American Geographical Society The U.S. Military as Geographical Agent: The Case of Cold War Alaska Author(s): Laurel J. Hummel Source: Geographical Review, Vol. 95, No. 1 (Jan., 2005), pp. 47-72 Published by: American Geographical Society Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/30034309 Accessed: 26-08-2014 00:35 UTC Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. American Geographical Society is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Geographical Review. http://www.jstor.org This content downloaded from 137.229.78.190 on Tue, 26 Aug 2014 00:35:05 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions THE U.S. MILITARYAS GEOGRAPHICALAGENT: THE CASE OF COLD WARALASKA* LAUREL J.HUMMEL ABSTRACT. Alaskawas strategicallykey to theU.S. defenseplan during the cold war(1946- 1989).As such,it was thescene of an enormousand sustainedmilitary investment, the effect of whichwas amplifiedby Alaska's undiversified economy, sparse development, small resi- dentpopulation, and marginalizedpolitical status at thebeginning of theera. The strong militarypresence affected Alaskan demographics, economic development, and infrastruc- tureand figuredprominently in theadmission of Alaska to the union in 1959. The high profile andlong-term presence of the U.S. military had such a dramaticaffect on thecourse of Alaska thatthe result was tantamountto a "militarizedlandscape." Keywords: Alaska, cold war, his- toricaldevelopment, militarized landscape. 1tthe beginning of World War II, Alaska's mostly primary-sector economy shifted dramaticallywhen the territory was catapultedto strategicimportance in thePa- cifictheater as bothan air-corridorconnection to theSoviet Union, then a U.S. ally, and keyterrain that needed to be keptout ofJapanese hands. Defense expenditures in Alaskatotaled more than si billion between 1941 and 1945(USARAL 1969). Atthe end ofthe war, defense spending pushed Alaska into a periodof uncertainty.Alas- kanshad little confidence that the main prewar extractive industries, especially min- eral mining,would recoverin timeto preventeconomic malaise and massive out-migration(Whitehead 1998). Forestry, fishing, and mininghad been shut down duringWorld War II, fromthe diversion of male labor, interruption ofnormal trade and manufacturingpatterns, and, in thecase of goldmining-a significant part of themining industry at the time-the War Production Board order that closed down all gold-miningoperations in thecountry. Butthe enormous military undertakings in Alaskaduring the cold war ensured Alaska'sfuture and set thestage for statehood, which otherwise would likely not haveoccurred until the discovery of oil on theNorth Slope in 1968.According to theAlaska historians Claus Naskeand HermanSlotnick, "the Cold War rescued Alaskafrom economic depression and obscurity"(1987, 131). The buildup was con- ditionedby the quickly changing international security picture, the national strate- giesthat addressed it, and rapidtechnological changes. It broughtimmediate and enormoustransformation toAlaska in manytangible and intangibleways. In terms ofconstruction and infrastructureexpansion, the military investment peaked early in thecold war,during what one observerdubbed "the frantic fifties" (Woodman 1999,lo9). This discussionfocuses on the U.S. military'srole as a powerfulgeo- graphicalagent between 1945 and 1959,the year of Alaska's entry into the union as * Theauthor wishes to gratefully acknowledge the technical assistance of Francis A. Galgano. * DR. HUMMELis an associateprofessor of geographyat theU.S. MilitaryAcademy, West Point, New York 10996-1695. TheGeographical Review 95 (1): 47-72, January 2005 Copyright@ 2006by the American Geographical Society of New York This content downloaded from 137.229.78.190 on Tue, 26 Aug 2014 00:35:05 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 48 THE GEOGRAPHICAL REVIEW theforty-ninth state. The degree of military influence remained very strong through- out thecold war period, and evenin thepost-cold war epoch the military contin- ues to rankamong Alaska's top employersand is the major conduitfor federal spendingin thestate (Case 1999;Goldsmith 2000; Friedand Windisch-Cole2002; Haycox2002; Schell2002). THE ORIGINS OF THE COLD WAR AND ALASKA'S EMERGING ROLE At theclose of WorldWar II, theSoviet Union moved quickly to neutralizeGer- manyand transform central Europe into a bufferzone against the West by establish- ing pro-Sovietregimes in EasternEurope (Walker 1994). Although the cold war beganas a confrontationofconventional military forces in Europe,it evolved into a globalcontest of strategicnuclear arms as theSoviet Union began rapid develop- mentof nuclear weapons, long-range bombers, and missilesin responseto forward deploymentof U.S. B-29"atomic bombers" (Ambrose 1993; Hoffecker and Whorton 1995).The August 1949 detonation of the first Soviet nuclear bomb, followed by the Communisttakeover of mainland China, created enormous domestic political pres- sureon theU.S. militaryto reassessearlier estimates that the Soviet Union would notbe ableto launch a successfulattack with nuclear weapons and long-range bomb- ersuntil 1955. The administrationof PresidentHarry Truman responded with Na- tionalSecurity Council Resolution 68, calling for a peacetimemilitary mobilization to meetthe rapidly increasing international threat (Schaffel 1991). The invasionof SouthKorea by Communistforces in 1952provided further incentive to stepup militarypreparations. The United States embarked on a hastyand majorexpansion ofconventional as wellas strategicnuclear forces around the world (Ambrose 1993) andon developmentof new strategies for detection, interception, retaliation, standoff, and showdownagainst the "Red Menace." Alaska figured prominently in thosede- fenseplans. Withthe Soviet Union defined as theprimary enemy, Alaska gained strategic significancebecause of its location (Denfeld 1996). Central to earlycold war think- ingwas the"polar concept," based on thesimple geographical truth that the short- estdistance between the United States and theSoviet Union-and vice versa-was a straightline across the polar region (Figure i). Recognizedin the1930s by Gen. Billy Mitchell,one of theearliest and mostvocal proponents of airpower, as thekey to futureair wars (Pagano 1998), the polar concept garnered new attention as techno- logicaladvances eventually rendered the continental United States a vulnerabletar- get.The perceiveddanger of transpolarattack triggered planning for systems of advancedwarning and interception across northern North America and made Alaska a strategicair center for basing and commandingthe required forces. Alaska'sproximity to theSoviet Union was key for another reason as well:Close enoughto registerseismic anomalies through the ground and via airborneplat- forms,it allowed the United States to monitorthe ambitious Soviet nuclear testing program.Alaska's strategic value also includedits geologicalwealth: It possessed tenof the sixteen minerals crucial to thecreation of cold war industrial and military This content downloaded from 137.229.78.190 on Tue, 26 Aug 2014 00:35:05 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions U.S. MILITARY AS GEOGRAPHICAL AGENT 49 PEKIN, ALASKAAS A FORWARD E U STAGINGAREA MOSCOW NADYM To K AKTKtI V'KUT~ GL /AR 150 OPNH N 00 jI -,,,- '~P4~DA SPACIFIC Ot NAUTICAL OCEAN MILES, ANCHORAGETO: YYR ALANTIC Anadyr 905 OCEAN Archan e 3,253 Chicago 2,483 DRO Copnhqen 3,518 300 onoalutu 2,482 60 London 3,902 Migadan 1,703 Moscow 3.789 Murmansk 3,001 isoAi 459 Nadoym 2,973 ~r6~ New York 2,930 Norilsk 2,598 Peking 3,468 Provide1iya 662 San Fanisco 0 ,742 1ea9ttl 9,249 Seoul 3,278 Tokyo 3,004 Vladivostok 2,878 Vorkuta 2,950 Yakutsk 2,152 AEATTLE 1500 NEW YORK },6,OLUL VCHICAO0~ 60 ~S~N FRANCISCO 120 9O0 FIG.1--An Alaskan view of coldwar political geography. Maps likethis showing Alaska's proximity to potentialfoes and alliesbordering the polar route helped to justifythe U.S. militaryinvestment in Alaska.Source: Adapted from Cloe 1984.(Cartography by Robert A. Getz,U.S. MilitaryAcademy) products(Nielson 1988). This mineralsupply, combined with Alaska's perceived "barrenness"and remotenessfrom the continental United States, attracted federal authoritieswho wantedto base nuclearand chemicalactivities of all sortsin the region,including nondefense detonations under the Atomic Energy Commission's PlowshareProgram as wellas declaredmilitary-related detonations, experimental nuclearpower, and chemical-weaponstesting.' In addition,Alaska was theonly place where U.S. forcescould traindomesti- callyfor ground and air combatin cold-weatherconditions similar to thosefound in the SovietUnion. Despite military leaders' pronouncements that air-delivered nuclearweaponry was thefuture of warfare, no one trulybelieved that the mission of ground forcesto keep and hold terrainwas obsolete (USARAL 1972).Whether in preparationfor a manneddefense of Alaska or foran invasionof Sovietterritory, Americansoldiers had to trainto fightin extremeArctic conditions. With an area morethan twice the size of Texas, Alaska offered relatively unlimited space