~e; EM weather WMD

From bc <human@electronetwork.org>
Date Tue, 12 Mar 2002 10:57:53 -0600

  [thanks to * for the forward...]



It's not only greenhouse gas emissions: Washington's new world order
have the ability to trigger climate change.

By Michel Chossudovsky - Professor of Economics, University of Ottawa
and TFF associate, author of The Globalization of Poverty, second
edition, Common Courage Press

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

In the US, the technology is being perfected under the High-frequency
Active Aural Research Program (HAARP) as part of the ("Star Wars")
Strategic Defence Initiative (SDI). Recent scientific evidence
suggests that HAARP is fully operational and has the ability of
potentially triggering floods, droughts, hurricanes and earthquakes.


>From a military standpoint, HAARP is a weapon of mass destruction.
Potentially, it constitutes an instrument of conquest capable of
selectively destabilising agricultural and ecological systems of
entire regions.

While there is no evidence that this deadly technology has been used,
surely the United Nations should be addressing 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 deliberate
climatic manipulations for military use has never been explicitly part
of the UN agenda on climate change. Neither the official delegations
nor the environmental action groups participating in the Hague
Conference on Climate Change (CO6) (November 2000) have raised the
broad issue of "weather warfare" or "environmental modification
techniques (ENMOD)" as relevant to an understanding of climate change.

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


World renowned scientist Dr. Rosalie Bertell confirms that "US
military scientists are working on weather systems as a potential
weapon. The methods include
the enhancing of storms and the diverting of vapor rivers in the
Earth's atmosphere to produce targeted droughts or floods."(2)

Already in the 1970s, former National Security advisor Zbigniew
Brzezinski had foreseen in his book "Between Two Ages" that:

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

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

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


The High-Frequency Active Aural Research Program (HAARP) based in
Gokoma Alaska-jointly managed by the US Air Force and the US Navy-is
part of a new generation of sophisticated weaponry under the US
Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI). Operated by the Air Force Research
Laboratory's Space Vehicles Directorate, HAARP constitutes a system of
powerful antennas capable of creating "controlled local modifications
of the ionosphere".

Scientist Dr. Nicholas Begich-actively involved in the public campaign
against HAARP-describes HAARP as: "A super-powerful radiowave-beaming
technology that lifts areas of the ionosphere (upper layer of the
atmosphere) by focusing a beam and heating those areas.
Electromagnetic waves then bounce back onto earth and penetrate
everything-living and dead." (6)

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


HAARP has been presented to public opinion as a program of scientific
and academic research. US military documents seem to suggest, however,
that HAARP's main objective is to "exploit the ionosphere for
Department of Defense purposes." (8) Without explicitly referring to
the HAARP program, a US Air Force study points to the use of "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 integrated
weapons' system, which has potentially devastating environmental
consequences: "It is related to fifty years of intensive and
increasingly destructive programs to understand and control the upper
atmosphere. It would be rash not to associate HAARP with the space
laboratory construction which is separately being planned by the
United States. HAARP is an integral part of a long history of space
research and development of a deliberate military nature.

The military implications of combining these projects is alarming. The
ability of the HAARP / Spacelab/ rocket combination to deliver very
large amount of energy, comparable to a nuclear bomb, anywhere on
earth via laser and particle beams, are frightening. The project is
likely to be "sold" to the public as a space shield against incoming
weapons, or, for the more gullible, a device for repairing the ozone
layer. (10)

In addition to weather manipulation, HAARP has a number of related
uses: "HAARP could contribute to climate change by intensively
bombarding the atmosphere with high-frequency rays. Returning
low-frequency waves at high intensity could also affect people's
brains, and effects on tectonic movements cannot be ruled out. (11).

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


HAARP is part of the weapons arsenal of the New World Order under the
Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI). From military command points in
the US, entire national economies could potentially be destabilized
through climatic manipulations. More importantly, the latter can be
implemented without the knowledge of the enemy, at minimal cost and
without engaging military personnel and equipment as in a conventional
war. The use of HAARP-if it were to be applied-could have potentially
devastating impacts on the World's climate.

Responding to US economic and strategic interests, it could be used to
selectively modify climate in different parts of the World resulting
in the destabilization of agricultural and ecological systems. It is
also worth noting that the US Department of Defense has allocated
substantial resources to the development of intelligence and
monitoring systems on weather changes. NASA and the Department of
Defense's National Imagery and Mapping Agency (NIMA) are working on
"imagery for studies of flooding, erosion, land-slide hazards,
earthquakes, ecological zones, weather forecasts, and climate change"
with data relayed from satellites. (13)


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

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

It is also worth recalling that an international Convention ratified
by the UN General Assembly in 1997 bans "military or other hostile use
of environmental modification techniques having widespread,
long-lasting or severe effects." (15) Both the US and the Soviet Union
were signatories to the Convention. The Convention defines
"environmental modification techniques" as referring to any technique
for changing-through the deliberate manipulation of natural
processes-the dynamics, composition or structure of the earth,
including its biota, lithosphere, hydrosphere and atmosphere or of
outer space." (16) Why then did the UN-disregarding the 1977 ENMOD
Convention as well as its own charter-decide to exclude from its
agenda climatic changes resulting from military programs?


In February 1998, responding to a report of Mrs. Maj. Britt
Theorin-Swedish MEP and longtime peace advocate--, the European
Parliament's Committee on Foreign Affairs, Security and Defense Policy
held public hearings in Brussels on the HAARP program.(17) The
Committee's "Motion for Resolution" submitted to the European
Parliament: "Considers HAARP by virtue of its far-reaching impact on
the environment to be a global concern and calls for its legal,
ecological and ethical implications to be examined by an international
independent body; &#91;the Committee&#93; regrets the repeated refusal
of the United States Administration to give evidence to the public
hearing into the environmental and public risks [of&] the HAARP
program." (18.)

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


While there is no concrete evidence of HAARP having been used,
scientific findings suggest that it is at present fully operational.
What this means is that HAARP could potentially be applied by the US
military to selectively modify the climate of an "unfriendly nation"
or "rogue state" with a view to destabilizing its national economy.
Agricultural systems in both developed and developing countries are
already in crisis as a result of New World Order policies including
market deregulation, commodity dumping, etc. Amply documented, IMF and
World Bank "economic medicine" imposed on the Third World and the
countries of the former Soviet block has largely contributed to the
destabilization of domestic agriculture. In turn, the provisions of
the World Trade Organization (WTO) have supported the interests of a
handful of Western agri-biotech conglomerates in their quest to impose
genetically modified (GMO) seeds on farmers throughout the World.

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


1. The latter calls for nations to reduce greenhouse gas
emissions by an average of 5.2 percent to become effective
between 2008 and 2012. See Background of Kyoto Protocol at

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
Report, http://www.au.af.mil/au/2025/ (emphasis added).

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

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

8. Quoted in Begich and Manning, op cit.

9. Air University, op cit.

10. Rosalie Bertell, Background of the HAARP Program, 5
November, 1996,

11. Begich and Manning, op cit.

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

13. Military Space, 6 December, 1999.

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

15. See Associated Press, 18 May 1977.

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

17. European Report, 7 February 1998.

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

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

Copyright by Michel Chossudovsky, Ottawa, November, 2000.

All rights reserved.

  Permission is granted to post this text on non-commercial community
internet sites, provided the essay remains intact and the copyright
note is displayed. To publish this text in printed and/or other forms
contact the author at chossudovsky@videotron.ca, fax: 1-514-4256224.

Michel Chossudovsky
Department of Economics, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, K1N6N5

Voice box: 1-613-562-5800, ext. 1415

Fax: 1-514-425-6224

E-Mail: chossudovsky@videotron.ca; (altern. E-mail:

.... [unrelated .sig info (non-em) trimmed]

  the electronetwork-list
  electromagnetism / infrastructure / civilization