“We should tell the world that we need to turn our missile defense program back into a directed energy science-driver project and once again make the United States a force for war-avoidance and economic progress.”
“Our current missile defense policy fails to overturn the economic injustice of arms control, but it creates one interesting potential: it gives Alaskans the ability to speak to the world community.”
The recent discussions of Alaska’s role in the Ballistic Missile Defense program require the comments of someone who was part of the organization that convinced President Reagan to adopt the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI).
In the early 1980s, I participated in many Executive Intelligence Review (EIR) conferences and discussions in Washington D.C. concerning the technologies and strategic implications of the SDI. The creation of the SDI represented a new military and industrial policy. Under this policy, nuclear missiles would have become obsolete using the high-energy physics of beam weapons, and the world economy would have been developed using thousands of new SDI related technologies.
In the year 2001, the eyes of the world community are focusing on Alaska because the federal government is deciding whether to station interceptor missiles in our state. For this reason, Alaskans must understand the changes in missile defense doctrine that have occurred since the early 1980s. These changes are turning the United States away from being a force for economic progress and toward being a nation that increases the opportunities for war.
In the early 1980s, the Strategic Defense Initiative promoted building a “science-driver project” similar to President John F. Kennedy’s race to the moon. The idea was that nations, including the Soviet Union, would work together to discover “new physical principles” that would make “nuclear-tipped missiles impotent and obsolete.”
The military objective was to avoid war by overturning the logic of arms control which is creating barriers to economic and technological progress for much of the world’s population and is increasing hostility toward the United States. By working to make nuclear missiles obsolete, many of the technology restrictions demanded by arms control could be removed. We could then implement a 1944 Bretton Woods-style bankruptcy reorganization of world finance to raise living standards by building infrastructure using new industrial technologies.
Today’s National Missile Defense policy does not include economic progress as a goal and consists only of stationing a few obsolete interceptor missiles in Alaska. The military objective of these missiles is to shoot down terrorist or rogue nation launches and prevent the former Soviet Union from threatening an accidental launch during debt negotiations. Funding has been cut for basic advances in science while the massive consolidation and collapse of international finance are being allowed to continue.
Our current missile defense policy fails to overturn the economic injustice of arms control, but it creates one interesting potential: it gives Alaskans the ability to speak to the world community. We should tell the world that we need to turn our missile defense program back into a directed energy science-driver project and once again make the United States a force for war-avoidance and economic progress.
During the early 1980s conferences. I asked many scientists and political leaders what Alaska’s civilian role would be in the SDI. The result of my asking this question over and over again was that Alaska would use the technologies of the military development program to provide the strategic materials necessary for military requirements and space colonization.
These strategic materials are required to protect electronic devices from electromagnetic pulse (EMP) and radiation. During a nuclear explosion all electronic devices in the range of the EMP of a nuclear blast are permanently destroyed. The cost of shielding against EMP is so great that it is affordable only on a limited basis. A whole new class of affordable EMP resistant materials and technologies must be developed to make the SDI a workable solution.
The first step toward this solution began in 1984 by stimulating discussions among government, corporate. and financial institutions to increase Alaska’s private and government investment in mining operations. Alaska’s vast supply of minerals and natural gas, and massive investment in mining operations today make Alaska an ideal location for the high-income heavy manufacturing of EMP resistant construction materials.
To produce these materials, and revive Alaska’s civilian role in the SDI, we must participate with our federal government in developing plasma-aided manufacturing. Plasma is a quasi-neutral gas of charged and neutral particles (like the Northern Lights) which exhibit collective behavior. Plasma-aided manufacturing is the use of these particles in manufacturing processes. What is exciting is that producing EMP resistant materials in Alaska will act as a catalyst for creating other new plasma processing industries.
Beam weapon assisted plasma processing can be used to produce hundreds of different internationally competitive products. I suggest focusing on structural and thermal construction products because of our severe lack of infrastructure and extreme climate. Additional suggestions include focusing on the plasma smelting of minerals or producing high pressure pipe to support our oil industry. SDI related plasma processing can also be used for keeping Alaska’s industries super clean while offering rural communities, and developing nations, mobile waste disposal systems.
Whatever products we end up producing, the University of Alaska must play a critical role by being given the long-term mission assignment of working with our corporations in launching miniature plasma construction products factories into space.
The knowledge created by miniaturizing factories will help keep Alaska’s industries on the leading edge of competitiveness.
Alaska’s civilian role in all of this SDI related technological advancement is possible, but the problem is that the SDI policy has never been funded according to its original conception. Instead of directed energy physics, Congress meagerly funded the old Project Defender program of missiles shooting down missiles under the new name Ballistic Missile Defense. By barely reviving the old program instead of fully funding the SDI, our military industrial policy fails to address poverty as one of the root causes of war. Advancing and sharing the frontiers of physics will dramatically affect every area of physical production and thus increase the total wealth of humanity and increase the cooperation between nations that are attempting to rise out of poverty.
More important, nations that are rapidly losing their standard of living during the current international financial collapse could possibly cause a global war. The SDI can provide powerful new technologies and industrial goals ready for investment by a new international financial system before the crisis leads to military conflict. The SDI is a war avoidance policy and Alaskans must take on the responsibility of a civilian role in reviving that policy.
Moreover, Alaska’s civilian role in this national science project is mostly whatever Alaska’s leadership wants to make it. Thousands of technologies are available for investment, but which ones are best for Alaska? My suggestions are based on discussions that began over 19 years ago. These suggestions make the most sense considering our vast mineral deposits and the physical needs of our people, but they are not the last words on the subject. If you have suggestions for Alaska’s civilian role in directed energy missile defense then I encourage you to get involved in the public discussion.
I hope Alaska’s political and financial leadership will understand that Alaska’s most useful civilian role in missile defense is to participate with our federal government in funding plasma processing with an emphasis on advancing the production of EMP resistant construction materials. We must do our part in overturning the war-causing logic of our current arms control policy. We must help to protect all populations form the insanity that is able to launch nuclear missiles while returning the United States to a force of economic progress.
Charles E. Duncan
