnment, the
scientists argued.

As soon as the communique
was agreed, Strauss stumped
out of the room, but not before
the following incident occur-
red, showing that the scientists
had been completely unim-
pressed:

At one point when the final
draft was being read aloud
Adenauer said: “A comma
should be inserted there,”
State Secretary Hallstein
thereupon delivered a short
discourse on grammar.

Adenauer was unimpressed
and repeated: “But I say a
comma _ should be - inserted
there.” At this, one of the
professors stated, loud enough
for Adenauer to hear: “I shall
decide where the comma be-
longs.” :

Atomic Minister Balke and
Nobel Prize-winner Professor
Werner Heisenberg were two
notable absentees from the
discussions. Balke is reputed
to be in bad odor for having
said to the professors: “One
cannot prevent a, man from
having his sown opinion.”

Professor Heisenberg had
excused himself ‘on health

grounds, but was well enough
to grant an interview on the
eve of the talks repeating his
views (and that of his 17
colleagues) that Western Ger-
many must renounce atomic
weapons.

Furthermore, on the-day of
the discussions he was well
enough to travel to Munich to
see the Bavarian premier, him-
self an opponent of atomic
weapons.

After six hours discussion
with a whole battery of poli-
tical’ and military leaders,
using cajolery and thinly cam-
ouflaged threats, the scientists
remain unshaken.

Their warning has set in
motion a gigantic protest
movement in Western Ger-
many, one involving all op-
position political parties and
the six-million strong Con-
federation of Labor.

It is inspiring the people
with the conviction that they
have the power to stop this
atomic madness.

China tackles its population problem

by GRACE LIU

TIENTSIN

HE National Committee of

the Chinese People’s Poli-
tical Consultative Council is
now tackling the problem of
controlling the increase in
population — currently about
15 million a year.

In a survey of some textile
mills in Shanghai, among 609
pregnant wemen, 17 percent
were pregnant twice within
one year, 53 percent each year
and 22 percent twice in three
years. In one mill with 7,000
workers, the women had had
7,000 children in seven years.

In the old days most of these
children would not have had
a chance to live.

One of my students told me
that before the Liberation in
his home province of Kiangsi,
out of every nine children
born only two lived. But now
with raised hygienic stand-
ards, better mother and child
care, better food and better

living conditions all around,
most children live.

This is now creating prob-
lems. One of them is that such
a big and constant increase in
population makes all the more
difficult the country’s task of
improving the people’s wel-
fare while engaging in great
industrial construction.

How to care for the working
mother’s children when there
are too many, and the effect
of too close and too many
pregnancies on the health of
mothers, are also problems
that cause conceern.

The authorities have been
doing some birth control work
since 1954 and this has begun
to show results. Last year
Peking’s birth rate. was 37 per
1,000 compared to 43 per 1,000
in 1954.

it xt

This new. effort is some-
thing much bigger. A -nation-
wide campaign is being
launched to teach the popula-
tion of properly-spaced child-

births and to overcome the
age-old opposition to birth
control, which is still so strong,
especially in the countryside.

To begin with, public
opinion is being aroused
against the teen-age marriages
that have been the custom in
China for so many centuries.
Newspaper editorials and
magazine articles, quoting doc-
tors and statistics, are dis-
couraging these early mar-
riages.

“Extensive propaganda for
the practice of contraception
has been started. A.birth con-
trol exhibition which opened
in Peking on March 8 was
visited by 4,500 people the
first day. The processes of
conception and methods of
contraception are explained
in charts on display, and charts
and models set for the advan-
tages of properly spaced
childbirths.

A spokesman for the min-
istry of public health announc-
ed such exhibitions are being

held “in many parts of the
country, along with discus-
sions and lectures to spread
the knowledge of contracep~
tion,

Induced abortion and steril-
ization have been discussed:
Ninteen doctors made.a joint
statement to the Political Con-
sultative Council in which they
expressed strong opposition
to abortion unless medically
necessary.

They opposed the random
use of sterilization, but had
no objection to its use where
both husband .and wife were
in agreement after mature
consideration.

They supported control of
conception’ and said that in
standing for planned parent-
hood they were taking into

consideration the health of the

mothers and of future genera”
tions, family happiness a?
the fact that birth control
is one of the people‘s inalien-
able rights.

“MAY 10, 1957 ~ PACIFIC TRIBUNE—"AGE 10