What are armaments? The Preparatory Disarmament Commission found no answer (TIME, May 31). Its Military Committee began an attempt at definition (TIME, June 14) only to be confounded by the Latins, Netherlanders and Swedes, who presented lists of “armaments” which included such items as pigs, fogs, birth rates, ocean currents. . . .
Last week, calm brooded upon confusion. A formula of agreement was discovered. There was drafted, passed, recorded a succinct definition: Armaments are armaments.
Lest this should seem a modicum of accomplishment to crown the labors of many men for almost a month, there was also drafted, passed and recorded a definition of “potentials of war.” This voluminous document contained all the pigs, fogs, birth rates, etc. . . . etc. . . . etc. . . . originally proposed for inclusion under “armaments.”
Thus by a weaseling of words, the committee was saved from admitting that mankind is not yet ready even to use the word disarmament, much less accomplish the fact.
Speaking in behalf of the U. S. delegation, Major General Dennis E. Nolan caustically deplored the tendency of the committee to name as “armaments” what international common sense would denote simply as “resources.”
More Must-Reads from TIME
- The Reintroduction of Kamala Harris
- IVF Changed America . But Its Future Is Under Threat
- The 7 States That Will Decide the Election
- Inside Sam Bankman-Fried's Siege of D.C.
- Do You Really Store Stress in Your Body?
- The Rise of a New Kind of Parenting Guru
- The 50 Best Romance Novels to Read Right Now
- Can Food Really Change Your Hormones?
Contact us at letters@time.com