Arguably the world's very first protester against nuclear weapons, 
Joseph Rotblat was the only scientist to leave the Manhattan Project base
at Los Alamos, New Mexico. After the end of WW II, Rotblat founded 
the Atomic Scientists' Association, forerunner of the Pugwash movement.

An edited transcript from an encounter in a television studio.

My first meeting with Bertrand Russell, on 13 April 1954, was on an
auspicious occasion: a special BBC television programme, entitled "The
Hydrogen Bomb". Nearly a decade back, I had been greatly impressed by Russell's
perspicacity, when in a speech in the House of Lords, in November 1945
(three months after the Hiroshima bomb), he had predicted the development
of the hydrogen bomb. He had had no idea at that time that research on that
weapon had actually been going on; a fact known to me from my Los Alamos
days. By 1954, the H-bomb was manufactured and began to be tested by both
sides.

The Russian test of a fission bomb, in August 1949, came as a terrible
shock to the military and political leaders of the United States; they
believed that it would take decades for the Soviet Union to make it, if
ever. Of course, the detailed information about the design of the Nagasaki
bomb, provided by Klaus Fuchs and other spies, was of great help and
enabled the USSR to accomplish the task in a shorter time. Anyway, the loss
of the nuclear monopoly caused a panic in the USA, and led to a crash
programme to develop the H-bomb. But this time, the Russians were right on
the Americans' heels.

The first US test of a true hydrogen bomb, with a yield of 15 megatons (the
explosive yield of the Hiroshima bomb was 15 kilotons), was carried out on
the Bikini Atoll on 1 March 1954. A Japanese fishing boat, the Fukuryu Maru
(Lucky Dragon) was showered with its radioactive fall-out. One member of
the crew subsequently died from radiation exposure.
This episode became a major news item and the public wanted to know more
about the H-bomb. Hence the BBC programme, for which top-notch
personalities were invited to discuss various aspects of this development:
military, strategic, political and ethical; the last in a fascinating
dialogue between the Archbishop of York and Bertrand Russell. I - the
youngest and least known - was asked to start the programme with an
explanation of the physics of the bomb and its effects.

I felt badly about inadvertently misinforming the British public. I was
also getting worried about the health hazard from the radioactive fall-out
of testing large thermonuclear weapons. When later the US Atomic Energy
Commission issued a statement implying that there was no health hazard, I
felt that I must inform the public about my findings. Despite an attempt by
the British government to stop me, I did publish the paper. It turned out
to be a sensation: the mass media picked up the story and gave it much
publicity. Testing of nuclear weapons became a matter of public concern and
mass campaigns.

A Christmas broadcast
leading to a manifesto

I kept Lord Russell informed about my "detective" work. He was becoming
more and more agitated about the danger of a thermonuclear war and its
catastrophic consequences, arising in particular from the long-term effects
of the radioactive fall-out. He decided to express his fears in a broadcast
on BBC radio, on 23 December 1954. Under the title "Man's Peril", Russell
drew the attention of the general public to the grave dangers to humanity
that have arisen from the development of nuclear weapons.

The broadcast made a deep impression and Russell received many letters
supporting the ideas contained in it. Encouraged by this, Russell decided
on a new initiative: to persuade a number of eminent scientists from all
over the world to join him in a statement warning governments and the
general public and, in particular, calling on the scientific community to
convene a conference on steps to avert the danger.

A similar action had been contemplated by scientists for some time back. In
my capacity as Executive Vice-President of the Atomic Scientists'
Association in the UK, I had been in correspondence with officers of the
Federation of American Scientists, in particular with Eugene Rabinowitch (
the editor of the bulletin of the Atomic Scientists), about organizing an
international conference of scientists. Quite early we realized that such a
conference would be useful only if we could ensure the participation of the
Stalin regime, in the mid-fifites, before contact could be established.
Russell's initiative was thus very timely.

The most eminent scientist alive at that time was Albert Einstein, and
Russell wrote to him to seek his advice about the statement. Einstein
immediately responded enthusiastically. He asked Russell to draft the
statement and send it to him for his signature. Russell did this promptly.
The date was 18 April 1955. Lord Russell was flying from Rome to Paris,
when the captain conveyed to the passengers the news he had just received,
that Einstein had died. Russell was shattered; he feared that without
Einstein's sponsorship the whole project would collapse. But when he
arrived at his hotel in Paris, there was a letter awaiting him, a letter
forwarded from London, with Einstein's signature. Signing the statement was
one of the last acts of his life. This gives the statement - which became
known as the Russell-Einstein Manifesto - extra poignancy: the last message
from the man who symbolized the acme of human intellect, imploring us not
to allow our civilization to be destroyed by human folly.

Most of the signatories, as is the case for eminent people, were of fairly
advanced age; the average age of the eleven signatories was 62 years. At
46, I was the youngest, but I was closest to Russell. In his introductory
staement at the Press Conference he predicted the award of the Nobel Prize
to me, but it took 40 years for it to come true!

After Russell had read the Manifesto there were questions, plenty of them.
Russell handled them beautifully and soon won over the audience with his
masterly and witty replies. It became quite evident that the media realized
the far-reaching significance of the Manifesto. Indeed, the media all over
the world gave it excellent coverage, with the result that hundreds of
letters and cables, from individuals and groups, came pouring in from many
countries expressing approval and offering support. It was evident that the
Manifesto touched a sensitive cord in the minds of the general public and
the scientific community.

"We are speaking on this occasion, not as members of this or that nation,
continent or cree, but as human beings, members of the species Man, whose
continued existence is in doubt... Almost everybody who is politically 
conscious has strong feelings about one or more of these issues; but we want you,
if you can, to set aside such feelings and consider yourselves only as members of
a biological species which has had a remarkable history, and whose disappearance
none of us can desire. 

We shall try to say no single word which should appeal to one group rather
than another. All, equally, are in peril, and, if the peril is understood,
their hope is that they may collectively avert it.
We have to learn to think in a new way."

Pugwash Village: the
venue for a new movement

The Manifesto called on scientists to assemble in conference to discuss
ways to avert the danger. Plans had already been laid to hold the
Conference in India, where Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru was very keen on
a conference in New Delhi and had offered hospitality for it. Indeed
letters of invitation had been sent out for the Conference to be held in
December 1956 in New Delhi. However, two international events - the Suez
crisis and the Hungarian uprising - made the political situation unstable,
and Russell decided to cancel the meeting. After the situation calmed down,
we resumed the plans for the Conference. The support from India was no
longer available and we had to find other ways to cover the costs of the
meeting.

Steering clear of
outside interference

To understand Russell's attitude one has to recollect the vehement
anti-communist climate of the time, particularly in the United States, in
the McCarthy period. Anyone in the West who was willing to sit down with
Soviet scientists and talk about peace and disarmament was immediately
branded as a fellow traveller, if not as an outright Communist. The
participation from the West of persons known for their extreme left
sympathies would certainly have led to the Movement being branded as a
Communist front organization.

Those who could not be accused of being fellow travellers, were slated as
being naive, dupes, and easy prey to Soviet propaganda. This perception
persisted for quite a while after the First Conference. There was a
widespread opinion in the West that we were being manipulated by the KGB to
support Soviet policies.

As a matter of fact, clumsy attempts to do this were made by the Soviet
government but we saw through them easily. I became aware of this even
before our arrival in Pugwash for the First Conference. The foreign
participants travelled first to Montreal, and from there we flew in Mr.
Eaton's private jet to Moncton in New Brunswick. The final sector of the
journey to Pugwash in Nova Scotia was by car which in those days took
several hours. It so happened that I shared a car with Alexander Topchiev,
the head of the Soviet group, and a Mr. Vladimir Pavlichenko who - we were
told - was Topchiev's interpreter. It did not take me more than half an
hour in the car to realize that Pavlichenko had an additional assignment.
His role became clear to everbody at the very first session. Topchiev, who
did not speak any English, made an important statement in Russian, which
Pavlichenko translated. But in doing this he embellished it generously with
Party propaganda. He didn't reckon with the presence of Eugene Rabinowitch,
whose mother tongue was Russian (he was born in what was then - and is now
again - St. Petersburg).  After Pavlichenko had finished, Rabinowitch told
him bluntly that this was not quite what Topchiev had said, and then
proceeded to give the true translation. Afterwards Pavlichenko was much
more circumspect.

In later meetings there were a few other participants from the Soviet Union
who were obviously sent to push the Party line, but the majority were
genuine scientists and behaved as such. Attempts to influence us politically
were not one-sided. The governments in the USA and UK were initially suspicious 
of us, but after watching us for a few years they became convinced that we were 
genuine, not an instrument of Soviet propaganda. They also realized the great 
importance of the channel of communication opened by Pugwash, and so they tried
to use it for their purposes. In the UK I was embraced by the Establishment. 
I began to be given unsolicited advice about who should be invited to Conferences, 
what topics we should discuss, what our line should be, and so on. To their
chagrin I was as resolute against the takeover bid from the West as I had been 
to the overtures from the East. It was only recently that I came across a letter 
from a high official in the British Foreign Office, complaining that I was not 
consulting them about the participants in Pugwash Conferences: 
"... the difficulty is to get Prof. Rotblat to pay any attention to what we think... 
To get a new organizer for the British delegation seems to be the first need, 
but I do not know if there is any hope of this."

The First Pugwash Conference:
a scientists' gathering

I have run well ahead of events in my narrative, but this was essential in
order to convey the kind of anxieties and fears felt by Russell and his
helpers when organizing the First conference in July 1957. This was an
historic encounter, the first time that eminent scientists from East and
West met to discuss what essentially were highly sensitive political
issues, issues on which there was a big divergence of views even in the
scientific community in the West. We were worried that in the atmosphere of
hostile propaganda of the Cold War, this divergence would be exacerbated on
a confrontation with Soviet scientists. When the 22 scientists from ten
countries, embracing both sides of the political divide (the USA and USSR,
UK and China, France and Poland, Austria, Australia, Canada and Japan) met
in the Pugwash village, we had no clear vision that this was the start of a
new world movement. We thought of it as a one-off event, because we
estimated that there was more than an even chance that the meeting would
break up in disagreements.

This, that - on the contrary - we found ourselves in broad agreement on the
main aspects of the agenda, was due to several factors but, in my opinion,
the main reason was that this was a meeting of scientists. It was not a
coincidence that about 70 per cent of the participants were physicists, an
number of whom had worked on the Manhattan Project during WW II. The fact
that this was a meeting of scientists of international repute was of
significance in two ways. First, we knew one another from our scientific
work, either personally or from reading our scientific publications, and we
had confidence in each other's scientific integrity. We were able to build
on this confidence, when discussing problems that were to a large extent
political in nature. Second, we were decided from the beginning that we
would approach these problems in the scientific spirit of rational analysis
and objective inquiry. In the main we have kept to this resolution ever
since.

In the discussion on that item at Pugwash, there appeared to be a
divergence of opinion between the Western and Soviet scientists about the
magnitude of the radiation hazard. But we soon established that the
difference was a matter of approach rather than of substance, and we were
quickly able to agree on the text of a substantive report. I should add
that the issue of radiation hazards figured prominently.
The third item on the agenda, the responsibility of scientists, is
fundamental to Pugwash and we came back to it time and time again. At the
First Conference we agreed on a list of eleven points of common beliefs
among scientists without regard to political and economic systems. The last
point is particularly noteworthy, considering that it was accepted by the
scientists from countries with political regimes based on rigid dogmas:
"Science develops most effectively when it is free from interference by any
doctrine imposed from the outside, and permitted to question all
postulates, including her own. Without this freedom of scientific thought,
and the freedom to exchange information and ideas, full utilization of the
constructive possibilities of science will not be possible." All those
ideas were included in the public statement issued at the end of the
Conference.

CND and Pugwash:
a Division of Labour

Although Bertrand Russell was initially in favour of Pugwash becoming a
large movement of scientists issuing public statements, he later agreed
that the decision we had taken to keep a low profile was wise. Although he
was in favour of mass movements and direct action, he realized that there
was also room for the private type of activity that Pugwash carried out.
This division of activities became clear after the start of the Campaign
for Nuclear Disarmament. CND came formally into being at a meeting on 11
January 1958, when Russell was elected as its President, and I as a member
of the first Executive Committee. Soon afterwards Russell and I had a
serious conversation about our participation in the CND and Pugwash. He
felt that the two organizations may sometimes diverge in the pursuit of
their objectives, and that it would be in any case wasteful for both of us
to be active in both organizations. As a result of this discussion I
resigned from the CND Executive Committee after about one month, in order
to concentrate on Pugwash.

Russell continued as chairman of the Continuing Committee, but his
increasing involvement in the Direct Action Committee, and later in the
Committee of 100, made it difficult for him to find time for Pugwash. He
participated in the Third Pugwash Conference in 1958. The main part of it
was held in the Austrian resort of Kitzbuhel, but the last part was in
Vienna, and Russell came to it for a public session at which the Vienna
Declaration, a statement of the objectives and principles of Pugwash, was
promulgated. In 1962, he took part in the Tenth Pugwash conference in
London.

The London Conference was the last Pugwash meeting in which Russell
participated. But he continued to take a profound interest in our
activities. I kept him fully informed and frequently consulted him about
our plans.

What Pugwash has achieved

The Russell-Einstein Manifesto posed the question: "shall we put an end to
the human race; or shall mankind renounce war?" Throughout the years of its
existence the Pugwash Movement has made valiant efforts to ensure that the
human race does not come to an end by its own actions. During the Cold War
period we had to tackle the immediate danger, and our efforts were
concentrated on preventing a nuclear war and halting the arms race. This
necessitated reaching agreement on treaties of limited value. Apart from
the 1963 Partial Test Ban Treaty, these included the Tlatelcolco Treaty of
1967; the Non-Proliferation Treaty of 1968; the Anti-Ballistic Missile
Treaty of 1972; the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty of 1987; and
the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty of 1996. We were also involved in the
negotiations for the Biological Weapons Convention of 1972; the
Conventional Forces in Europe Treaty of 1990; and the Chemical Weapons
Convention of 1993.

Non-governmental organizations were involved in the preparatory work for
these treaties, and it is difficult to assess the credit due to a single
group. But the role played by Pugwash was attested to by many public
figures, including Mikhail Gorbachev, who said, "Through its activities,
due to its scientific and moral authority, Pugwash has contributed in a
unique way to averting the military danger, has helped to stop the Cold War
and to achieve profound positive changes in the development of the world."
After the end of the Cold War and the abatement of the immediate danger, we
directed our attention to the major objective; the elimination of nuclear
war. More and more, we are also concentrating our efforts on the long-term
objective: the elimination of all war. The most important acknowledgement of
our activities in the nuclear issue - the top accolade - came in 1995 in the 
award of the Nobel Peace Prize: "...for their efforts to diminish the part played
by nuclear arms in international politics and in the longer run to eliminate such arms"
(Norwegian Nobel Committee citation).

Epilogue

The acknowledgements and prestigious awards to Pugwash do not mean that we
can now rest on our laurels. Our job is not yet finished. We have still to
convince the governments of the nuclear powers that they, and the rest of
the world, will be better off without nuclear weapons; we have still to
educate the public to realize that war - any war -  must be eliminated; we
have still to educate the scientific community that it must take
responsiblity for the outcome of its research. We know what the penalty
would be if these objectives were not attained. The last paragraph of the
Russell-Einstein Manifesto spells this out: "There lies before us, if we
choose, continual progress in happiness, knowledge and wisdom. Shall we,
instead, choose death, because we cannot forget our quarrels? We appeal, as
human beings, to human beings: Remember your humanity, and forget the rest.
If you can do so, the way lies open to a new Paradise; if you cannot, there
lies before you the risk of universal death."

The choice is still to be made but the portents are that we will choose
life. We are gradually realizing the folly of war; we are slowly and
painfully learning to solve our disputes by means other than military
confrontation.

Bertrand Russell was fond of writing his own obituaries. In the preface to
Volume III of his Autobiography he said that he was not sure whether it
should be one of hope or one of fear. In the light of subsequent events,
towards which his life work has contributed significantly, this hopeful
version should be his epitaph:

The world's great age begins anew, the golden years return... Heaven
smiles, and faiths and empires gleam, like wrecks of a dissolving dream.