Churchill on War (2)

Churchill on War (2)

con­tin­ued from part 1….

Part 2: What He Said in the Nuclear Age

Meeting Eisenhower at Bermuda, November 1953.
Meet­ing Eisen­how­er at Bermu­da, Novem­ber 1953.

In the imme­di­ate after­math of the atom­ic bomb it was regard­ed by many as just anoth­er weapon of war. Churchill him­self spoke pri­vate­ly of using it, or threat­en­ing to use it, to roll back Sovi­et advances in Europe in 1946-47, though not on the ple­nary lev­el, and was push­ing for a nego­ti­at­ed set­tle­ment with Rus­sia by ear­ly 1948. At the 1953 Bermu­da con­fer­ence the British del­e­ga­tion was aston­ished to find Pres­i­dent Eisen­how­er, and his Sec­re­tary of State, John Fos­ter Dulles, still regard­ing the bomb as con­ven­tion­al. With the arrival of the hydro­gen bomb, Churchill’s thoughts became apoc­a­lyp­tic, as he vain­ly tried to arrange a “sum­mit” with the Amer­i­cans and Stalin’s suc­ces­sor, Geor­gy Malenkov. These are his words on war and peace in the nuclear age:

Anoth­er great war, espe­cial­ly an ide­o­log­i­cal war, fought as it would be not only on fron­tiers but in the heart of every land with weapons far more destruc­tive than men have yet wield­ed, would spell the doom, per­haps for many cen­turies, of such civ­i­liza­tion as we have been able to erect since his­to­ry began to be writ­ten…. —1944, 15 Decem­ber, House of Com­mons (here­inafter “HC”)

This rev­e­la­tion of the secrets of nature, long mer­ci­ful­ly with­held from man, should arouse the most solemn reflec­tions in the mind and con­science of every human being capa­ble of com­pre­hen­sion. We must indeed pray that these awful agen­cies will be made to con­duce to peace among the nations, and that instead of wreak­ing mea­sure­less hav­oc upon the entire globe they may become a peren­ni­al foun­tain of world pros­per­i­ty. —1945, 6 August, HC

The bomb brought peace, but men alone can keep that peace, and hence­for­ward they will keep it under penal­ties which threat­en the sur­vival not only of civ­i­liza­tion but of human­i­ty itself. —1945, 16 August, HC

The atom­ic bomb is still only in the hands of a State and nation which we know will nev­er use it except in the cause of right and free­dom. But it may well be that in a few years this awful agency of destruc­tion will be wide­spread and the cat­a­stro­phe fol­low­ing from its use by sev­er­al war­ring nations will not only bring to an end all that we call civ­i­liza­tion but may pos­si­bly dis­in­te­grate the globe itself. —1946, 19 Sep­tem­ber, Zurich Uni­ver­si­ty

If we….firmly grasp the larg­er hopes of human­i­ty, then it may be that we shall move into a hap­pi­er sun­lit age, when all the lit­tle chil­dren who are now grow­ing up in this tor­ment­ed world may find them­selves not the vic­tors nor the van­quished in the fleet­ing tri­umphs of one coun­try over anoth­er in the bloody tur­moil of destruc­tive war, but the heirs of all the trea­sures of the past and the mas­ters of all the sci­ence, the abun­dance and the glo­ries of the future. —1948, 7 May, Con­gress of Europe, The Hague

….lit­tle did we guess that what has been called The Cen­tu­ry of the Com­mon Man would wit­ness as its out­stand­ing fea­ture more com­mon men killing each oth­er with greater facil­i­ties than any oth­er five cen­turies put togeth­er in the his­to­ry of the world. —1949, 31 March, Mass­a­chu­setts Insti­tute of Tech­nol­o­gy

Appease­ment in itself may be good or bad accord­ing to the cir­cum­stances. Appease­ment from weak­ness and fear is alike futile and fatal. Appease­ment from strength is mag­nan­i­mous and noble and might be the surest and per­haps the only path to world peace. —1950, 14 Decem­ber

The human race is going through tor­ment­ing con­vul­sions, and there is a pro­found long­ing for some breath­ing space, for some pause in the fren­zy. —1951, 8 Octo­ber, Broad­cast, Lon­don

I have since heard it said that cer­tain math­e­mat­i­cal quan­ti­ties when they pass through infin­i­ty, change their signs from plus to minus—or the oth­er way round. It may be that his rule may have a nov­el appli­ca­tion, and that when the advance of destruc­tive weapons enables every­one to kill every­body else, nobody will want to kill any­one at all.   —1953, 3 Novem­ber, HC

When I meet Malenkov we can build for peace.…[Eisenhower] doesn’t think any good can come from talks with the Rus­sians. But it will pay him to come along with us. I shall do what I can to per­suade him.          —1953, 3 Decem­ber, Hamil­ton, Bermu­da

[Dulles says] noth­ing but evil can come out of meet­ing with Malenkov. Dulles is a ter­ri­ble hand­i­cap. Ten years ago I could have dealt with him. Even as it is I have not been defeat­ed by this bas­tard. I have been humil­i­at­ed by my own decay. —1953, 7 Decem­ber, Hamil­ton, Bermu­da

Then it may well be that we shall by a process of sub­lime irony have reached a stage in this sto­ry where safe­ty will be the stur­dy child of ter­ror, and sur­vival the twin broth­er of annihilation.…The [nuclear] deter­rent does not cov­er the case of lunatics or dic­ta­tors in the mood of Hitler when he found him­self in his final dug-out. That is a blank…. —1955, 1 March, HC.

A bomb in the hands of lunatics is, alas, the blank we may some­day face.

con­clud­ed in part 3…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *