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.