As memories of World War II have faded into history and as the considerations of national survival that determined its course have lost their urgency, many have come forward to question the desirability of our having developed atomic energy. Some people have even gone so far as to assert that the United States was morally corrupt in making the effort. When I consider the sources of these later claims, my first inclination is to ignore them and I would do so if it were not for the fact that if free men are to arrive at a fair appraisal and full understanding of the Manhattan Project, they must be acquainted with the points in its favor, as well as with the views of those who criticized it and of those whose responsibilities were small at the most.
The atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki ended World War II. There can be no doubt of that. While they brought death and destruction on a horrifying scale, they averted even greater losses—American, English and Japanese. No man can say what would have been the result if we had not taken the steps that were necessary to achieve this end. Yet, one thing seems certain—atomic energy would have been developed somewhere in the world in the mid-twentieth century. Because of the great costs and difficulties involved and the apparently very small chance of success I do not believe the United States ever would have undertaken it in time of peace. Most probably the first developer would have been a power-hungry nation, which would then have dominated the world completely and immediately. If a peacefully inclined nation had been first, it might have tried initially to use atomic energy for peaceful purposes, but as others exploited its military uses, every country would soon have been forced, as has happened in recent years, to concentrate on the development of weapons. Not until each of the great powers had produced a full atomic arsenal would the threat of one-sided atomic war pass.
Once this state was finally achieved, and I feel that it has been, with sane national leadership, major war is impossible. All that stands in the way of effective international control is the acceptance by all the world’s political leaders of this fact. But there is no reason why work on the peaceful uses of atomic energy cannot be pushed ahead vigorously.
The fact that during the years following the end of World War II an unquestioned superiority in atomic weapons rested with the United States has not only averted a catastrophic war without a complete surrender of our principles and our ideals, but it has enabled us to take the first steps toward the realization of a few of the many possible constructive uses of atomic energy. While it is tragic that the forces for destruction that we unleashed are stronger than man’s present ability to control them, it is fortunate indeed for humanity that the initiative in this field was gained and kept by the United States. That we were successful was due entirely to the hard work and dedication of the more than 600,000 Americans who comprised and directly supported the Manhattan Project.
Looking back, I think I can see five main factors that made the Manhattan Project a successful operation:
First, we had a clearly defined, unmistakable, specific objective. Although at first there was considerable doubt whether we could attain this objective, there was never any doubt about what it was. Consequently the people in responsible positions were able to tailor their every action to its accomplishment.
Second, each part of the project had a specific task. These tasks were carefully allocated and supervised so that the sum of their parts would result in the accomplishment of our over-all mission. This system of compartmentalization had two principal advantages. The most obvious of these was that it simplified the maintenance of security. But over and above that, it required every member of the project to attend strictly to his own business. The result was an operation whose efficiency was without precedent.
Third, there was positive, clear-cut, unquestioned direction of the project at all levels. Authority was invariably delegated with responsibility, and this delegation was absolute and without reservation. Only in this way could the many apparently autonomous organizations working on the many apparently independent tasks be pulled together to achieve our final objective.
Fourth, the project made a maximum use of already existing agencies, facilities and services—governmental, industrial and academic. Since our objective was finite, we did not design our organization to operate in perpetuity. Consequently, our people were able to devote themselves exclusively to the task at hand, and had no reason to engage in independent empire-building.
Fifth, and finally, we had the full backing of our government, combined with the nearly infinite potential of American science, engineering and industry, and an almost unlimited supply of people endowed with ingenuity and determination.
When I was a boy, I lived with my father at a number of the Army posts that had sprung up during the Indian wars throughout the western United States. There I came to know many of the old soldiers and scouts who had devoted their active lives to winning the West. And as I listened to the stories of their deeds, I grew somewhat dismayed, wondering what was left for me to do now that the West was won. I am sure that many others of my generation shared this feeling.
Yet those of us who saw the dawn of the Atomic Age that early morning at Alamogordo will never hold such doubts again. We know now that when man is willing to make the effort, he is capable of accomplishing virtually anything.
In answer to the question, “Was the development of the atomic bomb by the United States necessary?” I reply unequivocally, “Yes.” To the question, “Is atomic energy a force for good or for evil?” I can only say, “As mankind wills it.”