Conversation with
Professor Joseph Rotblat
Joseph Rotblat was Professor of Physics at the University of London at St.
Bartholomew's Hospital Medical College and the hospital's Chief Physicist from
1950 to 1976. In 1955 Professor Rotblat was one of the eleven signatories of the
Russell-Einstein Manifesto, which invited scientists from around the world to
ward off the danger of nuclear weapons being used again. He founded the Pugwash
Conferences on Science and World Affairs in 1957 and served as its secretary-general
and later as its president for forty years. In 1995 Dr. Rotblat and Pugwash
received the Nobel Prize for Peace. He is the author of over 300 publications.

Professor Joseph Rotblat
Professor Rotblat visited the Boston area this past October to deliver a
keynote address at the New England Organizing Conference for Nuclear Weapons
Abolition (see below). On a break from the conference, he kindly consented to
visit the Center for an interview. What follows are excerpts of his remarks on
the motivation for his lifelong devotion to nuclear abolition, the mission of
Pugwash, and the social responsibility of scientists.
What motivated you to devote yourself to the nuclear abolition movement?
The main reason is my involvement in the atomic bomb project. Although it
went against my principles as a scientist, I was afraid in 1939 that the German
scientists under Hitler would make the bomb, and that then he would win the war.
This I could not accept, so I developed a philosophy that the only way to
prevent Hitler from using his bomb against us would be if we threatened him with
retaliation.
I joined the Manhattan Project later on, and I could see that it would take
much longer to make the bombs than we had imagined. At the end of 1944 I was
informed that the Germans had given up. As soon as I found this out, I resigned
from the Project. It was not easy, but eventually I was given permission to
leave on the condition that I would not talk to anybody about this. I was
completely cut off and didn't know anything until I heard the BBC announce on
the sixth of August about the Hiroshima bomb. This came as a terrible shock to
me because my idea was to make the bomb to prevent its being used, and here it
had been used immediately after it was made, against civilian populations. I
began to despair about the future of mankind, and I felt, "we must stop this."
What were some of the first steps you took in this direction?
I did two things. I changed my whole line of scientific work, from nuclear
physics to medical physics, because there I could see immediately that what I
was doing had some effect to help patients. Then I began to speak to my fellow
physicists in England about the dangers. This was the beginning of a movement
known as the Atomic Scientists Association. In the United States there was a
corresponding body called the Federation of American Scientists, which is still
very strong. These two organizations worked in parallel, and we tried to evolve
a policy about nuclear energy and nuclear weapons. The very first resolution of
the United Nations General Assembly in January of 1946 was to try to set up a
commission to see how we could get rid of all nuclear weapons. This was largely
the work of scientists. Unfortunately, it became impossible because of the
antagonism that existed between the Soviet Union and the United States.
When we failed at the government level, I thought I would go to the popular
level. I organized an exhibition called "Atom Train," which was two carriages
fitted out with experiments to explain to the public what nuclear energy is, for
good or evil. It was very successful all over England, Wales, and Scotland.
Did the Pugwash Group come out of some of the work of these early
organizations of scientists?
That's right. We worked together with this group of scientists in the United
States, but quite early we realized that talking to each other was not enough.
We had to bring in the Soviet scientists for there to be any hope of achieving
something. But during the Stalin regime, you couldn't expect that the scientists
would be allowed to come and talk about these problems, so we had to wait until
Stalin died and Kruschev's regime was established.
The initiative came first from Bertrand Russell and Albert Einstein. We came
out with the Russell-Einstein Manifesto in 1955, which made an enormous
impression at the time. The main idea was to bring together a group of
scientists who were knowledgeable in this field and could make a proper
assessment of the danger, because the government was trying to minimize it so
people wouldn't believe that radiation was dangerous. Soon after the Manifesto
was published, Cyrus Eaton, a Canadian, offered to pay for the expenses of a
conference on the condition that it was held in Pugwash, a small village in
Canada. It was the first time scientists of eminence had come together from both
sides of the Iron Curtain. It was a great success, and we decided to continue by
setting up the Pugwash Conferences on Science and World Affairs.
Although yours is a group of eminent specialists, it has remained a people's
movement, maintaining its nongovernmental status. As such, your work and
publications have been particularly important.
Yes, we're independent, but we had great difficulties in the early years
about these meetings, because anybody in the West who was willing to sit down
with scientists from the other side of the Iron Curtain and talk to them about
peace was suspect. Those scientists who agreed to come showed great courage in
doing this, because it could have affected their careers.
Then after a few years, the reverse occurred. The British and American
governments recognized the real importance of Pugwash. So they tried to take
over. We had to keep a very narrow path of neutrality, not to fall on either
side. And this was the reason why we were successful.
What do you think are the greatest obstacles today to nuclear disarmament
and abolition?
The greatest obstacles are "fossilized" minds, particularly among the
military, who simply cannot adapt themselves to the new situation. The need for
nuclear weapons arose from a situation during the Cold War when many people
believed that the Soviets intended to govern the world with their very strong
conventional weapons. This is how it started, with the stockpiling of nuclear
weapons to prevent a conventional attack.
Now we have exactly the reverse. The West is much stronger in conventional
arms than the Russians are, and we continue to say we need nuclear weapons in
order to prevent an attack from the other side. Once the Pentagon and British
higher military circles got used to the idea that we need nuclear weapons, they've
been unable to get away from it.
How have you maintained your own sense of perseverance and dedication in the
face of obstacles through the years?
It's very simple. I just don't give in. Because I think, what is the
alternative? The alternative is to give in and say, all right, the world will
come to an end. This of course is completely unacceptable. There's no
alternative here. And therefore I have to keep on. Of course, I am frustrated by
seeing that the proposals we put forth are not accepted. But one has to be
patient, keep on, and then there is great satisfaction in seeing many of these
people come around to your point of view. This gives you hope that it will go
further from there.
Could you share your thoughts about the social responsibility of scientists
toward creating a sustainable environment and protecting life?
This is very important, and it is the main purpose of Pugwash--to make sure
that scientists' work is not causing damage to human society and the environment.
When I was young the first world war broke out, and it had a tremendous
effect on me. It was terrible from the physical point of view. My dream was that
science should help mankind. Now, looking back, I see this dream has come true
to a very large extent. Because of science, even the poorest person is better
off now. Science can do a great deal of good, but it can also do a great deal of
damage. We have to realize that what we are doing has an impact not only on the
life of every individual, but also on the whole destiny of humankind.
I do not belong to a religious body; nevertheless, I strongly believe in the
value of human life. Human life is of supreme importance, and therefore I feel
that whatever we do, we must make sure that life goes on.
The elimination of war is coming about. Look at the world today compared with
the time when I was young. In the last two world wars the mortal enemies were
Germany and France; now the idea of Germany and France fighting is just
inconceivable. There has been a complete revolution, but people don't realize
how much progress we've already made in this direction.
Nowadays any type of military conflict could escalate, involve the rest of
the world, and bring down humanity. Therefore, we have to develop in ourselves a
sense of loyalty to humankind. This is an important thing that each of us can
do. Each of us has a number of loyalties: the family, our circle of work, the
village, a town, nation. This is where it has stopped. At the moment, loyalty to
the nation is supreme. What I'm saying is that without giving up loyalty to the
nation, extend it to all of humankind. This is where we have to go.
Copyright © 2001 Boston Research Center for the 21st Century
|