Department of State Atomic Energy Files
The Chief of Staff to the Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy (Leahy) to the United States Representative on the Atomic Energy Commission (Baruch)
Dear Mr. Baruch: Thank you for the compliment contained in your request for advice in the problem faced by you in obtaining a [Page 852] treaty that will be effective in preventing the employment of atomic bombs in war.4
I realize that the difficulties before you must appear almost insurmountable and I believe that from a military point of view and in the interest of the National Defense of the United States, the only practicable line of approach is to endeavor to obtain from the United Nations an agreement that the employment of atomic bombs in war is outlawed except when authorized by a majority vote of the Security Council in retaliation for an unlawful use of atomic bombs.
Acceptance by the United Nations of the use of atomic bombs in retaliation when authorized by a majority vote of the Security Council involves a repeal of the “veto” provision of the United Nations Charter on this one particular problem.
Difficulty in obtaining agreement on such a repeal is foreseen. It is my belief that the most aggressive nations that can now be foreseen would hesitate long before becoming outlaws under such a world statute as the charter of the United Nations by the use of atomic bombs in war with a practically certain retaliation in kind by a majority of the United Nations of the world.
The present advantage held by the English speaking world through possession of atomic bombs should be advantageous in negotiating with our former enemies treaties that are designed to preserve world peace.
It therefore appears apparent that the United States should not enter into a treaty that would limit our possibilities of producing atomic bombs until:
- 1.
- Treaties of peace with our former enemies are ratified by the Allied Nations.
- 2.
- Effective and workable methods of inspection and control of manufacture are developed, tested, and found effective.
The only promising means of creating in the minds of all men a desire to comply with such a treaty is through fear of punishment for its violation.
Automatic and certain punishment for violation of the treaty must be within the authority of a majority vote of the Security Council.
I do not know of any short cut to the elimination of war that appears [Page 853] to be an intermittent acute disease with which the human animal has been afflicted since his appearance upon the earth.
Widespread education in the material advantages of peace, illustrations of the horrors of war, convincing assurances that net losses in war are shared by the victor and the vanquished and that there can be no profit to anybody in an international war spread to all people of all nations by every possible means of modern methods of communication, and with world approval through the United Nations, might incline even the “have not” peoples toward our desire to keep the peace between nations and induce those people that already have more than their just share to meticulously avoid interfering with the governments of other nations.
I realize fully that these brief observations of mine based on military considerations of the national defense of the United States, which is my principal interest, will be of very little assistance to you in the solution of your most difficult problem, but they are the best reply that I can make to your inquiries.
With expressions of high regard, I remain always
Most sincerely,
- Mr. Baruch had solicited the views of Generals Eisenhower, Spaatz, MacArthur, and McNarney, and Admirals Leahy, Nimitz, and King in letters of May 24. He had requested suggestions on not only international control of atomic energy, but also as to how war itself could be outlawed. The Baruch letters and replies from those mentioned above with the exception of General MacArthur exist in the Department of State Atomic Energy Files. The United States Delegation to the Atomic Energy Commission received additional military guidance in the form of a memorandum by General Groves dated January 2, 1946, “Our Army of the Future—As Influenced by Atomic Weapons,” which General Groves transmitted to Mr. Hancock on June 10; for text, see p. 1197.↩