Hope Calhoun

Eisenhowers Atoms For Peace Speech Analysis

With post-World War II tensions high, the United States and the Soviet
Unions view on Germanys government and state of affairs after the war were
conflicting. After Hiroshima and with the new technology of atomic warfare, fear of a
nuclear war that could wipe out human existence between the US and the Soviet
Union was a national and global fear. And with the escalating nuclear arms race
between the US and the Soviet Union, such fear was warranted. Atoms for Peace
was an effort to assuage the anxieties surrounding nuclear weapon technology.
Dwight D. Eisenhower delivered Atoms for Peace to the United Nations General
Assembly on December 8, 1953. In this speech he proposed an international agency
to promote peaceful applications of atomic energy (Lavoy).
Post-War World II, nuclear weapons were an unfamiliar and mostly a
cautionary idea for outsiders looking in, namely, the members of the United Nations.
Eisenhower helped to establish the United States stance on nuclear weapons and its
peaceful intentions. He chronologically explains the details leading up to the atomic
age; outlines how the US has participated in the development of nuclear weapons,
and defines the hopes he has for what nuclear energy will look like in the future. His
main purpose was to give the United Nations a point of reference for the nuclear
age, explaining what nuclear energy would encompass during peacetime. And also,
restore an image of a peaceful and tolerance United States. He sault to inform the UN
and his main points were centered around explaining US nuclear weapon intentions
and to outline his proposal for an International Atomic Energy Agency.

In Eisenhowers introduction, he makes powerful statements and begins to

establish pathos from the onset of the speech by promoting peace and overall well
being for all parties involved in the delegation. He introduces his central theme and
main information point: the new language of atomic warfare. This serves as a
transition into the body of the speech and provided the audience with a simplistic
idea of what his message will pertain to. By leading with such a concise and clear
idea, it appealed to the diverse audience of whom he was presenting. In terms of
stating his purpose, Eisenhower succeeded in fulfilling the most important aspect of
an introduction. In contrast, by opening up the speech with multiple references to
Bermuda, although the audience may have identified, still did not help the attention
seeking aspect of a good introduction, and may have hurt his initial appeal to the
audience.
In this speech, there are three main supporting materials utilized.
Throughout the speech he uses various statistics to relate to the audience the
parameters of the current state of nuclear weapons. For example, when he states
that atomic bombs are more than twenty times as powerful as the weapons with
which the atomic age dawned. He also references the resolution of November 18th,
1953 of the general assembly; he uses a document as supporting material and
references it when detailing his agency proposal. And again, he uses an example to
support his purpose, with outlining a plan for peaceful nuclear energy regulation
with his international atomic energy agency. When he describes the details of how
this said agency would operate, he is using an example support material. In regards
to support he did not provide, testimonial support would have aided in his message.

Considering the tensions with the Soviet Union, if he had presented information
pertaining to the hopeful dissolution of the conflict with the Soviet Union, which
would have strengthened his message. In the same instance, being the atomic arms
race was underway, and later would come the Cold War, testimonials about the
pending truce with the Soviet Union was not available to Eisenhower given the
circumstances.
Audience analysis is the most important aspect of the planning process when
writing a speech. When trying to convey a message, persuade, or entertain you must
have a topic that relates to your audience. Eisenhower understood the concerns of
the audience and addresses them. He discusses the state of affairs of the atomic age,
what that will mean in the future, and how that pertains to the US current foreign
policy. Eisenhower effectively analyzed his diverse audience and succeeded in
assuaging their concerns.
Stylistically, Atoms for Peace would not be considered a highly stylized or
prolific in manner. Being this was a manuscript speech, there were limitations
present. In the context of delivering a highly informative speech, the content of the
speech is important in determining the necessity of unique style. For this occasion,
the manner of which he delivered this speech was the most appropriate. When
speaking to the United Nations, there may be communication barriers if the
language is exclusive or if the style of the speech is culturally influenced, like in the
instance of MLK. Especially with the lists of various facts and with proposing an
international atomic agency, the manuscript style is the most suitable for the setting
and topic.

Eisenhowers conclusion restates his earlier claims and gives closure to the
topic. He closes the speech with a pledge from the United States to be determined to
solve fearful atomic dilemma and for the US to devote its power to the good of
man, not the destruction. Overall his conclusion is powerful and purposeful. It does
not leave questions and it continues with the central theme of the United States
intentions of peace and wellbeing.
Atoms for Peace was a response to a growing hysteria from the aftermath
Hiroshima and arising conflicts with the possibility of both sides having nuclear
warfare capabilities. Dwight Eisenhower encouraged peace and assured that peace
was important to the United States. With that, he proposed a plan that would
regulate nuclear weapons during peacetime and give assurance to those countries
that mistrusted the weapons in the hands of their adversaries.

Works Cited
Lavoy, Peter R. "The Enduring Effects of Atoms for Peace." Arms Control Association.
Dec. 2003. Web. 3 Dec. 2013.