The Manhattan Project

Soviet Atomic Bomb Program

John Earl Haynes's Interview

Cindy Kelly: I’m Cindy Kelly. It is Monday, February 6, 2017. We’re in Santa Fe. I’m interviewing the historian John Earl Haynes. My first question is for you to say your full name and spell it.

John Earl Haynes: John Earl Haynes. Haynes is spelled H-A-Y-N-E-S.

Kelly: What was going on in the ‘30s and ‘40s with respect to the Soviet infiltration of the United States, and how they happened to fasten on the atomic project?

Martin J. Sherwin's Interview

Cindy Kelly: I’m Cindy Kelly, Atomic Heritage Foundation, Washington, D.C. It is Monday, April 24, 2017. I have with me distinguished historian and Pulitzer Prize-winner Martin J. Sherwin. My first question to him is to say his name and spell it for us.

Martin Sherwin: Martin J. Sherwin, M-A-R-T-I-N, middle initial J—actually, middle name Jay, J-A-Y, Sherwin, S-H-E-R-W-I-N.

Kelly:  Can you tell us when [J. Robert] Oppenheimer was born and where, and who his parents were?

John Manley's Interview (1985) - Part 1

Martin Sherwin: Good afternoon, this is an interview with John Manley at the Red Onion restaurant, January 9th, 1985, Los Alamos, New Mexico.

John Manley: —whether you want to start that yet or not? I’m not at all sure in what way I can help you.

Sherwin: Well, I would like to write a book. [Laughter]

Manley: I would like somebody else to write a book with information I could supply.

Norris Bradbury's Interview - Part 2

Martin Sherwin: Okay, this is the middle of an interview with Norris Bradbury.

Norris Bradbury: The fact that I wasn’t particularly involved in these discussions, of the type which the Federation of Atomic Scientists started—they started here, of course. I suppose I was committed to running a laboratory and trying to get people to stay here, while I was not uncommitted to international control of nuclear weapons, for heaven’s sakes. No one could be.

Hans Bethe's Interview (1982) - Part 2

Hans Bethe: The other was M - A - D, MAD [Mutually Assured Destruction], which essentially says that nuclear weapons make sense only as a safeguard against nuclear weapons. As [Wolfgang] Panofsky has said recently, and there is actually an article by him, "It is not a doctrine. It is a fact of life. Nothing else is possible, whatever you might wish.” So I think you should not present it as something really unavoidable, without any movements in the opposite direction.  

Siegfried Hecker's Interview - Part 1

Richard Rhodes: So what I thought we might do since you just came back from – was this work related to the Russian collaboration?

Siegfried Hecker: Yes.

Rhodes: Then maybe we should debrief you about that first before we go back and do the earlier part of the story. Does that make sense to you?

Hecker: Well, I do not know how you do these things. I am completely in your hands. Whatever you think makes sense.

Robert Lamphere's Interview - Part 3

Richard Rhodes: I really am going to have to go through and revise the Perseus discussion, I think.

Robert Lamphere: It’s got Lona [Cohen] and the tissue thing. I think it became a story that she told. But who’s to know?

I just found that Greenglass’s information on implosion was the first news the Soviets had of it. I just found that fascinating because I learned something.

Rhodes: It’s probably the reason they were willing to cross the two nets.

Pages

Subscribe to Soviet Atomic Bomb Program