“THE GOVERNMENT HAS ACKNOWLEDGED THE REALITY OF UFOS”
Kean is a veteran investigative reporter who has spent over 20 years delving into the once-taboo topic of unidentified flying objects (UFOs). But is the truth really out there?
How do you best characterise where we are today, given your NY Times co-authored piece that catapulted things into public view?
We have seen a major change since our December 2017 New York Times story that included two
Navy videos. The government has acknowledged the reality of UFOs and the fact that they impact national security, and that alone is a major shift. We have more Navy videos of unexplained objects, an official UAP Task Force and most recently a government report on UAPs which was requested by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence.
The report stated there is no evidence that
UAPs are ours, Russian or Chinese. It forced many stove-piped agencies to pool information for the first time and gained further attention for UAPs from policymakers, with some calling for open congressional hearings. Even before the June
2021 UAP report, high-level officials have made statements as to the need for further investigation of these unexplained objects exhibiting technology beyond what we possess.
The taboo against taking the subject seriously is diminishing, and scientists have come out of the woodwork advocating for studies on UAPs. These events are unprecedented. And the media can’t get enough of UFOs. Recently, for the first time, UFOs were covered by both The New Yorker and the CBS show 60 Minutes.
Do you believe the ‘UAP’ focus is the same as decades of ‘UFO’ reports? Are they one and the same, or not, in your view?
I don’t think there’s any difference in how the reports describe the phenomenon. Government documents such as the famous 1947 Twining Memo describe the behaviour of the objects in the same way as later documents did, and in the same way they are reported today. The difference is that today we have better cameras, radar, satellite and sensor technology than we had decades ago, increasing the specificity of data on UAPs, which remains classified.
The term ‘UAP’ has gradually become the preferred term used by the government and military because it encompasses a broader range of phenomena than the term ‘UFO’. But since ‘UAP’ came into use, primarily to avoid the stigma and baggage associated with ‘UFO’, there really isn’t much difference between the two other than the impression the acronym creates. One seems more cultural; the other more official. ‘UAP’ removes any association with conspiracy theories, or shows like The X-Files or the fringe element. Even so, the term ‘UFO’ has been around forever and has a wider appeal. In my reporting I use the terms interchangeably, depending on the context.
Given your long and productive research on the UFO issue, what has surprised you the most? Similarly, what has disappointed you the most? Especially in the early years of my reporting, I was most surprised by the lack of curiosity among scientists and policymakers about UFOs. I was also surprised by how entrenched and powerful the stigma was in the media and in culture in general. It mystified me why just about everyone wasn’t impacted by the potential implications of the evidence for this phenomenon.
It didn’t take long for me to realise that most people in a position to make a difference were uninformed, and understandably had other priorities. Still, given how fascinated I was with this, and given what it might mean if even one
UFO was extraterrestrial, I found this apathy and disinterest hard to understand.
Many times I was amazed that accomplished investigative journalists did not jump on board and
take a deep dive into this subject. As a freelancer I couldn’t open the same doors as The Washington
Post, The New York Times or The New Yorker. Yet they were essentially silent. That was frustrating to me, but it has all changed now.
I was also frustrated that there was no government agency in place to receive reports from police officers, commercial pilots and other credible witnesses, and to conduct investigations when necessary. You can imagine my surprise when I learned about the Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program (AATIP) in 2017. However, being limited only to military cases and being secret, it was not exactly what I had been hoping for.
With all the chatter now about UAPs, the UAP preliminary report and so on, where are we now, and what’s next?
We have made tremendous progress in the last three-and-a-half years. There was a lot of momentum which built up prior to the release of the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) UAP report on 25 June, and we have to keep that momentum going. But when things get quiet, I am aware that there is still a lot going on behind the scenes.
For our next steps, we need to have a wellfunded task force with expanded staff that can access information from all government agencies and consolidate it. The best experts from many fields need to analyse this data. We need to understand the root of the intelligence failure which has stymied a meaningful government investigation into UAPs. Taskforce reports for the public and Senate committees need to continue to be published on a regular basis. And, of course, I believe that much more information should be released to the public.
There are videos and photographs in
Department of Defense files which are vastly superior to the ones we have seen so far. I think the public has a right to this and other data, as stated by [former US] Senator Harry Reid, who initiated the [AATIP] government program. The secrecy is excessive here, despite the need for some classification on grounds of national security.
Perhaps we will be fortunate enough to see open congressional hearings on UAPs. Eventually, we may be issued a definitive statement that these objects are not Russian or Chinese. It has been established that they are not ours, but the door on UAPs being technology from a foreign adversary has not been completely closed. Some in a position to know have stated that these objects are not created by Russia or China. That needs to be stated as fact in one of the subsequent written reports. Perhaps one day those two countries will join with the US to acknowledge this reality. At that point, we will have crossed a line into a new world.
The public is experiencing a new wave of UFO frenzy – something we saw in the 1950s. There are those in this arena hard at work to make money. There are dedicated investigators trying to unravel this saga. What are your thoughts on how the public should be wary, but still remain open to getting to the bottom of the UFO story?
I would advise the public to be careful about who they listen to. Focus on official information provided by current and former government officials and others with credentials that are in a position to have knowledge. They often speak in generalities because they have been exposed to much classified information, and can only go so far in what they can say publicly. But their words carry a lot of weight and should be taken seriously.
Scientists have come out of the woodwork advocating for studies on UAPs
I recommend paying attention to in-depth investigations, such as those from The Debrief and The Drive.
Fortunately, this subject transcends politics, and we have to keep it that way. We must all be wary of people with extreme conspiratorial views who are trying to influence the public for their own gain. Any such claims must be backed up with facts, names and documents that can be corroborated, or they are worthless. I encourage people to bear this in mind.
Do you expect ‘full disclosure’ regarding UFOs in the near term? If so, is the public ready for this disclosure and the related add-on of possibly distrusting the government?
It depends on what you mean by ‘full disclosure’. Some people think this means that government officials will stand up and announce that we have been visited by extraterrestrial craft for over 70 years and we knew about it all along. I don’t think this is ever going to happen.
If we get to a point where it becomes an official, stated fact, and universally accepted that these objects are not ours, Russian, Chinese or made by any country on Earth, this would be disclosure of at least some UFOs originating off this planet. At the same time, I suspect that tagged on to any admission along these lines would be the caveat that we don’t know what they are, where they are from or why they are here. Such clarity will not necessarily be established in the near term.
It all goes in steps – sometimes small ones – and it takes time. I think the process will continue to be gradual disclosure, and this will help minimise distrust in government. It gives all of us time to absorb, explore and challenge each step along the way. We are closer than ever before to a new level of confirmation. Yet I am sure there is plenty of resistance to such a paradigm shift
Lastly, is there a need to ‘internationalise’ this UAP/UFO dialogue?
Definitely. Sources have told me that other countries have reached out to us since the June UAP report was released. China has established its own UAP task force. South America is active in investigating UAPs. International cooperation among government officials and among scientists is crucial in moving forward.
I believe that scientists need to follow the lead of Harvard’s Avi Loeb and become more involved, initiating their own independent, international explorations of this phenomenon. They might be able to tell us more about it than our governments because they can make their results public.