H.A.A.R.P.
It's not only greenhouse gas emissions:
Washington's new world order weapons
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.
HAARP IS A MASS DESTRUCTIVE WEAPON - NOT PART OF ANY
NEGOTIATIONS
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.
"WEATHER WARFARE"
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
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)
MISLEADING PUBLIC OPINION
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)
WEAPONS OF THE NEW WORLD ORDER
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)
POLICY INERTIA OF THE UNITED NATIONS
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?
EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT ACKNOWLEDGES IMPACT OF HAARP
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; [the Committee]
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
Washington.
FULLY OPERATIONAL
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.
NOTES
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
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
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,
http://www.globalpolicy.org/socecon/envronmt/weapons.htm
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
added).
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
1999.
Copyright
by Michel Chossudovsky, Ottawa, November, 2000.
All
rights reserved.