UFOs are no longer taboo

Unidentified Flying Objects (UFOs) are coming in from the cold. It is no longer taboo to speak about them. The Pentagon has made them a respectable subject for discussion.

On June 25 2021 the Office of the Director of National Intelligence published its Preliminary Assessment: Unidentified Aerial Phenomena. "UFOs" are now to be called "UAPs". Republican Senator Marco Rubio (Florida) added a request for such a report in the 2020 financial authorization legislation. At a time when Republicans and Democrats are feuding in Congress, his request received bipartisan support.

The report says little but symbolizes a lot. The document (freely available on the Internet) is only nine pages long. It acknowledges the limited amount of high-quality reporting on UAPs. But it does admit that some UAPs cannot be currently explained.

The significance of the report is that the taboo on even mentioning them has now been lifted. After all, even the US military have problems explaining some of the occurrences.

Professor Alexander Wendt (University of Ohio) is one of the US's leading theorists in International Relations. Over a decade ago he called for the lifting of the taboo on UFOs as a subject for academic research. He acknowledged it could cost him his standing in IR.

Rarely does any university research money go into funding UFO research. Academic bodies tend to be very conservative and here we could see that conservatism writ large. Any funding has come from private sources, willing to go where conservative academics will not.

Professor Wendt's controversial campaign has now been vindicated. I agree with his approach: we need to find out just what is happening with the reporting of UFOs/UAPs.

This is not an automatic endorsement of the existence of alien life or that the planet is somehow under threat. It is simply a request for research to be done. Research would normally be the lifeblood of academics but on this subject they have been spineless.

Now the Pentagon has provided a spine. It is no longer taboo to talk about the need to examine the claims about the sightings of UFOs/UAPs.

First, there is a need to standardize data collection. There have been thousands of sightings in the last 70 or so years. There are documents scattered across government files; a report is made and then – because of the taboo - just filed away.

Many observers are skilled military personnel. They know their aircraft. We now know that some have seen UAPs but have not reported them because of a fear of being laughed out of the barracks. That will now change.

The National Archives of Australia is an example. In July 1960 at the secret Maralinga British nuclear test facility in South Australia, Constable Hubert Scarborough reported on seeing a strange object. Investigations were made, but then the document was filed away. It is now in the public domain.

It is now likely that governments may be more forthcoming about what they have in their files. Currently serving military personnel and civilians may be more willing to come forward.

This could even become an international research project. The UK and France have done their own investigations and the old USSR had also noted some reports within its own territory. Perhaps all these initiatives could now come together an international project.

Second - and returning to a more traditional political mode of thinking - this is a matter of national security. Modern equipment is now tracking UAPs that move faster than current aircraft, and which are able to move through the atmosphere then dip into the ocean then to re-emerge into the atmosphere – and all with no obvious means of propulsion.

Are these foreign adversary aerial systems? Do the US's enemies (whoever they may be) now possess better flying systems than the US? Is the US lagging behind in new technology? If I were an American taxpayer spending US$715billion on defence, I would want to know how come - despite all that money - there are evidently even better aerial systems out there.

Over the past 70 or so years there has been a strong consistency in the size, shape and mysterious propulsion of the UAPs. But the US has not had the same adversaries during that period. The USSR/ Russia has moved from Cold War to Détente and then to a cold peace. China 70 years ago had few ambitions to harass the US's own territory. It is now building sophisticated technology in other areas – but it is not boasting about these aerial systems. In short: a variety of adversaries and yet there is a consistent pattern in the traits of the UAPs.

Even more odd is that if an adversary were so far ahead in aerial technology, why show it off near US defence facilities where it will be tracked? This weapon system should be kept secret so as to inflict the maximum damage on the US as a surprise in a conflict.

Third, there is the basic question of near misses. Modern aircraft fly at high speeds and aircrew are well aware of the risks of aerial collisions. One of the recurring themes in the US reporting is the concern about near misses.

The Pentagon has released some video footage taken by US personnel from their aircraft. It is obvious that the personnel are shocked by what they see. We owe to them to take their worries seriously and investigate UAPs.

Finally, a great deal of money is being spent looking for extra-terrestrial life in and beyond our solar system. Why not spend some of it looking at the UAPs that are evidently flying so near us?

To conclude, we should be grateful to Senator Marco Rubio and the Pentagon for ending the taboo on researching UFOs/ UAPs. A new research topic has been created now that the taboo has been lifted.