WRM:
Mr. Navrozov, your articles on WorldTribune.com and
Newsmax.com are intriguing. What is nanotechnology and
how does it neutralize the nuclear potential of the
US?
LN:
The word "nano" means "one billionth" of a meter.
Nanotechnology is a field of many fields, some of them
civilian, dealing with such small systems. What is of
interest to us is tiny systems (they are called
"assemblers") of molecular nanotechnology. Such
assemblers can penetrate molecules and transform or
destroy them.
The
world peace has been based on Mutual Assured
Destruction. That is, every nuclear power such as the
United States, Russia, or China has had means of
nuclear retaliation, which an enemy nuclear attack
could not destroy. Thus, nuclear weapons could and can
destroy New York, Moscow, or Beijing, but they could
not and cannot destroy submarines deep underwater,
carrying nuclear missiles, underground nuclear
missiles, or bombers on duty high in the air carrying
nuclear bombs. Nano assemblers can find these means of
retaliation and destroy them by penetrating in between
their atoms. Thus an attacked country can be destroyed
safely by nuclear weapons because it has no means of
nuclear retaliation to retaliate after the enemy
nuclear attack and destroy the attacker by way of
Mutual Assured Destruction.
WRM:
Is nanotechnology to be used more as an intelligence
asset, to identify enemy weapons, or as a weapon
itself? If it is used as weapon, how does it work?
LN:
"By way of answer, I will quote a young
nanotechnologist's e-mail to me of August 1, which
e-mail I published, with his permission, in my
NewsMax.com and WorldTribune.com columns. I was drawn
to your article because you're the first person I've
ever seen on a mainstream website to deal with the
topic of 'Superweapon #3' in the realistic near-term,
rather than as an ambiguous creation 'decades in the
future.' I ardently believe 'Superweapon #3' will be
a molecular assembler, and I have devoted myself to
the task of educating others in regard to its
potential dangers. Your article today prompted me to
go back and read through your NewsMax archives. All I
can say is 'keep up the good work!'
"One
article I read [WorldTribune, "Proof of Post-Nuclear
Weapons in China and Russia"] dealt with the comments
of a Mr. William Stroupe, who stated the following:
'It does intrigue me that if one could possibly down
the crucial technological assets of the West in one
fell swoop, without the use of nuclear weapons, then
world domination on the part of the attacker would
surely result. But how could this possibly be done,
from a technological standpoint?'
"Such a prospect of world domination could easily be
achieved with the creation of a molecular assembler--a
device capable of breaking and creating the chemical
bonds between atoms and molecules. Since a molecular
assembler is by definition able to self-replace, the
first could build a duplicate copy of itself. Those
two then become four, become eight, and so on. ...
This compounding capital base could lead to a massive
and decisive force within days. As Eric Drexler
described in his book, 'a state that makes the
assembler breakthrough could rapidly create a decisive
military force--if not literally overnight, then at
least with unprecedented speed.'
"To
answer to Mr. Stroupe's question, such a device is
capable of rapidly manufacturing and
deploying billions of microscopic/macroscopic machines
at relatively little cost. These machines could comb
the oceans for enemy submarines and quickly disable
the nuclear arsenals they carry. Similar acts of
sabotage could be carried out simultaneously against
land-based nuclear facilities and conventional
military forces in a matter of hours, if not minutes.
"The
race to build a molecular assembler, if won by China,
will result in a worldwide nanotechnic dictatorship,
and I appreciate your efforts to call attention to
this important subject. We are certainly at a crucial
juncture in history, not unlike 1938 and its nuclear
scientists who foretold the atom bomb. This time, we
cannot afford to be caught sleeping."
WRM:
What countries are involved in the post-nuclear
superweapons involving nanotechnology?
LN:
From my further answers, it is clear that we can speak
only of China, Russia if dictatorship comes back to
that country, and the United States if it awakens from
its sleep, which may well be its last. To make the
nanoweapons useful, a country must have a nuclear
arsenal and the will to either world domination or to
the defense against another country's world
domination.
WRM:
What do you believe are the motives and goals of the
countries that are developing the post-nuclear
superweapons?
LN:
Hitler came to power because the Treaty of Versailles
had made Germany virtually defenseless against
Stalin's invasion, and Hitler was creating an
"adequate defense." But owing to dictatorship in
Germany, his whims or pleasures were the laws of the
land, and one of his whims was to attain world
domination, the dream of Alexander the Great and
Napoleon, for which purpose Hitler's adequate defense
transformed into aggression.
The
dictators of China have been saying that they are
creating adequate defense against the West. But world
domination is not just their whim to tickle their
vanity (was not China called the "Center of the
World"?) but also the dire necessity for the
preservation of their absolutism.
The
dictatorship fell in Russia in 1991. In 1989, there
originated in China what did not exist in Russia in
1991--a national student movement, inspired by the
West and especially the United States. The national
student movement had a kind of open-air headquarters
in Tiananmen Square in Beijing, where the students
came from all over China, stayed for a while to
demonstrate their solidarity, and then were replaced
by other students from other areas.
"What?" Winston Churchill would have exclaimed had he
been living to 1989. "In 1918, we trembled lest the
proletarian poor rob the rich bourgeoisie and come to
power by way of Lenin's world proletarian revolution.
Now the dictators of socialist China, where the
proletarian poor carried out Lenin's proletarian
revolution in 1949, tremble lest the proletarians
establish the Western, and in particular American,
bourgeois system."
Yes,
in 1918, Churchill called for the Western invasion of
Soviet Russia to destroy its subversive appeal to a
world proletarian revolution, and today the dictators
of China want to annihilate the West in order to stop
the subversive appeal to the Habeas corpus act and
universal suffrage of the bourgeois West.
The
national student movement, associated with Tiananmen
Square, endangered the Chinese dictatorship more than
any group in Soviet Russia two years later. Yet the
Soviet dictatorship fell. What a lesson for the
Chinese dictators! We know authentic information
about the Tiananmen Square movement from Zhang Liang
publication "The Tiananmen Papers," a 514-page
collection of Chinese government documents. It is
clear that the dictators of China saw how absolutism
was endangered in China and understood that the only
way to prevent future Tiananmens was to annihilate the
source of subversion, viz,.the West.
WRM:
What do you believe are going to be China's next steps
in terms of acquiring territory?
LN:
In contrast to Hitler, who stupidly grabbed the rump
of Czechoslovakia in 1939, China has been very
cautious in its local claims, since the position of
China now is the best for the development of "Superweapon
#3."
WRM:
Who does China see as allies and enemies?
LN:
The worst enemy is the democratic West, whose very
existence produces Tiananmens able to destroy the
Chinese dictatorship. The best ally is the democratic
West, supplying China with everything necessary for
the annihilation of the democratic West.
WRM:
Does China plan to provoke a war with the United
States by say, invading Taiwan, or by a surprise
attack? Or do they hope to use these new weapons to
deter the US from intervention in the Pacific?
LN:
Why "provoke a war?" The war will be an ultimatum for
unconditional surrender or just the annihilation of
the West without any ultimatum.
WRM:
What role will conventional arms and traditional
chemical, biological and nuclear weapons play in this
new environment for war fighting?
LN:
The statement that weaponized molecular nanotechnology
will be THE weapon of world domination (Superweapon
No.3) is as hypothetical as was the contention that in
1939 the next key weapon (Superweapon No. 2) will be
nuclear. Therefore, Soviet Russia developed in the
1970s and 1980s all kinds of post-nuclear weapons such
as anthrax, produced at the rate of 5500 tons a year.
Similarly, when Project 863 was founded in China, it
was to do research in seven fields of post-nuclear
weapons, one of which was expected to turn out to be
Superweapon No.3. Now it seems that the likeliest
candidate is molecular nanotechnology.
WRM:
Are the other post-nuclear weapons being researched to
this day? If so, are they known? If not, can you
enlighten us?
LN:
Since the nano "Superweapon #3" is a hypothesis, and
not an absolute certainty, the Chinese Project 863 has
been engaged in genetic engineering and other
promising fields.
WRM:
How should we view the buildups of China's
conventional arms and nuclear weapons, which are
covered much more in the press than the post-nuclear
superweapons?
LN:
Nuclear weapons will evidently be necessary in
combination with nanoweapons. As for the buildups in
China of the traditional army, its numbers per capita
are far smaller than those of the United States. It is
or rather was covered in the press because the media
do not understand China, a different civilization
whose roots go four or five millennia back. When the
mainstream media praises China, they praise it as
philistines who know nothing about China except trade,
cheap labor, and tourism, including the Beijing duck.
When the mainstream media wanted to scold China,
they scolded it for wrong reasons, such as the
numerical growth of its conventional army.
WRM:
If China has or is close to, molecular nanotechnology
to be used in war, what is the purpose of having a
large, advanced conventional army and "traditional"
nuclear weapons?
LN:
Eric Drexler, the Newton of nanotechnology, alive and
enriching us with his wisdom, discusses the problem
in his historic book of 1986 "Engines of Creation."
My assistant Isak Baldwin says that, according to
Drexler,
"A
nation armed with molecular nanotechnology-based
weapons would not require nuclear weapons to
annihilate a civilization. In fact, it seems that a
rather surgical system of seeking and destroying enemy
human beings as cancerous polyps could be
developed--leaving the nations infrastructure intact
to be repopulated."
Nevertheless nuclear weapons might be useful even on
the "D-day," after nanotechnology has been
successfully weaponized. Conventional non-nuclear
weapons have been useful even after 1945. Please
recall that two "atom bombs" were delivered in 1945 by
conventional U.S. bombers with conventional machine
guns and all.
WRM:
When do you feel these weapons will be revealed, and
what will be the effect on the various strategic
regions?
LN:
No one can tell when the nanoweapons will come into
being in China, as no one could tell in 1939 when
nuclear weapons would be obtained in the United
States. They may be expected daily. As for the United
States, I do not see that the nanoweapons would be
developed in this country given the present
allocations and pace. As for their effect, the United
States will have to surrender in due time or be
annihilated, as Japan faced the grim choice in 1945,
when it was confronted by US nuclear bombs, whose
number Japan did not know.
WRM:
According to the writings of the Chinese ideological
leaders who desire to make China dominate the Pacific,
there is no plan to actually occupy the United States.
They want to restore the "Middle Kingdom". Do you
believe that China's goal truly is to control the USA,
or is it rather limited to becoming the world
superpower? Would they settle with adequate defense to
deter a Western assault?
LN:
As I said in the previous ten answers, the goal of
China is to suppress the West, the source of
Tiananmens, for the Tiananmen of 1989 nearly led to
the collapse of dictatorship, similar to that in
Russia in 1991. Before 1939, Hitler talked about the
unification of Germans (as in the Sudeten,
Czechoslovakia}. But in 1939 his goal proved to be
world domination, though he never declared it. The
goal of China has never been and never will be
declared until the D-day, the Chinese nano ability to
destroy the Western means of nuclear retaliation.
WRM:
Does China seek to simply blackmail the world, or is
there a new map to be created? And what beliefs or
desires are motivating this? The belief Communism must
triumph over Capitalism?
LN:
A New York taxi robber risks his life, life
imprisonment, or death sentence to acquire the taxi
driver's $200. Hence the bullet-proof partitions in
taxis. The dictators of China defend not $200, but
their power, which is worth trillions of dollars,
apart from what cannot be expressed in terms of money
(royal grandeur, cult, and glorification). Many
dictators have been saying and can always say:
"Communism
/capitalism/democracy/freedom/socialism/national
socialism/our great country/the meaning of life/the
goal of history/--it is me.
WRM:
Do you feel the US simply lacks the technology for
post-nuclear weapons, or has it and neglects to use it
for defense purposes?
LN:
In 1938, England, France, and the United States had no
will to confront Hitler and represented him as a
champion of peace. It is only an accident, Hitler's
seizure of the rump of Czechoslovakia that awakened
the West. We are living in 1938 all over again, with
"Communist China" instead of "national-socialist
Germany." There is no will to confront China, and
President George W. Bush's "Iraqi stunt" has been
intended to divert public attention from the
development of post-nuclear superweapons in China.
WRM:
If the US is the most technologically advanced
country, does this mean we have been surpassed?
LN:
The "most technologically advanced country" is an
ambiguous generality. In the 1950s, Russia was still a
technologically backward country, with most of its
population deprived of running water, to say nothing
of passenger cars. Yet it did not prevent Russia from
outstripping the United States in space rocketry, when
the Soviet space satellite was launched before its
American counterpart. In its annual "Soviet Power,"
to which I subscribed, the Pentagon could not help
praising certain Soviet weapons as second to none in
the world.
WRM:
What today is holding China back from becoming overtly
aggressive and reshaping the geopolitical world?
LN:
The dictators of China are not insane! China's
government-controlled "capitalist corporations" have
been penetrating into the entrails of the Western
economies, absorbing the latest science and
technology--or sometimes entire Western corporations,
induced to operate in China on cheap local labor.
President George W. Bush's touching friendship with
the Chinese dictators makes China look like a
peaceful, respectable, and humane society, and every
Western scientist will regard it as an honor to work
in or for China, especially since he will be
generously paid out of those trillions of dollars the
Chinese dictators have received owing to trade and
economic cooperation. Does not the West (to say
nothing of Russia, an official military "partner" of
China) sell to China any weapons its dictators ask
for?
To
become "overtly aggressive"? What for? To invade
Taiwan? To perish, along with the West, in Mutually
Assured Destruction? No, the dictators of China are
not insane!
Incidentally, President George W. Bush is not insane
either. When the United States becomes a
continent-size Hong Kong, the Beijing world sovereigns
will recall his touching friendship in the days of
yore and will give him the "yarlyk,” that is, the
right to rule the United States as their
governor-general, if they decide to preserve the
United States and its population.
WRM:
What are your suggestions for defending the US? What
steps must be taken?
LN:
It is necessary for the US political establishment,
including the government and the CIA, to understand
what is going on. Then the right step will be taken.
This is not a recipe that one person or one group can
offer. This must be a national effort.
In
1978, to enlighten the West, I convinced 19
outstanding Westerners to join the Advisory Board of
the Center for the Survival of Western Democracies
under my presidentship. The irony is that when we
concentrated on Soviet Russia, before 1991, we had all
the grants we needed. But in the last eight years or
so, China was the American holy cow, and we have had
no funds to carry on our research of China and the
enlightenment of the West.
WRM:
How much progress have you made in alerting the
government and intelligence apparatus about the
Chinese threat?
LN:
Since our Center for the Survival of Western
Democracies began to regard China, and not Russia, as
the key geostrategic attacker, the donations to our
organization stopped. My assistants work without pay
or with a token pay. We need a top-level publicist at
$10,000 for two months, Chinese translators at $100 a
week, etc. Quite unlike $200 billion on the war in
Iraq, where WMDs are still being hidden (presumably
under Hussein's bed, which is also being hidden) and
$600 billion for the reconstruction of Iraq (well,
once it has been destroyed by the Coalition bombs,
missiles, and shells, it is to be reconstructed).
WRM:
What do you predict will occur in the future?
LN:
For the time being, the prediction is not difficult:
unless the situation changes, the West will be
annihilated or will become a Chinese colony with all
the consequences arising therefrom. To predict these
consequences, one must delve into the history of
China, which was in some respects freer than the West
of the time of the Inquisition, for example, but in
other respects, it was more ruthless than the West
ever was, except in Germany under Nazism.