www.DemocraticFundamentalism.org - Government - The = Ultimate Weapon of Mass Destruction: "Owning the Weather" for Military = Use

The important debate on global warming under = UN=20 auspices provides but a partial picture of climate change; in = addition=20 to the devastating impacts of greenhouse gas emissions on the = ozone=20 layer, the World's climate can now be modified as part of a new=20 generation of sophisticated "non-lethal weapons." Both = the=20 Americans and the Russians have developed capabilities to = manipulate the=20 World's climate.

In the US, the technology is being perfected = under the=20 High-frequency Active Auroral Research Program (HAARP) as part = of the=20 ("Star Wars") Strategic Defence Initiative (SDI). Recent = scientific=20 evidence suggests that HAARP is fully = operational and=20 has the ability of potentially triggering floods, droughts, = hurricanes=20 and earthquakes. From a military standpoint, HAARP is a weapon = of mass=20 destruction. Potentially, it constitutes an instrument = of=20 conquest capable of selectively destabilising agricultural and=20 ecological systems of entire regions.

While there is no evidence that this = deadly=20 technology has been used, surely the United Nations should be = addressing=20 the issue of "environmental warfare" alongside the debate on the = climatic impacts of greenhouse = gases...

Despite a vast body of scientific knowledge, = the issue of=20 deliberate climatic manipulations for military use has never been=20 explicitly part of the UN agenda on climate change. Neither the = official=20 delegations nor the environmental action groups participating in = the Hague=20 Conference on Climate Change (CO6) (November 2000) have raised the = broad=20 issue of "weather warfare" or "environmental modification = techniques=20 (ENMOD)" as relevant to an understanding of climate change.

The clash between official negotiators, = environmentalists=20 and American business lobbies has centered on Washington's = outright=20 refusal to abide by commitments on carbon dioxide reduction = targets under=20 the 1997 Kyoto protocol.(1) The impacts of military technologies = on the=20 World's climate are not an object of discussion or concern. = Narrowly=20 confined to greenhouse gases, the ongoing debate on climate change = serves=20 Washington's strategic and defense objectives.

"WEATHER WARFARE"

World renowned scientist Dr. Rosalie Bertell = confirms=20 that "US military scientists ... are working on weather systems as = a=20 potential weapon. The methods include the enhancing of storms and = the=20 diverting of vapor rivers in the Earth's atmosphere to produce = targeted=20 droughts or floods." (2) Already in the 1970s, former National = Security=20 advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski had foreseen in his = book=20 "Between Two Ages" that:

"Technology will make available, to = the leaders=20 of major nations, techniques for conducting secret warfare, of = which=20 only a bare minimum of the security forces need be appraised...=20 [T]echniques of weather modification could be employed to = produce=20 prolonged periods of drought or = storm."

Marc Filterman, a former French military = officer,=20 outlines several types of "unconventional weapons" using radio=20 frequencies. He refers to "weather war," indicating that the U.S. = and the=20 Soviet Union had already "mastered the know-how needed to unleash = sudden=20 climate changes (hurricanes, drought) in the early 1980s."(3) = These=20 technologies make it "possible to trigger atmospheric disturbances = by=20 using Extremely Low Frequency (ELF) radar [waves]." (4)

A simulation study of future defense = "scenarios"=20 commissioned for the US Air Force calls for:

"US aerospace forces to 'own the weather' by=20 capitalizing on emerging technologies and focusing development = of those=20 technologies to war-fighting applications... From enhancing = friendly=20 operations or disrupting those of the enemy via small-scale = tailoring of=20 natural weather patterns to complete dominance of global = communications=20 and counterspace control, weather-modification offers the war = fighter a=20 wide-range of possible options to defeat or coerce an = adversary... In=20 the United States, weather-modification will likely become a = part of=20 national security policy with both domestic and international=20 applications. Our government will pursue such a policy, = depending on its=20 interests, at various levels.(5)

HIGH-FREQUENCY ACTIVE AURORAL RESEARCH = PROGRAM=20 (HAARP)

The High-Frequency Active Auroral Research = Program=20 (HAARP) based in Gokoma Alaska --jointly managed by the US Air = Force and=20 the US Navy-- is part of a new generation of sophisticated = weaponry under=20 the US Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI). Operated by the Air = Force=20 Research Laboratory's Space Vehicles Directorate, HAARP = constitutes a=20 system of powerful antennas capable of creating "controlled local=20 modifications of the ionosphere". Scientist Dr. Nicholas Begich = --actively=20 involved in the public campaign against HAARP-- describes HAARP = as:

"A super-powerful radiowave-beaming = technology that=20 lifts areas of the ionosphere [upper layer of the atmosphere] by = focusing a beam and heating those areas. Electromagnetic waves = then=20 bounce back onto earth and penetrate everything -- living and = dead."=20 (6)

Dr. Rosalie Bertell depicts HAARP as "a = gigantic heater=20 that can cause major disruption in the ionosphere, creating not = just=20 holes, but long incisions in the protective layer that keeps = deadly=20 radiation from bombarding the planet." 7

MISLEADING PUBLIC OPINION

HAARP has been presented to public opinion as a = program=20 of scientific and academic research. US military documents seem to = suggest, however, that HAARP's main objective is to "exploit the=20 ionosphere for Department of Defense purposes." (8) Without = explicitly=20 referring to the HAARP program, a US Air Force study points to the = use of=20 "induced ionospheric modifications" as a means of altering weather = patterns as well as disrupting enemy communications and = radar.9

According to Dr. Rosalie Bertell, HAARP is part = of a=20 integrated weapons' system, which has potentially devastating=20 environmental consequences:

"It is related to fifty years of intensive = and=20 increasingly destructive programs to understand and control the = upper=20 atmosphere. It would be rash not to associate HAARP with the = space=20 laboratory construction which is separately being planned by the = United=20 States. HAARP is an integral part of a long history of space = research=20 and development of a deliberate military nature. The military=20 implications of combining these projects is alarming. ... The = ability of=20 the HAARP / Spacelab/ rocket combination to deliver very large = amount of=20 energy, comparable to a nuclear bomb, anywhere on earth via = laser and=20 particle beams, are frightening. The project is likely to be = "sold" to=20 the public as a space shield against incoming weapons, or, for = the more=20 gullible, a device for repairing the ozone layer. = (10)

In addition to weather manipulation, HAARP has = a number=20 of related uses:

"HAARP could contribute to climate change by = intensively=20 bombarding the atmosphere with high-frequency rays... Returning=20 low-frequency waves at high intensity could also affect people's = brains,=20 and effects on tectonic movements cannot be ruled out. (11)

More generally, HAARP has the ability of = modifying the=20 World's electro-magnetic field. It is part of an arsenal of = "electronic=20 weapons" which US military researchers consider a "gentler and = kinder=20 warfare". (12)

WEAPONS OF THE NEW WORLD ORDER

HAARP is part of the weapons arsenal of the New = World=20 Order under the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI). From military = command=20 points in the US, entire national economies could potentially be=20 destabilized through climatic manipulations. More importantly, the = latter=20 can be implemented without the knowledge of the enemy, at minimal = cost and=20 without engaging military personnel and equipment as in a = conventional=20 war.

The use of HAARP -- if it were to be applied -- = could=20 have potentially devastating impacts on the World's climate. = Responding to=20 US economic and strategic interests, it could be used to = selectively=20 modify climate in different parts of the World resulting in the=20 destabilization of agricultural and ecological systems.

It is also worth noting that the US Department = of Defense=20 has allocated substantial resources to the development of = intelligence and=20 monitoring systems on weather changes. NASA and the Department of=20 Defense's National Imagery and Mapping Agency (NIMA) are working = on=20 "imagery for studies of flooding, erosion, land-slide hazards,=20 earthquakes, ecological zones, weather forecasts, and climate = change" with=20 data relayed from satellites. (13)

POLICY INERTIA OF THE UNITED NATIONS

According to the Framework Convention on = Climate Change=20 (UNFCCC) signed at the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro:

"States have... in accordance with the = Charter of the=20 United Nations and the principles of international law, the = (...)=20 responsibility to ensure that activities within their = jurisdiction or=20 control do not cause damage to the environment of other States = or of=20 areas beyond the limits of national jurisdiction." = (14)

It is also worth recalling that an = international=20 Convention ratified by the UN General Assembly in 1997 bans = "military or=20 other hostile use of environmental modification techniques having=20 widespread, long-lasting or severe effects." (15) Both the US and = the=20 Soviet Union were signatories to the Convention. The Convention = defines=20 "'environmental modification techniques' as referring to any = technique for=20 changing--through the deliberate manipulation of natural = processes--the=20 dynamics, composition or structure of the earth, including its = biota,=20 lithosphere, hydrosphere and atmosphere or of outer space." = (16)

Why then did the UN --disregarding the 1977 = ENMOD=20 Convention as well as its own charter-- decide to exclude from its = agenda=20 climatic changes resulting from military programs?

EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT ACKNOWLEDGES IMPACTS OF=20 HAARP

In February 1998, responding to a report of = Mrs. Maj=20 Britt Theorin --Swedish MEP and longtime peace advocate--, the = European=20 Parliament's Committee on Foreign Affairs, Security and Defense = Policy=20 held public hearings in Brussels on the HAARP program.(17) The = Committee's=20 "Motion for Resolution" submitted to the European Parliament:

"Considers HAARP... by virtue of its = far-reaching=20 impact on the environment to be a global concern and calls for = its=20 legal, ecological and ethical implications to be examined by an=20 international independent body...; [the Committee] regrets the = repeated=20 refusal of the United States Administration... to give evidence = to the=20 public hearing ...into the environmental and public risks [of] = the HAARP=20 program." (18).

The Committee's request to draw up a "Green = Paper" on=20 "the environmental impacts of military activities", however, was = casually=20 dismissed on the grounds that the European Commission lacks the = required=20 jurisdiction to delve into "the links between environment and = defense".=20 (19) Brussels was anxious to avoid a showdown with Washington.

FULLY OPERATIONAL

While there is no concrete evidence of HAARP = having been=20 used, scientific findings suggest that it is at present fully = operational.=20 What this means is that HAARP could potentially be applied by the = US=20 military to selectively modify the climate of an "unfriendly = nation" or=20 "rogue state" with a view to destabilizing its national = economy.

Agricultural systems in both developed and = developing=20 countries are already in crisis as a result of New World Order = policies=20 including market deregulation, commodity dumping, etc. Amply = documented,=20 IMF and World Bank "economic medicine" imposed on the Third World = and the=20 countries of the former Soviet block has largely contributed to = the=20 destabilization of domestic agriculture. In turn, the provisions = of the=20 World Trade Organization (WTO) have supported the interests of a = handful=20 of Western agri-biotech conglomerates in their quest to impose = genetically=20 modified (GMO) seeds on farmers throughout the World.

It is important to understand the linkage = between the=20 economic, strategic and military processes of the New World Order. = In the=20 above context, climatic manipulations under the HAARP program = (whether=20 accidental or deliberate) would inevitably exacerbate these = changes by=20 weakening national economies, destroying infrastructure and = potentially=20 triggering the bankruptcy of farmers over vast areas. Surely = national=20 governments and the United Nations should address the possible=20 consequences of HAARP and other "non-lethal weapons" on climate=20 change.

NOTES

1. The latter calls for nations to reduce = greenhouse gas emissions by an average of 5.2 percent to = become=20 effective between 2008 and 2012. See Background of Kyoto = Protocol at=20 http://www.globalwarming.net/gw11.html = .

2. The Times, London, 23 November = 2000.

3. Intelligence Newsletter, December 16, = 1999.

4. Ibid.

5 Air University of the US Air Force, AF = 2025 Final=20 Report, http://www.au.af.mil/au/2025/ (emphasis=20 added).

6 Nicholas Begich and Jeane Manning, The = Military's=20 Pandora's Box, Earthpulse Press, http://www.xyz.net/~nohaarp/earthlight.html . See=20 also the HAARP home page at http://www.haarp.alaska.edu/

7. See Briarpatch, January, 2000. = (emphasis=20 added).

8 Quoted in Begich and Manning, op = cit.

9. Air University, op cit.

10. Rosalie Bertell, Background of the = HAARP=20 Program, 5 November, 1996, http://www.globalpolicy.org/socecon/envronmt/weapons.htm<= /A>=20

11. Begich and Manning, op cit.

12. Don Herskovitz, Killing Them Softly, = Journal of=20 Electronic Defense, August 1993. (emphasis added). According = to=20 Herskovitz, "electronic warfare" is defined by the US = Department of=20 Defense as "military action involving the use of = electromagnetic=20 energy..." The Journal of Electronic Defense at http://www.jedefense.com/ has published = a range of=20 articles on the application of electronic and = electromagnetic=20 military technologies.

13. Military Space, 6 December, 1999.

14. UN Framework Convention on Climate = Change, New=20 York, 1992. See complete text at
http://www.unfccc.de/resource/conv/conv_002.html ,=20 (emphasis added).

15. See Associated Press, 18 May = 1977.

16. Environmental Modification Ban = Faithfully=20 Observed, States Parties Declare, UN Chronicle, July, 1984, = Vol. 21,=20 p. 27.

17. European Report, 7 February 1998.

18. European Parliament, Committee on = Foreign=20 Affairs, Security and Defense Policy, Brussels, doc. no. = A4-0005/99,=20 14 January 1999.

19. EU Lacks Jurisdiction to Trace Links = Between=20 Environment and Defense, European Report, 3 February=20 1999.

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are the = sole=20 responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect = those of=20 the Centre for Research on Globalization.

=A9 = Copyright Michel=20 Chossudovsky, GlobalResearch.ca, 2005=20

www.democraticfundamentalism.org<= /P>	Government
The Ultimate Weapon of Mass Destruction: = "Owning=20 the Weather" for Military=20 = Use

(c) 2001,2002,2003,2004,2005,2006, 2007=20 DemocraticFundamentalism.org, All Rights=20 Reserved
Fair Use Notice: This site contains copyrighted = material=20 the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by = the=20 copyright owner. We are making such material available in an = effort to=20 advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, = economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. = We=20 believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted = material=20 as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In = accordance=20 with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is=20 distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior = interest=20 in receiving the included information for research and = educational=20 purposes. For more information go to: www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml If = you wish to=20 use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own = that go=20 beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright = owner.=20 The views expressed herein are the writers' own and not = necessarily=20 those of this site or its = associates.