the biggest contest in the world . after four months &apos; travel in Russia and the United States Mervyn Jones compares life in the two competing super-powers and the attitudes of their people . to say that it is nice to be home , after four months and seven thousand miles of travel in America and Russia , is true in more than one way . appreciation of living in England , now amply reinforced , is the least of it . the greatest relief is not to be at either pulling end in the global tug-of-war . whether we call it cold war or peaceful competition , the contest between the two super-powers is a burden of which they will never be free in what we can discern of the future . the material weight of this burden , considerable in America , is enormous in Russia . its psychological weight is incalculable for two peoples whose inclination , from reasons of geography and tradition , is to want the rest of the world to stop bothering them . this is evident , notably , with regard to the race to the moon . for us in England , according to individual outlook , the exploration of space is either a silly game or a glorious endeavour of the human spirit . for the contestants , it is no joke and no fun either . it is something that has to be done because the other side is doing it . teacher &apos;s view of space flights . for Americans , Russia &apos;s lead in the race is as grim a matter as Japan &apos;s initiative after Pearl Harbour . of the possible reactions , sheer denial was commoner than I could have expected . a famous columnist explained in detail how the Gagarin and Titov flights had been ( not might have been ) fabricated . a mother , sensible enough to believe in them , asked me what she should say to her child after the teacher had told the class they were a fake . tell her what you think , I said ; but in a conformist small town this was evidently as hard as for an atheist parent to challenge religious instruction . belief in the flights necessarily implied gloom . as I bought my paper at the candy store on the day of the Titov flight , the headlines were big and black . the shopkeeper &apos;s wife glanced at them and said : is n&apos;t it just too awful ? the third reaction was to take comfort in America &apos;s way of doing things . ours , said a young teacher , is a democratic space programme . by this he meant that it was attended by publicity and by care for human life . I had been assured several times that half-a-dozen Russians are whirling dead through space . we could have a man on the moon in six months if we just shot them off regardless , said the teacher . none of these people was excited by the thought of an American in space . the whole thing &apos;s crazy when you think of half the world starving , said an economics student at Cleveland . but he added : I guess we &apos;ve got to do it . getting ready for massacre . for the Russians , who enjoy the lead , one might expect it to be an inspiration . for some of them , it is . a woman pulling potatoes on an especially primitive collective farm , and lunching as I spoke to her on dry bread and gherkins , said : do n&apos;t judge our country by what you see - we &apos;ve got the first man in space . the surprise was to meet Russians ( not intellectuals , but common folk ) who took a contrary view . an engineer : it &apos;s not the right way to use millions of roubles , with conditions as they are . a miner &apos;s wife : it will n&apos;t do any harm , if we can believe it &apos;s for peaceful purposes , but it would have been better to build more hospitals . a tractor driver : we do n&apos;t say this publicly , you understand , but most of us think it &apos;s a waste of money . at this , the tractor driver &apos;s mate grinned and said : people say Titov was really sent up to photograph America . I asked if he thought the space flights justified . he shrugged : might do one good thing - prove once and for all there &apos;s no God up there . what is taken for granted , both in America and in Russia , is that there would be no sputniks if there were no military rockets . which brings me to the gloomiest aspect of my journey : the spectacle of two great peoples getting ready to massacre each other . it is a clich&amp;eacute; to say that neither the American nor the Russian people want war , but it is true . with the Russians , it is a simple matter of scars yet unhealed . time and again , people gripped me by the arm , told ghastly stories of the Nazi invasion , and asked : can you imagine that we would start a war ? it is impossible to doubt their sincerity . with the Americans , there are several strands . they have a great deal to lose . they have , even now , a deep suspicion of militarism , of the brass , of the gearing of the nation to war . a young ornithologist , asked how he came to choose his profession , explained : after I graduated I was in chemistry , but I found they were using it for war . I switched to electronics , and it was the same . I sat down to figure out what they could n&apos;t use for war , and what I came up with was birds . no real awareness of nuclear threat . add to this a still potent distrust of foreign entanglements . the evening after the President &apos;s July 25 speech , announcing a readiness to fight for Berlin and an increase in the call-up - a speech which caused more alarm over interrupted careers than satisfaction - I chatted over a coffee with a factory worker . he was all enthusiasm : it was a wonderful speech , he was behind Kennedy all the way . then he said abruptly : a good thing we have n&apos;t got Truman in the White House now . never was any need to fight in Korea , and if he was around we &apos;d be fighting in Germany now . but , sad to relate , they want peace is not the whole story . one has to add that both Americans and Russians are ready to contemplate war . the reason is that neither people has any real awareness of what nuclear war would mean . Union Square in New York is a public forum , comparable to Speakers &apos; Corner in Hyde Park . as a listening-post , it is more instructive than Hyde Park because nobody gets on a platform . a man with something on his mind starts to talk , and those around him join in . you gotta admit , a young man was saying as I neared a sizeable group , that things advance when there &apos;s a war . we got penicillin because of the last war , and we &apos;ll get something else next time . a religious pacifist intervened : did you ever see a picture of Hiroshima ? the first speaker countered : aw , Hiroshima - did you ever see a man mangled by a bus ? another man observed with an air of sagacity : wars are fought for real estate . they kick it around for a bit , then they divide it up . look at Korea , look at Vietnam . another summed up : there always will be wars , it do n&apos;t matter how much you talk . I broke in to ask if anyone disagreed with this proposition . among about fifty people , nobody did . lecture on need for disarmament . nobody in Russia would talk about the benefits of war . but when a Russian talks of the horrors of war , he is talking a different language from a nuclear disarmer . the very intensity of past experience inhibits thought of a worse future . once , a man who had experienced Nazi occupation told me how the Germans knocked people about and turned them out of their homes to freeze . he wound up , inevitably : we do n&apos;t want to see that again . I said : one thing that &apos;s certain is that you will n&apos;t . you &apos;ll see either peace or death in a split second . he stared at me , wondering what I was talking about . at a restaurant in Kursk , three Russians lectured me on the need for disarmament and cited the speech Khrushchev had made the previous day at Stalingrad ( sorry , Volgograd ) . nettled by some remarks by de Gaulle , the Soviet Premier had declared that France would be obliterated in another war and added : however , it is impossible to destroy the Soviet Union . Americans &apos; inborn optimism . I said that Khrushchev was quite right about France , and Britain , too , but unduly sanguine about his own country . nuclear weapons , I went on , could destroy the human race . signalling to the waitress for another round of Cuban rum , one of the Russians said positively : not the Soviet Union . it is equally inconceivable for Americans that their country could cease to function as an organised society . paradoxically , the civil defence drive strengthens this feeling . estimates of how many people would be killed , however horrific , merely suggest how many would be saved . with their inborn optimism , many Americans envisage the aftermath of nuclear attack as a period of getting back on their feet , like the day after a hurricane . the point is often made that Americans have never known modern war on their soil . it is sometimes forgotten that Russians have never known long-range bombing . the blitz on London was a frustrated substitute for invasion . Leningrad was shelled and many Russian towns were devastated by street-fighting , but Moscow - with the Germans almost in the suburbs - never had an air raid on the London scale , and behind the lines was behind the lines . it is natural to think with some confidence of keeping the enemy out next time . Russians do , of course , know about nuclear bombs and missiles . but everyone hopes that his home town will not be a target , and they have been told very little about fallout . defence , therefore , means defence for them . views that go unchallenged . to this , one has to add the general conviction that our side is in the right , and acting defensively , over what Russians call the German question and Americans the Berlin crisis . the view that Khrushchev is simply trying to settle the German problem on a sensible basis is , of course , never publicly challenged in Russia . the view that Kennedy is simply trying to maintain a position unreasonably attacked by the Soviet Union is seldom publicly challenged in America . for people who do not rule out war if necessary , the mood is not far on either side from : we do n&apos;t want to fight , but by jingo if we do &amp;hellip; . any glossary of the Russo-American political vocabulary ( and I am thinking of everyday speech as well as official statements ) must include these entries : threat : a bellicose move made by our opponents . warning : a bellicose move made by us . I have met both Americans and Russians who were genuinely saddened by the resumption of nuclear tests , which was in the offing while I was in America and happened while I was in Russia . it meant that hopes had been dashed , and it showed how bad things were getting . but I met nobody who thought it actually wrong if their leaders found it necessary . one might sum up by recording two posters in the same street in Kiev . the first showed a mother clutching a child and read : for their sake , we must have peace . the other showed a steel-helmeted soldier with levelled bayonet and read : ready for the defence of the motherland . I feel sure that both meet with general approval . cold war , nevertheless , is less intense than hot war in more than one respect . the antagonism is less total , and among both peoples there is a refreshing absence of the undiscriminating hatred known in the last war as Vansittartism . this is easy for the Americans . they reason that , since one can be loyal to America and oppose Kennedy , one can be fond of Russia while loathing Khrushchev . there is in fact a certain vogue for Russia in the United States . far more young people are learning the Russian language than in Britain , and they are not all hoping for jobs with the voice of America . 