IPCC should include weather warfare as part of the global climate change debate

Two of the defence contractors dominating the directed energy weapons (“DEWs”) market – Raytheon and BAE – are also involved with environmental modification techniques.  One such environmental modification project was HAARP in Alaska and both defence contractors were partners in it.

“Beware the US military’s experiments with climatic warfare,” Professor Michel Chossudovsky warns.

According to a March 2023 report by Report Linker, DEWs constitute a buoyant $5.3 billion business in 2022 and are slated to grow to $12.9 billion by 2027.

A DEW is a ranged weapon that damages its target with highly focused energy, including laser, microwaves, and particle beams. A key driver propelling the growth of the global DEW market, a summary of the report said, is the defence of chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear materials.

DEW equipment like lasers, radiation detectors, and biosensors are being used to defend against chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear (“CBRN”) emergencies.

Directed Energy Weapons Market by Technology, Platform, Application, Product, Range and Region – Global Forecast to 2027, Report Linker, March 2023

This profit-driven military-industrial market is dominated by six “defence contractors” including Raytheon Technologies Corporation (US), Northrup Grunman Corporation (US), Lockheed Martin Corporation (US), Thales Group (France) and BAE Systems (UK).

In 2021, the UK Ministry of Defence (“MoD”) awarded three contracts worth around £72.5 million to UK industry to produce advanced laser and radio frequency demonstrators as part of the Novel Weapons Programme (“NWP”), known collectively as DEWs. The development of these weapon systems for the MoD is being led by Thales and Raytheon UK.

Raytheon and BAE Systems are not only two of the companies dominating the DEW market, these two companies are also involved with environmental modification (“ENMOD”) technologies on behalf of the US Air Force.

ENMOD techniques were prohibited by the United Nations in the ENMOD Convention which was approved in 1976 in response to international concern over the use of military tactics that could manipulate and damage the environment:

Each State Party to this Convention undertakes not to engage in military or any other hostile use of environmental modification techniques having widespread, long-lasting or severe effects as the means of destruction, damage or injury to any other State Party.

The term “environmental modification techniques” refers 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.

Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques (“ENMOD Convention”), United Nations, Geneva: 18 May 1977

Professor Michel Chossudovsky, author and founder of the Centre for Research on Globalisation, began his research on ENMOD in 2001 focusing on the HAARP system of antennas, in Gokona, Alaska. “The HAARP facility was fully operational starting in the mid-1990s with advanced capabilities. While HAARP was closed down in 2014, ENMOD techniques have in the course of the last ten years become increasingly sophisticated as well as precise. Much of the documentation has become classified,” he wrote at the end of last month.

In 2004, he published an article titled ‘The Ultimate Weapon of Mass Destruction: “Owning the Weather” for Military Use’ in which he discussed that weather modification is rarely included in the debate on climate change. “Both the US and Russia have developed capabilities to manipulate the climate for military use,” he said.

In 2007, he published an article in The Ecologist titled ‘Weather Warfare’ which he republished on his Substack page a few days ago as it is of “relevance to the assessment of recent climatic disasters.”  We have reproduced his 2007 article below.

Further Resources:

Weather Warfare: “Beware the US Military’s Experiments with Climatic Warfare”

By Prof. Michel Chossudovsky, 7 December 2007

Rarely acknowledged in the debate on global climate change, the world’s weather can now be modified as part of a new generation of sophisticated electromagnetic weapons. Both the US and Russia have developed capabilities to manipulate the climate for military use.

Environmental modification techniques have been applied by the US military for more than half a century. US mathematician John von Neumann, in liaison with the US Department of Defence, started his research on weather modification in the late 1940s at the height of the Cold War and foresaw “forms of climatic warfare as yet unimagined.” During the Vietnam War, cloud-seeding techniques were used, starting in 1967 under Project Popeye, the objective of which was to prolong the monsoon season and block enemy supply routes along the Ho Chi Minh Trail.

The US military has developed advanced capabilities that enable it selectively to alter weather patterns. The technology, which is being perfected under the High-frequency Active Auroral Research Program (“HAARP”), is an appendage of the Strategic Defence Initiative – “Star Wars.” [HAARP facility was closed down in 2014. Since then, more advanced facilities have been developed]. From a military standpoint, HAARP is a weapon of mass destruction, operating from the outer atmosphere and capable of destabilising agricultural and ecological systems around the world.

Weather modification, according to the US Air Force document AF 2025 Final Report “offers the war fighter a wide range of possible options to defeat or coerce an adversary,” capabilities, it says, extend to the triggering of floods, hurricanes, droughts and earthquakes:

“Weather modification will become a part of domestic and international security and could be done unilaterally… It could have offensive and defensive applications and even be used for deterrence purposes. The ability to generate precipitation, fog and storms on earth or to modify space weather… and the production of artificial weather all are part of an integrated set of [military] technologies.” – Weather as a Force Multiplier: Owning the Weather in 2025

In 1977, an international Convention was ratified by the UN General Assembly which banned “military or other hostile use of environmental modification techniques having widespread, long-lasting or severe effects.” It defined environmental modification techniques as “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.”

While the substance of the 1977 Convention was reasserted in the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (“UNFCCC”) signed at the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio, debate on weather modification for military use has become a scientific taboo.

Military analysts are mute on the subject. Meteorologists are not investigating the matter and environmentalists are focused on greenhouse gas emissions under the Kyoto Protocol. Neither is the possibility of climatic or environmental manipulations as part of a military and intelligence agenda, while tacitly acknowledged, part of the broader debate on climate change under UN auspices.

The HAARP Programme

Established in 1992, HAARP, based in Gokona, Alaska, is an array of high-powered antennas that transmit, through high-frequency radio waves, massive amounts of energy into the ionosphere (the upper layer of the atmosphere). Their construction was funded by the US Air Force, the US Navy and the Defence Advanced Research Projects Agency (“DARPA”). Operated jointly by the Air Force Research Laboratory and the Office of Naval Research, HAARP constitutes a system of powerful antennas capable of creating “controlled local modifications of the ionosphere.” According to its official website, www.haarp.alaska.edu , HAARP will be used “to induce a small, localised change in ionospheric temperature so physical reactions can be studied by other instruments located either at or close to the HAARP site.”

But Rosalie Bertell, president of the International Institute of Concern for Public Health, says HAARP operates as:

“A gigantic heater that can cause major disruptions in the ionosphere, creating not just holes, but long incisions in the protective layer that keeps deadly radiation from bombarding the planet.”

Physicist Dr Bernard Eastlund called it “the largest ionospheric heater ever built.”

HAARP is presented by the US Air Force as a research programme, but military documents confirm its main objective is to “induce ionospheric modifications” with a view to altering weather patterns and disrupting communications and radar.

According to a report by the Russian State Duma:

“The US plans to carry out large-scale experiments under the HAARP programme [and] create weapons capable of breaking radio communication lines and equipment installed on spaceships and rockets, provoke serious accidents in electricity networks and in oil and gas pipelines, and have a negative impact on the mental health of entire regions.”

An analysis of statements emanating from the US Air Force points to the unthinkable:

“The covert manipulation of weather patterns, communications and electric power systems as a weapon of global warfare, enabling the US to disrupt and dominate entire regions.”

Weather manipulation is the pre-emptive weapon par excellence. It can be directed against enemy countries or “friendly nations” without their knowledge, used to destabilise economies, ecosystems and agriculture. It can also trigger havoc in financial and commodity markets. The disruption in agriculture creates a greater dependency on food aid and imported grain staples from the US and other Western countries.

HAARP was developed as part of an Anglo-American partnership between Raytheon Corporation, which owns the HAARP patents, the US Air Force and British Aerospace Systems (BAES).

The HAARP project is one among several collaborative ventures in advanced weapons systems between the two defence giants. The HAARP project was initiated in 1992 by Advanced Power Technologies, Inc. (APTI), a subsidiary of Atlantic Richfield Corporation (ARCO). APTI (including the HAARP patents) was sold by ARCO to E-Systems Inc, in 1994. E-Systems, on contract to the CIA and US Department of Defence, outfitted the “Doomsday Plan,” which “allows the President to manage a nuclear war.” Subsequently acquired by Raytheon Corporation, it is among the largest intelligence contractors in the World. BAES was involved in the development of the advanced stage of the HAARP antenna array under a 2004 contract with the Office of Naval Research.

The installation of 132 high-frequency transmitters was entrusted by BAES to its US subsidiary, BAE Systems Inc. The project, according to a July report [2007] in Defence News, was undertaken by BAES’s Electronic Warfare division. In September [2007] it received DARPA’s top award for technical achievement for the design, construction and activation of the HAARP array of antennas.

The HAARP system is fully operational and in many regards dwarfs existing conventional and strategic weapons systems. While there is no firm evidence of its use for military purposes, Air Force documents suggest HAARP is an integral part of the militarisation of space. One would expect the antennas already to have been subjected to routine testing.

Under the UNFCCC, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (“IPCC”) has a mandate “to assess scientific, technical and socioeconomic information relevant for the understanding of climate change.” This mandate includes environmental warfare. “Geo-engineering” is acknowledged, but the underlying military applications are neither the object of policy analysis nor scientific research in the thousands of pages of IPCC reports and supporting documents, based on the expertise and input of some 2,500 scientists, policymakers and environmentalists. “Climatic warfare” potentially threatens the future of humanity, but has casually been excluded from the reports for which the IPCC received the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize.

by Rhoda Wilson