Allies & A-Bombs

The further the'U.S. goes in furnishing intermediate-range ballistic missiles to NATO allies, the more it begins to trip over the letter of U.S. law governing custody of atomic weapons. Strictly interpreted, the Atomic Energy Act of 1946 requires that U.S. forces keep possession of atomic bombs and warheads on foreign soil. Because it takes hours to install an atomic warhead on an IRBM, this requirement cuts down the ability of a NATO IRBM force to retaliate instantly.

One way to solve the problem is to amend the act so as to give greater warhead control to such IRBM-minded allies as Britain, Turkey and Italy. But rather than stir up a debate over "giving away A-bombs" to other powers in an election year, the Administration's atomic councilors decided that the terms of "custody" could be legally stretched to cover installation in ready IRBMs--as long as the U.S. held an electronic key that prevented firing. President Eisenhower apparently didn't get the word. Answering a question on A-bomb custody at his press conference last week, Ike plumped for making "our law more liberal . . . We should not deny to our allies . . . what your potential enemy already has."

Members of the Joint Congressional Committee on Atomic Energy, who had just been assured that the Administration had no intention of trying to change the law this session, boiled up and over. The White House first issued one "clarification," saying., that the President would propose a change, then issued another, saying that the matter was under "continuing review" but no present change was contemplated. All of which left the problem just where it was before: if Western forces are to get full benefit out of IRBM power, the U.S. must find a way to keep allied missiles legal, cocked and ready.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.