> # Nonlethal Weapons
> A Global Issue

> ## by Cheryl Welsh,
> copyright

> ###

> From the CAHRA web site

> ## Contents

> > Possible Remedies From the International Community Concerning the Illegal Use and Experimentation with Electromagnetic and Mind Control Technology

> > What Can Be Done on an International Level?
> > Introduction: Nonlethal Weapons
> > Background Information. A Serious International Issue According to the Experts.
> > Denial That the Weapons Exist and Little Public Accountability
> > International Use of Nonlethal Weapons
> > The Dangers of Nonlethal Electromagnetic Weapons
> > International Human Rights Organizations:
> > No Match for the International Military Arms Trade
> > Major Conclusions: Comparisons to the Atomic Bomb
> > References
> > What Major Newspaper, Magazine and Journals Are Writing
> > about Nonlethal Electromagnetic Weapons

> ### What Can Be Done on an International Level?

> (This is a summary of the Nonlethal Weapons article and extensive footnotes which follow.)

> The U.S. seems to be the world leader in the global arena. Military budgets are the driving force and speak louder than public input. International organizations such as the UN, the European Union and the International Committee of the Red Cross are politically controlled by these factors. (See example 1 below.) Therefore, public protest will be an area to work on. Working with professionals who care about this issue and are willing to speak out is critical. Finding the decision-making organizations such as the UN Committee on Disarmament and making public statements is important. The odds are formidable but less so when examined and analyzed.

> For example, Nick Begich, co-author of Angels Don't Play This HAARP which discussed the U.S. HAARP defense project and mind control, spoke at the European Parliament about HAARP and environmental and health concerns in February 1998.(Tigner, 1998,p.3). This was reported in Defense News and contributed to public awareness.

> It is important to work as a group. Projects are better than just one letter to the UN C.A.H.R.A. is planning on compiling reports and to work with other human rights groups. Your support and contact with C.A.H.R.A. can make a difference. As C.A.H.R.A. is a nonprofit organization, there can be no political activities but C.A.H.R.A can research and disseminate information.

> Example 1. "Progress toward a ban{on landminds] has been painfully slow. After endless debate, 38 countries, including Britain, agreed to add a protocol to the 1980 Convention on "certain conventional weapons", which seeks to make a distinction between legitimate military weapons and those that cause "superfluous injury..in excess of what is needed for military purposes". But it was a feeble affair. It regulates rather than prohibits landmines by stipulating that only weapons which self-destruct after 30 days may be manufactured and sold. The trouble is that these new "improved" landmines cost $5, and since most customers are from poor countries, they are likely to opt for the cheaper version. What is more the protocol could take at least ten years to come into effect."

> Linklater, Magnus.(1997,Jan.16).Diana's Smart Weapon. Times. Lexis-Nexis

> Contents

> ### Introduction: Nonlethal Weapons

> Electromagnetic technology is a new emerging weapon with significant importance to international politics. Electromagnetic technology has been developed internationally as a weapon of war for at least forty years, but it has been highly classified.(Pasternak,1997). The weapons are designed to target any and every nerve of the body including the human brain. There are many independent sources that verify this little-publicized fact. "Research work in this field [directed energy weapons] has been carried out in almost all industrialized countries, and especially by the great powers, with a view to using these phenomena for anti-materiel or anti-personnel purposes." (Doswald-Beck,1990,18). ..."[U.S.] scientists, aided by government research on the 'bioeffects' of beamed energy, are searching the electromagnetic and sonic spectrums for wavelengths that can affect human behavior." (Pasternak,1997,38). A 1993 Defense News article entitled "U.S. Explores Russian Mind-Control Technology" described "acoustic psycho-correction, the capability to control minds and alter behavior of civilians and soldiers..." It uses "transmission of specific commands via static or white noise bands into the human subconscious..." The article further stated that U.S. and Russian sources were planning "...discussions aimed at creating a framework for bringing the issue under bilateral or multilateral controls".(Opall,1993,4). These are just a few examples of the dozens of articles available on this topic.

> Contents

> ### Background Information. A Serious International Issue According to the Experts.

> Electromagnetic weapons are as important as the atomic bomb, according to many experts. Here are examples of just a few. Gorbachev stated in 1986 "new non-nuclear weapons [such as] ...radio wave, infrasonic... which, in terms of their destructive potential, could be no less dangerous than already existing weapons of mass destruction." (BBC,1986,A1.) Dr. Stefan Possony was a Hoover Institute fellow and was called "the intellectual father of 'Star Wars' and "one of the most influential civilian strategic planners in the Pentagon"(Guardian,1995,17). Dr. Possony wrote about "messaging directly into a target mind" with low frequency waves. (Possony,1983,34). The article was entitled "Scientific Advances Hold Dramatic Prospects for Psy-Strat". A "Harvard molecular geneticist and biological/chemical warfare specialist, Matthew S. Meselson warned: 'We're going to learn how to manipulate every life process, genetic ones, mental ones, the emotional ones, ...If our inevitably increasing knowledge of life process is also harnessed to hostile purposes, that will completely change the nature of the expression of human hostility.' (Mann,1996, 58). It is logical to conclude that some of the top strategists and academic experts may know of the classified technology and cannot openly discuss it.

> There are several unclassified sources to document a forty year history of the international arms race to develop electromagnetic weapons. From 1975 to 1998, the UN Committee on Disarmament has discussed the Russian proposals to ban "new types of weapons of mass destruction." One of these weapons was described by the Soviet government in 1979 as "Infrasonic 'acoustic radiation' weapons. They would utilize harmful effects of infrasonic oscillations on biocurrents of the brain and nervous system;" (United Nations Department for Disarmament Affairs,1985,115). But neither side has admitted to having electromagnetic weapons. "Russia's Federal Counterintelligence Service emphasized that there is no psychotronic weapons on the territory of Russia, and never has been."(Tass,1994). Psychotronic is the Russian name for electromagnetic mind control weapons. And the Pentagon has stated that "Radiofrequency weapons are too sensitive to discuss." ("CNN Reports", 1985).

> Contents

> ### Denial That the Weapons Exist and Little Public Accountability

> While the superpowers have denied the existence of the weapons on one level, there are many articles to the contrary. And it seems that the United States has the lead in this international arms race. For example, U.S. non-proliferation experts have categorized acoustic and directed energy weapons as "highly dangerous technologies", in order to control the arms sales. (Opall,1997,16.) And since the 1990s, there are numerous articles have been written about the so called new nonlethal technologies, which include electromagnetic weapons. It can be concluded that the classified technology is now going online and consequently there has been some declassification at an international level.

> Public awareness has been slow. Here is just one example. France is involved in NATO research on this topic. They have begun to implement nonlethal strategy into their military doctrine. A classified study in 1995 listed 50 types of weapons including acoustic and electromagnetic, psychological and persuasive weapons ("France's Non-Lethal",1996,286). The president of France, Jacques Chirac described the weapons as "science fiction". The public has had a difficult time figuring out the facts on electromagnetic weapons when conflicting statements are made by government officials who may not be aware of the classified technology.

> China experts have discussed electromagnetic weapons. "...weapons systems produced by the third military revolution mainly used sound, electromagnetism, ...they possess enormous military potential.(Pillsbury,1997). Russia, China, Ukraine, the U.K., Australia, and France reportedly have advanced RF programs and Germany , Sweden, South Korea, Taiwan and Israel are said to have emerging programs..." ("Emerging Threat",1998). Several articles support the fact that electromagnetic weapons are here to stay.

> Contents

> ### International Use of Nonlethal Weapons

> The public is now beginning to hear the debates on the strategic development of electromagnetic weapons. While much of the technology is still classified, the nonlethal weapon debate is reflective of international concerns about electromagnetic weapons. Many countries plan to use nonlethal weapons for low intensity conflict, international terrorism and peace-keeping missions. The many articles on this topic describe the great interest in and funding of nonlethal weapons and the possibilities for it's misuse. For example in Harvard International Review, Ethan Mollick described a nonlethal weapon catastrophe in the Gulf War, the use of carbon-fiber bombs which caused widespread civilian deaths as a result of the electrical and water pump failures. Military proponents have stated that one of the main goals is to limit deaths.

> Proponents claim nonlethal weapons will provide more options in conflict situations but opponents argue that more military interventions may occur based on misperceptions about nonlethal weapons. Mollick effectively argues for an international consensus and exploration of nonlethal strategies.

> Mollnick does repeatedly discuss the problem of unrealistic expectations by the military and the public and stated that this is a very important issue for the future successful use of nonlethal weapons. For example, in OOTW or operations other than war, the apolitical nature of the armed services may be compromised and in a similar way there are concerns that nonlethal weapons will require new strategies and will fulfill new roles in war and will substantially change the nature of fighting. These are important issues that the strategic experts are beginning to work out.

> A 1996 report by the Institute for Foreign Policy Analysis was extremely thorough and detailed about the role of nonlethal weapons on an international level. This study pointed out the important factors in developing the United States policy framework on nonlethal weapons. Nonlethal weapons were considered an asset to military operations. This report recommended further development of a clearly worded nonlethal weapons policy so that the opponent would take the U.S. stance seriously and know that the U.S. could stand behind it's stated capability. Nonlethal weapons were discussed as part of the U.S. arsenal and there were questions about issues of proliferation and problems of countermeasures. The consensus was that the U.S. should continue staying one step ahead of other countries in nonlethal weapons technology and not worry about using the classified technology. Public discussions on this issue were encouraged and nonlethal weapons cooperation with NATO members was encouraged. Multinational cooperation is an area of concern. Discussions concerning deterrence policy and the role of nonlethal weapons are currently being discussed. The U.S. seems to be leading the way for international policy formulations, based on the quantity and quality of the U.S. information on nonlethal weapons.

> Contents

> ### The Dangers of Nonlethal Electromagnetic Weapons

> In an article commissioned by the European Parliament, concerns about "less-lethal' weapons were discussed. The European Union is concerned about nonlethal weapons and protecting civil rights. The article concluded that further research on such topics as proliferation and control are needed. "Formal liaison arrangements between the EU and the USA" on nonlethal weapons was investigated. This further demonstrates the international importance of nonlethal weapons. Many countries are seriously incorporating the use of nonlethal weapons into their arsenals. Accordingly, concerns about maintaining a lead other countries and of the abuse of the new technologies are being discussed by most countries today.

> The European Parliament complained of the dangers of HAARP, a U.S. electromagnetic defense project and of being uninformed about the dangers after NATO and U.S. officials had declined invitations to the discussions on HAARP (Tigner,1998,3). This is a good example of the possible global implications of electromagnetic weapons and the problems involved with classified weapons programs such as miscommunication. Several articles point out similar concerns.

> The discussions on nonlethal weapons has increased dramatically since the 1990s. Most articles present a pro and con picture and that the nonlethal arsenals are increasing in many countries. Nonlethal weapons will play a significant role in international strategies, according to the cited articles above. And they have already been deployed in Somalia during the United Nations peacekeeping missions in 1995.(Schmitt,1995) This is indicative of nonlethal international strategies on the use of the still very classified nonlethal weapons that is now in effect.

> Another example of the importance of electromagnetic weapons was clearly stated as follows. "In a much quoted speech made in 1974, Fleet Admiral Groshkov of the USSR, considered the "father" of modern Soviet navy, stated that "the country that best exploits the electromagnetic spectrum will win the next war." (Herron,1984,64) Proliferation and the development of countermeasures have led to an escalating arms race. To a certain extent, the country with the money can buy this technology, but the superpowers have the leading edge technology. It is available on the international market and is proliferating at a very fast pace. (Dunigan,1996,15). This is another factor that will affect nonlethal strategic policy development.

> Contents

> ### International Human Rights Organizations: No Match for the International Military Arms Trade

> International regulation of electromagnetic weapons has been discussed by the International Committee of the Red Cross and the Stockhom International Peace Research Institute, as well as other human rights groups. Concerns about the humane use of these weapons are being discussed. But overall, the consensus on arms control is small in comparison to the interest in gaining military power. Most would agree that the process of international arms control has and does make a significant difference. For example, some of the above cited articles discussed the international treaties and laws under which nonlethal weapons must comply and concerns about whether other countries will obey. This is just one factor which may affect developing strategic plans.

> Rupert Pengelley of the International Defense Review as well as others have argued against the possible misuse of nonlethal weapons (Pengelly,1994,1). Pengelly described the atomic bomb as "the ultimate nonlethal weapon." The atomic bomb was a great deterrent after Hiroshima and Pengelly wonders who will be first to use nonlethal weapons so that they too will never be used.

> Additionally, comparisons of nonlethal weapons to the atomic bomb and the powerful deterrent effects of it's terrifying destructive power have been made by Dunnigan in the book, Digital Soldiers. The atomic bomb and it's effect on international politics is still being sorted out. The atomic bomb will be a point of comparison for mind control technology discussions as the electromagnetic technology is declassified.

> Most of this technology has been classified until recently and little public protest or input on this topic can be found in the literature. Here is one of the few international politics position today on electromagnetic mind control. "World opinion is not ready for dealing appropriately with the problems coming from the possibility of direct access to the human mind." (Opall,1993,4.)

> The alarming problem with electromagnetic mind control has been articulated by Russian officials as follows. "As far as it has become possible to probe and correct psychic contents of human beings despite their will and consciousness by instrumental means... results having been achieved can get out of [our] control and be used with inhumane purposes of manipulating psyches, the [Russian] paper stated." (Opall,1993,4)

> Contents

> ### Major Conclusions: Comparisons to the Atomic Bomb

> As with many international issues, the use of electromagnetic weapons on an international level is complex. Many experts agree that it should be a topic of concern in international politics.

> Experts and officials have called electromagnetic mind control 'science fiction', 'too sensitive to discuss' or nonexistent and electromagnetic technology is confusing and not understood or known by the public. Public discussions and declassification of the technology is being recommended.

> Electromagnetic technology has become a part of the arsenals of most countries. As a result of the world-wide declassification and use of electromagnetic nonlethal weapons in the 1990s, the problems and strategies are being discussed openly by experts. There is no international global strategy for nonlethal weapons but trends and strategies are developing. New technologies and counter technologies are proliferating. International discussions on the legal, moral and ethical use of electromagnetic weapons are beginning to take place.

> The United States, the leader in nonlethal weapons at this time, is formulating strategy and tactical uses for nonlethal weapons. International politics is changing in very complicated ways and strategic experts are beginning to discuss the possible future effects that nonlethal weapons will have. Nonlethal weapons will not replace lethal power but most international countries believe that it will be a significant addition to their arsenals. Most strategic experts are using words of warning.

> The atomic bomb had a major impact on international politics and the consensus is that this new emerging technology will have a similar effect. Many complex factors are developing in discussions on electromagnetic warfare. The history of the atomic bomb will be a useful tool of analysis.

> Contents

> ### References

> Aftergood, Steven. (1994, September/October). The Soft-Kill Fallacy. Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, 40-45.

> Coupland, Robin M. (1997, Jul 12). Non-lethal weapons: precipitating a new arms race. Medicine must guard against its knowledge being used for weapon development. British Medical Journal, 315, 72.

> Doswald-Beck, Louse and Cauderay, Gerald C. (1990, 1 Nov.). The Development of New Antipersonnel Weapons. International Review of the Red Cross, 279.

> Goldblat, Jozef. (1983). Arms Control Agreements. Praeger Publishers, New York.

> Herron, Maj. Robert. (1984, May. Electronic Warfare--New Priority for next generation fighters. Aerospace America.[ONLINE],pg. 64.Available:Lexis-Nexis/MILTRY.

> Kelly, Jack A. & Conway Joseph. (1996, May). Nonlethal Weapons, Emerging Requirements for Security Strategy, Institute for Foreign Policy Analysis.

> Lopez,Ramon.(1993, March 1).Special Operations Survive Pentagon Budget Constraints.International Defense Review,26(3). [ONLINE],p.247.Available:Lexis-Nexis/MILTRY[December 12, 1994].

> Matthews,Owen.(1995, July 11).Report: Soviets Used Top-Secret 'Psychotronic' Weapons. Moscow Times. [ONLINE].Available: LexisNexis/AllNews.

> Mann,Paul.(1996,June17).Mass Weapons Threat Deepens Worldwide. Aviation Week and Space Technology.144(25). [ONLINE], p.58 Available:LexisNexis/MILTRY.

> Mollick,Ethan.(1996,Fall).A Gentler War The Debate over Non-Lethal Weapons. Harvard International Review. 18(4). {ONLINE],P.46.Available:EBSCOhost.

> Morrison, David C. (1995, July 22). More-Than-Lethal Weapons. National Journal, 1919.

> Opall, Barbara. (1993, Jan 11-17). U.S., Russsia Hope to Safeguard Mind-Control Techniques. Defense News, 4.

> Opall, Barbara. (1997, Nov. 24-30). U.S. Experts:Focus Arms Control Goals. Defense News, 6.

> Thomas, Timothy L. (Spring 1998). The Mind Has No Firewall. Parameters US Army War College Quarterly. 28(1), 84.

> Pasternak, Douglas. (1997, July 7). Wonder Weapons The Pentagon's quest for nonlethal arms is amazing. But is it smart? U.S. News and World Report, 38-45.

> Pengelley, Rupert. (1994, April 1). Wanted: A Watch On Non-lethal Weapons. International Defense Review. 27(4), 1.

> Pillsbury, Michael. (1997, September 18). Prepared Testimony by Dr. Michael Pillsbury Associate Fellow National Defense University Before the Senate Intelligence Committee.Federal News Service.[Online]. Available:Lexis-Nexis/MILTRY[Sept.20,1997]

> Possony, Stefan. (1983, July). Scientific Advances Hold Dramatic Prospects for Psy-Strat. Defense and Foreign Affairs, 34. [ONLINE]. Available:Lexis-Nexis/MILTRY.

> Pravda. 27, Jan. 1986).Pravda Editorial on Gorbachev's Programme of Nuclear Disarmament. BBC Summary of World Broadcasts [Online] Pg.A1,Available:Lexis-Nexis/MILTRY.

> Schmitt, Eric. (1995, Feb. 16). Zany New Weapons for U.S. team in Somalia. International Herald Tribune.

> Tigner, Brooks. (1997, Sept. 29). NATO Panel To Consider Nonlethal Weapon Guidelines. Defense News, 14.

> Tigner, Brooks. (1998, Feb. 16-22). Europeans Protest U.S. Ionospheric Research. Defense News, 3.

> United Nations Department for Disarmament Affairs. (1985). The United Nations and Disarmament: 1945-1985. New York: United Nations.

> Unknown author. (1985, Nov. 15). CNN Reports on Radio-Frequency Weapons. PR Newswire [Online],Available:Lexis-Nexis/MILTRY.

> Unknown author. (1998, March 2). Emerging Threat: Radio Frequency Weapons. Defense Week,19 [ONLINE]. Available:LexisNexis/MILTRY[Mar. 4, 1998].

> Unknown author. (1998, Feb. 7,1998).EU/United States:Euro-Mps Concerned About New Version of "Star Wars". European Report [Online},no. 2289,Available:Lexis-Nexis?News/MILTRY[Feb.9, 1998].

> Walker, Martin. (1995, May 5). Dark Dreamer of Star Wars: Obituary:StefanPossony.Guardian(London).[Online],Pg.17,Available:Lexis-Nexis/AllNEWS[1995, May 31].

> Wright, Steve. (1998, Jan 6). An Appraisal of Technologies for Political Control. European Parliament Scientific and Technological Options Assessment, STOA. Luxembourg, European Parliament.

> Contents

> ### What Major Newspaper, Magazine and Journals Are Writing about Nonlethal Electromagnetic Weapons

> (Important information is hightlighted so that it can be skimmed.)

> "Certainly one of these things is to recognize that export control documents, particularly the Military Critical Technologies List, need to be reviewed to determine if radio frequency technologies should be considered in the same careful way we do nuclear technologies," he[Army Lt. Gen. Robert Schweitzer speaking to Congress] said.

> no author.(1993, Mar. 2). Emerging Threat: Radio Frequency Weapons. Defense Week, vol. 19.

> "The Pentagon's exotic weapons programme, led by the Air Force, is cloaked in ultra-secrecy which forbids any public comment by scientists. ...Electromagnetic radiation-basically waves below radio frequencies -was found to prompt human or animal brains to release chemicals that affect behaviour. "We could put animals in a stupor," he explained, adding it would be probably possible to create flu-like symptoms and nausea in humans. Such work continues. In 1995 Air Force generals reviewed more than 1,000 proposed exotic weapons projects. One was called "Put the enemy to sleep/Keep the enemy from sleeping." Another project approved for more research involved brain-wave manipulation. ...According to Louis Slesin, editor of Microwave News, the effort is practical. He says such exotic weapons are merely the next logical step to the variety of radio beams used to knock out the electronic systems of aircraft or missiles. "Once you are into these anti-material weapons, it is just a short jump to anti-personnel ones." In effect, humans are also just electro-chemical systems that can be disrupted."

> Dettmer, Jamie.(1997, Aug 3). It's war, Jim, but not as we know it. Scotsman Publications Ltd. Scotland on Sunday.p 5. Lexis-Nexis.

> "As former science-fiction writers,[Janet and Chris Morris, leading proponents of nonlethal weapons] the couple speak with zeal about a coming age in which the enemy will be disorientated by very low frequency sound waves, dazzled by isotropic radiators, imprisoned by invisible magnetic fields,... ...After his retirement, [Ray] Cline, the leading biographer of the CIA, had taken charge of a privately funded Washington think-tank called the US Global Strategy Council. A world authority, he soon became the Morrises' mentor and their introduction to the murkier reaches of the Pentagon. ...The Morrises even talk admiringly about a technology that would enable two different acoustic beams to plant a voice in a dictator's head, convincing his subordinates that he had suddenly gone mad."

> Bone, James. (1996, Sept.21). Stick'em up. The Times.

> "The microwave bomb, which works by emitting a massive pulse of radio energy, would render humans unconscious by scrambling neural paths in the brain but would not cause lasting injury."

> Campbell, Christy. (1992,Sept 27). Microwave bomb that does not kill. Sunday Telegraph.p6.

> "Terrifying noise weapons that can rupture organs, inflict burns, and create bubbles and cavities in human tissue may be just around the corner, an expert has warned. Acoustic weapons are now so highly developed that they could make an appearance at any moment, according to writer William M. Arkin[Human Rights Watch]. ...About 20 US government laboratories and military commands were involved in acoustic weapons development, contracting with half-a-dozen private companies. ...one of two leading contractors, Scientific Applications and Research Associates Inc. (Sara), Huntington Beach, CA. A high-power weapons would radiate a directed energy beam to "induce severe incapacitation (and if necessary, lethality), within a specified/designated area." The intensity could vary from a 90 to 120 decibel low-frequency soundwave "to provide extreme levels of annoyance and distraction", through 150 to 150 decibels for "strong physical bodily trauma and damage to tissues', to "shockwave" levels at more than 170 decibels. At this intensity, an acoustic weapon could produce "instantaneous blastwave-type trauma" and lethal effects. Very low frequencies could produce internal hemorrhaging and spasms while higher frequencies were capable of raising body temperature and burning tissue. At the top end of the frequency scale, cavitation effects and bubbles could result as the structure of human flesh broke down." Arkin[writing in the quarterly journal Medicine Conflict and Survival]said: "Acoustic weapons could be the next new major weapons to be deployed based upon 'novel' and heretofore unapplied physical principles in warfare." Arkin recommended "the humanitarian community to involve itself in the assessment and debate..." [on high-power acoustic beam weapons.] ...He suggested that Protocol IV[of the Inhumane Weapons Convention] might be the starting point for curbing acoustic weapons."Medicine, Conflict and Survival is a journal of the group International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War."

> von Radowitz.(1997, Dec.7). Acoustic Weapons 'Close to Becoming Reality'.Press Association Newsfile.Lexis-Nexis.

> "The International Red Cross is looking at other weapons which may cause "gratuitous" damage to human beings, including some that may not have progressed beyond the drawing-board. Recently, it mounted a successful campaign to ban laser weapons that cause blindness. Now it is looking at cluster-bombs, which cause appalling injuries and which can have the same effect as landmines if they lie unexploded on the ground. There are electromagnetic and acoustic weapons which destroy human organs, and fuel-air explosives worse than Napalm. No one can say for certain what the next generation of "unacceptable" weapons will consist of -only that they will be worse."

> Linklater, Magnus.(1997, Jan.16). Diana's Smart Weapon. Times Newspapers Limited.

> "Chinese Views of Future Warfare: Prepared Testimony by Dr. Michael Pillsbury, Associate Fellow National Defense University Before the Senate Intelligence Committee. ...Radiation Combat--"In the wars of the past, the power to inflict casualties mainly depended on the effects of kinetic energy and thermal energy; but the weapon systems produced by the third military revolution mainly use sound, electromagnetism, radiation, and other destructive mechanisms. The main radiation weapons are laser weapons, microwave weapons, particle beam weapons and subsonic wave weapons;they possess enormous military potential. ...Vice President of the Russian Academy of Military Science Vladimir Slipchenko [stated that] ...By directing energy emission at a target it is possible to turn an enemy division into a herd of frightened idiots...electromagnetic weapons...ionizing (plasma ) weapons...our 'likely friends' in the West and the East are developing new weapons and means of employing them."

> Pillsbury, Michael.(1997, Sept.18)Senate Intelligence Committee. Federal News Service. Lexis-Nexis.

> "...a new U.S. government publication, "Chinese View of Future Warfare, sponsored by Andy Marshall, the Pentagon's director of net assessment. ...editor Michael Pillsbury. ...Richard Macke, former commander-in-chief of U.S. Pacific Command. ...He noted, however, that China does not intend to put its gradually modernized force to use. "I don't think they want to go to war with anybody. I think they want to amass the capabilities that we have in order to earn respect...showing force without using it."

> Opall, Barbara.(1997,May19). Chinese Covet High-Technology Arsenal; DoD Report Reveals PLA Quest For Robotics, Cyber Warriors.Defense News.pg.1.

> "The latter stages of the Cold War saw a new twist to the development of Non-lethal weapons, involving the use of directed-energy devices exploiting different parts of the electromagnetic spectrum(such as laser light, isotropic radiators, high-power microwaves, and electromagnetic pulses) to disrupt,or impede the functioning of, military equipment.

> ...The ICRC [international Committee of the Red Cross] is right to call attention to the emergence of this new generation of weapon. Some form of international regulation is indeed needed-an agreement between the then Soviet Union and the United States not to utilize lasers...has been in effect since January 1990, and could provide the basis for a wider agreement. Similarly, at a national level there need to be strict legal controls over the acquisition and use of non-lethal weapons, not least by security agencies."

> Pengelly, Rupert.(1994, Apr.1). Wanted:a Watch on Non-lethal Weapons.International Defense Review Vol27 No.4 pg.1.

> "Richardson said one far-future[2011 and beyond] communications system being investigated is "synthetic telepathy." One day, SOF commandos may be capable of communicating through thought processes. A less revolutionary communications system available today is the New Eagle Communications Model DB headset. It incorporates a bone vibrating speaker placed directly in front of the ear that transfers incoming radio signals through bones."

> Lopez, Ramon.(1993, Mar.1). Special Operations Survives Pentagon Budget Constraints. International Defense Review. Vol.26; No. 3.pg. 247.

> "This fall, a joint committee staffed by the Department of Justice and the Pentagon will decide which "less than lethal" technologies to develop. Here is a sample of systems the committee may consider: ...High-power electromagnetic generators that interfere with brain waves and alter behavior."

> Walker, Sam.(1994,Sept.6).An Array of 'Less Than Lethal' Weapons. Christian Science Monitor. pg.12.

> A classified nonlethal weapons study by France included a "list of around 50 types of such weapons placed into three categories: those that neutralize personnel... ...Other sub-systems are acoustic weapons; computer viruses and disruptive agents; psychological and persuasive weapons."

> No author.(1996,Apr.18).France's Non-Lethal Options.Intelligence Newsletter. Indigo Publications.;N.286.

> "Examples include weapons that...infrasound waves that disorient civilians for crowd control and psychological operations,... Co-chaired by conservative luminaries like former UN ambassador Jeane Kirkpatrick and an array of former generals, admirals, and defense secretaries, the council formed a nonlethality policy review group in 1990 that bent the ears of Vice President Dan Quayle, Chief of Staff John Sununu, and National Security Advisor Brent Scowcroft, persuading the Bush administration to establish a Nonlethality Task Force under the secretary of defense. ...Research has been actively pursued for the past several years at Lawrence Livermore and Los Alamos National laboratories... Like the Strategic Defense Initiative a decade ago, nonlethality exercises a seductive promise to render the enemy 'impotent and obsolete'...

> Sommer, Mark.(1994, Feb.17).Nonlethal Weapons Offer a Faustian Bargain.Christian Science Monitor.p19.

> "The two doctors[Dr. Nick Lewer and Dr. Steven Schofield, Bradford University Peace Studies Dept.]-whose survey of the strategic, technological, ethical and environmental issues arising from the use of non-lethal weapons was published yesterday-say there is an urgent need for awareness and political debate to determine the proper ground rules for their use. ...Research and development of new weapons is proceeding apace, in what amount to an almost unseen arms race."

> Simister, David.(1997,Apr.15).UK:Lethal Warning on New Breed of Weapons. Yorkshire Post.

> "Security classification makes it difficult to be very specific about the technologies. We know that all of the U.S. armed services..are working on weapons projects that could be described under the heading non-lethal technologies and that at least some of these projects have parallels in other nations," said Professor Harvey Sapolsky, of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, in a recent report.[Dr. Sapolsky also with SIPRI,Stockholm International Peace Research Institute]."

> Winton, Neil.(1995,May22). Hi-tech Weapons offer War Without Death.Reuters North American Wire. Lexis-Nexis.

> "True, a CIA report published this summer asserted that former Presidents Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan both claimed to have seen UFOs. But that just tells us what we already know: that Americans are credulous. But who can blame them? The very government they accuse of withholding information on the paranormal from them is directly responsible for feeding their wildest fantasies. ...The Federation[of Atomic Scientists, FAS] was set up in 1945 by researchers into the atomic bomb, anxious to campaign against government secrecy over scientific research. If anyone reliable might be capable of exposing a cover-up, you feel it must be them. ...John Pike...director of Space Policy[FAS]. ...Pike, ultimately, has no doubt there is intelligent extraterrestrial life, and that it has visited our end of the galaxy."

> White, Jim & Fowler, Rebecca.(1997, Sept21). Adventures in Alien Territory. Mail On Sunday(London).Pg13. Lexis-Nexis.

> "For example,[U.S. Air Force Maj. Norman] Routanen has proposed using "very powerful microwave devices to confuse, disable, or even kill the enemy." The report by the Georgetown University panel on combating terrorism similarly proposes "techniques to impair brain functions." Navy physician Capt. Paul E. Tyler sees an opposite use for electromagnetic radiation: he suggests that exposing U.S. military personnel or their allies to electromagnetic radiation might allow them to act 'with minimal rest and still maintain peak performance."Efforts to create a super soldier are not as far-fetched as they sound, nor are they new. Members of the navy's SEALS--its elite special-forces unit--took dexedrine to stay awake for several days on missions during the Vietnam War. Since at least 1954, various Defense Department agencies have conducted hundreds of experiments on ways of enabling troops to endure extremely taxing conditions."

> Miller, Marc S.(1987,Aug.). Ambiguous War The United States and Low-Intensity Conflict.MIT Alumni Association Technology Review Vol.90 pg.60.

> "The U.S. Government has been researching beam weapons --microwave, light (laser), electron and other particle beams, and most recently x-rays--since the 1940s. ...Dr. Robert Cooper, director of the Defense Advance Research Projects Agency(DARPA), the Pentagon's own R & D arm, has been involved with beam weapons since the 1960s. ...All four technologies have made huge strides in 25 years, Dr. Cooper says. Radars are 10 to 100 times as powerful, and have been supplemented by optical surveillance systems that did not exist in 1959. The power of the biggest computers, needed for battle management, has tripled every three years since 1959. ...At Sandia National Laboratory, managed by Bell Laboratories for the U.S. Government, they are probably as knowledgeable as any centre in the world of the damage beams can do."

> Fishlock, David.(1983,Sept.19).Thunderbolt of the future;Reagan's 'Star Wars' Mission.Financial Times(London)p.18.

> The[NATO Nonlethal Weapon Technologies for Peace Support Operations,1996 Study. The April 16th study was approved during a semiannual meeting in Brussels of NATO national armaments directors] study lists 10 categories of technology that offer potential for industrial collaboration among NATO countries. These are: containment devices and entanglers; dazzle lasers, including strobe lights and holograms; markers; ...and odors."

> Tigner, Brooks.(1996,Apr.29).NATO Group Pushes, Pentagon Pulls Nonlethal Efforts;Alliance Study Urges Nations To Collaborate on Weapons.Defense News.pg12.

> "This raises the question of the extent to which hypersonic systems have been explored in the "black" world of unacknowledged programs. The SAB's[Scientific Advisory Board, USAF] recommendations appear bold in the extreme in light of "white-world" experience. As far as the unclassified world is concerned, the highest speed attained by any US air-breather is just over Mach 5...A body of black-world experience would make the goal a little more reasonable."

> Sweetman Bill.(1996,June,1).US Air Force Probes Technological Frontiers.International Defense Review.Vol.1.No.6.Pg.1.

> This new "non-lethal' arsenal includes devices that stop engines from afar, capture hostage-takers, push cars off roads, knock down attackers, control crowds and prisoners and incapacitate field troops and small populations. ...In the US, the FBI has ordered Myotron "Widow Makers" -a powerful new type of stun gun that knocks down men, tigers and even elephants for several crucial minutes(time to get away or call for help) without harm. ...Humans on whom it has been tested, say it feels like millions of tiny needles racing through their body. Brain signals are scrambled and all voluntary muscles are incapacitated."...Mr. William Gunby, "They are legal to the public by US federal law and we are re selling them around the world." But what if the US$200 (S$335) Myotron falls into the hands of robbers or rapists? ...the Vortex Cannon was designed to fire a smoke ring-like charge of air spinning faster than the speed of sound.Inside the barrel of air is a shock wave which cannot be stopped by anything built by man. ..America had already begun a highly secret vortex programme called Project Squid in 1940. The US Army and Navy have top-secret vortex projects underway at Camp Pendleton, California but will not discuss them. Now Swedish researchers have miniaturized and refined the Vortex so it can blow cars off a road, engulf, knock down and sicken rioters or deliver gas at the speed of sound.

> Laytner, Ron.(1998,Jan.4). You can hide but you can't run: Radar will top your car. Straits Times(Singapore) Sunday Plus.Pg6. Lexis-Nexis.

> "The advent into the world's arsenals of directed energy weapons may be as revolutionary as was the introduction of the other great weapon developments of the 20th century--the machine-gun and the atomic bomb,"according to the former head of the Defense intelligence Agency(DIA, Leonard Perroots. ...According to U.S. experts, the Soviet Union has the edge over the United States in developing what is known as "directed energy weapons" and "Radiofrequency weapons."

> Debusmann, Bernard.(1990,Mar.28).Beam Weapons Predicted to Revolutionize War, Spur Arms Trade.Reuter Library Report BC cycle. Lexis-Nexis.

> "The Marine Corps, which fought long and hard for the honour of being chosen to expand "non-lethal warfare", believes that the weapons will be of great value, particularly in peace-keeping operations such as those in Bosnia and Somalia where minimum force has to be used to try to avoid alienating the local population."

> Bellamy, Chris.(1996,Mar.30).Weapons that don't Kill? Tell it to the marines.Independent(London).p1.

> "Today there is a new class of radically new and important radio frequency weapons(RFW) which merits your attention as it emerges. ...This is particularly true of the newly emerging threat of radiofrequency weapons. And even more importantly, we must develop countermeasures before such weapons are used against us."

> Prepared Testimony by Lieutenant General Robert L Schweitzer U.S. Army (Retired) Before the Joint Economic Committee.(1997,June17). Federal News Service.Lexis-Nexis.

> "Brain Bombs. According to Dr. John Nuckolls, head of physics at the Livermore laboratory, human suffer confusion and disorientation when subjected to long wavelength radiation of great strength. So too, he said, it is entirely possible that physicists might one day find a way to direct and concentrate the fower from nuclear weapons into this part of the electromagnetic spectrum, producing a bomb that would leave an enemy stunned and unable to wage war.

> Broad, William.(1985, July16). 40 Years Ago, The Bomb: the Questions Came Later. New York Times. Section c pg1.

> "Susan Blackmore states: "Suddenly, prospect of magnetic mind control seem an awful lot worse than the idea of being abducted by imaginary aliens". ...[Scientist, Michael] Persinger was employed by the US national security establishment to develop behaviour-modifying electromagnetic weapons under project "Sleeping Beauty". He came to the attention of the defense industry after he published a paper entitled "Possible cardiac driving by an external rotating magnetic filed" in 1973. Captain Paul Tyler, the Director of the US Armed Forces Radiobiology Research Institute, wrote in 1986 of a technique employed by national security establishment to disrupt "the electrical signal in cardiac muscle", to produce "complete asystole with a resultant fatal outcome".

> Krawczyk, Glenn.(1994,Dec.17).Mind Control. New Scientist. p.50.

> "There are indications that (electro-magnetic weapons) may have adverse affects on the brain," she[Doswald-Beck] said. ...Louise Doswald-Beck, deputy head of the legal division of the Geneva-based ICRC, said the international community had scored a major breakthrough last year when it banned blinding laser weapons before they came on the market. ...that new directed-energy weapons threatened the status quo. ...all new weapons should be scrutinized to see if they contravened the humanitarian principles of causing unnecessary suffering or being indiscriminate in nature, she said. ...humanitarian law exerted only moral pressure on weapons-makers and governments by stigmatizing new and inhumane tools of war."

> Della-Giacoma, Jim.(1996,May30). Microwave and acoustic weapons pose new threats. Reuters World Service.

> Contents