by American Prometheus: The Triumph;Tragedy of J. Robert Oppenheimer
441 Over time, Crouch: Fred J. Cook, The Nightmare Decade, p. 388; Cedric Belfrage, The American Inquisition, pp. 208, 221–22.
441 Later, Crouch’s testimony: Robert Justin Goldstein, Political Repression in Modern America, p. 348; Navasky, Naming Names, p. 14.
441 Eventually, Crouch’s lies and theatrics: When Crouch named as communists the well-known lawyer and former FCC commissioner Clifford Durr and his wife, Virginia (Justice Hugo Black’s sister-in-law), Virginia responded that Crouch was a “grinning, lying dog.” Years later, she described Crouch as “a dirty piece of Kleenex about to disintegrate—such a wreck of a man that even while he was destroying you anyone would feel sorry for him.” The usually mild-mannered Clifford Durr was so incensed by what Crouch said about his wife that he once tried to punch Crouch in the nose. Navasky, Naming Names, p. 14.
441 “if my reputation”: Belfrage, American Inquisition, 1945–1960, pp. 227–28; Edwin M. Yoder, Jr., Joe Alsop’s Cold War, p. 129.
441 “exceedingly ambivalent”: Bernstein, “The Oppenheimer Loyalty-Security Case Reconsidered,” Stanford Law Review, July 1990, p. 1415.
442 “wisdom of our war plan”: Ibid.
442 “I carried away”: Ibid.
443 Strauss “devoted a good part”: Extract from JCAE staff memo written by Borden, concerning conversation with Commissioner Strauss, 8/13/51, Philip M. Stern Papers, JFKL. See also Bernstein, “The Oppenheimer Loyalty-Security Case Reconsidered,” Stanford Law Review, July 1990, pp. 1413–14.
443 “technically sweet”: Wheeler, Geons, Black Holes, and Quantum Foam, p. 222.
443 “delayed or attempted to delay”: FBI memo, Albuquerque, 5/15/52, declassified 9/9/85 and 10/23/96, JRO FBI file.
444 “would do anything possible ”: Edward Teller, interview by FBI, report made at Albuquerque, 5/15/52, nine pages, declassified 10/23/96, JRO FBI file.
444 “serious questions as to”: JRO hearing, p. 749.
444 “That was the goddamnedest”: Dyson, Weapons and Hope, p. 137.
444 Chapter Five of the report: Stern, The Oppenheimer Case, pp. 182–85.
445 briefing was a “success”: Ruth Tolman to JRO, 1/15/52, box 72, JRO Papers. In an early draft of chapter 5, Oppenheimer advanced the ethical argument that tactical weapons should replace strategic weapons—but this passage was eventually deleted (Herken, Counsels of War, p. 67).
445 “went straight through”: Stern, The Oppenheimer Case, p. 185.
445 “ever since Oppenheimer”: Lewis Strauss to Senator Bourke Hickenlooper, 9/19/52, “H-bomb,” AEC series, box 39, Strauss Papers, HHL.
445 The Air Force’s: William L. Borden, memo to JCAE chairman, 11/3/52, p. 2, box 41, JCAE, no. DCXXXV, RG 128, NA.
445 “bringing the battle back”: Oppenheimer was right to regard the ten- and twenty-megaton hydrogen bombs carried by SAC aircraft as both genocidal and militarily useless weapons. But he did not realize that, in just a few years, technical developments would make it possible to design low-yield hydrogen weapons small enough to mount on intercontinental ballistic missiles—or in an artillery shell (Herbert York, e-mail to Howard Morland, 3/5/03).
445 “are not policy weapons”: Thorpe, “J. Robert Oppenheimer and the Transformation of the Scientific Vocation,” dissertation, pp. 450–51.
446 “the bulk of the B-47 fleet”: Steven Leonard Newman, “The Oppenheimer Case: A Reconsideration of the Role of the Defense Department and National Security,” dissertation, New York University, February 1977, p. 48.
446 “Finletter was filled with wrath”: Ibid., p. 53. Newman’s source is a letter to him from Col. Charles J. V. Murphy, 9/17/74. Murphy was the author of the Fortune magazine attack on JRO.
446 “pro-Russian or merely confused”: Stern, The Oppenheimer Case, pp. 190–91.
447 “rude beyond belief”: Ibid., pp. 191–92.
447 “whether [Oppenheimer] was a subversive”: Herken, Brotherhood of the Bomb, p. 253.
447 “In dealing with the Russians”: William L. Clayton Papers, 6/7/51, p. x, HSTL; see also “A Statement on the Mutual Security Program,” April 1952, Committee on the Present Danger, Averell Harriman Papers, Kai Bird Collection.
447 “Oppie’s line”: Stewart Alsop to Martin Sommers, 2/1/52, “Sat. Evening Post Jan.–Nov. 1952” folder, box 27, Alsop Papers, LOC. Yoder, Joe Alsop’s Cold War, p. 121; JRO hearing, p. 470.
448 “I think it does”: “Meeting for Dr. J. Robert Oppenheimer,” 2/17/53, p. 28, Council on Foreign Relations Archives.
448 “Some of the ‘boys’ ”: Hershberg, James B. Conant, p. 600.
448 “Physics is complicated”: Herken, Brotherhood of the Bomb, p. 251; JRO to Frank Oppenheimer, 7/12/52, “Weinberg Perjury Trial, 1953” folder, box 237, JRO Papers.
449 “I find it hard to thank you”: Bird, The Color of Truth, p. 113; Bundy correspondence, box 122, JRO Papers.
449 “problem of survival”: Minutes, mtg. of 5/16–18/52, Panel of Consultants on Arms and Policy, Princeton, box 191, JRO Papers; Bird, The Color of Truth, p. 113.
449 “while the more significant fact”: Hershberg, James B. Conant, pp. 602–4, 902; Bird, The Color of Truth, p. 114.
450 “it seems to us”: David Holloway, Stalin and the Bomb, p. 311.
450 “any such idea”: Hershberg, James B. Conant, p. 605; minutes of mtg., NSC, 10/9/52, FRUS 1952–54, vol. 2, pp. 1034–35.
450 “I no longer have”: Hershberg, James B. Conant, p. 605.
450 Oppenheimer sat grimly: Herken, Brotherhood of the Bomb, p. 257.
451 “Some people in the Air Force”: Lee DuBridge, interview by Sherwin, 3/30/83, p. 23.
451 This document was forwarded: Mac Bundy published the declassified version of this report in the journal International Security (Fall 1982) under the title “Early Thoughts on Controlling the Nuclear Arms Race.” See also Bundy’s essay “The Missed Chance to Stop the H-Bomb,” New York Review of Books, 5/13/82, p. 16.
451 “should tell the story”: Bird, The Color of Truth, p. 115.
452 “The Missed Chance”: McGeorge Bundy, “The Missed Chance to Stop the H-Bomb,” New York Review of Books, 5/13/82, p. 16.
452 “enemy archives”: Leffler, “Inside Enemy Archives: The Cold War Re-Opened,” Foreign A fairs, Summer 1996.
452 “never believed that”: Bird, “Stalin Didn’t Do It,” The Nation, 12/16/96, p. 26; Alperovitz and Bird, “The Centrality of the Bomb,” Foreign Policy, Spring 1994, p. 17. See also Arnold A. Offner, Another Such Victory, and Carolyn Eisenberg, Drawing the Line.
452 “would mean the destruction”: Vladislav Zubok and Constantine Pleshakov, Inside the Kremlin’s Cold War, pp. 166–68.
452 But in practice: David S. Painter, The Cold War, p. 41.
452 “I couldn’t sleep”: Holloway, Stalin and the Bomb, pp. 340–45, 370; William Taubman, Khrushchev, p. xix.
453 Yet no less a Sovietologist: Charles E. Bohlen, Witness to History, pp. 371–72.
Chapter Thirty-two: “Scientist X”
454 “entirely cooperative”: JRO, interview by FBI, 5/3/50, sect. 8, JRO FBI files.
454 “So there was a cloud”: Joseph Weinberg, interview by Sherwin, 8/23/79, pp. 20–21.
454 “My God,” he thought: Ibid., p. 22.
455 Fortunately for Weinberg: J. Edgar Hoover, FBI memo, 5/8/50, JRO FBI files, sect. 8.
455 By April 1950: A. H. Belmont to D. M. Ladd, FBI memo, 4/14/50, Crouch affair, JRO FBI file.
455 “They were fools”: Weinberg, interview by Sherwin, 8/23/79, pp. 22, 30.
455 “we would want a transcript”: Transcript of conference between Oppenheimer, Marks, Arens, and Connors, 12/13/51, box 237, JRO Papers.
456 “that no such persons”: Keith G. Teeter, FBI memo, 11/18/52, re: 5/20/52 interview of JRO and Crouch, JRO FBI file, sect. 14, p. 3. Oppenheimer did volunteer that he vaguely recalled that someone, perhaps Ken May, had asked permission to use his home for “a meeting of young people.” But he could not recall whe
ther he had given his permission or even where he had been living at the time of this request.
456 “to see if he would recognize”: Ibid. The FBI memo claims that Crouch was not forewarned of Oppenheimer’s presence. According to Crouch, he had not seen Oppenheimer since their one encounter in July 1941. Even so, anyone who read the newspapers would have seen photographs of Oppenheimer.
457 “Dr. Oppenheimer stated”: Ibid.
457 This might be regarded: The FBI later learned that Hiskey was employed until 8/28/41 by the TVA in Knoxville, TN; TVA records showed that Hiskey had not left Knoxville until the end of August (A. H. Belmont to D. M. Ladd, FBI memo, 7/10/52, declassified 7/22/96, JRO FBI file).
457 In fact, Oppenheimer’s lawyers: Excerpts from Gordon Dean’s diary, 5/16/52 to 2/25/53, History Division, Department of Energy.
458 “It will be Oppenheimer’s word”: Dean to Truman, 8/25/52, and Truman to Dean, 8/26/52, D folder, PSF general file, box 117, HSTL.
458 “Oppie will have to”: Gordon Dean diary, 11/18/52, History Division, Department of Energy.
458 “government prosecutors said”: Bernstein, “The Oppenheimer Loyalty-Security Case Reconsidered,” Stanford Law Review, July 1990, p. 1426; San Francisco Chronicle, 12/2/52.
458 “Such a miserable”: Ruth Tolman to JRO, 1/2/53, box 72, JRO Papers.
458 “it seemed a terrible thing”: Bernstein, “The Oppenheimer Loyalty-Security Case Reconsidered,” Stanford Law Review, July 1990, p. 1426.
459 “isn’t some natural”: Ibid., pp. 1426–27.
459 “this case can be cut”: Gordon Dean diary, 2/25/53.
459 Oppenheimer had to go: Criminal docket, U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, criminal no. 829-52, chronology of United States v. Joseph W. Weinberg.
459 “felt so worn out”: Ruth Tolman to JRO, Sunday, 3/1/53, box 72, JRO Papers.
459 Since the prosecution was: Affidavit of Joseph A. Fanelli, United States v. Joseph W. Weinberg, criminal no. 829-52, U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, filed 11/4/52.
459 “the court does not”: NYT, 3/6/53, p. 14.
459 “With so many mean”: Lilienthal to JRO, 3/1/53, box 46, JRO Papers, LOC, cited in Barton J. Bernstein, “The Oppenheimer Loyalty-Security Case Reconsidered,” Stanford Law Review, July 1990, p. 1427.
460 “We looked at each other”: Sis Frank, interview by Sherwin, 1/18/82, p. 5.
460 And despite his acquittal: NYT, 3/6/53.
460 “this will be the last time”: JRO to Bernard Spero, 4/27/53, box 237, JRO Papers; Weinberg, interview by Sherwin, 8/23/79, p. 25. Weinberg said his prospective employer told him he’d need some cover to hire him and that he’d accept a letter from Robert Oppenheimer.
460 he “did not know” and subsequent quotes: Lewis Strauss, memo to file, 1/6/53, box 66, Strauss Papers, HHL. Oppenheimer’s final legal bill in connection with the Weinberg case was $14,780 (Katherine Russell to Strauss, 4/28/53, HHL). That the board finally rejected Oppenheimer’s legal bill can be found in A. H. Belmont, to D. M. Ladd, FBI memo, 6/19/53, sect. 14, JRO FBI file.
Chapter Thirty-three: “The Beast in the Jungle”
462 “Utterly transfixed”: Anne Wilson Marks to Bird, 5/11/02.
462 “It hasn’t yet come”: Henry James, The Beast in the Jungle and Other Stories, pp. 39, 70.
463 According to the historian: Hewlett and Holl, Atoms for Peace and War, p. 44; McGrath, Scientists, Business, and the State, 1890–1960, p. 155.
463 His chosen audience: “Meeting for Dr. J. Robert Oppenheimer,” 2/17/53, Council on Foreign Relations Archives.
463 “Atomic Weapons and American Policy” and subsequent quotes: “Armaments and American Policy: A Report of a Panel of Consultants on Disarmament of the Department of State,” January 1953, top secret, declassified 3/10/82, White House Office of Special Assistant for National Security Affairs, NSC series, Policy Papers subseries, Disarmament folder, box 2, DDEL.
464 Atomic bombs, he continued and subsequent quotes: “We may be likened to”: JRO, “Atomic Weapons and American Policy,” Council on Foreign Relations speech, 2/17/53, reprinted in JRO’s The Open Mind, pp. 61–77. Oppenheimer may have borrowed the “two scorpions in a bottle” phrase from a speech Vannevar Bush gave at Princeton. See McGrath, Scientists, Business, and the State, 1890–1960, p. 151.
465 On the other hand: Later that evening Oppenheimer dined alone with Lilienthal, who thought the speech was quite eloquent (Lilienthal, The Journals of David E. Lilienthal, vol. 3, p. 370).
465 two major powers as “two scorpions”: A draft copy of Oppenheimer’s speech, dated March 1953, was sent to C. D. Jackson. It was published in Foreign A fairs in July 1953 (JRO, “A Note on Atomic Weapons and American Policy,” Atomic Energy folder, box 1, C. D. Jackson Papers, DDEL).
465 “atomic weapons strongly favor”: Eisenhower to C. D. Jackson, 12/31/53, DDE diary, Ann Whitman file, December 1953 folder (1), box 4, DDEL.
466 “You can’t have”: Herken, Counsels of War, p. 116.
466 For a moment: Stephen E. Ambrose, Eisenhower, p. 132. See also “Chronology: Candor-Wheaties,” 9/30/54, Ann Whitman Admin. Series, Atoms for Peace folder, box 5, DDEL.
466 “the Soviets of trouble”: Strauss, Men and Decisions, p. 356. Eisenhower appointed Strauss on 3/9/53 to be his “special assistant” on atomic energy issues. In July 1953, Strauss became chairman of the AEC.
466 “Dr. Oppenheimer was not”: Eisenhower diary, 12/2/53, Ann Whitman file, box 4, folder Oct.–Dec. 1953, DDEL. Eisenhower noted, “When I first came to this office some one individual (I cannot now recall who it was) stated that in his opinion Dr. Oppenheimer was not to be trusted. Whoever it was—and I think it was probably Admiral Strauss—later told me that he had reason to revise his opinion.”
466 “Finally Strauss told”: JRO to Strauss, 5/18/53, re: Felix Browder; Strauss to JRO, 5/12/53, JRO correspondence, IAS Archives. Browder taught at Princeton, Yale, the University of Chicago, and Rutgers University. He later won both a prestigious Guggenheim Fellowship and a Sloan Fellowship and was elected president of the American Mathematical Society.
467 “is alleged to have delayed”: D. M. Ladd to Hoover, 5/25/53, sect. 14, JRO FBI file.
467 Strauss “came back to him”: Newman, “The Oppenheimer Case,” dissertation, chapter 4, footnote 127. Newman is citing an Eisenhower quote in a letter from Philip Stern to Gen. Robert L. Schulz, 7/21/67, box 1, Stern Papers, JFKL.
467 “he could not do the job”: Ladd to Hoover, 5/25/53, sect. 14, JRO FBI file 100-17828.
467 “he needed very badly”: Newman, “The Oppenheimer Case,” chapter 2, footnotes 18, 21, 24.
467 “almost hypnotic power”: Ibid., chapter 4, footnote 165. Newman is citing Jackson, memo to Henry Luce, 10/12/54, box 66, Jackson Papers, DDEL.
467 “The Hidden Struggle”: Herken, Counsels of War, p. 69.
468 “another nasty”: Lilienthal, The Journals of David E. Lilienthal, vol. 3, pp. 390–91; Stern, The Oppenheimer Case, p. 203; Herken, Brotherhood of the Bomb, p. 263.
468 “absolutely furious”: Newman, “The Oppenheimer Case,” chapter 4, footnote 69.
468 “talked out of reasonable”: Ibid., chapter 2, footnote 30 (Newman is citing Gertrude Samuels, “A Plea for Candor About the Atom,” New York Times Magazine, 6/21/53, pp. 8, 21); Hewlett and Holl, Atoms for Peace and War, p. 53.
468 “dangerous and its proposals”: Pfau, No Sacrifice Too Great, p. 145.
469 “That’s complete nonsense”: Lewis Strauss, “Memorandum of Conversation with the President,” 7/22/53, Strauss Papers, AEC memos to AEC Commissioners, box 66, HHL.
469 “We don’t want”: Ambrose, Eisenhower, p. 133.
469 “Very relieved to”: Jackson diary, 8/4/53, box 56, log 1953 (2), Jackson Papers, DDEL; Hewlett and Holl, Atoms for Peace and War, p. 57.
469 Events also conspired: Hewlett and Holl, Atoms for Peace and War, pp. 58–59.
470 “New Look”: Ambrose, E
isenhower, p. 171; Strauss, Men and Decisions, pp. 356–62.
470 “fraud upon the words”: Newman, “The Oppenheimer Case,” chapter 2, footnote 102.
470 “obstruct things”: JRO FBI file, sect. 3, doc. 103, FBI wiretap of JRO phone conversations with David Lilienthal and Robert Bacher, 10/23–24/46.
470 “You’d better tell”: Stern, The Oppenheimer Case, p. 208.
470 “I knew he was in trouble”: Rabi, interview by Sherwin, 3/12/82, p. 13.
471 While he was in Brazil, the FBI: Hoover to legal attaché, Rio de Janeiro, 6/18/53, sect. 14, JRO FBI file, doc. 348.
471 “close and cordial”: Hoover to Tolson and Ladd, memo, 6/24/53, sect. 14, JRO FBI file.
471 “in the closest of confidence”: Ibid.; Hoover to Tolson, Ladd, Belmont, and Nichols, memo, 5/19/53, sect. 14, JRO FBI file.
472 “In the first place”: Strauss crossed out the word much and replaced it with some. Lewis Strauss to Senator Robert Taft, draft ltr., 6/22/53, Taft folder, Strauss Papers, HHL.
472 “as if he were flag”: Roland Sawyer, “The Power of Admiral Strauss,” New Republic, 5/31/54, p. 14.
472 His first maneuver: Belmont to Ladd, memo, 6/5/53, sect. 14, JRO FBI file 100-17828; FBI summary of Oppenheimer file, 6/25/53, sect. 14, JRO FBI file. Strauss, memo for Gen. Robert Cutler and C. D. Jackson, 12/17/53, Strauss Papers, HHL.
472 During the Eisenhower: Hewlett and Holl, Atoms for War and Peace, p. 45.
