~93reason to ask ourselves whether some significant use could not and should not be made of it while it lasts. The fact that this country is temporarily enjoying absolute security from atomic attack means little because no major conflagration was likely to occur so soon after the close of a world war anyway. It is being asked whether the spectacular increase in our military power, occurring at the very time when ticklish postwar problems are being thrashed out between the Allies, should not be helping our diplomats to obtain results more nearly in line with American views and principles. Heevitence so far indicates fe that the atomic bomb has exerted no such influence. \Rather “than being a suitable “yr instrument through which to obtain concessions from the Russians, it may have been an impediment to our diplomacy, There are good reasons why this should be so. Current negotiations with the Soviet Union bear on matters which from the view~ point of the American public are of secondary interest; they bear an NPar-away regions," to use the words Neville Chamberlain applied to Czechoslovakia, The United States will not attack Russia with atom bombs over such issues as democracy in Eastern Zurope or "autonomy movements" in Asia, and the Soviet leaders know it. American and Pritish statesmen, as a matter of fact, have assured the Russians that they do not have the remotest intention of using the bomb as a means of diplomatic pressure , 07 In saying so, they are promising little. It may be praiseworthy of them not to want to swing the "biz stick," but it would not be much of a stick if they did, All they could achieve would be to arouse resentment and to vrovoke the Russians to more vigorous resistance to their desires. The mere suspicion on the part of the Russians that the imglish-speaicing statesmen te Foreign Secretary Ernest Bevin addressing the House of Commons stated, "I have never once allowed myself to think that I could arrive at this or that decision because Britain was in possession of the atomic bomb, or whether she was not." Wew York Times, November 8, 195. Secretary of State James F, Byrnes on November 16, 19)5: "The suggestion that we are using the atomic bomb as a diplomatic or military threat against any nation is not only untrue in fact but is a wholly unwarranted reflection upon the American Government and people." New York Times, November 17, 1945.