Most viewed
UFO , Mary and Jezus363 views
Kali Durga - Devi - Ishtar - Inanna form Sumer to the Indus Valley, Northern India in 2900 BC363 viewshttp://www.dollsofindia.com/durga.htm

Origins of Durga as a Deity

Traces of origin of Durga as a deity have been found in wild regions such as the Vindhya Mountains and with old tribes such as the Sabaras and Pulindas. Probably these roots associate her with the non-Aryan habits of drinking alcohol and non-vegeterianism. Durga is first mentioned in the Mahabharata as a virgin delighting in wine, flesh, and animal sacrifice. Durga's association with agriculture, especially in her major festival, the Durga Puja, may arise from her early origins. She is thought to be the power inherent in the growth of crops and in all vegetation.he origin of goddess Durga can be, very strangely, traced back to the Mesopotamian culture. The depictions and form of goddess Ishtar, worshipped in Mesopotamia, hold a striking resemblance to those of goddess Durga in Hindu religious texts. Mesopotamia of ancient times is an area, which is mostly covered by present day Iraq. The goddess Ishtar was worshipped by the Sumerians, Assyrians, Babylonians, and even Romans and Egyptians, since about 2000 B.C. and probably even before that, since an epic called the descent of Ishtar was already traced to an old tale of that time. Ishtar is described as an independent goddess who roamed the forests and deserts at will and was a constant seeker of battle. She was depicted as riding a lion and had multiple arms holding many weapons. She was thought to have had many lovers from all sorts of backgrounds and probably this was seen as a probable cause of her immense popularity with the common man of those days since he preferred her raw energy to pretensions and pomposity often associated with most other gods. This feeling of her transcending class division was emphasized by the wide-ranging profile of lovers from all social classes.Possibly through trade routes and ancient cross-cultural contacts, goddess Ishtar found her way into ancient Hinduism. However, the nature of promiscuity of Ishtar did not probably find favor with the ancient Hindus and hence those characteristics of hers, which alluded to promiscuity, were discarded and thus goddess Durga took form in ancient Hindu religion. Other forms of Durga have been found in other regions, cultures and religions too - with evidence of similar deities in Japanese-Buddhist art forms.

Widespread worship of goddess Durga is found in texts of the 4th and 7th centuries A.D., with the resurgence of goddess worship during those times. She is the only female deity after whom an entire Upanisad is named. At the close of the Vedic era there were apparently several goddesses acknowledged as wives of Shiva while other goddesses were worshiped by different castes throughout India. These diverse deities eventually coalesced into the one great goddess, Mahadevi, whose ultimate origin may have been the Mother Goddess of the Indus valley civilization. In the ancient Indus Valley civilization it is obvious that the worship of female deities had a very prominent place in society. The many seals and figurines found provide evidence for the apparently highly important place of female deities in the religion of the time. There is evidence of a Mother or Earth goddess cult being in existence in the period.
Ancient Technology from Nibiru Rediscovered: NASA's Newest Spacecraft Ares and Orion - called Din.gir in Sumer, Alalu first and Enki later landing in Persian Gulf some 450.000 years ago (See: The 12th Planet, Z. Sitchin)362 viewsImage Credit: Lockheed Martin Corp, who was awarded the contract to build Orion on Aug. 31, 2006.


The larger size will allow Orion to accommodate four crew members on missions to the moon, and six on missions to the International Space Station or Mars
image: discs362 views
Belgie - 30/31 March 1990; Radar; 990 K=1830 km/u362 viewsTR-3B Astra, sometimes becoming invisible to the radar or naked eye..

Read the article once published in UFO-Magazine: www.abovetopsecret.com/pages/abt.html

Dennis Kucinich spotted a Triangular shaped UFO: www.youtube.com/watch?v=G980aLrAwoM (2:07)
1988, Puerto Rico , Jet & UFO362 views
Rolwolken Noordzee 3 juni 2005 Ijmuiden Nederland. Foto credit Ufodewaarheid.com362 views
Airbus A380, prototype F-WWOW at monday 19th March-2007 in LA photographed by Brian Lockett362 viewsGoleta Air & Space Museum, see: www.air-and-space.com
Seeds of Deception361 viewswww.seedsofdeception.com/Public/Home/index.cfm
Tesla at age 64361 viewsQuotes from Dr. Nikola Tesla...

On Invention: It is the most important product of man's creative brain. The ultimate purpose is the complete mastery of mind over the material world, the harnessing of human nature to human needs.

Of all the frictional resistance, the one that most retards human movement is ignorance, what Buddha called "the greatest evil in the world." The friction which results from ignorance can be reduced only by the spread of knowledge and the unification of the heterogeneous elements of humanity. No effort could be better spent.

Universal peace as a result of cumulative effort through centuries past might come into existence quickly -- not unlike a crystal that suddenly forms in a solution which has been slowly prepared.

George Westinghouse was a man with tremendous potential energy of which only part had taken kinetic form. Like a lion in the forest, he breathed deep and with delight the smoky air of his Pittsburgh factories. Always affable and polite, he stood in marked contrast to the small-minded financiers I had been trying to negotiate with before I met him. Yet, no fiercer adversary could have been found when aroused. Westinghouse welcomed the struggle and never lost confidence. When others would give up in despair, he triumphed.

The last 29 days of the month [are] the hardest.

No matter what we attempt to do, no matter to what fields we turn our efforts, we are dependent on power. We have to evolve means of obtaining energy from stores which are forever inexhaustible, to perfect methods which do not imply consumption and waste of any material whatever. If we use fuel to get our power, we are living on our capital and exhausting it rapidly. This method is barbarous and wantonly wasteful and will have to be stopped in the interest of coming generations.

The scientific man does not aim at an immediate result. He does not expect that his advanced ideas will be readily taken up. His work is like that of a planter -- for the future. His duty is to lay foundation of those who are to come and point the way.

Even matter called inorganic, believed to be dead, responds to irritants and gives unmistakable evidence of a living principle within. Everything that exists, organic or inorganic, animated or inert, is susceptible to stimulus from the outside.

Science is but a perversion of itself unless it has as its ultimate goal the betterment of humanity.

We are confronted with portentous problems which can not be solved just by providing for our material existence, however abundantly. On the contrary, progress in this direction is fraught with hazards and perils not less menacing than those born from want and suffering. If we were to release the energy of the atoms or discover some other way of developing cheap and unlimited power at any point of the globe this accomplishment, instead of being a blessing, might bring disaster to mankind... The greatest good will come from the technical improvements tending to unification and harmony, and my wireless transmitter is preeminently such. By its means the human voice and likeness will be reproduced everywhere and factories driven thousands of miles from waterfalls furnishing the power; aerial machines will be propelled around the earth without a stop and the sun's energy controlled to create lakes and rivers for motive purposes and transformation of arid deserts into fertile land... (Nikola Tesla, "My Inventions: the autobiography of Nikola Tesla", Hart Bros., 1982. Originally appeared in the Electrical experimenter magazine in 1919.)

War cannot be avoided until the physical cause for its recurrence is removed and this, in the last analysis, is the vast extent of the planet on which we live. Only through annihilation of distance in every respect, as the conveyance of intelligence, transport of passengers and supplies and transmission of energy will conditions be brought about some day, insuring permanency of friendly relations. What we now want is closer contact and better understanding between individuals and communities all over the earth, and the elimination of egoism and pride which is always prone to plunge the world into primeval barbarism and strife... Peace can only come as a natural consequence of universal enlightenment... (Nikola Tesla, "My Inventions: the autobiography of Nikola Tesla", Hart Bros., 1982. Originally appeared in the Electrical experimenter magazine in 1919.)

In our dynamo machines, it is well known, we generate alternate currents which we direct by means of a commutator, a complicated device and, it may be justly said, the source of most of the troubles experienced in the operation of the machines. Now, the currents, so directed cannot be utilized in the motor, but must - again by means of a similar unreliable device - be reconverted into their original state of alternate currents. The function of the commutator is entirely external, and in no way does it affect the internal workings of the machines. In reality, therefore, all machines are alternate current machines, the currents appearing as continuous only in the external circuit during the transfer from generator to motor. In view simply of this fact, alternate currents would commend themselves as a more direct application of electrical energy, and the employment of continuous currents would only be justified if we had dynamos which would primarily generate, and motors which would be directly actuated by, such currents. (Adopted from T.C. Martin, "The Inventions, Researches and Writings of Nikola Tesla," New Work: Electrical Engineer, 1894, pp. 9-11.)

On George Westinghouse: George Westinghouse was, in my opinion, the only man on this globe who could take my alternating-current system under the circumstances then existing and win the battle against prejudice and money power. He was a pioneer of imposing stature, one of the world's true nobleman of whom America may well be proud and to whom humanity owes an immense debt of gratitude. (Speech, Institute of Immigrant Welfare, Hotel Baltimore, New York, May 12, 1938, read in absentia.)

On Edison: If Edison had a needle to find in a haystack, he would proceed at once with the diligence of the bee to examine straw after straw until he found the object of his search. ...

I was a sorry witness of such doings, knowing that a little theory and calculation would have saved him ninety per cent of his labor. (New York Times, October 19, 1931.)

On Voltaire: I had a veritable mania for finishing whatever I began, which often got me into difficulties. On one occasion I started to read the works of Voltaire when I learned, to my dismay, that there were close on one hundred large volumes in small print which that monster had written while drinking seventy-two cups of black coffee per diem. It had to be done, but when I laid aside the last book I was very glad, and said, "Never more! (Nikola Tesla, "My Inventions: the autobiography of Nikola Tesla", Hart Bros., 1982. Originally appeared in the Electrical experimenter magazine in 1919.)

On Mark Twain: I had hardly completed my course at the Real Gymnasium when I was prostrated with a dangerous illness or rather, a score of them, and my condition became so desperate that I was given up by physicians. During this period I was permitted to read constantly, obtaining books from the Public Library which had been neglected and entrusted to me for classification of the works and preparation of the catalogues. One day I was handed a few volumes of new literature unlike anything I had ever read before and so captivating as to make me utterly forget my hopeless state. They were the earlier works of Mark Twain and to them might have been due the miraculous recovery which followed. Twenty-five years later, when I met Mr. Clemens and we formed a friendship between us, I told him of the experience and was amazed to see that great man of laughter burst into tears. (Nikola Tesla, "My Inventions: the autobiography of Nikola Tesla", Hart Bros., 1982. Originally appeared in the Electrical experimenter magazine in 1919.)

UFO Japan361 views
B2 spirit stealth refuel361 views
F-117 Nighthawk360 views
Groote Keeten, Noord Holland, 26-07-2002360 viewsvoor meer info zie: www.dcca.nl/2002/grootekeeten/gk1-nl.htm
Rapport van Robert Boerman
Op zondag 21 juli kregen wij een melding van een graancirkel in tarwe nabij Groote Keeten. De eigenaar van het veld gaf de melding door aan de Stichting PTAH en was zelf ook wel geinteresseerd in het graancirkelfenomeen.

Ook vonden we heel veel graanstengels waarvan de aren niet volgroeit waren. Deze aren rustten op de bovenste groeiknoop (= verdikking in de stengel) terwijl bij een normaal ontwikkelde stengel de aar zich ongeveer 25 a 30 centimeter bonden de bovenste groeiknoop bevind. Deze afwijking is voor het eerst waargenomen in een graancirkel in Whitefish, Montana, USA in 1999. In 2000 zijn door de Amerikaanse journalist Linda Moulton Howe ook dergelijke afwijkingen gevonden in een formatie in Avebury, Whiltshire, Engeland. Buiten deze afwijkingen zijn er ook een aantal 'blown nodes' (= geexplodeerde groeiknopen) gevonden.UPDATE 02-08-2002:

Van Paul Anderson ontvingen we het bericht dat dergelijke afwijkingen zoals we die in Groote Keeten hebben gevonden, ook al eens in Canada gevonden waren. Dat was in Moosomin, Saskatchewan 2000.
Red Ufo360 views
Taipei - China , 2004 360 views
UFO watching; a Hanebu or Vimana (India, Egypt)- 1330 AD360 viewsUFOs secretly controlling and guiding humanity througout the 4.5 hundred millennium on this Planet Earth.
Image: Chemtrails and Antigravity Vimanas also in the Mahabharatha, Ramanaya, Vimanika Shastra, Samara Sutradhara etc. - in Ancient India..360 viewsAir travel in Ancient India: www.hinduwebsite.com/sacredscripts/hinduism/vimana/ancientvimanas.asp
Egyptian winged Scarabee, in Sumerie: Nibiru, the 12th Planet - August 21, 2005 - Wiltshire, UK359 viewsNi.bi.ru. - winged planet, sign Alpha and the horned bull.
Arunachala UFO359 views*from the later added YouTube footage of june 18, 2007.

...an enormous (rotating) STAR(ship) was passing to the North-East of the Peak of Arunachala seen as far as Madras by many..
Even on this footage you can see it's not a meteor seen as far as now Bombay? this time...

Goto (4:12) and see yourSelf: www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTMGl6WTvMU (5:51)
Jim Humble359 viewswww.miraclemineral.org

This Breakthrough can save your life, or the life of a loved one. The answer to AIDS, hepatitis A,B and C, malaria, herpes, TB, most cancer and many more of mankind's worse diseases has been found. Many diseases are now easily controlled. More than 75,000 disease victims have been included in the field tests in Africa. Scientific clinical trials have been conducted in a prison in the country of Malawi, East Africa.
In mid 1996, deep within the mining jungles of South America, a United States scientist named Jim Humble made an almost accidental discovery... a discovery that would change the course of human health history forever. Out of one small mining team's struggle for survival, came a simple, yet all-prevailing cure for nearly every pathogen-borne disease known to mankind.

It started with malaria. Caused by a protozoan parasite, this disease kills over one million people every year. After more than 75,000 documented successful treatments of this disease, many of which took effect in less than four hours, it was discovered to have similar effects on diseases caused by viruses, bacteria, fungi and proteins; diseases like: AIDS, Hepatitis A, B & C, Typhoid, BSE (mad-cow disease), Cancers, Herpes, Pneumonia, Tuberculosis, Arthritis, Asthma, Colds and Flus... including H5N1 ("Bird Flu").

In the summer of 2007, this man heroically stepped out of the shadows to make this information freely available to all humanity. He believes the long-term availability of this substance may soon be heavily controlled by "the powers that be". The ingredient(s) are few... the chemistry, simple... the science, sound... the materials (right now)... abundant.

Chances are, however, you've never heard of this substance from your doctor. Few medical doctors are practicing chemists. Sadly, you won't find it at your local pharmacy anytime soon. Nature can't be patented. Pharmaceutical companies profit from "treatments" not cures. Ironically, however, this substance has already been approved for varied uses by the FDA. Used in many industries for the eradication of pathogens outside the body, its safety for human consumption has hardly been disclosed to the public. Taken as suggested, it serves to destroy all known pathogens within the body... on contact, leaving behind only a negligible trace of sodium.

What is this mystery panacea?

A simple and stabilized dioxide ion which, once in the human body, becomes the most powerful killer of disease that has ever been known. It can be bought and easily prepared in your own kitchen. A single bottle can last an entire family a year. Taken orally, it can save your life, or the life of someone you love. There are a hundred reasons why everyone should have at least one bottle, if not more, on-hand.

Learn more about Jim Humble's story and his amazing gift to humanity, called "Miracle Mineral Supplement" at miraclemineral.org.

In service,
Friends for Health Freedom

Two Fishes, zodiacal Sign of Pisces, Mosaic Found November 2005 at Mount Megiddo359 viewsSee: Postscript at page 307, The End of Days, Armageddon and Prophecies of the Return by Zecharia Sitchin.
sky UFOs359 views
Histamenon nomisma - Micael 1776358 viewsARE THE ILLUMINATI GETTING GEARED UP TO GREET THE NEW MESSIAH? http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/fakesecondcoming/fakesecondcoming14.htm

The Bilderberger Group make the rules to run the planet amongst themselves. Various sources say it is 13 main families and include 75 families with lesser influence. They are generally Freemason or Knights of Malta, including middle eastern leaders. As the main power brokers of the world are from King David (of the tribe of Judah and in league with powerful Jews e.g. Lord Rothschild) the coming of the 'awaited' Messiah would be of great interest, especially if they are have not accepted Jesus as Messiah.

Freemasons at the 33rd degree are told Lucifer is superior to Jesus, according to former Initiates of this degree. There is evidence that the Freemasons and various pagan societies are using the Kaballa to release the 'right' energies to hasten the return of the expected "Messiah," determining scientifically the right vibrational frequencies and magnetic field levels around the planet to create the perfect conditions for him to arrive, having been told by the Council of Nine what transmitters are necessary to put around the planet, and what gridlines must be activated where, to ensure the timelines match that which supposedly puts our 'reality' to the frequency of this entity.

However this interpretation of the promised Messiah has been distorted by Theosophy. What these leaders of the secret societies are promoting in their Illuminati controlled Committee of 300 newage outlets is that the name "Christ" is an office and just a title of a World Teacher for the Age.

The "Messiah/Christ" expected by these secret societies and eastern religions (entwined with Freemasonry and UN) will herald in the Aquarian Age and the 6th Aryan race - the next Root Race that supposedly has the stature of supermen and psychic powers.

Much of the expectation is to start a golden age where only the 'chosen race' remains in a regenerated world, with inferior races eliminated is disseminated by the groups following Alice Bailey, originally of the Theosophical Society.


The Nazis were followers of Theosophical Society teachings, especially where it says that the Aryan race came from Agartha, and were previously pioneers from Atlantis. The Council of Nine ET information is channeled and promoted by the followers of Alice Bailey and also Benjamin Creme, who promotes the entity, (supposedly from Sirius according to one source), as holding the "Office of Christ" for the Aquarian Age.

Dr. Richard Boylan was told by one of the highest levels of informants in the US National Security Network called "Z" that the Bilderberg Council, comprised of European royalty, Heads of Govts., and multinational corporations are interacting with the Council of Nine, a groups of ET representatives from a council of co-ordination for many extraterrestrial super civilizations in contact with earth.

Again Dr. James Hurtak, who once worked for Dr. Andrija Puharich, speaks of the Council of Nine in his book The Keys of Enoch and the plans they have made for the technological future of the human race, after the 'fallen' races have been killed off.

What remains are the Christic people/Adamic Seed or Chosen Ones of the 12 Tribes of Israel.

Creation of homo sapiens, 300.000 years ago (12th Planet - Z. Sitchin)358 viewsAre these aviation technologies in these albums this old, what seems to be the case, according the Sumerian claytablets thousands of years old - yep hard to understand..
Is this technology invented, re-invented, re-discovered or re-given? by astronauts from another planet, called Nibiru, whether humanity is aware of it or not, but very well known in the past as the Gir, Mu (Sumer), Ben Ben (Egypt), Vimana's (India), Vrils and Hanebu's in the 20th century..
Deepspace4.com - website of IZAKOVIC358 viewswww.deepspace4.com

Nicola Tesla (1856-1943)357 viewswww.tesla-museum.org

"The practical success of an idea, irrespective of its inherent merit, is dependent on the attitude of the contemporaries. If timely it is quickly adopted; if not, it is apt to fare like a sprout lured out of the ground by warm sunshine, only to be injured and retarded in its growth by the succeeding frost."
Nikola Tesla

In his later years Tesla became a vegetarian. In an article for Century Illustrated Magazine he wrote: "It is certainly preferable to raise vegetables, and I think, therefore, that vegetarianism is a commendable departure from the established barbarous habit." Tesla argued that it is wrong to eat uneconomic meat when large numbers of people are starving; he also believed that plant food was "superior to it [meat] in regard to both mechanical and mental performance." He also argued that animal slaughter was "wanton and cruel".[
NASA Confirms Weather-Shaping Chemtrails 357 viewswww.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg93668.html

NASA: S-L-O-W To Spit Out The Truth
by Lisa Guliani

In the June 17, 2002 issue of the American Free Press newspaper, a bold headline caught my attention: "NASA Confirms Weather-Shaping Chemtrails". What?? Could it be? Do I dare believe my eyes? NASA is confirming that chemtrails are real? Naturally, I had to read this article written by Mike Blair.

Austria, Steire - 1971357 views
Alton Barnes 2005357 viewsOliver Shanti & Friends, Sacral Nirvana + Wheat Circlex: www.nl.youtube.com/watch?v=5JXrmUD0EK0&NR=1 (5:07)
27 October 1996, Hungary [HUFON]357 views
MccMinnville, Oregon - 26 June blad LIFE.jpg
Mc Minnville - Oregon357 views
Zeus356 views..and the Helpers of the Anunnakies: www.youtube.com/watch?v=SBwnfNcvluk&feature=related
Merry Christmas and a Happy 2009! Marc van Druten356 views
White Horse of Uffington355 viewsLanding Mark for Anunna-spaceships, those from Nibiru, Mars=Lahmu, and Earth=Gaya.
More info: www.sitchin.com
Triangle 28 juli 2006 Chicago355 views
Belgie UFO Triangle 1989-1990; the Blackbird, Aurora and TR-3B program (SR 71-75) activated ..355 viewsTR-3B EM-Antigravity using Zero Point Energy (ZPE) spaceships, Belgium UFO-Wave 1991..
belle vue Washington 2000355 views
Rukma-Vimana355 viewsFor more information: www.hinduwisdom.info/Vimanas.htm#Chariots%20of%20The%20Gods

The Indian Emperor Ashoka started a "Secret Society of the Nine Unknown Men": great Indian scientists who were supposed to catalogue the many sciences. Ashoka kept their work secret because he was afraid that the advanced science catalogued by these men, culled from ancient Indian sources, would be used for the evil purpose of war, which Ashoka was strongly against, having beenconverted to Buddhism after defeating a rival army in a bloody battle. The"Nine Unknown Men" wrote a total of nine books, presumably one each. Book number was "The Secrets of Gravitation!" This book, known to historians, but not actually seen by them dealt chiefly with "gravity control." It is presumably still around somewhere, kept in a secret library in India, Tibet or else where (perhaps even in North America somewhere). One can certainly understand Ashoka's reasoning for wanting to keep such knowledge a secret, assuming it exists. Ashoka was also aware of devastating wars using such advanced vehicles and other "futuristic weapons" that had destroyed the ancient Indian "Rama Empire" several thousand years before.

Only a few years ago, the Chinese discovered some Sanskrit documents in Lhasa, Tibet and sent them to the University of Chandrigarh to be translated. Dr. Ruth Reyna of the University said recently that the documents contain directions for building interstellar spaceships! Their method of propulsion, she said, was "anti- gravitational" and was based upon a system analogous to that of "laghima," the unknown power of the ego existing in man's physiological makeup, "a centrifugal force strong enough tocounteract all gravitational pull." According to Hindu Yogis, it is this "laghima" which enables a person to levitate. Dr. Reyna said that on board these machines, which were called "Astras" by the text, the ancient Indians could have sent a detachment of men onto any planet,according to the document, which is thought to be thousands of years old. Themanuscripts were also said to reveal the secret of "antima"; "the cap ofinvisibility" and "garima"; "how to become as heavy as a mountain of lead."Naturally, Indian scientists did not take the texts very seriously, but thenbecame more positive about the value of them when the Chinese announced that they were including certain parts of the data for study in their spaceprogram! This was one of the first instances of a government admitting to be researching anti-gravity. The manuscripts did not say definitely that interplanetary travel was evermade but did mention, of all things, a planned trip to the Moon, though it is not clear whether this trip was actually carried out.

However, one of the great Indian epics,the Ramayana, does have a highly detailed story in it of atrip to the moon in a Vihmana (or "Astra"), and in fact details a battle on themoon with an "Asvin" (or Atlantean") airship. This is but a small bit ofrecent evidence of anti-gravity and aerospace technology used by Indians. To really understand the technology, we must go much further back in time. The so-called "Rama Empire" of Northern India and Pakistan developed at leastfifteen thousand years ago on the Indian subcontinent and was a nation of manylarge, sophisticated cities, many of which are still to be found in the deserts of Pakistan, northern, and western India. Rama existed, apparently, parallel to the Atlantean civilization in the mid- Atlantic Ocean, and wasruled by "enlightened Priest-Kings" who governed the cities.

Save the Internet!355 views"Independence Day", Global Net Neutrality:

Mark Twain in Tesla's lab355 viewsQuote of Nicola Tesla of Mark Twain:
On Mark Twain: I had hardly completed my course at the Real Gymnasium when I was prostrated with a dangerous illness or rather, a score of them, and my condition became so desperate that I was given up by physicians. During this period I was permitted to read constantly, obtaining books from the Public Library which had been neglected and entrusted to me for classification of the works and preparation of the catalogues. One day I was handed a few volumes of new literature unlike anything I had ever read before and so captivating as to make me utterly forget my hopeless state. They were the earlier works of Mark Twain and to them might have been due the miraculous recovery which followed. Twenty-five years later, when I met Mr. Clemens and we formed a friendship between us, I told him of the experience and was amazed to see that great man of laughter burst into tears. (Nikola Tesla, "My Inventions: the autobiography of Nikola Tesla", Hart Bros., 1982. Originally appeared in the Electrical experimenter magazine in 1919.)

USAF B2 spirit 354 views
Interview Edgar Fouche: Area 51, Aurora, TR-3B Astra and UFO Alien Technology354 viewswww.youtube.com/watch?v=W8ee1WzukBk&mode=related&search= (3:54)
An episode of Duck Tales dealing with the negative consequences of inflation. 354 viewshttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_LWQQrpSc4&feature=related
East Field Alton Barnes354 views
Life Magazine - Tulsa, Oklahoma353 views
Antigravity; Aurora - can also travel to the moon...353 viewsUFOs or Top Secret Spy Planes, the Aurora Mystery: www.ufocasebook.com/auroramystery.html

Aurora and Mystery Ships www.fas.org/irp/mystery/aurora.htm

Lockheed Martin X33A Venture353 views
353 views2012 Return of the Nephilim: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qo3JhD87Vto&NR=1

Chemtrails Baarn - the Netherlands, June 2009: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n5BQHe2ak4o
Nibiru depicted by Astronomer Robert Harrington353 viewsMaybe Pluto does belong..www.youtube.com/watch?v=l4saKMx6Q6Q (7min25sec)
March 4, 2005 - Westwego LA, Flying Triangle - tr-3b353 viewsMUFON-LA_TR-3B Antigravity Physics Explained, by John Kooiman: www.mufonla.com/tr3b.htm

Mr. Fouche describes the TR-3B's propulsion system as follows:
"A circular, plasma filled accelerator ring called the Magnetic Field
Disrupter, surrounds the rotatable crew compartment and is far ahead
of any imaginable technology... The plasma, mercury based, is
pressurized at 250,000 atmospheres at a temperature of 150 degrees
Kelvin, and accelerated to 50,000 rpm to create a super-conductive
plasma with the resulting gravity disruption.

The MFD generates a magnetic vortex field, which disrupts or
neutralizes the effects of gravity on mass within proximity, by 89
Brave New World is a 1932 novel by Aldous Huxley. 352 viewsSet in the London of AD 2540 (632 A.F. in the book), the novel anticipates developments in reproductive technology and sleep-learning that combine to change society. Huxley answers this book with a reassessment in an essay, Brave New World Revisited (1958), and with his final work, a novel titled Island (1962), both summarized below. Brave New World was inspired by the H. G. Wells' Utopian novel Men Like Gods. Wells' optimistic vision of the future gave Huxley the idea to begin writing a parody of the novelBrave New World is more of a revolt against Utopia than against Victoria. ?
Aldous Huxley talking about "Brave New World" and "1984" (including a message to him). Happiness as a weapon used by dictators instead of repression: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S7_YFKyhQMI&feature=related
For Brave New World, Huxley received nearly universal criticism from contemporary critics, although his work was later embraced. Even the few sympathetics tended to temper their praises with disparaging remarks
Altarpiece of the Annunciation 1430-1432 AD352 views
King Arthur352 views
Cheyenne Indian woman, Indian Natives and the Holy Name Of 'Yah Weh Weh Yah' YHWH352 viewsIndian wisdom: www.youtube.com/watch?v=w9URX3Tbm78&NR=1

Chant To The Sun God 'Weh Yah': http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V_baloCb-nM&feature=related

8. Upon this, an old woman who had approached the group, to better hear Issa, was pushed aside
by one of the disguised men, who placed himself before her.
9. Then said Issa: "It is not good for a son to push away his mother, that he may occupy the place
which belongs to her. Whoso doth not respect his mother--the most sacred being after his God--is
unworthy of the name of son.
10. "Hearken to what I say to you: Respect woman; for in her we see the mother of the universe,
and all the truth of divine creation is to come through her.
12. "She is the fount of everything good and beautiful, as she is also the germ of life and death.
Upon her man depends in all his existence, for she is his moral and natural support in his labors.
12. "In pain and suffering she brings you forth; in the sweat of her brow she watches over your
growth, and until her death you cause her greatest anxieties. Bless her and adore her, for she is
your only friend and support on earth.
13. "Respect her; defend her. In so doing you will gain for yourself her love; you will find favor
before God, and for her sake many sins will be remitted to you.
14. "Love your wives and respect them, for they will be the mothers of to-morrow and later the
grandmothers of a whole nation.
15. "Be submissive to the wife; her love ennobles man, softens his hardened heart, tames the wild
beast in him and changes it to a lamb.
16. "Wife and mother are the priceless treasures which God has given to you. They are the most
beautiful ornaments of the universe, and from them will be born all who will inhabit the world.
The Unknown Life of Jesus Christ Nicolas Notovitch 46

Ningishzidda352 views
THE SUPERNATURAL ZONE352 viewswww.w5www.com/ufo.htm
Z. Sitchin.jpg
Zecharia Sitchin, discoverer of the 10th planet; Nibiru352 viewsTHE OLMEC ENIGMA: ASTRONAUT CORROBORATES SITCHIN

If an astronaut were ever to corroborate an aspect of my writings, I would have expected it to be in regard to planetary matters. Surprisingly, such a corroboration concerns, of all things, the Olmecs of ancient Mexico.

The unexpected corroboration is tucked away in the recently published book A Leap of Faith by the Mercury-7 astronaut Gordon Cooper, in which his story as a test pilot and astronaut is peppered with (to quote from the dust jacket) "his strong views on the existence of extraterrestrial intelligence -- and even the distinct possibility that we have already had contact."

The Olmec Enigma

Readers of my books, and especially of The Lost Realms, as well as of a previous article on this website titled "The Case of the Missing Elephant," know by now that beginning with the discovery of a colossal stone head in 1869, an advanced civilization that preceded the Mayas and Aztecs of Mexico came to light. Its leaders and bearers were unmistakably black Africans. They were arbitrarily named by archaeologists "Olmecs"; and their embarrassing enigma -- of who they were, and how they had come across the ocean, and why, was compounded by the timing of their arrival in the New World.

Once it was conceded (very grudgingly!) that the 'Olmecs' did indeed represent the earliest or even Mother Civilization of Mesoamerica, the date of their arrival was at first set at about 250 B.C.; then at about 500 B.C.; then farther back and back, until 1500 B.C. was acknowledged.

But I have argued for a date twice as old!

A God and His Secret Number

My conclusion that the Olmec presence in the New World went back at least 5,000 years, to circa 3000 B.C., was reached by many paths. The first one was an attempt to identify the great god of Mesoamerica, the Winged Serpent (Quetzalcoatl to the Aztecs, Kukulkan to the Mayas), and the significance of his promise to return to those lands on the first day of a 52-year cycle, (AD 1519, when the Aztec king Montezuma believed that the appearance of the Spanish conquistador Cortez was such a Return, coincided with the anticipated sacred date).

The peoples of Mesoamerica employed in addition to a practical calendar of 365 days, called the Haab, also a Sacred Calendar (called Tzolkin) of 260 days. The two cyclical calendars were conceived as two wheels with meshing teeth that turned and returned to the same spot once in 52 years; and 52 was the Sacred Number of the Winged Serpent god?

Since 52 was also the Secret Number of the god known to the Egyptians as Thoth; since Thoth as Quetzalcoatl, was the god of science and the calendar; and since Thoth was exiled from Egypt circa 3100 B.C., I have suggested that it was he who took a group of his African followers to a new land, bringing the "Olmecs" to Mesoamerica.

Accordingly, I said, Olmec presence goes back to at least 3000 B.C. -- a date twice as old as that conceded by established archaeologists.

The Mysterious "Day One"

By the time I was writing The Lost Realms, the book devoted to the prehistory of the Americas, I was sure that the arrival of the Olmecs with Thoth/Quetzalcoatl could be established with astounding precision. The key to unlocking the enigma was the Olmec Calendar.

In addition to the Haab and the Tzolkin, there was in Mesoamerica a third calendar, used to inscribe dates on monuments. Given the name the Long Count, it was not cyclical as the other two, but linear -- a continuous one, counting the total number of days that had passed since the counting began on a mysterious Day One.

By means of glyphs denoting groups of days
(1, 20, 360, 7,200 or even 144,000) and dots
and bars giving the number for each group-glyph, monuments were dated by saying: A total of so many days from Day One have passed when this Monument was erected.

But what was that Day One, when did it occur, and what was its significance?

It has been established beyond doubt that this Long Count calendar was the original Olmec calendar; and it is now generally agreed that Day One was equivalent to August 13, 3113 B.C.

But what does that date signify? As far as I know, the only plausible answer was provided by me: It was the date of Thoth/Quetzalcoatl's arrival, with his followers in Mesoamerica!

The Unexpected Corroboration

All official publications continue, however, to remain at 1250 B.C. -- 1500 B.C. at most -- as the date of the start of the Olmec presence.

Imagine my pleasant surprise to come across an eye-witness report by the astronaut Gordon Cooper in chapter 11 of his book A Leap of Faith. "During my final years with NASA," he writes, "I became involved in a different kind of adventure: undersea treasure hunting in Mexico." One day, accompanied by a National Geographic photographer, they landed in a small plane on an island in the Gulf of Mexico; local residents pointed out to them pyramid-shaped mounds, where they found ruins, artifacts and bones. On examination back in Texas, the artifacts were determined to be 5,000 years old!

"When we learned of the age of the artifacts," Cooper writes, ?we realized that what we'd found had nothing to do with seventeenth-century Spain... I contacted the Mexican government and was put in touch with the head of the national archaeology department, Pablo Bush Romero."

Together with Mexican archeologists the two went back to the site. After some excavating, Cooper writes,

"The age of the ruins was confirmed: 3000 B.C. Compared with other advanced civilizations, relatively little was known about this one --called the Olmec."

Proceeding to describe some of the amazing discoveries about the Olmecs and their achievements, Gordon Cooper continues thus:

"Engineers, farmers, artisans, and traders, the Olmecs had a remarkable civilization. But it is still not known where they originated... Among the findings that intrigued me most: celestial navigation symbols and formulas that, when translated, turned out to be mathematical formulas used to this day for navigation, and accurate drawings of constellations, some of which would not be officially 'discovered' until the age of modern telescopes."

It was this, rather than his experiences as an astronaut, that triggered Gordon Cooper's "Leap of faith": "This left me wondering: Why have celestial navigation signs if they weren't navigating celestially?? And he asks: If ?someone? had helped the Olmecs with this knowledge, from whom did they get it?

My readers, of course, know the answers.

Has the Cover-up Ended?

The outstanding museum on the Olmec civilization in Jalapa, in the Veracruz province of Mexico, included when it was built a wall panel showing the extent and dates of Mexico's various cultures. On my first visit there, I could hardly believe my eyes: The first (earliest) civilization, that of the Olmecs, was shown as begun circa 3000 B.C.!

I urged the members of my group to take pictures of me pointing to the date: Finally, the date claimed by me has been officially accepted!

On a second visit, however (to which the previous article, The Case of the Missing Elephant relates), not only the telltale elephant-toy disappeared; the Olmec column starting at 3000 B.C. was also gone... And the official Museum Catalogue, reviewing the Olmec civilization, reverted to 1500 B.C.

But now comes the astronaut Gordon Cooper, and innocently and inter-alia tells, as an eye-witness, what he was told by the chief Mexican archaeologist: 3000 B.C.

And thus, when all is said and done, I stand vindicated.

Zecharia Sitchin
November 2000

Reproduction is permitted if accompanied by the statement:

? Z. Sitchin 2001
Reproduced by permission.

Chemtrails Paleis Soestdijk op 24-2-2006 om 18.00u351 viewsOp alle foto's is geen wolkje te zien: Dit zijn allemaal chemische sporen van de vliegtuigen.

Who's Spraying Our Skies? Chemtrails on June 2nd, 2009 over Baarn, the Netherlands, filmed by Marc van Druten- UfoQuest4Truth.com: http://www.ufodewaarheid.com/movie/MOV00347.3GP
Nicola Tesla 351 viewsBut the revolutionizing influence on aircraft of the future Mr. Tesla believes to lie in the possibility of transmitting power to them through the air. "For years," he said, " I have advocated my system of wireless transmission of power which is now perfectly practicable and I am looking confidently to its adoption and further development. In the system I have developed, distance is of absolutely no consequence. That is to say, a Zeppelin vessel would receive the same power whether it was 12,000 miles away or immediately above the power plant. The application of wireless power for aerial propulsion will do away with a great deal of complication and waste, and it is difficult to imagine that a more perfect means will ever be found to transport human beings to great distances economically. The power supply is virtually unlimited, as any number of power plants can be operated together, supplying energy to airships just as trains running on tracks are now supplied with electrical energy through rails or wires."
"The transmission of power by wireless will do away with the present necessity for carrying fuel on the airplane or airship. The motors of the plane or airship will be energized by this transmitted power, and there will be no such thing as a limitation on their radius of action, since they can pick up power at any point on the globe
28-8-2006 16.20u350 viewsWelsbach Seeding Patent For global Warming: www.willthomas.net/Chemtrails/welsbach-seeding.pdf
21dec 1994 Mt Popocatepetl Puebla Mexico - Carloz Diaz350 views
Electricity350 viewswww.b92.net/eng/special/tesla/life.php?nav_id=36437

Research in the filed of wireless transport of signals and energy followed. Tesla publicly presented his idea and intention to direct his research towards that goal in a speech during the opening of the Electric plant at Niagara Falls in 1897. What was the expression on the faces of the people who, just after witnessing the transport of electricity to longer distances, are told about its wireless transport?

Tesla?s research in this field represents a great mystery. Although he spent almost a year in Colorado Springs (1899-1900), and left a detailed journal about his research, a wider use of wireless transport of electricity has not been accomplished to this day. Tesla intended to use the upper layers of Earth in order to transport energy from one side of the world to the other. He described some of his discoveries in the essay ?The Problem of Increasing Human Energy,? which caused great interest in the world of science and business.

Probably intrigued with the essay as well, J. P. (John Pierpont) Morgan (1837-1913), at that time one of the wealthiest people in America, offered financial support to Tesla. Collaboration was achieved on the project ?World Radio System,? which Tesla led in his lab on Long Island. Already after a year, nevertheless, in 1901, Morgan stopped financing Tesla. The reason for breaking off the collaboration was the successful transatlantic sending of a radio message achieved by Guglielmo Marconi (1874-1937). Tesla admitted to Morgan that he could have done something like that long ago, but that wasn?t the goal of his research. Morgan was furious because of this, as he saw it, concealment, and he never collaborated with Tesla again.

Tesla somehow managed to continue the project until 1905 when he completely exhausted the sources of financing, and he was forced to abandon it. Years in which he worked on improving the existing and patenting new inventions in the area of mechanical engineering followed. Those years were pretty difficult for him. The public was reminded of the great genius in 1917 when he was awarded Edison?s medal, the greatest American award in the area of engineering. In 1919, Nikola Tesla published his autobiography through a series of articles in the magazine Electrical Experimenter. To the people who were not close to him, the news about Tesla came through newspaper articles in which they were able to read his often overly sensationalistic statements.

He did dream and his dreams came true, he did have visions but they were of a real future, not an imaginary one.
Marc van Druten - Groote Keeten, Noord Holland, 26-07-2002350 views
350 views1. I can assure you the flying saucers, given that they exist, are not
constructed by any power on earth. President Harry S. Truman - Press
conference, Washington DC, April 4, 1950.

2. Based upon unreliable and unscientific surmises as data, the Air Force
develops elaborate statistical findings which seem impressive to the
uninitiated public unschooled in the fallacies of the statistical method.
One must conclude that the highly publicized Air Force pronouncements
based upon unsound statistics serve merely to misrepreent the true
character of the UFO phenomena. Yale Scientific Magazine (Yale University)
Volume XXXVII, Number 7, April 1963

3. I feel that the Air Force has not been giving out all the available
information on the Unidentified Flying Objects. You cannot disregard so
many unimpeachable sources. John W. McCormack, Speaker of the House of
Representatives of the United States. January 1965

4. I have absolutely no idea where the UFO's come from or how they are
operated, but after ten years of research, I know they are something from
ourside our atmosphere. Dr. James E. McDonald, Professor of Atmospheric
physics, University of Arizona. 1967.

5. I've been convinced for a long time that the flying saucers are real and
interplanetary. In other words we are being watched by beings from outer
space. Albert M. Chop, deputy public relations director, National
Aeronautics and Space Administration, and former United States Air Force
spokesman for Project Blue Book.

6. The least improbable explanation is that these things UFO's are artificial
and controlled. My opinion for some time has been that they have an
extraterrestrial origin. Dr. Maurice Bilot, one of the world's leading
aerodynamicists and mathematical physicists. Life, April 7, 1952

7. Of course the flying saucers are real and they are interplanetary.
Air Chief Marshal Lord Dowding, commanding officer of the Royal Air Force
of Great Britain, August 1954

Afbeeldingenzee 010.jpg
17.07u 10-2-2008 Chemtrails Ijmuiden NL349 viewswww.youtube.com/watch?v=1ceRnWPsevk&feature=related

Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.
Martin Luther King Jr., Strength to Love, 1963
Inanna - Ishtar349 viewsMufon LA nov. 2006- Lecture Jason Martell and the Search for Planet X or Nibiru according the research of Zecharia Sitchin: www.youtube.com/watch?v=hIGrX3xDT4g&mode=related&search= (9:00)
Mars - Hubble space telescope - 2003349 views
Baptism of Jezus in Jordan river 348 views
Perseus, Andromeda and the White winged Horse348 views
The Book; The 12th Planet347 viewsSee: www.sitchin.com/booklist.htm
17000 BC, France - Cave of PechMerle, Le Cabberets347 views Reliable reports indicate there are objects coming into our atmosphere at very high speeds and controlled by thinking intelligences.
?Navy Admiral Delmar Fahrney, public statement, 1957.

Alien - Alaska 1930347 views
Chemtrails en H.A.A.R.P. of iets anders?- gaten ontstaan in het kunstmatig gefabriceerde wolkendek..eind juni 2007 Hilversum NH347 views
Vril 7347 viewss:
Aurora - Car346 views
UFO DVDs, UFO Magazines, UFO Books and much more..346 viewswww.theUFOstore.com
Laren [ChemWebs] 't Gooi346 viewsChemtrails in de vorm van RUITEN, boven Laren zomer 2006, "to control and to own the Weather and the people [Mind- and Mood Control]".
Stealth fighter345 viewsStealth bomber from shastra
A glass-like material based on technology found in an ancient Sanskrit text that could ultimately be used in a stealth bomber (the material cannot be detected by radar) has been developed by a research scholar of Benaras Hindu University.

Prof M A Lakshmithathachar, Director of the Academy of Sanskrit Research in Melkote, near Mandya, told Deccan Herald that tests conducted with the material showed radars could not detect it. ?The unique material cannot be traced by radar and so a plane coated with it cannot be detected using radar,? he said.

The academy had been commissioned by the Aeronautical Research Development Board, New Delhi, to take up a one-year study, ?Non-conventional approach to Aeronautics,? on the basis of an old text, Vaimanika Shastra, authored by Bharadwaj.

Though the period to which Bharadwaj belonged to is not very clear, Prof Lakshmithathachar noted, the manuscripts might be more 1,000 years old.

The project aims at deciphering the Bharadwaj?s concepts in aviation.

However, Prof Lakshmithathachar was quick to add that a collaborative effort from scholars of Sanskrit, physics, mathematics and aeronautics is needed to understand Bharadwaj?s shastra.

The country?s interest in aviation can be traced back over 2,000 years to the mythological era and the epic Ramayana tells of a supersonic-type plane, the Pushpak Vimana, which could fly at the speed of thought.
Playing Cards of the Sumerian Anunnakies345 viewswww.wingeddisk.com
World Government - New World Order - World Domination344 viewsNew World Governance: www.youtube.com/watch?v=kTfv6uOHgqQ&eurl=http://www.infowars.com/?p=5549

EU Member States:
Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Germany, Denmark, Estonia, Spain, Finland, France, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Sweden, United Kingdom

Other states in Europe:
Switzerland, Iceland, Norway, Faroes, Andorra, Monaco, Liechtenstein, San Marino, Russia, Ukraine, Moldova, Transdniestria (Transnistria), Belarus, Turkey, Croatia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Serbia, Montenegro, Albania, Kosovo, Abkhazia, South Ossetia.
William Cooper's UFO Story344 viewsNew UFO Website: http://www.ufo8.webs.com/
Alton Barnes 2005344 viewswww.video.google.nl/videoplay?docid=5043378172083766362&q=alien+sign
The Twelve Tribes of Israel344 viewshttp://www.tombofjesus.com/2007/home/welcome.html

The Bahavishya Maha Purana is a document written in Sanskrit.

The words of the 'wise teacher' are highlighted in red. Is he Jesus?

"...One day, Shalivahan, the chief ot the Sakyas, went into the Himalayas. There, in the Land of the Hun (Ladakh, a part of the Kushan empire), the powerful king saw a man sitting on a mountain, who seemed to promise auspiciousness. His skin was fair and he wore white garments.

"The king asked the holy man who he was. The other replied: 'I am called a son of God, born of a virgin, minister of the non-believers, relentless in search of the truth.' The king then asked him: 'What is your religion?' The other replied, 'O great king, I come from a foreign country, where there is no longer truth and where evil knows no bounds. In the land of the non-believers, I appeared as the Messiah. But the demon Ihamasi of the barbarians (dasyu) manifested herself in a terrible form; I was delivered unto her in the manner of the non-believers and ended in Ihamasi's realm.'

"'O king, lend your ear to the religion that I brought unto the non-believers: after the purification of the essence and the impure body and after seeking refuge in the prayers of the Naigama, man will pray to the Eternal. Through justice, truth, meditation and unity of spirit, man will find his way to Isa in the center of light. God, as firm as the sun, will finally unite the spirit of all wandering beings in himself. Thus, O king, Ihamasi will be destroyed; and the blissful image if Isa, the giver of happiness, will remain forever in the heart; and I was called Isa-Masih.' After the king heard these words, he took the teacher of the non-believers and sent him to their pitiless land."
Lost Tribes - Introduction

Assuming that Jesus Christ survived the crucifixion, for what purpose would he travel, far away from his homeland, to Kashmir? Perhaps the answer might be found in the Bible:

?These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, ?Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not: But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.?? (Bible, Matthew 10: 5 & 6)

Even Christians believe that one of the Disciples, Thomas, did precisely that: he traveled to India and set up the first Christian communities there. During the ministry of Jesus Christ in Israel there were only two tribes of the Jewish people in his homeland: Yehuda and Binyomin (Judah and Benjamin). The other ten tribes had been scattered away during the First Temple Era. Proponents of the Jesus-in-India theory state that the ?lost sheep? mentioned by Jesus Christ in the Bible referred to the ten tribes that had been scattered, and that the term ?lost sheep? did not just mean wayward Jews who no longer followed the path of God.

So, after the Ascension of Jesus (or, according to the Jesus-in-India theory, after he began his travels through Asia), the Apostles met in Jerusalem and, in obedience to the above-mentioned Biblical instruction of Jesus Christ to go and preach his message to the remaining Jewish tribes, portioned all the countries of the world amongst themselves. India, which at that time included all Middle East to the present India, was given to Thomas.

Lost Tribes - Charts showing the Israelite-Kashmiri Link

The first chart below lists names of the tribes, castes and sub-castes of the Kashmiri People, along with equivalent names as found in the Bible (chiefly, the Old Testament). Also provided is the exact Biblical chapter and verse containing the name. The second chart gives the same for the Afghani people. The third and fourth charts offer the names of cities and towns and places in Kashmir and Afghanistan that also match names to be found in Biblical verses. This list, incidentally, as extensive as it is, is not complete.

It seems hardly coincidental that such a large number of tribes, castes, cities, etc. would have names equivalent to Biblical ones unless there were some kind of connection between the people of Afghanistan and Kashmir and the Ten Lost Tribes of Israel.

And, as stated earlier, Jesus was determined to get his message to all of the tribes of Israel. It is significant to note that while various peoples around the world have claimed that Jesus Christ appeared in their country, there probably exists no place on earth outside of Israel where one can find the profusion and concentration of Biblical names than Kashmir/Afghanistan:

CHART 1: Kashmir
CHART 2: Afghanistan, Bukhara, Pakistan
CHART 3: Kashmir & Nearby Areas

DNA Link

The May 11, 1998 edition of the Wall Street Journal contained an article about a special DNA test that can determine Jewish ancestry.

?Jewish tradition states that the Cohanim are the members of the Jewish priest class who are descended patrilineally from the first high priest, Aaron, who was Moses?s brother. Today, the names Cohn, Cone, Kahn and Kann indicate that people carrying one or the other of those names are descended from Aaron. Parfitt and Bradman looked for genetic traits that are shared by Cohanim in the West:

?The technique examines the Y-chromosome, a long strand of DNA that contains the genetic formula for maleness. The Y-chromosome is passed only from father to son and is unique in that most of the strand doesn?t exchange DNA with a partner chromosome. Like an unshuffled deck of cards, the Y-chromosome remains unchanged for thousands of years, except for tiny genetic variations, or mutations. What most Cohanim have in common is that their DNA is stacked in the same order. Messrs. Parfitt and Bradman have confirmed that there is a genetic link between Lemba tribesmen in southern Africa, Jews from Yemen, and now the Bene Israel. The finding, says Mr. Parfitt, validates Islamic sources about the Jews? path into Africa and could revise the history of ancient Jewish commerce across the Indian Ocean.?

Though this test was performed on the Bene Israel Jews of Alibag India, it is clear that the general Indian traditions regarding the presence of Jews throughout India in ancient times, including Kashmir, are based in truth.

Important Note:

It was noted in the article that:

?Unlike many other lost-tribe adventurers, Mr. Parfitt doesn?t have a political or religious agenda. He isn?t out to populate Israel with clansmen of obscure Jewish sects. Nor does Mr. Parfitt rely on cultural evidence of shared traditions and rituals between these sects and Western Jewry. He also wants biological evidence. ?DNA is a tool of Jewish history,? he says


23 april 2004 - Long Island - NY344 views
Otis T. Carr344 viewswww.projectcamelot.net/ralph_ring.html
343 viewshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tower_of_Babel
Tower of Babel
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
This article is about the Biblical story. For other uses, see Tower of Babel (disambiguation).

Engraving The Confusion of Tongues by Gustave Dor? (1865), who based his conception on the Minaret of Samarra[citation needed]The Tower of Babel (Hebrew: מגדל בבל‎ Migdal Bavel Arabic: برج بابل‎ Burj Babil) is a structure featured in chapter 11 of the Book of Genesis, an enormous tower intended as the crowning achievement of the city of Babilu, the Akkadian name for Babylon. According to the biblical account, Babel was a city that united humanity, all speaking a single language and migrating from the east; it was the home city of the great king Nimrod, and the first city to be built after the Great Flood. The people decided their city should have a tower so immense that it would have "its top in the heavens." (וְרֹאשׁוֹ בַשָּׁמַיִם). However, the Tower of Babel was not built for the worship and praise of God, but was dedicated to false man-made religion[citation needed], with a motive of making a 'celebrated name' for the builders[citation needed]. - Genesis 11:4. God seeing what the people were doing and sinning[citation needed] against him, confused their languages and scattered the people throughout the earth.

Babel is the Hebrew equivalent of Akkadian Babilu (Greek Babylon), a cosmopolitan city typified by a confusion of languages.[1] The Tower of Babel has often been associated with known structures, notably the Etemenanki, the ziggurat to Marduk, by Nabopolassar (610s BC). A Sumerian view of this story is preserved in Enmerkar and the Lord of Aratta.
Enki - EA (Whose House is Water)343 viewsChronos & Chaos: www.nordstrom1.com/
Kernenergie - Nee Bedankt!343 viewswww.million-against-nuclear.net
Czechoslovakia 342 views
11.34u 25 februari 2008 Chemtrails over Baarn 341 viewswww.earthpulse.com/src/subcategory.asp?catid=1&subcatid=2

"The potential applications of artificial electromagnetic fields are wide-ranging and can be used in many military or quasi-military situations...Some of these potential uses include dealing with terrorist groups, crowd control, controlling breaches of security at military installations, and antipersonnel techniques in tactical warfare. In all of these cases the EM (electromagnetic) systems would be used to produce mild to severe physiological disruption or perceptual distortion or disorientation. In addition, the ability of individuals to function could be degraded to such a point that they would be combat ineffective. Another advantage of electromagnetic systems is that they can provide coverage over large areas with a single system. They are silent and countermeasures to them may be difficult to develop... One last area where electromagnetic radiation may prove of some value is in enhancing abilities of individuals for anomalous phenomena."

Do these comments point to uses already somewhat developed? The author of the government report refers to an earlier Air Force document about the uses of radiofrequency radiation in combat situations. (Here Begich and Manning note that HAARP is the most versatile and the largest radio-frequency-radiation transmitter in the world.)

The United States Congressional record deals with the use of HAARP for penetrating the earth with signals bounced off of the ionosphere. These signals are used to look inside the planet to a depth of many kilometers in order to locate underground munitions, minerals and tunnels. The U.S. Senate set aside $15 million dollars in 1996 to develop this ability alone -- earth-penetrating-tomography. The problem is that the frequency needed for earth-penetrating radiations is within the frequency range most cited for disruption of human mental functions. It may also have profound effects on migration patterns of fish and wild animals which rely on an undisturbed energy field to find their routes.

As if electromagnetic pulses in the sky and mental disruption were not enough, Eastlund bragged that the super-powerful ionospheric heater could control weather. Begich and Manning brought to light government documents indicating that the military has weather-control technology. When HAARP is eventually built to its full power level, it could create weather effects over entire hemispheres. If one government experiments with the world's weather patterns, what is done in one place will impact everyone else on the planet. Angels Don't Play This HAARP explains a principle behind some of Nikola Tesla's inventions -- resonance -- which affects planetary systems.

Laurel & Hardy341 views
Patently Obvious; A Partial History of Aerosol and Weather Related Technologies 341 viewswww.seektress.com/patlist.htm

1225521 - May 8, 1917 - Protection From Poisonous Gas in Warfare
Referenced in 4704942 - Charged aerosol
"A method of defending against a warfare cloud of toxic aerosol utilizes
a charged defensive aerosol which is sprayed into the cloud.
The defensive aerosol is made of a defensive agent
which may be chemically or biologically active."

Patently Obvious
A Partial History of Aerosol and Weather Related Technologies

July 30, 2003
Lorie Kramer [email protected]

1225521 - May 8, 1917 - Protection From Poisonous Gas in Warfare
Referenced in 4704942 - Charged aerosol
"A method of defending against a warfare cloud of toxic aerosol utilizes
a charged defensive aerosol which is sprayed into the cloud.
The defensive aerosol is made of a defensive agent
which may be chemically or biologically active."


1302332 - April 29, 1919 -Toy Machine Gun - F.V. Du Pont
Referenced in - 4141274 which is for a smoke generator,
which evolved into the particle and aerosol devices in use today.


The history of interest in aerosol and weather related technologies and devices is evident when a list of related patents is compiled and examined, even a partial list.

The following patents are all verifiable, along with additional information that can be found by reading the referrenced patents included in the documentation. Patent information can be found by visiting the

United States Patent and Trademark Office
Free Patents Online


1338343 - April 27, 1920 - Process And Apparatus For The Production of Intense Artificial Clouds, Fogs, or Mists
1619183 - March 1, 1927 - Process of Producing Smoke Clouds From Moving Aircraft
1631753 - June 7, 1927 - Electric Heater - Referenced in 3990987
1665267 - April 10, 1928 - Process of Producing Artificial Fogs
1892132 - December 27, 1932 - Atomizing Attachment For Airplane Engine Exhausts
1928963 - October 3, 1933 - Electrical System And Method
1957075 - May 1, 1934 - Airplane Spray Equipment
2097581 - November 2, 1937 - Electric Stream Generator - Referenced in 3990987
2409201 - October 15, 1946 - Smoke Producing Mixture
2476171 - July 18, 1945 - Smoke Screen Generator

2480967 - September 6, 1949 - Aerial Discharge Device
2550324 - April 24, 1951 - Process For Controlling Weather
2510867 - October 9, 1951 - Method of Crystal Formation and Precipitation
2582678 - June 15, 1952 - Material Disseminating Apparatus For Airplanes
2591988 - April 8, 1952 - Production of TiO2 Pigments - Referenced in 3899144
2614083 - October 14, 1952 - Metal Chloride Screening Smoke Mixture
2633455 - March 31, 1953 - Smoke Generator
2688069 - August 31, 1954 - Steam Generator - Referenced in 3990987
2721495 - October 25, 1955 - Method And Apparatus For Detecting Minute Crystal Forming Particles Suspended in a Gaseous Atmosphere
2730402 - January 10, 1956 - Controllable Dispersal Device
2801322 - July 30, 1957 - Decomposition Chamber for Monopropellant Fuel - Referenced in 3990987
2881335 - April 7, 1959 - Generation of Electrical Fields
2908442 - October 13, 1959 - Method For Dispersing Natural Atmospheric Fogs And Clouds
2986360 - May 30, 1962 - Aerial Insecticide Dusting Device
2963975 - December 13, 1960 - Cloud Seeding Carbon Dioxide Bullet
3126155 - March 24, 1964 - Silver Iodide Cloud Seeding Generator - Referenced in 3990987
3127107 - March 31, 1964 - Generation of Ice-Nucleating Crystals
3131131 - April 28, 1964 - Electrostatic Mixing in Microbial Conversions

3174150 - March 16, 1965 - Self-Focusing Antenna System

3234357 - February 8, 1966 - Electrically Heated Smoke Producing Device
3274035 - September 20, 1966 - Metallic Composition For Production of Hydroscopic Smoke
3300721 - January 24, 1967 - Means For Communication Through a Layer of Ionized Gases
3313487 - April 11, 1967 - Cloud Seeding Apparatus
3338476 - August 29, 1967 - Heating Device For Use With Aerosol Containers - Referenced in 3990987
3410489 - November 12, 1968 - Automatically Adjustable Airfoil Spray System With Pump
3429507 - February 25, 1969 - Rainmaker
3432208 - November 7, 1967 - Fluidized Particle Dispenser
3441214 - April 29, 1969 - Method And Apparatus For Seeding Clouds
3445844 - May 20, 1969 - Trapped Electromagnetic Radiation Communications System
3456880 - July 22, 1969 - Method Of Producing Precipitation From The Atmosphere
3518670 June 30, 1970 - Artificial Ion Cloud
3534906 - October 20, 1970 - Control of Atmospheric Particles
3545677 - December 8, 1970 - Method of Cloud Seeding
3564253 - February 16, 1971 - System And Method For Irradiation Of Planet Surface Areas
3587966 - June 28, 1971 - Freezing Nucleation
3601312 - August 24, 1971 - Methods of Increasing The Likelihood oF Precipatation By The Artificial Introduction Of Sea Water Vapor Into The Atmosphere Winward Of An Air Lift Region
3608810 - September 28, 1971 - Methods of Treating Atmospheric Conditions
3608820 - September 20, 1971 - Treatment of Atmospheric Conditions by Intermittent Dispensing of Materials Therein
3613992 - October 19, 1971 - Weather Modification Method
3630950 - December 28, 1971 - Combustible Compositions For Generating Aerosols, Particularly Suitable For Cloud Modification And Weather Control And Aerosolization Process
USRE29142 - This patent is a reissue of patent US3630950 - Combustible compositions for generating aerosols, particularly suitable for cloud modification and weather control and aerosolization process
3659785 - December 8, 1971 - Weather Modification Utilizing Microencapsulated Material
3666176 - March 3, 1972 - Solar Temperature Inversion Device
3677840 - July 18, 1972 - Pyrotechnics Comprising Oxide of Silver For Weather Modification Use
3722183 - March 27, 1973 - Device For Clearing Impurities From The Atmosphere
3769107 - October 30, 1973 - Pyrotechnic Composition For Generating Lead Based Smoke
3784099 - January 8, 1974 - Air Pollution Control Method
3785557 - January 15, 1974 - Cloud Seeding System
3795626 - March 5, 1974 - Weather Modification Process
3808595 - April 30, 1974 - Chaff Dispensing System
3813875 - June 4, 1974 - Rocket Having Barium Release System to Create Ion Clouds In The Upper Atmopsphere
3835059 - September 10, 1974 - Methods of Generating Ice Nuclei Smoke Particles For Weather Modification And Apparatus Therefore
3835293 - September 10, 1974 - Electrical Heating Aparatus For Generating Super Heated Vapors - Referenced in 3990987
3877642 - April 15, 1975 - Freezing Nucleant
3882393 - May 6, 1975 - Communications System Utilizing Modulation of The Characteristic Polarization of The Ionosphere
3896993 - July 29, 1975 - Process For Local Modification of Fog And Clouds For Triggering Their Precipitation And For Hindering The Development of Hail Producing Clouds
3899129 - August 12, 1975 - Apparatus for generating ice nuclei smoke particles for weather modification
3899144 - August 12, 1975 - Powder contrail generation
3940059 - February 24, 1976 - Method For Fog Dispersion
3940060 - February 24, 1976 - Vortex Ring Generator
3990987 - November 9, 1976 - Smoke generator
3992628 - November 16, 1976 - Countermeasure system for laser radiation
3994437 - November 30, 1976 - Broadcast dissemination of trace quantities of biologically active chemicals
4042196 - August 16, 1977 - Method and apparatus for triggering a substantial change in earth characteristics and measuring earth changes
RE29,142 - February 22, 1977 - Reissue of: 03630950 - Combustible compositions for generating aerosols, particularly suitable for cloud modification and weather control and aerosolization process
4035726 - July 12, 1977 - Method of controlling and/or improving high-latitude and other communications or radio wave surveillance systems by partial control of radio wave et al
4096005 - June 20, 1978 - Pyrotechnic Cloud Seeding Composition
4129252 - December 12, 1978 - Method and apparatus for production of seeding materials
4141274 - February 27, 1979 - Weather modification automatic cartridge dispenser
4167008 - September 4, 1979 - Fluid bed chaff dispenser
4347284 - August 31, 1982 - White cover sheet material capable of reflecting ultraviolet rays
4362271 - December 7, 1982 - Procedure for the artificial modification of atmospheric precipitation as well as compounds with a dimethyl sulfoxide base for use in carrying out said procedure
4402480 - September 6, 1983 - Atmosphere modification satellite
4412654 - November 1, 1983 - Laminar microjet atomizer and method of aerial spraying of liquids
4415265 - November 15, 1983 - Method and apparatus for aerosol particle absorption spectroscopy
4470544 - September 11, 1984 - Method of and Means for weather modification
4475927 - October 9, 1984 - Bipolar Fog Abatement System
4600147 - July 15, 1986 - Liquid propane generator for cloud seeding apparatus
4633714 - January 6, 1987 - Aerosol particle charge and size analyzer
4643355 - February 17, 1987 - Method and apparatus for modification of climatic conditions
4653690 - March 31, 1987 - Method of producing cumulus clouds
4684063 - August 4, 1987 - Particulates generation and removal
4686605 - August 11, 1987 - Method and apparatus for altering a region in the earth's atmosphere, ionosphere, and/or magnetosphere
4704942 - November 10, 1987 - Charged Aerosol
4712155 - December 8, 1987 - Method and apparatus for creating an artificial electron cyclotron heating region of plasma
4744919 - May 17, 1988 - Method of dispersing particulate aerosol tracer
4766725 - August 30, 1988 - Method of suppressing formation of contrails and solution therefor
4829838 - May 16, 1989 - Method and apparatus for the measurement of the size of particles entrained in a gas
4836086 - June 6, 1989 - Apparatus and method for the mixing and diffusion of warm and cold air for dissolving fog
4873928 - October 17, 1989 - Nuclear-sized explosions without radiation
4948257 - August 14, 1990 - Laser optical measuring device and method for stabilizing fringe pattern spacing
4948050 - August 14, 1990 - Liquid atomizing apparatus for aerial spraying
4999637 - March 12, 1991 - Creation of artificial ionization clouds above the earth
5003186 - March 26, 1991 - Stratospheric Welsbach seeding for reduction of global warming
5005355 - April 9, 1991 - Method of suppressing formation of contrails and solution therefor
5038664 - August 13, 1991 - Method for producing a shell of relativistic particles at an altitude above the earths surface
5041760 - August 20, 1991 - Method and apparatus for generating and utilizing a compound plasma configuration
5041834 - August 20, 1991 - Artificial ionospheric mirror composed of a plasma layer which can be tilted
5056357 - October 15, 1991- Acoustic method for measuring properties of a mobile medium
5059909 - October 22, 1991 - Determination of particle size and electrical charge
5104069 - April 14, 1992 - Apparatus and method for ejecting matter from an aircraft
5110502 - May 5, 1992 - Method of suppressing formation of contrails and solution therefor
5156802 - October 20, 1992 - Inspection of fuel particles with acoustics
5174498 - December 29, 1992 - Cloud Seeding
5148173 - September 15, 1992 - Millimeter wave screening cloud and method
5245290 - September 14, 1993 - Device for determining the size and charge of colloidal particles by measuring electroacoustic effect
5286979 - February 15, 1994 - Process for absorbing ultraviolet radiation using dispersed melanin
5296910 - March 22, 1994 - Method and apparatus for particle analysis
5327222 - July 5, 1994 - Displacement information detecting apparatus
5357865 - October 25, 1994 - Method of cloud seeding
5360162 - November 1, 1994 - Method and composition for precipitation of atmospheric water
5383024 - January 17, 1995 - Optical wet steam monitor
5425413 - June 20, 1995 - Method to hinder the formation and to break-up overhead atmospheric inversions, enhance ground level air circulation and improve urban air quality
5434667 - July 18, 1995 - Characterization of particles by modulated dynamic light scattering
5441200 - August 15, 1995 - Tropical cyclone disruption
5486900 - January 23, 1996 - Measuring device for amount of charge of toner and image forming apparatus having the measuring device
5556029 - September 17, 1996 - Method of hydrometeor dissipation (clouds)
5628455 - May 13, 1997 - Method and apparatus for modification of supercooled fog
5631414 - May 20, 1997 - Method and device for remote diagnostics of ocean-atmosphere system state
5639441 - June 17, 1997 - Methods for fine particle formation
5762298 - June 9, 1998 - Use of artificial satellites in earth orbits adaptively to modify the effect that solar radiation would otherwise have on earth's weather
5912396 - June 15, 1999 - System and method for remediation of selected atmospheric conditions
5922976 - July 13, 1999 - Method of measuring aerosol particles using automated mobility-classified aerosol detector
5949001 - September 7, 1999 - Method for aerodynamic particle size analysis
5984239 - November 16, 1999 - Weather modification by artificial satellite
6025402 - February 15, 2000 - Chemical composition for effectuating a reduction of visibility obscuration, and a detoxifixation of fumes and chemical fogs in spaces of fire origin
6030506 - February 29, 2000 - Preparation of independently generated highly reactive chemical species
6034073 - March 7, 2000 - Solvent detergent emulsions having antiviral activity
6045089 - April 4, 2000 - Solar-powered airplane
6056203 - May 2, 2000 - Method and apparatus for modifying supercooled clouds
6110590 - August 29, 2000 - Synthetically spun silk nanofibers and a process for making the same
6263744 - July 24, 2001 - Automated mobility-classified-aerosol detector
6281972 - August 28, 2001 - Method and apparatus for measuring particle-size distribution
6315213 - November 13, 2001 - Method of modifying weather
6382526 - May 7, 2002 - Process and apparatus for the production of nanofibers
6408704 - June 25, 2002 - Aerodynamic particle size analysis method and apparatus
6412416 - July 2, 2002 - Propellant-based aerosol generation devices and method
6520425 - February 18, 2003 - Process and apparatus for the production of nanofibers
6539812 - April 1, 2003 - System for measuring the flow-rate of a gas by means of ultrasound
6553849 - April 29, 2003 - Electrodynamic particle size analyzer
6569393 - May 27, 2003 - Method and device for cleaning the atmosphere


Chem Trail Tracking USA
Cliford Carnicom - Aerosol Crimes & Cover-up Documented
Rense.com Chemtrail Datapage

Ufo in clouds - San Franscesco, Italy341 views
A12 Avenger340 views
Aurora - Engine340 views
No Fake News340 viewswww.freepress.net/fakenews
Nimrod/Ninurta, the Tower Of Babel and World Governance339 viewshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tribulation

In August of 2008, author Tom Kovach released a book, Tribulation: 2008, which claimed that the Tribulation would begin on 29 September 2008. The claim is based upon a multi-faceted analysis of history, linguistics, military tactics, and even the "decompression of time". That final aspect is based upon 2nd Peter 3:8, which says, "But, beloved, do not forget this one thing, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day." (New King James Version) Tribulation: 2008 claims that all seven seals have already been opened; and, that the first of the seven trumpets (Revelation 8:7) blew in Heaven at the same time that the Hebrew Feast of Trumpets began on Earth in 2008. Seven years later (from the Spring of 2014 to the Spring of 2015), according to Messianic Jewish scholar Pastor Mark Biltz, there will be a series of blood moons and eclipses that matches the predictions that Jesus gave for events "in the sun, moon, and stars" that occur after the Tribulation. (Matthew 24:29) Notably, the book also made other predictions that came true after publication.

[edit] Events
Among Christians who hold a futurist view of the Tribulation, there are differing views about what will happen to Christians during the Tribulation:

Pretribulationists believe that all Christians then alive will be taken bodily up to Heaven (called the Rapture) before the Tribulation begins. Those who become Christians after the rapture will live through (or perish during) the Tribulation. After the Tribulation, Christ will return.
Prewrath tribulationists believe the rapture will occur during the tribulation, halfway through or after, but before the seven bowls of the wrath of God.
Seventh Trumpet Tribulationists believe the rapture will occur during the tribulation, halfway through or after, but before the seven bowls of the wrath of God. Specifically, at the sound of the Seventh Trumpet (Rev. 11:15, 1 Cori. 15:52) of the Seventh Seal.
Midtribulationists believe that the rapture of the faithful will occur halfway through the Tribulation, but before the worst part of it occurs. The seven year period is divided into half - the "beginning of sorrows" and the "great tribulation" proper.
Posttribulationists believe that Christians will not be taken up into Heaven. But, they will be received or gathered by Christ into the Kingdom of God on earth at the end of the Tribulation. "Immediately after the tribulation ... then shall appear the sign of the Son of Man [Jesus] ... and he shall gather his elect" (Matthew 24:29?31; Mark 13:24-27; Luke 21:25-27). The idea of a post-tribulation coming can also be read into 2 Peter 3:10-13 where Christ's return is equated with the "elements being melted" and "the earth also and the works therein shall be burned up."
In pretribulationism and midtribulationism, the rapture and the Second Coming (or Greek, par[a]ousia) of Christ are separate events; while in post-tribulationism the two events are identical or simultaneous. Another feature of the pre- and mid-tribulation beliefs are the idea that after the Rapture, Christ will return still again (a third coming), to set up his kingdom on the earth.

Some?including many Roman Catholic theologians?do not believe in a "time of trouble" period as usually described by tribulationists, but rather that there will be a near utopic period led by the Antichrist. Others, unable to form an opinion or simply desiring to remain non-divisive, describe themselves as pantribulationists believing that everything will "pan out in the end."

Many other groups, such as Jehovah's Witnesses do not believe in a rapture at any point.[citation needed] According to Jehovah's Witnesses, the Great Tribulation is coming and is soon to arrive. This period will see the fall of Babylon the Great, the Great Harlot, as spoken of in Revelation. After Babylon the Great has been removed, they say, the world powers shall move against God's chosen people for a short while. This will then usher in the ending of this "world" (not the earth, but the removal of all those who do not wish to follow God by standards).[citation needed] The Great Tribulation ends with the battle of Armageddon.[citation needed]

27 october 1979 New Zealand339 views
HAARP High Freq Active Auroral Research, Gakona - Alaska 339 views"What is really happening on the North Pole?!"

www.youtube.com/watch?v=WF2Rq5rCwHg&NR (10min07sec)

The HAARP Research Station is located approximately 8 miles north of Gakona, Alaska - North Pole
TR-3B ASTRA Triangular Craft - st. Petersburg, USSR - 19 februari 1997, 7.15 pm. Foto: Riddle of the Skies - RTL 5.339 views..absorbing QuantumTechnology, possibly another example of so called 'reverse engineering of UFOs' already here for many hundreds of millenia..

See video UFO St. Petersburg Triangle: www.youtube.com/watch?v=B42MQgNHtDo (1:14)

like Belgium UFO flap of 1989-1991, same sort of Tr3B Triangles..
Endgame - Truth Rising339 viewswww.endgamethemovie.com
The Book; Genesis Revisited339 viewsSee: www.sitchin.com/booklist.htm
Take Action to Stop Fluoridation - Sign the Online Petition339 viewswww.fluoridealert.org

Water en Gezondheid in Nederland
Nimrod Tower of Babylon339 views This stone carving (above) was found in Iraq near the ancient city of Babylon (Bagdad). Historians falsely interpret this illustration so I invite you to look at it carefully. There are clearly two suns in the sky and everyone is looking up at them. The tallest figure (wearing the horns of the bull... Nimrod's old crown) appears to be a giant. Giants in the Bible were roughly 18 feet tall. The dome-shaped object is too perfect to be a mountain peak. Instead, imagine that it's the "top" of the Tower of Babel.
IF that indeed were a rocket with a hydrogen bomb in the top, then this picture shows the defiance of Nimrod and his followers who still remembered the huge meteorite that pierced the water canopy and caused the global flood. This Tower was to prevent that from ever happening again as God's access through the Gateway (what Babylon translates into... Gateway City) would forever be destroyed. Fallen angels would understand how to separate the isotopes of hydrogen because hydrogen fusion is the framework of stars and angels. All ancient ziggurats used water for some unknown reason. You separate the isotopes of hydrogen from ordinary water. Hydrogen bomb-making was within the reach of Nimrod. Why else would God have to scatter mankind by confusing his tongue?
Historical note: In 1250 BC, the Historian Sanchuniation had this to say about a snake: "The snake has a speed that nothing can exceed because of its breath. Its energy is exceptional. It has illuminated everything with its gleam." Does that fit the description of any snakes you've seen lately? Or... how about a rocket?
Ramana Maharshi - zijn leer in gesprekken en citaten - Arthur Osborne, pagina 71, 1987; Ankh-Hermes bv - Deventer339 viewsD: "Als ik met oefenen bezig ben ervaar ik dat ik niet in mijn pogingen kan slagen, als de genade van Bhagavan niet op mij neerdaalt."
B: "De genade v/d Guru is er altijd. U verbeeldt zich dat het iets ergens hoog in de hemel is, dat neer moet dalen, maar in werkelijkheid is het binnen in u, in uw hart en zodra u het opgaan van het denken in zijn bron op welke manier dan ook verwezenlijkt, welt de Genade omhoog als een overvloedig sproeiende fontein in uw binnenste." Bron: Sri Ramana Maharshi
Underground Boring Machine339 views
Marc Sylvester van Druten, Groote Keeten, Noord Holland, 26-07-2002338 views
The Face of Mars, Cydonia Area. Photo credits Viking NASA.338 viewsThe Face of Mars is the tomb of Alalu, the deposed king of Nibiru who escaped to Earth (some 445.000 years ago) and discovered gold; he died on Mars; his image was carved on a rock that was his tomb.

Reprinted with permission, Copyrigth Z. Sitchin

Source: The Lost Book of Enki, memoirs and prophecies of an extraterrestial god, by Zecharia Sitchin
Bear & Company Rochester, Vermont-USA

John the Baptist338 views
Dios - All Seeing Eye337 views
great Sioux Chief Sitting Bull337 viewsTatanka Iyotake (bij de Grand River (South Dakota), 1831 ? Standing-Rock-reservaat (North Dakota), 15 december 1890), beter bekend als Sitting Bull, was een leider van de Hunkpapa Sioux (zie Lakota) in de Verenigde Staten.


A Sioux Prayer
Translated by Chief Yellow Lark - 1887

Oh, Great Spirit, whose voice I hear in the winds
Whose breath gives life to the world, hear me
I come to you as one of your many children
I am small and weak
I need your strength and wisdom

May I walk in beauty
Make my eyes ever behold the red and purple sunset.
Make my hands respect the things you have made
And my ears sharp to your voice.
Make me wise so that I may know the things you have taught your children.

The lessons you have written in every leaf and rock
Make me strong--------!
Not to be superior to my brothers, but to fight my greatest enemy....myself

Make me ever ready to come to you with straight eyes,
So that when life fades as the fading sunset,
May my spirit come to you without shame.
Psalm 82 A psalm of Asaph - YHWH - El Olam - El Elohim337 viewsPsalm 82
A psalm of Asaph.

1God presides in the great assembly;
he gives judgment among the ?gods?:

2?How long will you defend the unjust
and show partiality to the wicked?
3Defend the cause of the weak and fatherless;
maintain the rights of the poor
and oppressed.
4Rescue the weak and needy;
deliver them from the hand of the wicked.

5?They know nothing, they
understand nothing.
They walk about in darkness;
all the foundations of the earth
are shaken.

6?I said, ?You are ?gods?;
you are all sons of the Most High.?
7But you will die like mere men;
you will fall like every other ruler.?

8Rise up, O God, judge the earth,
for all the nations are your inheritance.
445.000 years ago336 views445.000 jaren geleden; De Nefilim, aangevoerd door Enki, komen aan op de aarde vanaf de Twaalfde Planeet, Eridu - Aarde station I - wordt in zuidelijk Mesopotamie (nu Irak) gevestigd.
*From the 12th Planet, Z. Sitchin.
1996 in Denver336 views
Eye of God - photo credit; NASA336 viewsThe Watchers, the Anunnaki: www.youtube.com/watch?v=p-4H41KIhKc (5:49)
John the Baptist335 views
Lo- USA, July 2nd - 2002335 viewsChemtrailer; Exotic weapons..
TR-3B ASTRA Triangular Craft (Driehoek) Belgische Ufo-golf; Nov. 1989, 30-31 maart 1990 - 1991335 viewsBelgium F16s chasing Triangles 'Hide and Seek' in Gulf War Period.
A12 Avenger334 views
a Boeing Delta 4 Rocket launches from Vandenberg for first time - LA Daily News - photo credit Tim Madden334 views-makes its inaugural West Coast blastoff at 8:33 p.m. June 27 carrying a so called 'classified national security satellite'.

See: www.spaceflightnow.com/delta/d317/060627launch/03.html

*this photo captures the rocket as the twin solid motors separate with a bright JUPITER visible above!

UfodeWaarheid.com in Hagelstorm op 28-2-2006 om 14.24u te Eemdijk-Bunschoten.334 views
Andromeda - flying cigar - GOLD used for producing UFOs and HEALING THE UPPER ATMOSPHERE AND THE HEAVENS OF THE GODS; EXPLAINED IN DETAIL in the Sutra Of Golden Light [the Suvarnabhasa in Sanskriet]333 viewsMaharshi Bharadwaaja:

☞ "Rukmascha" Sootra 1.

"Rukma too"

Bodhaananda Vritti:

This vimaana is of golden colour. Therefore it is called Rukma vimaana, Rukma meaning gold. The Rukma should be made out of Raajaloha only. By duly processing, Raajaloha can be made to assume golden colour. That metal should be used for the vimaana:

IN THE END OF DAYS - THE EXCELLENT DRUM OF GOLDEN LIGHT WILL SHINE! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7g_2M_J2d0c
UFO - January 1990 6:24:46 - Area 51, Nevada333 views
Charleston 4-4-1980, South Carolina333 views
Chemtrails en HAARP - ...en later een scheidings- lijn ontstaan in het kunstmatig gefabriceerde wolkendek..eind juni 2007 Hilversum - NH333 viewswww.hinduwisdom.info/Vimanas.htm#Ancient%20Writings%20tell%20of%20UFO%20visit%20in%204,000%20B.C.

?The ancient Hindus could navigate the air, and not only navigate it, but fight battles in it like so many war-eagles combating for the domination of the clouds. To be so perfect in aeronautics, they must have known all the arts and sciences related to the science, including the strata and currents of the atmosphere, the relative temperature, humidity, density and specific gravity of the various gases...?

~ Col. Henry S Olcott (1832 ? 1907) American author, attorney, philosopher, and cofounder of the Theosophical Society in a lecture in Allahabad, in 1881.

Chemtrails Paleis Soestdijk t/m Hilversum op 24-2-2005333 viewsChemtrails Baarn - the Netherlands, June 2nd, 2009: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n5BQHe2ak4o

The International Space Station (ISS) March 17th, 2009 - Baarn, The Netherlands: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yVC3ERtZxSk

CHEMTRAILS! BAARN - SOEST - AMERSFOORT, NEDERLAND - 22 APRIL 2009: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCjtu-wC1og

IN THE END OF DAYS - THE EXCELLENT DRUM OF GOLDEN LIGHT WILL SHINE! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7g_2M_J2d0c
Great Pyramid Capstone UFO, March 30, 2007333 views
UFO DVDs, UFO Magazines, UFO Books and much more..332 viewswww.theUFOstore.com/
Europees Burgerinitiatief332 viewswww.europeesburgerinitiatief.nl
F-117 Nighthawk332 views
ISS - ESA and Human Spaceflight and Exploiration332 viewsEuropean Space Agency - ISS Info: http://www.esa.int/esaHS/index.html
Mars - the Igigi332 viewsHubble's sharpest view of planet Mars, March 10, 1997. The Martian Melting North Pole is at the top!
is Nibiru or Planet X, the 10th Planet now causing Solar System Global Warming?

Phoenix Lights - Triangles332 viewsGiant Tr-3b Astra nuclear powered platform: See www.rense.com/general5/trb.htm

CNN UFO News: What were those lights in the Phoenix sky in 1997? See: www.edition.cnn.com/US/9706/19/ufo.lights/
Belgie 1990 Radar; 990 K=1830 km/u331 viewsTr-3b "Astra"..moving at speeds up above 1000 km/u, sometimes invisible..
Chemtrails; de Elektromagnetische Kooi om de Aarde331 viewsen H.A.A.R.P., ELF, Atmospheric heater - Ionicsphere pulsator. Zie officieel rapport Europees Parlement punt 27 elders in dit album waarin het HAARP programma het weer en klimaat werelddwijd ernstige schade hebben toe berokkend.
cigar venusian.jpg
Adamski Cigar shaped UFO331 views
discovery sts 51331 views
EA331 viewsLike his counterparts Anu and Enki/Ea, several of Enlil's characteristics formed the theological background of later Canaanite and Israelite traditions. The Hebrew patriarch Abraham was said to have come from "Ur of the Chaldeans," directly downriver from Nippur, where Enlil's center of worship lay. Abraham's family certainly knew the stories of Enlil, Anu, and Enki. While Abraham rejected the polytheism of Babylonian religion, certain stories involving Enlil seem to have found their way into Israelite tradition. The clearest of these is the story of Enlil sending the Great Flood to destroy mankind. However, in the Hebrew version, there is only one God; and thus Yahweh is both the originator of the flood (Enlil's role) and the deity who warns Noah of its coming (Enki's role).

Because of his connection with water, Enki/Ea actually is also the patron god of the (hand-)washing and purifying rituals and the patron god of the exorcists.
The name of Ea; Water-house has the same meaning as Narayana, an other name of Brahma. Actually, as Lord of the Apsu, the realm of Light and wisdom, Enki is comparable with Michael, the Archangel of the Day. After choosing side for the true God, Abraham left Sumer and his teachings influenced Zoroaster; Parsism, Islam, Hindu Brahmin, and of course the Jews as well as Christianity. The titles -maker of all the gods that exist-, -wise, cunning, artful creator of every shape- and -the holy lamb residing in the middle of the deep waving sea, where no one dares stare- only add to this connection and even link him to Jesus.
The meaning of the name Job, (Ayub, aya abu) is thought to be; the pursued, or, where is my father, but is more likely to mean Ayah is my father. Job (Yob) is mentioned together with Noah and Daniel in the book Ezekiel (Eze 14;12-23). Noah, was the uta Noa pishtim of the Gilgamesh epos, radiant Noah the pious one, and Daniel was said to be living at the Babylonian court of Nebuchadnezzar.II. They lived in the Northern area of Sumeria; Assyria, Persia, where the Aryan people came from. The name Aya also resounds in names like; Arisai, Ma?dai, and Jeremai and the title/name of God; ..
Adonai; Lord Aya.

Ahyah asher ahyah.
(ehyeh asher ehyeh)
Ex 3:14

and, he said?;

You will say Ahyah sent me?

So, if anything He?s name should be Ahyah.
Ahyah asher ahyah

would then read;

It is Ahyah who I am. [EA?]

I Am that I Am (Hebrew: אהיה אשר אהיה, pronounced Ehyeh asher ehyeh [ʔehˈje ʔaˈʃer ʔehˈje] is a common English translation (King James Bible and others) of the response God used in the Bible when Moses asked for His name (Exodus 3:14). It is one of the most famous verses in the Torah.[citation needed] Hayah means "existed" or "was" in Hebrew; "ehyeh" is the first person singular imperfect form. Ehyeh asher ehyeh is generally interpreted to mean I am that I am, though it more literally translates as "I-shall-be that I-shall-be."
The word Ehyeh is used a total of 43 places in the Old Testament, where it is usually translated as "I will be" -- as is the case for its first occurrence, in Exodus 3:12 -- or "I shall be," as is the case for its final occurrence in Zechariah 8:8. It stems from the Hebrew conception of monotheism that God exists by himself, the uncreated Creator who does not depend on anything or anyone; therefore I am who I am. Some scholars state the Tetragrammaton itself derives from the same verbal root, but others counter that it may simply sound similar as intended by God, such as Psalm 119 and the Hebrew words "shoqed" (watching) and "shaqed" (almond branch) found in Jeremiah 1:11-12.
Roman Catholic Church interpretation
The Roman Catholic Church's interpretation has been summarized in the Catechism of the Catholic Church. The interpretation is found in numbers 203-213.
Some of the salient points are the following:
God revealed himself to his people Israel by making his name known to them. A name expresses a person's essence and identity and the meaning of this person's life. God has a name; he is not an anonymous force. To disclose one's name is to make oneself known to others; in a way it is to hand oneself over by becoming accessible, capable of being known more intimately and addressed personally.
In revealing his mysterious name, YHWH ("I AM HE WHO IS", "I AM WHO AM" or "I AM WHAT I AM"), God says who he is and by what name he is to be called. This divine name is mysterious just as God is mystery. It is at once a name revealed and something like the refusal of a name, and hence it better expresses God as what he is - infinitely above everything that we can understand or say: he is the "hidden God", his name is ineffable, and he is the God who makes himself close to men.
God, who reveals his name as "I AM", reveals himself as the God who is always there, present to his people in order to save them.
After Israel's sin, when the people had turned away from God to worship the golden calf, God hears Moses' prayer of intercession and agrees to walk in the midst of an unfaithful people, thus demonstrating his love. When Moses asks to see his glory, God responds "I will make all my goodness pass before you, and will proclaim before you my name 'the LORD' [YHWH]." Then the LORD passes before Moses and proclaims, "YHWH, YHWH, a God merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and abounding in steadfast love and faithfulness"; Moses then confesses that the LORD is a forgiving God.
The divine name, "I Am" or "He Is", expresses God's faithfulness: despite the faithlessness of men's sin and the punishment it deserves, he keeps "steadfast love for thousands"... By giving his life to free us from sin, Jesus reveals that he himself bears the divine name: "When you have lifted up the Son of man, then you will realize that "I AM"."
In God "there is no variation or shadow due to change."
The revelation of the ineffable name "I AM WHO AM" contains then the truth that God alone IS. The Greek Septuagint translation of the Hebrew Scriptures, and following it the Church's tradition, understood the divine name in this sense: God is the fullness of Being and of every perfection, without origin and without end. All creatures receive all that they are and have from him; but he alone is his very being, and he is of himself everything that he is.
[edit] Kabbalist interpretation
Kabbalists have long deemed that the Torah contains esoteric information. The response given by God is considered significant by many Kabbalists, because it is seen as proof in the divine nature of God's name, a central idea in Kabbalah (and to a lesser degree Judaism in general).
[edit] Other views
Some religious groups believe that this phrase or at least the "I am" part of the phrase is an actual name of God, or to lesser degree the sole name of God. It can be found in many lists where other common names of God are shown.
In the Hindu Advaita Vedanta, the South Indian sage Ramana Maharshi mentions that of all the definitions of God, "none is indeed so well put as the biblical statement ?I am that I am?". He maintained that although Hindu scripture contains similar statements, the Mahavakyas, these are not as direct as Jehovah. [1] Further the "I am" is explained by Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj as an abstraction in the mind of the Stateless State, of the Absolute, or the Supreme Reality, called Parabrahman. It is pure awareness, prior to thoughts, free from perceptions, associations, memories.
To New Age author Eckhart Tolle, God is and God is omnipresent, in everyone and everything. A name, like all words, is just an abstract label, a "sign post" that points to a meaning: God is presence. God is real. "And what is God's self-definition in the Bible? Did God say, "I have always been, and I always will be?" Of course not. That would have given reality to past and future. God said: "I AM THAT I AM." No time here, just presence."[2]

Haunebu331 views
antigravity- Rectangular Airvehicle331 views
Ancient Hindu Vimana text331 viewsSee: www.hinduwisdom.info/Vimanas.htm#v%20i%20m%20a%20n%20a%20s
Vril 1 image331 views
Chemtrails Zeist 2006331 viewsen - English

RAPPORT 155k 116k

14 janvier 1999 PE 227.710/d?f. A4-0005/99

sur l'environnement, la s?curit? et la politique ?trang?re
Rapporteur pour avis ( Proc?dure "Hughes"):
Mr Olsson, commission de l'environnement, de la sant? publique et de la protection des consommateurs
Commission des affaires ?trang?res, de la s?curit? et de la politique de d?fense
Rapporteur: Mme Maj Britt Theorin

Au cours de la s?ance du 13 juillet 1995, le Pr?sident du Parlement a annonc? qu'il avait renvoy? la proposition de r?solution d?pos?e, conform?ment ? l'article 45 du r?glement, par Mme Rehn sur l'utilisation potentielle des ressources ? caract?re militaire pour les strat?gies environnementales, (B4-0551/95) ? la commission des affaires ?trang?res, de la s?curit? et de la politique de d?fense, pour examen au fond, et ? la commission de l'environnement, de la sant? publique et de la protection des consommateurs, pour avis.
Annexe 1

Au cours de la s?ance du 13 juillet 1995, le Pr?sident du Parlement a annonc? qu'il avait renvoy? la proposition de r?solution d?pos?e, conform?ment ? l'article 45 du r?glement, par Mme Rehn sur l'utilisation potentielle des ressources ? caract?re militaire pour les strat?gies environnementales, (B4-0551/95) ? la commission des affaires ?trang?res, de la s?curit? et de la politique de d?fense, pour examen au fond, et ? la commission de l'environnement, de la sant? publique et de la protection des consommateurs, pour avis.

Suite ? la demande de la Conf?rence des pr?sidents des commissions, le Pr?sident du Parlement a annonc? au cours de la s?ance du 15 novembre 1996 que la commission des affaires ?trang?res, de la s?curit? et de la politique de d?fense ?tait autoris?e ? pr?senter un rapport sur ce sujet.

Au cours de sa r?union du 19 novembre 1996,la commission des affaires ?trang?res, de la s?curit? et de la politique de d?fense a nomm? Mme Maj Britt Theorin rapporteur.

Au cours de la s?ance du 19 juin 1998, le Pr?sident du Parlement a annonc? que ce rapport devait ?tre ?labor?, conform?ment ? la proc?dure Hughes, par la commission des affaires ?trang?res, de la s?curit? et de la politique de d?fense et par la commission de l'environnement, de la sant? publique et de la protection des consommateurs.

Le projet de rapport a ?t? examin? par la commission des affaires ?trang?res, de la s?curit? et de la politique de d?fense lors de ses r?unions des 5 f?vrier 1998, 29 juin 1998, 21 juillet 1998, 3, 23 et 28 septembre 1998, 13, 27 et 29 octobre 1998 et 4/5 janvier 1999, ainsi que par la sous-commission de la s?curit? et du d?sarmement lors de ses r?unions des 5 f?vrier 1998, 3 et 23 septembre 1998.

Au cours de la derni?re de ses r?unions, la commission des affaires ?trang?res, de la s?curit? et de la politique de d?fense a adopt? la proposition de r?solution par 28 voix et 1 abstention.

?taient pr?sents au moment du vote les d?put?s Spencer, pr?sident; Theorin, rappporteur; Aelvoet, Andr?-L?onard, Bar?n-Crespo, Bertens, Bianco, Burenstam Linder, Carnero Gonz?lez, Carrozzo (suppl?ant M. Colajanni), Dillen, Dupuis, Gahrton, Goerens (suppl?ant M. Cars), Graziani, G?nther (suppl?ant M. Gomolka), Lalumi?re, Lambrias, Pack (suppl?ant M. Habsburg), Pettinari (suppl?ant M. Imbeni conform?ment ? l'article 138, paragraphe 2, du r?glement), Piha, Rinsche, Sakellariou, Salafranca S?nchez-Neyra, Schroedter (suppl?ant M. Cohn-Bendit), Schwaiger (suppl?ant Mme Lenz), Speciale, Swoboda (suppl?ant Mme Hoff), Tindemans, Titley et Truscott.

L'avis de la commission de l'environnement, de la sant? publique et de la protection des consommateurs est joint au pr?sent rapport.

Le rapport a ?t? d?pos? le 14 janvier 1999.

Le d?lai de d?p?t des amendements sera indiqu? dans le projet d'ordre du jour de la p?riode de session au cours de laquelle le rapport sera examin?.


R?solution sur l'environnement, la s?curit? et la politique ?trang?re: strat?gie en vue de l'utilisation de ressources militaires ? des fins environnementales

Le Parlement europ?en,

- vu la proposition de r?solution d?pos?e par Mme Rehn sur l'utilisation potentielle des ressources ? caract?re militaire pour les strat?gies environnementales (B4-0551/95),

- vu l'?tude des Nations unies "Charting potential uses of resources allocated to military activities for civilian endeavours to protect the environment", (UN A-46/364, 17 septembre 1991),

- vu sa r?solution du 17 juillet 1995 sur "les mines terrestres antipersonnel: un obstacle meurtrier au d?veloppement"(1),

- vu ses r?solutions pr?c?dentes sur la non-prolif?ration des armes nucl?aires et les essais nucl?aires et sur le rapport de la commission de Canberra d'ao?t 1996 concernant l'abolition des armes nucl?aires,

- vu la d?cision unanime de la Cour internationale de justice concernant l'obligation qui incombe aux ?tats nucl?aires de conclure un accord sur l'interdiction des armes nucl?aires (avis consultatif nΊ 96/22 du 8 juillet 1996),

- vu sa r?solution du 19 avril 1996 sur la proposition de d?cision du Conseil instituant un programme d'action communautaire en faveur de la protection civile(2),

- vu ses r?solutions pr?c?dentes sur les armes chimiques,

- vu les r?sultats des conf?rences des Nations unies de Kyoto en 1997 et de Rio de Janeiro en 1992,

- vu l'audition sur le projet HAARP et les armes non l?tales convoqu?e ? Bruxelles, le 5 f?vrier 1998, par la sous-commission "s?curit? et d?sarmement" de la commission des affaires ?trang?res, de la s?curit? et de la politique de d?fense,

- vu l'article 148 du r?glement,

- vu le rapport de la commission des affaires ?trang?res, de la s?curit? et de la politique de d?fense et l'avis de la commission de l'environnement, de la sant? publique et de la protection des consommateurs (A4-0005/99),

. constatant que la fin de la guerre froide a profond?ment modifi? la situation g?opolitique sur le plan de la s?curit? et que, dans le domaine militaire, la d?tente a conduit ? un d?sarmement g?n?ral et, en particulier, ? une limitation des armements nucl?aires, ce qui a permis de lib?rer d'?normes ressources militaires,

B. consid?rant qu'en d?pit de ce bouleversement total de la situation g?ostrat?gique depuis la fin de la guerre froide, le risque d'une atteinte d?sastreuse ? l'int?grit? et ? la durabilit? de l'environnement global n'a pas sensiblement diminu?, tant sur le plan des tirs d'armes nucl?aires accidentels ou non autoris?s que sur celui de l'utilisation licite d'armes nucl?aires dans la crainte infond?e d'une attaque imminente,

C. consid?rant qu'il serait possible de limiter consid?rablement ce risque en tr?s peu de temps si tous les ?tats poss?dant un arsenal nucl?aire mettaient en oeuvre rapidement les six mesures pr?vues par le rapport de la Commission de Canberra, en particulier s'ils retiraient toutes les armes nucl?aires du dispositif d'alerte rouge et transf?raient progressivement toutes les armes dans la r?serve strat?gique,

D. consid?rant que l'article VI du trait? de non-prolif?ration des armes nucl?aires (TNP) de 1968 invite toutes les parties signataires ? s'engager ? "continuer ? n?gocier de bonne foi ... un trait? sur un d?sarmement g?n?ral et complet" et notant que les principes et les objectifs adopt?s lors de la Conf?rence de 1995 sur la non-prolif?ration des armes nucl?aires r?affirmaient que l'objectif ultime du trait? ?tait l'abolition compl?te des armes nucl?aires,

E. notant que les menaces sur l'environnement, l'affluence de r?fugi?s, les conflits ethniques, le terrorisme et le crime international constituent de nouvelles menaces tr?s graves contre la s?curit? et que la facult? de g?rer diff?rentes formes de conflit prend de l'importance ? mesure que se modifie le contexte de la s?curit?, et consid?rant qu'il est important que les ressources affect?es au secteur militaire servent ?galement ? des fins non militaires puisque certaines menaces contre la s?curit? ne sont pas de nature militaire,

F. constatant que l'exploitation outranci?re des ressources de la plan?te est responsable de la fr?quence accrue ? laquelle surviennent les catastrophes naturelles et environnementales, notant que des probl?mes ?cologiques locaux et r?gionaux de cette nature peuvent avoir des incidences consid?rables sur les relations internationales et d?plorant que les ?tats membres n'en aient pas davantage tenu compte dans la mise en oeuvre de leur politique ?trang?re, de s?curit? et de d?fense,

G. consid?rant que, dans le monde, les conflits se d?roulent essentiellement ? un niveau intra?tatique plut?t qu'? un niveau inter?tatique et que, lorsqu'?clatent des conflits inter?tatiques, ces derniers concernent de plus en plus l'acc?s aux ressources vitales ou leur disponibilit?, en particulier l'eau, la nourriture et les combustibles,

H. consid?rant que l'acc?s ? ces ressources naturelles vitales et leur disponibilit? sont ?troitement li?s ? la d?t?rioration et ? la pollution de l'environnement, en ce qui concerne la cause aussi bien que l'effet, et que la pr?vention des conflits doit donc de plus en plus ?tre ax?e sur ces questions,

I. consid?rant que les pressions qui s'exercent sur les terres - ? des fins d'exploitation aussi bien que d'habitation - et qui ont toujours constitu? une des principales causes de tensions et de conflits, sont de plus en plus souvent imputables ? la d?gradation de l'environnement, en particulier les changements climatiques et l'?l?vation du niveau des mers qui en r?sulte,

J. consid?rant que l'ensemble de ces facteurs, qui affectent avant tout les populations les plus pauvres et les plus vuln?rables de la terre, favorisent de plus en plus l'apparition de r?fugi?s dits "environnementaux", ce qui fait na?tre une pression directe sur les politiques de l'immigration et de la justice de l'Union europ?enne (UE), sur l'aide au d?veloppement et sur les ressources affect?es ? l'aide humanitaire, tout en accroissent indirectement les probl?mes de s?curit? de l'UE du fait de l'existence de foyers d'instabilit? r?gionale dans d'autres parties du monde,

K. consid?rant que, selon les r?sultats d'une recherche internationale d?taill?e men?e ? bien et publi?e par le Climate Institute de Washington, le nombre de "r?fugi?s environnementaux" d?passe maintenant celui des "r?fugi?s traditionnels" (25 millions contre 22 millions) et devrait doubler d'ici 2010, voire davantage dans la pire des hypoth?ses,

L. consid?rant que la question des "r?fugi?s environnementaux" n'est que le sympt?me d'un d?sastre humanitaire d'une ampleur beaucoup plus grande, sachant que 1,3 milliard de personnes vivent dans la pauvret? absolue selon la d?finition des Nations unies; que plus d'un quart de ces personnes tentent de subsister dans des r?gions du monde extr?mement vuln?rables sur le plan environnemental o? elles constituent le facteur essentiel de probl?mes environnementaux plan?taires comme la d?forestation et la d?sertification,

M. consid?rant que, depuis la fin de la guerre froide, bien que le contexte id?ologique qui pr?dominait auparavant ait largement disparu de la gestion des questions globales et que cette derni?re d?pende beaucoup moins de la question de l'?quilibre militaire, il n'en reste pas moins que cette situation devrait encore se refl?ter dans le syst?me de gestion globale des Nations unies en mettant l'accent sur la coh?rence et l'efficacit? des ?l?ments ? la fois militaires et non militaires de la politique de s?curit?,

N. consid?rant n?anmoins qu'une part croissante des travaux des Nations unies dans le domaine des questions de politique et de s?curit? globale est essentiellement d'ordre non militaire et porte avant tout sur les relations entre le commerce, l'aide, l'environnement et un d?veloppement durable,

O. constatant qu'il y a lieu de mobiliser d'urgence des ressources appropri?es afin de relever les d?fis environnementaux et notant que les ressources disponibles en mati?re de protection de l'environnement sont tr?s limit?es, ce qui implique une nouvelle conception de l'utilisation des ressources d?j? existantes,

P. notant que les forces arm?es ont une opportunit? unique et une capacit? ?norme de soutenir les efforts du secteur civil en vue de ma?triser les probl?mes environnementaux accrus ? mesure que les ressources militaires sont lib?r?es,

Q. constatant que les ressources militaires rel?vent du domaine national, alors que les d?fis environnementaux ont un caract?re global et que, d?s lors, il y a lieu de poser les jalons d'une coop?ration internationale en mati?re de transfert et d'utilisation des ressources militaires ? la fin de prot?ger l'environnement,

R. consid?rant que les co?ts ? court terme de la protection de l'environnement doivent ?tre ?valu?s par rapport aux co?ts ? long terme de l'inertie dans ce domaine et constatant que s'affirme la n?cessit? de proc?der ? une analyse du rapport co?t-efficacit? de diff?rentes strat?gies environnementales englobant les transferts ?ventuels, le r?am?nagement et le red?ploiement des ressources li?es au secteur militaire,

S. constatant qu'il ne sera pas possible de r?aliser l'objectif commun de l'assainissement des ?cosyst?mes endommag?s de la plan?te sans veiller ? l'exploitation ?quitable des ressources mondiales; qu'il est n?cessaire de faciliter la coop?ration technique internationale et de promouvoir le transfert de technologies militaires appropri?es,

T. consid?rant que la recherche militaire porte actuellement sur la manipulation de l'environnement ? des fins militaires, et ce en d?pit des conventions existantes; c'est le cas, par exemple, du syst?me HAARP bas? en Alaska,

U. consid?rant que l'exp?rience acquise dans le domaine du d?veloppement et de l'utilisation de l'?nergie nucl?aire ? des fins pacifiques constitue une mise en garde salutaire contre l'invocation du secret militaire pour emp?cher une ?valuation correcte et un contr?le des technologies relevant ? la fois des domaines civil et militaire puisque la transparence est de toute fa?on compromise,

V. consid?rant que la crainte g?n?rale d'un d?clin ?cologique et d'une crise environnementale doit inciter les ?tats ? fixer des priorit?s dans leur processus de d?cision et encourager les nations ? r?agir conjointement et efficacement ? l'?gard des catastrophes environnementales,

1. invite la Commission ? pr?senter au Conseil et au Parlement une strat?gie commune telle que pr?vue dans le trait? d'Amsterdam qui, d'ici 2000 ? 2010, ?tablisse les liens entre les aspects de la politique de l'UE li?s ? la politique ?trang?re et de s?curit? commune (PESC) et ses politiques dans les domaines du commerce, de l'aide, du d?veloppement et de l'environnement au plan international, de mani?re ? aborder les questions suivantes et ? examiner leur interaction:

a) la production agricole et alimentaire et la d?t?rioration de l'environnement,

b) la p?nurie d'eau et l'approvisionnement transfrontalier en eau,

c) la d?forestation et le r?tablissement des mines de charbon,

d) le ch?mage, le sous-emploi et la pauvret? absolue,

e) le d?veloppement durable et les changements climatiques,

f) la d?forestation, la d?sertification et la croissance de la population,

g) l'interaction entre l'ensemble des facteurs susmentionn?s et le r?chauffement de la plan?te, de m?me que l'impact de l'augmentation des ?v?nements climatiques extr?mes sur l'homme et l'environnement;

2. constate que les actions environnementales pr?ventives repr?sentent un instrument important sur le plan de la politique de s?curit?; invite, par cons?quent, les ?tats membres ? introduire des objectifs environnementaux et sanitaires dans leurs ?valuations, leur recherche militaire et leurs plans d'action ? long terme dans les domaines de la d?fense et de la s?curit?;

3. reconna?t le r?le important que joue l'arm?e dans la soci?t? d?mocratique et ses t?ches pour la d?fense du territoire, de m?me que le fait que des initiatives visant ? garantir et ? r?tablir la paix peuvent dans une large mesure contribuer ? ?viter les pr?judices environnementaux;

4. constate que les essais nucl?aires atmosph?riques et souterrains comportent des retomb?es radioactives qui ont entra?n? la dispersion d'?normes quantit?s de c?sium 137 radioactif, de strontium 90 et d'autres isotopes canc?rig?nes sur l'ensemble de la plan?te, et qu'ils ont ?t? terriblement pr?judiciables ? l'environnement et ? la sant? dans les zones d'essai;

5. consid?re que plusieurs r?gions du monde sont menac?es par le stockage et l'immersion incontr?l?s, dangereux et inappropri?s de sous-marins nucl?aires et de b?timents de surface, avec leur combustible nucl?aire et leurs r?acteurs nucl?aires fissur?s, vu qu'il est hautement probable que de vastes r?gions pourraient ?tre rapidement contamin?es par les radiations qui s'en d?gagent;

6. note qu'il s'agit encore et toujours de r?soudre le probl?me des armes chimiques et conventionnelles immerg?es ? de multiples endroits dans les mers europ?ennes apr?s les deux guerres mondiales, l'immersion ?tant une solution de facilit? pour se d?barrasser de ces stocks; constate que personne ne sait ? ce jour quelle peut en ?tre l'incidence sur l'environnement ? long terme, notamment sur les poissons et la vie baln?aire;

7. consid?re que l'UE devra apporter sa contribution au r?glement du probl?me; constate que la guerre qui continue de ravager des r?gions enti?res d'Afrique a d?truit les structures sociales et agricoles et qu'un d?sastre environnemental frappe ? pr?sent les terres du fait de la d?sertification r?sultant de la d?forestation et de l'?rosion;

8. demande ? l'arm?e de mettre un terme aux activit?s qui contribuent ? la d?t?rioration de l'environnement et de la sant?, et de prendre toute mesure qui s'impose afin de nettoyer et d'assainir les zones pollu?es;

S'agissant de l'affectation de ressources militaires ? des fins environnementales,

9. consid?re que les ressources disponibles pour assainir et sauver l'environnement ravag? sont insuffisantes pour relever les d?fis ?cologiques globaux; demande en cons?quence que les ?tats membres s'engagnt ? affecter des ressources militaires ? la protection de l'environnement par le biais de:

a) l'introduction d'une formation de soldats de l'environnement dans le but de cr?er une brigade europ?enne commune de protection de l'environnement,

b) l'?valuation de leurs besoins environnementaux et des ressources militaires pouvant ?tre affect?es ? l'environnement, et l'utilisation de ces ressources dans leurs programmes nationaux de protection de l'environnement,

c) l'?valuation des ressources militaires pouvant ?tre mises ? la disposition des Nations unies ou de l'UE ? titre provisoire, ? long terme ou en cas de besoin, en tant qu'instrument de coop?ration internationale dans le cas de d?sastres ou de crises ?cologiques,

d) le d?veloppement de programmes en vue de la cr?ation d'unit?s de protection internationales et europ?ennes utilisant du personnel, des ?quipements et des installations militaires mises ? leur disposition au titre du partenariat pour la paix en cas de situation de crise environnementale,

e) l'introduction des objectifs du d?veloppement durable respectueux de l'environnement dans leur concept de s?curit?,

f) la garantie que les forces arm?es respectent les r?gles environnementales ?tablies et que les d?g?ts ant?rieurs caus?s par celles-ci ? l'environnement seront r?par?s,

g) l'introduction de consid?rations environnementales dans leurs programmes militaires de recherche et de d?veloppement;

10. au regard de l'exp?rience concr?te lacunaire dans ce domaine, prie instamment les gouvernements des ?tats membres:

a) de cr?er des centres pour l'?change d'informations concernant l'exp?rience acquise sur le plan national dans le domaine de l'affectation de ressources militaires ? la protection de l'environnement,

b) de faciliter la diffusion globale de donn?es environnementales, en ce compris celles fournies par leurs satellites militaires ou obtenues par le biais d'autres plates-formes de collecte d'informations,

11. invite les ?tats membres ? appliquer la l?gislation environnementale en vigueur pour la soci?t? civile ? l'ensemble de l'activit? militaire et ? faire en sorte que le secteur militaire se charge et assume le co?t de l'examen et de l'assainissement des zones endommag?es du fait d'activit?s militaires ant?rieures de mani?re ? pouvoir les r?affecter ? des fins civiles; une telle d?marche rev?t une importance particuli?re pour les vastes entrep?ts de munitions chimiques et conventionnelles le long des c?tes de l'UE;

12. invite l'ensemble des ?tats membres ? fixer des objectifs environnementaux et sanitaires ainsi que des plans d'action visant ? am?liorer la protection de l'environnement et de la sant? au sein de leurs forces arm?es respectives;

13. prie instamment les gouvernements des ?tats membres d'am?liorer progressivement la protection de l'environnement dans le secteur militaire par le biais de la formation, du d?veloppement technique et d'une initiation fondamentale de l'ensemble du personnel des forces arm?es et de tous les appel?s ? la connaissance de l'environnement;

14. demande ? l'UE d'unir ses efforts autour d'une nouvelle strat?gie de l'environnement visant ? affecter les ressources militaires ? la protection commune de l'environnement;

15. consid?re que les strat?gies environnementales devraient comporter le contr?le de l'environnement de la terre, l'?valuation des donn?es collect?es, la coordination des activit?s scientifiques, la diffusion de l'information et l'exploitation des donn?es pertinentes fournies par les syst?mes d'observation et de contr?le nationaux afin d'?tablir un bilan continu et exhaustif de l'?tat de l'environnement;

16. souligne que l'importante r?duction des d?penses militaires peut conduire ? d'importantes crises au plan r?gional et invite de ce fait les ?tats membres ? accro?tre leurs efforts de conversion de la production et de la technologie militaires en faveur de produits et d'applications civiles gr?ce ? des programmes nationaux et ? des initiatives communautaires comme le programme KONVER;

17. souligne l'importance d'un renforcement des activit?s environnementales pr?ventives afin de pouvoir lutter contre les catastrophes environnementales et naturelles;

18. prie instamment la Commission d'examiner en profondeur les menaces sur l'environnement r?sultant de la politique de s?curit? en Europe et de r?diger un "livre vert" sur les activit?s militaires ? incidences environnementales;

19. invite le Conseil ? accro?tre ses efforts pour que les ?tats-Unis, la Russie, l'Inde et la Chine signent l'accord conclu ? Ottawa en 1997 sur l'interdiction des mines anti-personnel;

20. consid?re que l'UE devrait renforcer ses mesures de soutien aux victimes de mines terrestres et encourager le d?veloppement de techniques de d?minage; est d'avis que le d?veloppement desdites techniques doit ?tre acc?l?r?;

21. consid?re qu'il y a lieu de d?noncer la politique du secret en mati?re de recherche militaire et qu'il faut privil?gier le droit ? l'information et au contr?le d?mocratique des projets de recherche militaire;

22. prie instamment les ?tats membres de d?velopper des technologies de destruction d'armes compatibles avec l'environnement;

23. souligne qu'une des menaces environnementales les plus graves qui existent ? proximit? de l'UE est le manque de contr?le des d?chets de l'industrie nucl?aire et des stocks d'armes biologiques et chimiques, de m?me que l'absence de mesures d'assainissement ? l'issue d'activit?s militaires; souligne qu'il importe que les ?tats membres oeuvrent en faveur d'un renforcement de la coop?ration internationale, par exemple dans le cadre des Nations unies ou du Partenariat pour la paix, de mani?re ? ce que ces armes soient d?truites d'une mani?re aussi compatible que possible avec la protection de l'environnement;

24. est d'avis que toutes les n?gociations futures sur la limitation et l'abolition ?ventuelle des armements nucl?aires devront tendre ? la r?duction mutuelle et ?quilibr?e des stocks d'armes;

25. estime, compte tenu de la situation particuli?rement difficile des pays de l'ancienne Union sovi?tique, que la menace que la d?t?rioration de l'?tat des armes et des mat?riaux nucl?aires encore d?tenus par ces pays repr?sente pour l'environnement aux niveaux tant global que local rend encore plus urgente la conclusion d'un accord sur la poursuite de l'?limination progressive des armes nucl?aires;

S'agissant des aspects l?gaux des activit?s militaires

26. demande ? l'Union europ?enne de faire en sorte que les nouvelles techniques d'armes dites nonl?tales et le d?veloppement de nouvelles strat?gies d'armements soient ?galement couverts et r?gis par des conventions internationales;

27. consid?re que le projet HAARP (High Frequency Active Auroral Research Project), en raison de son impact g?n?ral sur l'environnement, pose des probl?mes globaux et demande que ses implications juridiques, ?cologiques et ?thiques soient examin?es par un organe international ind?pendant avant la poursuite des travaux de recherche et la r?alisation d'essais; d?plore que le gouvernement des ?tats-Unis ait ? maintes reprises refus? d'envoyer un repr?sentant pour apporter un t?moignage sur les risques que comporte pour l'environnement et la population le projet HAARP financ? actuellement en Alaska, durant l'audition publique ou ? l'occasion d'une r?union subs?quente de sa commission comp?tente;

28. demande ? l'organe charg? de l'?valuation des choix scientifiques et technologiques (STOA) d'accepter d'examiner les preuves scientifiques et techniques fournies par tous les r?sultats existants de la recherche sur le programme HAARP aux fins d'?valuer la nature et l'ampleur exactes du danger que HAARP repr?sente pour l'environnement local et global et pour la sant? publique en g?n?ral;

29. invite la Commission ? examiner les incidences sur l'environnement et la sant? publique du programme HAARP pour l'Antarctique, en coop?ration avec les gouvernements de Su?de, de Finlande, de Norv?ge et de la F?d?ration de Russie, et ? faire rapport au Parlement sur le r?sultat de ses investigations;

30. demande en particulier que soit ?tabli un accord international visant ? interdire au niveau global tout projet de recherche et de d?veloppement, tant militaire que civil, qui cherche ? appliquer la connaissance des processus du fonctionnement du cerveau humain dans les domaines chimique, ?lectrique, des ondes sonores ou autres au d?veloppement d'armes, ce qui pourrait ouvrir la porte ? toute forme de manipulation de l'homme; un tel accord devrait ?galement interdire toute possibilit? d'utilisation r?elle ou potentielle de tels syst?mes;

31. demande ? l'UE et ? ses ?tats membres d'oeuvrer ? la conclusion de trait?s internationaux visant ? prot?ger l'environnement contre des destructions inutiles en cas de conflit;

32. demande ? l'UE et ? ses ?tats membres de veiller ? ce que les incidences environnementales des activit?s des forces arm?es en temps de paix soient ?galement soumises ? des normes internationales;

33. demande au Conseil des ministres de l'UE de prendre une part active ? la mise en oeuvre des propositions de la Commission de Canberra et de l'article VI du TNP;

34. invite le Conseil et les gouvernements britannique et fran?ais en particulier, ? prendre la t?te dans le contexte du TNP et de la conf?rence sur le d?sarmement en ce qui concerne la poursuite de n?gociations relatives ? la pleine application des engagements pris quant ? la r?duction des armes nucl?aires et ? un d?sarmement aussi rapide que possible, de fa?on ? atteindre un niveau o?, provisoirement, le stock global des armes encore existantes ne constitue plus une menace pour l'int?grit? et la durabilit? de l'environnement global;

35. invite la pr?sidence du Conseil, la Commission et les gouvernements des ?tats membres ? d?fendre la position adopt?e dans la pr?sente r?solution dans le contexte de toutes les prochaines r?unions des Nations unies plac?es sous les auspices du TNP ou en rapport avec celui-ci, et de la Conf?rence sur le d?sarmement;

36. invite la pr?sidence du Conseil et de la Commission, conform?ment ? l'article J.7 du trait? sur l'Union europ?enne, ? lui faire rapport sur la position de l'Union concernant les points sp?cifiques contenus dans la pr?sente r?solution, notamment dans le contexte des prochaines r?unions des Nations unies, de ses agences et de ses organes, en particulier celles de la commission pr?paratoire du TNP de 1999, de la conf?rence sur le d?sarmement et tous les autres forums internationaux comp?tents;

37. charge son Pr?sident de transmettre la pr?sente r?solution au Conseil, ? la Commission, aux ?tats membres de l'Union europ?enne et aux Nations unies.

(1) () JO C 183 du 17.7.1995, p. 47 ( A4-0149/95).
(2) () JO C 141 du 13.5.1996, p. 258 (A4-0100/96).


Des forces arm?es luttant contre les menaces sur l'environnement

En mati?re de politique de s?curit?, la situation a consid?rablement ?volu? depuis quelque temps. Il y a un peu moins de dix ann?es, un rideau de fer se dressait au centre d'une Europe dot?e d'armements nucl?aires. ? pr?sent l'Europe s'unifie. L'Union europ?enne envisage un ?largissement vers d'anciens pays du Pacte de Varsovie. L'?re de la guerre froide est r?volue et il semble aujourd'hui impossible qu'un conflit majeur puisse ?clater en Europe. Parall?lement ? cette ?volution, l'?norme affluence de r?fugi?s, les conflits ethniques, le terrorisme et le crime international constituent autant de nouveaux dangers venant menacer la s?curit? quotidienne. Les catastrophes naturelles et les probl?mes environnementaux, qu'ils aient une cause naturelle, ou qu'ils d?coulent de l'exploitation des ressources de la terre par l'homme font peser une autre menace tout aussi grave.

Une s?rie de catastrophes naturelles a plac? l'humanit? devant de nouveaux probl?mes. La derni?re en date est la rupture d'une digue en Espagne. L'?rosion des terres en Italie, les ravages caus?s par le ph?nom?ne naturel El Ni?o et l'accident nucl?aire de Tchernobyl sont autant de ph?nom?nes et d'accidents ayant provoqu? des catastrophes naturelles et environnementales. Dans certaines parties du monde, la s?cheresse peut interdire toute possibilit? de moisson durant des ann?es, de sorte qu'une grande partie de la population souffre de la famine qui, souvent, conduit ? la mort. Face ? ces catastrophes, l'homme ne peut que constater son impuissance.

Les catastrophes environnementales et naturelles constituent une trag?die pour chaque individu et peuvent avoir des cons?quences d?sastreuses pour la soci?t? et la nation tout enti?re. Leur co?t est ?norme, aussi bien en termes de pertes en vies humaines qu'en termes de d?penses li?es ? la r?paration des d?g?ts mat?riels. Lorsqu'elles surviennent, force est de constater que la d?tection et/ou la pr?vention n'avaient pas ?t? dot?es de ressources suffisantes. De surcro?t, les mesures entreprises sont, souvent, trop tardives. Il faut renforcer les mesures de pr?vention, ce qui n?cessite des investissements ?normes. Mais les ressources sont tr?s limit?es. En cons?quence, il faut repenser l'utilisation des ressources disponibles tout en favorisant l'?mergence de nouvelles ressources. Il est ?vident qu'une nation ne peut mener une lutte isol?e contre les catastrophes naturelles car les probl?mes environnementaux impliquent une coop?ration internationale. Les menaces sont de nature globale et la coop?ration internationale est indispensable.

Les probl?mes ?cologiques locaux et r?gionaux peuvent avoir des incidences ?normes sur les relations internationales. Les retomb?es radioactives, les inondations et la s?cheresse ne respectent pas les fronti?res internationales. Les r?fugi?s fuyant les catastrophes environnementales traversent des fronti?res pour se rendre dans des pays aussi pauvres, voire plus pauvres que le leur. Ces nouvelles causes d'instabilit? et d'ins?curit? doivent ?tre reproduites dans le contenu et la nature des m?thodes utilis?es par les Nations pour le maintien et l'?tablissement de la paix et de la s?curit?. Puisque les probl?mes environnementaux et ?cologiques menacent s?rieusement la paix et la s?curit?, ils devront ?galement sous-tendre la politique ?trang?re, de d?fense et de s?curit?. Il faut analyser comment utiliser les ressources militaires pour s'attaquer ? cette menace accrue sur la s?curit? et annihiler ces nouvelles sources d'instabilit? et d'inqui?tude. Ces ressources doivent ?tre mobilis?es d'urgence afin de relever les d?fis environnementaux.

En mati?re de politique de s?curit?, la nouvelle donne a men? ? la d?tente militaire, au d?sarmement et ? des mesures visant ? instaurer la confiance entre les anciens ennemis que sont les ?tats-Unis et la Russie, ce qui a conduit ? une amputation consid?rable du budget de la d?fense, ? une r?duction des effectifs et ? la mise au rebus de mat?riel militaire.

La d?fense a surtout fait l'objet de mesures de restriction en Russie et aux ?tats-Unis, l'Europe a embo?t? le pas en r?duisant ses d?penses militaires(1).

? mesure que les ressources militaires sont d?gag?es, les forces arm?es disposent d'une opportunit? unique de s'attaquer aux probl?mes environnementaux croissants puisque leur potentiel est ?norme. L'arm?e est une organisation bien entra?n?e dot?e de moyens techniques complets pouvant ?tre utilis?s pour atteindre des objectifs environnementaux sans que cela entra?ne des co?ts ?lev?s. Il suffit de r?affecter ou de red?ployer des ressources. L'union europ?enne peut regrouper ses efforts autour d'une nouvelle strat?gie environnementale visant ? affecter les ressources militaires ? un objectif commun de protection de l'environnement. L'Union europ?enne peut initier la prise de conscience ?cologique commune et globale, et, par la m?me occasion, favoriser les efforts de paix et d'instauration de la confiance.

Les ?tats membres disposent ? la fois des atouts techniques et ?conomiques pour adopter une attitude totalement responsable ? l'?gard de l'environnement. Ils savent aussi quelles seraient les cons?quences d'un refus de relever les d?fis environnementaux. La d?gradation ?cologique influence les conditions de la croissance et du d?veloppement ?conomique, mais il n'emp?che que les d?penses militaires de par le monde sont trois ? cinq fois plus importantes que les sommes consacr?es ? la protection de l'environnement(2).

Le secteur de la d?fense en soi d?grade ?norm?ment l'environnement, ce qui devrait inciter les militaires ? adopter une attitude nettement plus responsable en la mati?re.

Menaces modernes sur la s?curit?

Le monde international prend de plus en plus conscience de l'ampleur des probl?mes environnementaux. En t?moignent les conf?rences de suivi des Nations unies sur l'eau (Mar del Plata), la d?sertification (Nairobi), l'environnement et le d?veloppement (Rio de Janeiro) et le changement climatique (Kyoto). Les probl?mes environnementaux peuvent g?n?rer des probl?mes tellement graves qu'ils sont susceptibles de menacer aussi bien la s?curit? des hommes que celle des ?tats. Ils peuvent aussi avoir une incidence sur les relations internationales des ?tats. L'air et l'eau ne connaissent pas de fronti?res internationales. Voici des exemples concrets de menaces potentielles ou existantes sur l'environnement:

Ressources hydrauliques limit?es

La demande d'eau propre augmente au diapason de la croissance de la population mondiale. La r?partition de l'eau douce naturelle est tr?s d?s?quilibr?e. Moins de 10 pays poss?dent 60 % de la totalit? des ressources d'eau douce de la plan?te(3). D'ailleurs, plusieurs pays d'Europe doivent importer de l'eau. Dor?navant, les attaques contre les sources d'eau potable ne constitueront plus un objectif en soi, mais bien un motif de conflit. Les conflits en mati?re de droit d'acc?s ? l'eau peuvent renforcer la tension internationale et locale et/ou d?boucher sur des conflits mondiaux. Par exemple, dans le cas de l'Inde et du Pakistan dont les relations sont tendues, des litiges ayant trait au fleuve Indus pourraient entra?ner un conflit arm?. Si l'on ?tablissait une liste des conflits potentiels li?s ? la ma?trise de l'eau douce, celle-ci serait longue. Quelque 300 fleuves, lacs et sources souterraines sont situ?s dans des zones frontali?res(4). Au Moyen-Orient, neuf pays sur 14 souffrent d'une p?nurie d'eau, mais il y a de fortes chances que les autres pays soient eux aussi un jour expos?s ? ce risque(5). En 1995, 1/5e de la population mondiale n'avait pas acc?s ? l'eau potable. Selon les estimations, la proportion sera de 2/3 en 2025(6).

Changement climatique

L'accroissement des ?missions, notamment des ?missions de dioxyde de carbone(7) a entra?n? une augmentation de la temp?rature moyenne de la plan?te de l'ordre de 5Ί durant le si?cle pr?sent. La chaleur a ?galement ?t? plus intense. Des chercheurs ont d?couvert que l'humidit? de l'air avait augment? de 10 % au cours des vingt derni?res ann?es. Dans certaines r?gions, cette humidit? accrue peut d?clencher des temp?tes plus violentes et plus fr?quentes, tandis que d'autres r?gions souffrent de la s?cheresse. Vingt ann?es de recherche intensive sur le changement climatique global seront peut-?tre n?cessaires avant de prendre une d?cision quant aux mesures qui s'imposent.

Selon les pr?visions du groupe intergouvernemental pour l'?tude du changement climatique (IPCC), une organisation internationale regroupant 2000 des meilleurs chercheurs mondiaux, la temp?rature de la plan?te augmentera de 1,5 ? 4,5 Ί et le niveau de la mer montera de 50 cm d'ici ? 2100 si les ?missions de dioxyde de carbone se maintiennent au niveau actuel. Les statistiques r?v?lent qu'un tiers de la population mondiale et un tiers des infrastructures sont regroup?s dans les r?gions c?ti?res. Une mont?e du niveau de la mer entra?nerait l'inondation de gigantesques r?gions. Des millions de personnes pourraient alors souffrir de la famine suite ? la perte de vastes zones agricoles.

Ce risque ainsi que d'autres peuvent entra?ner des exodes. Les r?fugi?s fuyant les catastrophes environnementales deviennent une pr?occupation majeure pour les ?tats du monde. Quelque 25 millions d'?tres humains ont ?t? chass?s par la s?cheresse, l'?rosion des terres, la d?sertification et d'autres probl?mes environnementaux, tandis que les r?fugi?s "traditionnels" repr?sentent environ 22 millions de personnes. Selon certains experts, les r?fugi?s de l'environnement peuvent provoquer "une des plus graves crises de notre ?poque"(8). Ils sont confront?s ? des probl?mes socio-politiques et ?conomiques pouvant d?clencher des conflits et des explosions de violence. Il faut leur accorder un statut officiel. Il faut s'attaquer au prob?me par le biais d'une coop?ration internationale renforc?e et augmenter l'aide aux pays menac?s et ? leurs habitants.

Impact environnemental des forces arm?es en temps de guerre et en temps de paix

Les forces arm?es sont un important facteur de d?gradation ?cologique. Leurs activit?s ont des incidences n?gatives ?normes sur l'environnement, aussi bien en temps de paix qu'en temps de guerre (certaines sont intentionnelles, d'autres involontaires). Depuis l'antiquit?, la destruction de l'environnement est une m?thode de guerre classique. D'ailleurs c'est la guerre qui nuit le plus ? l'environnement. En t?moignent les cons?quences terribles de la guerre du golfe o? des centaines de puits de p?trole ont ?t? la proie des flammes et o? des quantit?s de substances toxiques ont ?t? rejet?es dans l'atmosph?re de mani?re incontr?l?e. Il faudra du temps ? l'environnement pour s'en remettre. Certaines d?gradations peuvent ?tre irr?m?diables.

Les militaires d?veloppent des armes toujours plus puissantes provoquant des destructions sur une grande ?chelle. Sur le plan de l'environnement, une guerre moderne est plus destructrice que toute autre activit? polluante. Certains syst?mes d'armement, d?crits ci-dessous, sont ?galement susceptibles de d?grader gravement l'environnement en temps de paix.


Les mines d?truisent ?norm?ment l'environnement. Selon le PNUE (Programme des Nations unies pour l'environnement), les mines terrestres constituent l'arme la plus r?pandue que les guerres laissent derri?re elles; elles peuvent influencer l'?quilibre ?cologique. Le minage d?truit de vastes zones, souvent dans des r?gions agricoles qui deviennent inutilisables pendant longtemps. Les mines constituent l'obstacle majeur au d?veloppement dans de nombreux pays parmi les plus pauvres de la plan?te. 80 ? 110 millions de mines ont ?t? pos?es dans 65 pays. Elles peuvent exploser plusieurs dizaines d'ann?es plus tard, faisant surtout des victimes parmi la population civile, en particulier les enfants. La neutralisation des mines est un processus extr?mement dangereux, lent et co?teux. Le d?veloppement de nouvelles m?thodes de d?minage progresse trop lentement. Il faut acc?l?rer le processus.

Il faut se f?liciter que la conf?rence d'Oslo ait abouti en 1997 ? l'interdiction, sans exception, de toutes les mines antipersonnel, ? l'obligation de d?truire tous les stocks(9) de mines dans un d?lai de quatre ann?es et au renforcement de l'aide aux pays concern?s par ce fl?au. La Convention a ?t? sign?e ? Ottawa en 1997 par un grand nombre d'?tats, ? l'exception toutefois des ?tats-Unis, de la Russie, de l'Inde, de la Chine et d'autres ?tats qui ont pr?f?r? s'abstenir. L'Union europ?enne doit oeuvrer ? l'adh?sion imm?diate de ces pays ? l'accord. L'UE doit renforcer son aide aux victimes des mines et soutenir le d?veloppement de techniques de d?minage.

Armes non-l?tales(10)

Les armes dites non-l?tales ne sont pas un nouveau type d'armes. Elles existent depuis de nombreuses ann?es sous la forme, par exemple, de canons ? eau, de balles en caoutchouc et de gaz lacrymog?ne. Toutefois, les techniques deviennent de plus en plus sophistiqu?es. Elles sont appel?es non-l?tales bien qu'elles puissent faire beaucoup de d?g?ts, voire entra?ner l'invalidit? ou la mort.

Les armes technologiques mises au point peuvent ?tre dirig?es contres des objectifs mat?riels et humains. Citons, ? titre d'exemple, les armes acoustiques ? infrasons, des sons de basse fr?quence permettant de semer la confusion dans les rangs de l'ennemi, de le d?sorienter et, partant, de le neutraliser. La mousse paralysante et les lasers aveuglants sont d'autres exemples au m?me titre que certains produits chimiques qui, colorant l'eau, peuvent avoir un effet n?faste sur l'agriculture et mettre la population en danger. Les rayonnements ?lectromagn?tiques peuvent ?tre utilis?s pour neutraliser les syst?mes de donn?es, de navigation et de communication. Les armes dites non-l?tales peuvent aussi ?tre utilis?es contre les infrastructures et les administrations publiques, neutraliser le r?seau ferroviaire et jeter dans le chaos le syst?me financier d'un pays. Ces armes(11) pr?sentent des aspects communs: elles sont con?ues pour retarder, bloquer et vaincre un adversaire potentiel "sur le plan strat?gique".

Classer toutes ces armes sous la d?nomination commune et fallacieuse d'armes non-l?tales cr?e un grave malentendu. La d?nomination "non-l?tale" signifie que ces armes sont plus humaines que les armes conventionnelles. Or, il n'existe pas d'armes humaines. Tout type d'arme est susceptible de causer des d?g?ts ou de tuer, ce qui est pr?cis?ment sa raison d'?tre. En r?gle g?n?rale, les armes nonl?tales seront utilis?es durant la phase initiale d'un conflit; elles peuvent d'ailleurs constituer l'?l?ment d?clencheur du conflit. Les soldats et les policiers sont peut-?tre devenus plus violents parce que ces armes sont r?put?es moins dangereuses. Le danger majeur est que celles-ci risquent d'abaisser le seuil d'utilisation de la violence pour le r?glement des conflits.

L'objectif est de neutraliser l'ennemi sans lui infliger de longues souffrances et sans causer la mort. Le probl?me est de savoir comment et contre qui utiliser ces armes, car leurs cons?quences sont un aspect important. Une arme pouvant neutraliser un soldat est susceptible de blesser ou de tuer un enfant ou une personne ?g?e. La distance de tir et le nombre de tirs sont autant de facteurs dont il faut tenir compte pour ?valuer l'impact de l'arme. ? titre de comparaison, les armes conventionnelles n'entra?nent la mort "que" dans 25 cas sur 100(12).

Les armes non-l?tales constituent un auxiliaire efficace dans les guerres modernes, qu'elles soient utilis?es s?par?ment ou en m?me temps que des armes conventionnelles. Durant la guerre du Golfe, les ?tats-Unis ont utilis? des armes ? fr?quence radio pour neutraliser le syst?me d'approvisionnement en ?nergie de l'Irak(13), alors que l'on ignorait tout de leurs effets antipersonnel. Ces armes ne constituent donc pas une cat?gorie s?par?e, mais sont une composante d'un syst?me con?u pour tuer.

Le d?veloppement des armes non-l?tales ?largit les options guerri?res. Il en r?sulte une propension accrue ? utiliser la force et non l'inverse. Les armes non-l?tales n'entra?nent pas de conflits ? "z?ro perte".

L'int?r?t que les milieux militaires policiers et politiques portent ? l'essai de ces armes cro?t au rythme de leur diversification. Il ne s'agit pas que des pays du Nord les utilisent comme instrument d'immixtion politique ou de domination contre des pays du Sud.

Ces armes ne sont soumises ? aucune l?gislation efficace. Seule l'interpr?tation de diff?rentes dispositions en mati?re de contr?le des armements permet d'interdire un petit nombre d'armes et de techniques non-l?tales, par exemple, la mousse paralysante (utilis?e en Somalie et en Bosnie). La convention concernant l'utilisation de certaines armes conventionnelles a ?galement limit? l'utilisation de certains types de laser (aveuglant). La convention concernant l'utilisation des armes biologiques interdit le recours aux produits biologiques toxiques (salmonelles et autres bact?ries). Certaines d'entre elles peuvent ?tre d?sastreuses pour l'environnement. En cons?quence, il faut renforcer le droit international afin de r?glementer les armes nouvelles dont le d?veloppement se poursuit en permanence.

Le "projet Cyrus" du Comit? de la Croix Rouge internationale devrait s'appliquer aux armes nonl?tales en l'absence d'autres normes internationales fiables. Ce projet a class? les armes conventionnelles et ?tabli des crit?res en termes de mortalit?, d'invalidit?, de n?cessit? de traitement, de transfusion sanguine, etc. L'Union europ?enne doit faire en sorte que les nouvelles techniques d'armes et le d?veloppement de nouvelles strat?gies d'armement soient, elles aussi, couvertes et r?gies par des conventions internationales.

Armes chimiques

L'action des Nations unies en vue de la destruction des armes chimiques et d'autres armes de destruction massive en Irak a suscit? de graves pr?occupations quant aux incidences environnementales des activit?s militaires et a renforc? la n?cessit? de mettre au point des m?thodes de neutralisation pr?sentant des garanties de s?curit? sur le plan ?cologique. ? l'article 1 de la convention sur l'interdiction des armes chimiques (CWC), entr?e en vigueur en avril 1997, les ?tats parties ? la convention s'engagent ? ne jamais d?velopper, produire ou exporter des armes chimiques quelles que soient les circonstances, ? ne jamais faire usage d'armes chimiques et ? d?truire les armes chimiques courantes. L'article 3 dispose que trente jours apr?s l'entr?e en vigueur de la convention, les ?tats communiquent des informations sur les armes chimiques dont ils disposent, l'endroit o? celles-ci sont entrepos?es et pr?sentent un programme en vue de leur destruction. Les stocks les plus anciens devront ?tre d?truits d'abord. 165 ?tats ont sign? la convention et 110 ont ratifi? celle-ci. 26 ?tats n'ont pas sign? la convention, notamment plusieurs pays importants du Proche-Orient.

La destruction des armes chimiques comporte des aspects tr?s pr?occupants pour l'environnement - elles contiennent des dizaines de milliers de tonnes de gaz moutarde, de gaz neurotoxiques et d'autres produits chimiques. Elles peuvent ?tre d?truites par incin?ration, mais tr?s peu de pays disposent d'installations appropri?es. La neutralisation des armes chimiques est un processus on?reux, trois voire dix fois plus co?teux que leur production. Pour ?tre en mesure de d?truire ses ?normes stocks, la Russie devra recevoir une aide ?conomique d'autres pays. ? Kambarka, une ville de Russie, 6 000 tonnes d'armes chimiques sont entrepos?es dans des abris en bois ? deux kilom?tres d'une agglom?ration. Le traitement de grandes quantit?s de produits dangereux n?cessite des investissements consid?rables. Leur destruction s'?talera sur des ann?es. Il y a ? la fois un risque d'accident et de voir les armes tomber entre de mauvaises mains.

Il a ?t? confirm? que quelque 150 000 tonnes de bombes, d'obus et de mines contenant des armes chimiques, surtout du gaz moutarde, du phosg?ne, du tabun et de l'arsenic ont ?t? immerg?s dans le Skagerack ? la fin de la seconde guerre mondiale. 40 000 tonnes gisent au fond de la Baltique. Bon nombre de conteneurs ont ?t? rong?s par la rouille et les produits chimiques sont en contact direct avec l'eau de la mer. D?cision a ?t? prise de les laisser sur les fonds marins car le risque de perte massive de produit en cas de r?cup?ration est, proportionnellement, beaucoup plus ?lev?.

L'arme nucl?aire

Les cons?quences environnementales d'une guerre nucl?aire seraient ?normes. Il est probable que les effets combin?s des retomb?es radioactives sur une vaste zone, du trou d'ozone cr?? par le dioxyde d'azote lib?r? par les explosions nucl?aires et les modifications climatiques d?clench?es par de gigantesques incendies de longue dur?e entra?neraient des catastrophes environnementales.

Les effets n?fastes des essais nucl?aires sont eux aussi ?vidents. Selon les estimations, la quantit? totale de d?chets radioactifs lib?r?s dans l'atmosph?re durant les essais nucl?aires atmosph?riques est de 100 ? 1 000 fois plus importante que les retomb?es radioactives d?coulant de l'accident de Tchernobyl(14). L'accord partiel sur la limitation des essais nucl?aires conclu en 1963 entre les ?tatsUnis, l'Union sovi?tique et la Grande-Bretagne interdit les essais nucl?aires dans l'atmosph?re dans l'espace et sous l'eau, en l'occurrence dans tous les ?l?ments ? l'exception de la terre.

Depuis 1966, la France a proc?d? ? plus de 180 essais nucl?aire sur l'atoll de Mururoa dans le Pacifique, essais dont les incidences environnementales ont ?t? consid?rables(15). Plusieurs kilos de plutonium dangereux ont ?t? d?couverts dans les couches s?dimentaires des lagons des atolls de Mururoa et de Fangataufa. Des particules de plutonium se sont ?galement r?pandues sur le sol de trois ?les pr?s de Mururoa(16). L'Inde et le Pakistan, viennent d'effectuer des essais nucl?aires(17). Sur le plan technique, ces essais ne semblent pas encore suffisamment contr?l?s, ce qui signifie que leur impact environnemental d?passe largement la r?gion. Une commission d'enqu?te internationale ind?pendante devrait ?tre charg?e sur-le-champ d'examiner les effets environnementaux sur les lieux d'explosion et leurs environs.

Le plutonium est la substance la plus dangereuse que l'on connaisse. Beaucoup de pays d?tiennent d'?normes quantit?s de plutonium militaire. De surcro?t, il est relativement facile de produire des armes nucl?aires au moyen de plutonium "civil". Les installations ? vocation civile peuvent ?tre r?am?nag?es en peu de temps en vue de la production d'armes. La production de plutonium entra?ne une quantit? ?norme de d?chets hautement radioactifs. Le traitement de ces d?chets pose des probl?mes consid?rables.

La fabrication g?n?ralis?e d'armes de destruction massive durant ces derni?res d?cennies a produit des quantit?s ?normes de d?chets. Aucune m?thode n'est efficace lorsqu'il s'agit de stocker des d?chets radioactifs. Ceux-ci sont g?n?ralement plac?s dans des conteneurs, mais des quantit?s ?normes sont aussi d?vers?es dans la nature. Le d?chet radioactif est facilement inflammable et peut exploser en l'absence de ventilation ou de refroidissement. Un accident s'est produit en 1957 ? la centrale nucl?aire de Chelyabinsk-65 pr?s de la ville de Kystym dans l'Oural: un r?servoir rempli de d?chets radioactifs avait explos? et des d?chets s'?taient r?pandus sur une ?tendue de 1 000 km2. 10 000 personnes ont d? ?tre ?vacu?es. Aujourd'hui, au bord du lac Karachay, pr?s de Chelyabinsk-65, la radioactivit? est encore tellement puissante qu'elle peut entra?ner une mort instantan?e(18). Dans la r?gion de la mer Baltique, de vastes zones ont ?t? pollu?es par les activit?s de l'arm?e sovi?tique. En Estonie, le lac Sillanm?, aussi appel? "lac atomique" contient des d?chets radioactifs d'origine militaire, l'?quivalent de milliers d'armes nucl?aires. 100 m s?parent le lac Sillanm? de la Baltique. Toute contamination de la Baltique aurait des cons?quences d?sastreuses pour l'environnement dans toute la r?gion.

? la fin des ann?es 80, la Russie poss?dait plus de sous-marins nucl?aires que tous les autres pays du monde r?unis. La presqu'?le de Kola et Sevrodvinsk, en Russie, abritent aujourd'hui la plus forte concentration de r?acteurs nucl?aires (240)(19) au monde. Des quantit?s ?normes de d?chets radioactifs et d'innombrables sous-marins ? propulsion nucl?aire gisent dans les chantiers navals de Kola. La Russie et sa flotte sont confront?es ? un probl?me insoluble: la gestion des r?acteurs mis au rebut. Sur le plan ?conomique, elles n'ont pas les moyens de financer un d?montage pr?sentant toutes les garanties de s?curit?. La m?diocrit? des salaires a provoqu? l'exode des ?l?ments qualifi?s, de sorte que le personnel des chantiers manque cruellement de comp?tence.

En plein centre de Moscou, ont ?t? d?couvertes 1 200 sources de contamination radioactive, notamment des tas de sable, des abris, des appartements priv?s, des garages et des terrains de sport(20). En Russie, la possibilit? de se procurer des armes nucl?aires, chimiques et biologiques provenant d'entrep?ts militaires ou des substances issues d'instituts de recherche ou de l'industrie ne doit pas ?tre sous-estim?e.

L'absence d'installations appropri?es permettant de traiter les d?chets sans nuire ? l'environnement se fait fortement sentir. Les cons?quences d'un accident pourraient ?tre d?sastreuses, ? la fois pour l'?conomie et l'environnement. Les risques et l'ampleur d'un accident s?rieux ne font que cro?tre ? mesure que les ann?es se succ?dent sans que soient prises des mesures ad?quates.

Il existe une proposition concr?te et r?aliste en vue de la destruction progressive de l'arsenal nucl?aire de la plan?te. Cette proposition a ?t? pr?sent?e en ao?t 1996 par le groupe d'experts ind?pendant qui constituait la commission de Canberra(21). En juillet 1996, la Cour internationale de La Haye proclamait dans un arr?t unanime que l'article 6 du trait? sur la non-prolif?ration des armes nucl?aires obligeait les ?tats nucl?aires ? engager des n?gociations sur le d?sarmement nucl?aire. La Cour de justice a ?galement proclam? que toute menace d'utiliser les armes nucl?aires ou l'utilisation de cellesci ?tait incompatible avec le droit international. L'Union europ?enne doit prendre une part active ? la mise en oeuvre de la proposition de la commission de Canberra et de l'article 6 du trait? sur la nonprolif?ration des armes nucl?aires.

HAARP - Un syst?me d'armement modifiant le climat

Le 5 f?vrier 1998, la sous-commission s?curit? et d?sarmement du Parlement a proc?d? ? une audition portant notamment sur HAARP. Des repr?sentants de l'OTAN et des ?tats-Unis avaient ?t? convi?s ? la r?union. Ils ont toutefois choisi de ne pas venir. La sous-commission a d?plor? que les ?tats-Unis n'aient envoy? aucun repr?sentant ? l'audition et qu'ils n'aient pas saisi l'opportunit? de faire des commentaires sur le mat?riel pr?sent?(22).

HAARP est un programme de recherche sur le rayonnement ? haute fr?quence (High Frequency Active Auroral Research Project). Il est conduit conjointement par l'arm?e de l'air et la marine des ?tats-Unis et par l'Institut de g?ophysique de l'universit? d'Alaska ? Fairbanks. Des tentatives analogues ont lieu en Norv?ge, dans l'Antarctique, mais aussi dans l'ex-Union sovi?tique(23). HAARP est un projet de recherche utilisant un ?quipement terrestre, un r?seau d'antennes. Chacune est aliment?e par son propre ?metteur pour r?chauffer des parties de l'ionosph?re(24) au moyen d'ondes radio puissantes. L'?nergie ainsi g?n?r?e r?chauffe certaines parties de l'ionosph?re, ce qui cr?e des trous dans l'ionosph?re et des "lentilles" artificielles.

HAARP peut avoir de multiples applications. La manipulation des particularit?s ?lectriques de l'atmosph?re permet de contr?ler des ?nergies gigantesques. Utilis?e ? des fins militaires contre un ennemi, cette technique peut avoir des cons?quences terribles. HAARP permet d'envoyer ? un endroit d?termin? des millions de fois plus d'?nergie que tout autre ?metteur traditionnel. L'?nergie peut aussi ?tre dirig?e contre un objectif mobile, notamment contre des missiles ennemis.

Le projet am?liore la communication avec les sous-marins et permet de manipuler les conditions m?t?orologiques mondiales. Mais l'inverse, perturber les communications, est ?galement possible. En manipulant l'ionosph?re, on peut bloquer la communication globale tout en conservant ses propres possibilit?s de communications. La radiographie de la terre sur une profondeur de plusieurs kilom?tres (tomographie terrestre p?n?trante) ? la fin de d?couvrir les champs de p?trole et de gaz, mais aussi les ?quipements militaires sous-terrains, et le radar transhorizon qui identifie des objects ? grande distance au-del? de la ligne d'horizon sont d'autres applications du syst?me HAARP.

Depuis les ann?es 50, les ?tats-Unis proc?dent ? des explosions nucl?aires dans les ceintures de Van Allen(25) afin d'examiner les effets des impulsions ?lectromagn?tiques qu'elles d?clenchent sur les communications radio et le fonctionnement des ?quipements radars. Ces explosions ont g?n?r? de nouvelles ceintures de rayonnement magn?tique qui ont pratiquement entour? la terre tout enti?re. Les ?lectrons se d?pla?aient le long de lignes de champs magn?tiques et cr?aient une aurore bor?ale artificielle au-dessus du p?le nord. Ces essais militaires risquent de perturber ? long terme les ceintures de Van Allen. Le champ magn?tique terrestre pourrait s'?tendre sur de vastes zones et emp?cher toute communication radio. Certaines scientifiques am?ricains estiment qu'il faudra plusieurs centaines d'ann?es avant que les ceintures de Van Allen retrouvent leur ?tat initial. HAARP peut bouleverser les conditions climatiques. Tout l'?cosyst?me peut ?tre menac?, en particulier dans l'Antarctique o? il est fragile.

Les trous dans l'ionosph?re caus?s par les ondes radio puissantes qui y sont envoy?es constituent un autre effet tr?s grave d'HAARP. L'ionosph?re est notre bouclier contre le rayonnement cosmique. L'on esp?re que ces trous se refermeront, mais l'exp?rience acquise suite ? la modification de la couche d'ozone donne ? penser le contraire. Le bouclier de l'ionosph?re est fortement perc? ? plusieurs endroits.

En raison de l'ampleur de ces incidences sur l'environnement, HAARP constitue un probl?me global et il faudrait ?valuer si les avantages que procure ce syst?me compensent les risques encourus. Ses incidences ?cologiques et ?thiques doivent ?tre ?valu?es avant la poursuite des travaux de recherche et la r?alisation d'essais. L'opinion publique ignore pratiquement tout du projet HAARP et il est important qu'elle soit mise au courant.

HAARP est li? ? la recherche spatiale intensive men?e depuis 50 ans ? des fins clairement militaires, par exemple en tant qu'?l?ment de la "guerre des ?toiles" en vue du contr?le de la haute atmosph?re et des communications. Ces travaux de recherche doivent ?tre consid?r?s comme extr?mement n?fastes pour l'environnement et la vie humaine. Personne ne sa?t avec certitude ce que peuvent ?tre les effets de HAARP. Il faut lutter contre la politique du secret en mati?re de recherche militaire. Il faut promouvoir le droit ? l'information et au contr?le d?mocratique des projets de recherche militaire ainsi que le contr?le parlementaire.

Une s?rie d'accords internationaux ("la convention sur l'interdiction d'utiliser ? des fins militaires ou ? d'autres fins hostiles des processus modifiant l'environnement, le trait? sur l'Antarctique, l'accord ?tablissant les principes des activit?s des ?tats en mati?re de recherche spatiale, en ce compris la lune et d'autres corps spatiaux ainsi que la convention des Nations unies sur le droit maritime) font que HAARP est un projet hautement contestable non seulement sur les plans humain et politique mais aussi du point de vue l?gal. En vertu du trait? sur l'Antarctique, l'Antarctique ne peut ?tre utilis?e qu'? des fins pacifiques(26), ce qui signifie que HAARP enfreint le droit international. Tous les effets des nouveaux syst?mes d'armement doivent ?tre ?valu?s par des organes internationaux ind?pendants. Il faut encourager la conclusion d'autres accords internationaux afin de prot?ger l'environnement contre toute destruction inutile en temps de guerre.

Incidences des activit?s militaires sur l'environnement

Outre le syst?me d'armement militaire, toutes les activit?s militaires, m?me les manoeuvres en temps de paix ont, d'une mani?re ou d'une autre, des effets n?fastes sur l'environnement. Toutefois, lorsqu'il est question de d?vastation de l'environnement, le r?le de l'arm?e n'est, g?n?ralement, pas ?voqu?; c'est la soci?t? civile qui est la cible de toutes les critiques. Il y a au moins deux explications ? cela(27). Parce qu'elles sont plac?es sous le sceau du secret, les activit?s militaires ne sont pratiquement jamais cit?es, et il est difficile d'opposer le facteur environnement ? l'int?r?t supr?me d'un pays, ? savoir sa s?curit? et sa d?fense.? pr?sent que les catastrophes environnementales et naturelles constituent une menace majeure sur la s?curit?, cet argument devient plus discutable.

L'arm?e se pr?pare dans des conditions les plus r?alistes possibles aux t?ches qui seraient les siennes en cas de conflit. C'est pourquoi ses manoeuvres se d?roulent dans des conditions proches d'une guerre r?elle, ce qui occasionne de graves d?vastations de l'environnement. En t?moignent le retrait des troupes sovi?tiques et les bases militaires abandonn?es par celles-ci en Europe centrale et orientale qui ont fortement endommag? l'environnement local. Les manoeuvres militaires saccagent les sites et d?truisent la vie animale. Elles d?vastent consid?rablement l'environnement de vastes r?gions rurales. La superficie des terrains d'entra?nement pour les tirs d'artillerie et de missiles tactiques augmente. M?me la production d'?quipements militaires et l'industrie fabriquant les produits militaires entra?nent de graves nuisances.

Les militaires sont responsables des ?missions de plusieurs gaz influen?ant le climat, surtout le dioxyde de carbone, mais aussi de l'incin?ration de combustibles fossiles et de l'?mission de CFC qui entra?nent un amincissement de la couche d'ozone(28). Les combustibles utilis?s par les avions ?mettent des substances acides telles que le dioxyde de carbone et l'oxyde de soufre. L'arm?e consomme ?norm?ment de carburant et est responsable d'une large part de la totalit? de la pollution d?coulant des avions(29). Les avions volant ? haute altitude et les missiles sont particuli?rement polluants, tant en termes de nuisances sonores qu'en termes d'?missions. Les gaz d'?missions de tous les missiles utilisant un combustible solide contiennent d'?normes quantit?s d'acide chlorhydrique; chaque vol de la navette spatiale ?met quelque 75 tonnes de chlore qui ira d?truire la couche d'ozone. Le bruit r?sultant de l'utilisation de munitions de gros calibre durant les manoeuvres militaires peut aussi avoir des effets n?faste sur l'environnement.

Les exercices de tirs sont polluants car des ?clats m?talliques sont projet?s dans la nature et d'?normes quantit?s de plomb se r?pandent dans l'environnement suite ? l'utilisation de quantit?s ?normes de munitions de petit calibre contenant du plomb. L'on ne peut que d?plorer l'absence d'informations exhaustives quant ? l'utilisation de m?taux.

L'int?r?t port? aux cons?quences environnementales du d?sarmement est r?cent. Des quantit?s consid?rables de substances explosives sont d?truites chaque ann?e, la plupart de mani?re industrielle. Certains types de munitions, pour diverses raisons, ne
Chemtrails Zeist 4 maart 2005 omstreeks 16.40u331 viewshttp://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-//EP//TEXT+RE..

en - English

REPORT 163k 104k

14 January 1999 PE 227.710/fin. A4-0005/99

on the environment, security and foreign policy
Draftsman: Mr Olsson, Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Protection
(Hughes procedure)
Committee on Foreign Affairs, Security and Defence Policy
Rapporteur: Mrs Maj Britt Theorin

At the sitting of 13 July 1995, the President of Parliament announced that he had referred the motion for a resolution tabled pursuant to Rule 45 of the Rules of Procedure by Mrs Rehn Rouva on the potential use of military-related resources for environmental strategies, (B4-0551/95), to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, Security and Defence Policy as the committee responsible and to the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Protection for its opinion.
Annex 1

At the sitting of 13 July 1995, the President of Parliament announced that he had referred the motion for a resolution tabled pursuant to Rule 45 of the Rules of Procedure by Mrs Rehn Rouva on the potential use of military-related resources for environmental strategies, (B4-0551/95), to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, Security and Defence Policy as the committee responsible and to the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Protection for its opinion.

At the request of the Conference of Committee Chairmen, the President, at the sitting of 15 November 1996, announced that the Committee on Foreign Affairs, Security and Defence Policy had been authorised to submit a report on the matter.

At its meeting of 19 November 1996 the Committee on Foreign Affairs, Security and Defence Policy appointed Mrs Maj Britt Theorin rapporteur.

At the sitting of 19 June 1998 the President of Parliament announced that this report would be drawn up, pursuant to the Hughes Procedure, by the Committee on Foreign Affairs, Security and Defence Policy and the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Protection.

The draft report was considered by the Committee on Foreign Affairs, Security and Defence Policy at its meetings of 5 February, 29 June, 21 July, 3, 23 and 28 September, 13, 27 and 29 October 1998 and 4 and 5 January 1999, and by the Subcommittee on Security and Disarmament at its meetings of 5 February and 3 and 23 September 1998.

At the last meeting the Committee on Foreign Affairs, Security and Defence Policy adopted the motion for a resolution by 28 votes to none with one abstention.

The following took part in the vote: Spencer, chairman; Theorin, rapporteur; Aelvoet, Andr?L?onard, Bar?n-Crespo, Bertens, Bianco, Burenstam Linder, Carnero Gonz?lez, Carrozzo (for Colajanni), Dillen, Dupuis, Gahrton, Goerens (for Cars), Graziani, G?nther (for Gomolka), Lalumi?re, Lambrias, Pack (for Habsburg), Pettinari (for Imbeni pursuant to Rule 138(2), Piha, Rinsche, Sakellariou, Salafranca S?nchez-Neyra, Schroedter (for M. Cohn-Bendit), Schwaiger (for Mme Lenz), Speciale, Swoboda (for Mme Hoff), Tindemans, Titley and Truscott.

The opinion of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Protection is attached.

The report was tabled on 14 January 1999.

The deadline for tabling amendments will be indicated in the draft agenda for the relevant partsession.


Resolution on the environment, security and foreign policy

The European Parliament,

- having regard to the motion for a resolution tabled by Mrs Rehn Rouva on the potential use of military-related resources for environmental strategies (B4-0551/95).

- having regard to the UN study 'Charting potential uses of resources allocated to military activities for civilian endeavours to protect the environment', UN (A46/364, 17 September 1991),

- having regard to its resolution of 17 July 1995 on anti-personnel landmines; a murderous impediment to development (A4-0149/95),

- having regard to its previous resolutions on non-proliferation and the testing of nuclear weapons and the Canberra Commission report of August 1996 on the abolition of nuclear weapons,

- having regard to the International Court's unanimous ruling on the obligation of the nuclear weapon states to negotiate for a ban on nuclear weapons (Advisory Opinion No. 96/22 of 8 July 1996),

- having regard to its resolution of 19 April 1996 on the proposal for a Council Decision establishing a Community action programme in the field of civil protection (A4-0100/96),

- having regard to its past resolutions on chemical weapons,

- having regard to the outcome of the UN Conferences in Kyoto in 1997 and Rio de Janeiro in 1992,

- having regard to the hearing on HAARP and Non-lethal Weapons held by the Foreign Affairs Subcommitee on Security and Disarmament in Brussels on 5 February 1998,

- having regard to Rule 148,

- having regard to the report of Committee on Foreign Affairs, Security and Defence Policy and the opinion of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Protection (A4-0005/99),

A. whereas the end of the Cold War has radically changed the security situation in the world and that the relaxation of military tension has resulted in comprehensive disarmament in the military field in general and in nuclear weapons in particular, releasing substantial military resources,

B. whereas, despite this complete transformation of the geostrategic situation since the end of the Cold War, the risk of catastrophic damage to the integrity and sustainability of the global environment, notably its bio-diversity, has not significantly diminished, whether from the accidental or unauthorised firing of nuclear weapons or the authorised use of nuclear weapons based on a perceived but unfounded threat of impending attack,

C. whereas this risk could be very considerably reduced within a very short timeframe by the rapid implementation by all nuclear weapons states of the six steps contained in the Canberra Commission"s report concerning, in particular the removal of all nuclear weapons from the present "hair trigger alert? readiness and the progressive transfer of all weapons into strategic reserve,

D. whereas Article VI of the 1968 Treaty on the Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) commits all of its parties to undertake "to pursue negotiations in good faith on a treaty on general and complete disarmament? and the Principles and Objectives adopted at the 1995 NPT Conference reaffirmed that the Treaty"s ultimate goal was the complete elimination of nuclear weapons,

E. whereas threats to the environment, the flow of refugees, ethnic tension, terrorism and international crime are new and serious threats to security and that the ability to deal with various forms of conflict is increasing in importance as the security scene changes; whereas as some of the threats to security are non-military it is important that resources allocated to military activities are also used for non-military purposes,

F. whereas the world's resources are being exploited as if they were inexhaustible, which has led to increasingly frequent natural and environmental disasters; whereas such local and regional ecological problems may have considerable impact on international relations; regretting that this has not been more clearly reflected in national foreign, security and defence policies,

G. whereas conflicts throughout the world are predominantly at an intra-state rather than interstate level and, where inter-state conflicts do arise, they are increasingly concerned with access to or the availability of basic vital resources, especially water, food and fuel,

H. whereas the access to and availability of such vital natural resources are inherently connected to environmental degradation and pollution, by both cause and effect, whereas it follows logically therefore that conflict prevention must increasingly focus on these issues,

I. whereas the pressure on land, both fertile and habitable, historically a major cause of tension and conflict, is increasingly caused by environmental degradation, notably climate change and the consequent rise in sea levels,

J. whereas all those factors, which affect the poorest and most vulnerable populations of the world most of all, are constantly increasing the incidence of so-called 'environmental refugees', resulting both in direct pressure on EU immigration and justice policies, on development assistance and spending on humanitarian aid and, indirectly, in increased security problems for the EU in the form of regional instability in other parts of the world,

K. whereas, according to detailed international research collated and published by the Climate Institute in Washington, the number of 'environmental refugees' now exceeds the number of 'traditional refugees' (25 m compared with 22 m) and whereas this figure is expected to double by 2010 and could well rise by substantially more on a worst-case basis,

L. whereas the issue of 'environmental refugees' is merely a symptom of a humanitarian disaster on a much more massive scale in terms of the 1.3 billion people who live in absolute poverty according to the UN definition; whereas over one quarter of these people try to subsist in areas of the world that are extremely vulnerable environmentally and are the main contributors to global environmental problems such as deforestation and desertification,

M. whereas, since the end of the Cold War, although the management of global issues has been largely stripped of the previously dominant ideological context and is now much less determined by the question of military balance, this has yet to be reflected in the UN"s system of global governance by emphasising the coherence and effectiveness of both military and non-military components of security policy,

N. whereas, nonetheless, the emphasis of a growing proportion of the UN"s work on global political and security issues is essentially non-military, and notably related to the relationship between trade, aid, the environment and sustainable development,

O. whereas there is an urgent need to mobilise adequate resources to meet the environmental challenge and whereas very limited resources are available for environmental protection, for which reason a reappraisal of the use of existing resources is called for,

P. whereas as military resources have been released the armed forces have had a unique opportunity and ample capacity to support the civilian efforts to cope with the increasing environmental problems,

Q. whereas military-related resources are by their nature national assets while the environmental challenge is global; whereas ways must therefore be found for international cooperation in the transfer and use of military resources for environmental protection,

R. whereas the short-term costs of environmental protection have to be seen in the light of the long-term cost of doing nothing in this field, and whereas there is an increasing need for a cost benefit analysis of various environmental strategies which should cover possible transfers, reorientation and redeployment of military-related resources,

S. whereas the common goal of restoring the world's damaged ecosystems cannot be achieved in isolation from the question of the fair exploitation of global resources and whereas there is a need to facilitate international technical cooperation and encourage the transfer of appropriate military-related technology,

T. whereas, despite the existing conventions, military research is ongoing on environmental manipulation as a weapon, as demonstrated for example by the Alaska-based HAARP system,

U. whereas the experience of the development and use of nuclear power 'for peaceful purposes" serves as a salutory warning as to how military secrecy can prevent proper assessment and supervision of mixed civilian/military technologies if transparency is in any way compromised,

V. whereas the general disquiet over ecological decline and environmental crises requires the setting of priorities in the national decision-making process and that the individual countries must pool their efforts in response to environmental disasters,

1. Calls on the Commission to present to the Council and the Parliament a common strategy, as foreseen by the Amsterdam Treaty, which brings together the CFSP aspects of EU policy with its trade, aid, development and international environmental policies between 2000 and 2010 so as to tackle the following individual issues and the relationships between them:

(a) Agricultural and food production and environmental degradation;

(b) Water shortages and transfrontier water supply;

(c) Deforestation and restoring carbon sinks;

(d) Unemployment, underemployment and absolute poverty;(e) Sustainable development and climate change;

(f) Deforestation, desertification and population growth;

(g) The link between all of the above and global warming and the humanitarian and environmental impact of increasingly extreme weather events;

2. Notes that preventive environmental measures are an important instrument of security policy; calls, therefore, on the Member States to define environmental and health objectives as part of their long-term defence and security assessments, military research and action plans;

3. Recognises the important part played by the armed forces in a democratic society, their national defence role and the fact that peace-keeping and peace-making initiatives can make a substantial contribution to the prevention of environmental damage;

4. Considers that atmospheric and underground nuclear tests have as a result of nuclear radiation fall-out distributed large quantities of radioactive cesium 137, strontium 90 and other cancer inducing isotopes over the whole planet and have caused considerable environmental and health damage in the test areas;

5. Considers that several parts of the world are threatened by the uncontrolled, unsafe and unprofessional storage and dumping of nuclear submarines and surface-vessels, as well as their radioactive fuel and leaking nuclear reactors, considering the high possibility that as a result large regions might soon start to be polluted by the radiation;

6. Considers that still an appropriate solution has to be found to deal with the chemical and conventional weapons which have been dumped after both World Wars in many places in the seas around Europe as an 'easy" solution to get rid of these stocks and that up to today nobody knows what might be the ecological results in the long run, in particular for the fish and for beach-life;

7. Considers that the European Union will have to contribute to find a solution for the problem that, as result of ongoing warfare in whole regions of Africa, human and agricultural structures have been ruined and therefore the lands are now subject to environmental disaster in particular by deforestation and erosion leading to desertification;

8. Calls on the military to end all activities which contribute to damaging the environment and health and to undertake all steps necessary to clean up and decontaminate the polluted areas;

Use of military resources for environmental purposes

9. Considers that the resources available to reverse or stem damage to the environment are inadequate to meet the global challenge; recommends therefore that the Member States seek to utilize military-related resources for environmental protection by:

(a) introducing training for environmental defence troops with a view to establishing a coordinated European environmental protection brigade;

(b) listing their environmental needs and the military resources available for environmental purposes and using those resources in their national environmental planning;

(c) considering which of its military resources it can make available to the United Nations or the European Union on a temporary, long-term or stand-by basis as an instrument for international cooperation in environmental disasters or crises;

(d) drawing up plans for creating national and European protection teams using military personnel, equipment and facilities made available under the Partnership for Peace for use in environmental emergencies;

(e) incorporating objectives for environmental protection and sustainable development in its concepts of security;

(f) ensuring that its armed forces comply with specific environmental rules and that damage caused by them to the environment in the past is made good;

(g) including environmental considerations in its military research and development programmes;

10. Urges the governments of the Member States, since practical experience in the field is limited, to:

(a) establish centres for the exchange of information on current national experience in environmental applications for military resources;

(b) facilitating the global dissemination of environmental data including such data obtained by the use of military satellites and other information-gathering platforms;

11. Calls on the Member States to apply civil environmental legislation to all military activities and for the military defence sector to assume responsibility for, and pay for the investigation, clean-up and decontamination of areas damaged by past military activity, so that such areas can be returned to civil use, this is especially important for the extensive chemical and conventional munition dumps along the coastlines of the EU;

12. Calls on all Member States to formulate environmental and health objectives and action plans so as to enhance the measures taken by their armed forces to protect the environment and health;

13. Calls on the governments of the Member States progressively to improve the protection of the environment by the armed forces by means of training and technical development and by giving all regular and conscript personnel basic training in environmental matters;

14. Calls on the European Union to unite around a new environmental strategy using military resources for the joint protection of the environment;

15. Considers that environmental strategies should be able to include monitoring the world environment, assessing the data thus collected, coordinating scientific work and disseminating information, exploiting relevant data from national observation and monitoring systems to give a continuous and comprehensive picture of the state of the environment;

16. Notes that the drastic fall in military expenditure could result in substantial problems in certain regions and calls on the Member States to step up their efforts to convert military production facilities and technologies to produce civil goods, and for civil applications, using national programmes and Community initiatives such as the KONVER programme;

17. Stresses the importance of stepping up preventive environmental work with a view to combating environmental and natural disasters;

18. Calls on the Commission to conduct a detailed study of security-related threats to the environment in Europe and to draw up a Green Paper on military activities affecting the environment;

19. Calls on the Council to do more to ensure that the USA, Russia, India and China sign the 1997 Ottawa Treaty, banning anti-personnel mines, without delay;

20. Believes that the EU should do more to help the victims of landmines and to support the development of mine clearance techniques, and that the development of mine clearance methods should be accelerated;

21. Believes that the secrecy of military research must be resisted and the right to openness and democratic scrutiny of military research projects be encouraged;

22. Calls on the Member States to develop environmentally-sound technology for the destruction of weapons;

23. Notes that one of the potentially most serious threats that exist on the EU's doorstep lies in the inadequate monitoring of waste from nuclear arms processing and of biological and chemical weapons stores and in the need for decontamination following military activity; stresses that it is important that the Member States actively promote increased international cooperation, for instance within the UN and the Partnership for Peace, with the aim of destroying such weapons in as environment-friendly way as possible;

24. Takes the view that all further negotiations on the reduction and the eventual elimination of nuclear weapons must be based on the principles of mutual and balanced reductions commitments;

25. Takes the view that, given the particularly difficult circumstances afflicting the countries of the former Soviet Union, the threat to the global as well as local environment posed by the degradation of the condition of nuclear weapons and materials still held in those countries makes it an even more urgent priority to reach agreement on the further progressive elimination of nuclear weapons;

Legal aspects of military activities

26. Calls on the European Union to seek to have the new 'non-lethal' weapons technology and the development of new arms strategies also covered and regulated by international conventions;

27. Considers HAARP (High Frequency Active Auroral Research Project) by virtue of its farreaching 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 before any further research and testing; regrets the repeated refusal of the United States Administration to send anyone in person to give evidence to the public hearing or any subsequent meeting held by its competent committee into the environmental and public risks connected with the high Frequency Active Auroral Research Project (HAARP) programme currently being funded in Alaska;

28. Requests the Scientific and Technological Options Assessment (STOA) Panel to agree to examine the scientific and technical evidence provided in all existing research findings on HAARP to assess the exact nature and degree of risk that HAARP poses both to the local and global environment and to public health generally;

29. Calls on the Commission, in collaboration with the governments of Sweden, Finland, Norway and the Russian Federation, to examine the environmental and public health implications of the HAARP programme for Arctic Europe and to report back to Parliament with its findings;

30. Calls in particular for an international convention for a global ban on all research and development, whether military or civilian, which seeks to apply knowledge of the chemical, electrical, sound vibration or other functioning of the human brain to the development of weapons which might enable any form of manipulation of human beings, including a ban on any actual or possible deployment of such systems;

31. Calls on the European Union and its Member States to work for the establishment of international treaties to protect the environment from unnecessary destruction in the event of war;

32. Calls on the European Union and its Member States to work towards the establishment of international standards for the environmental impact of peacetime military activities;

33. Calls on the Council to play an active part in the implementation of the proposals of the Canberra Commission and Article 6 of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty on nuclear disarmament;

34. Calls on the Council, and the British and French governments in particular, to take the lead within the framework of the NPT and the Conference on Disarmament with regard to the further negotiations towards full implementation of the commitments on nuclear weapons reductions and elimination as rapidly as possible to a level where, in the interim, the global stock of remaining weapons poses no threat to the integrity and sustainability of the global environment;

35. Calls on the Presidency of the Council, the Commission and the governments of the Member States to advocate the approach taken in this resolution in all further United Nations meetings held under the auspices of or in relation to the NPT and the Conference on Disarmament;

36. Calls on the Presidency of the Council and the Commission, in accordance with Article J.7 of the Treaty on European Union, to report to it on the Union"s position concerning the specific points contained in this Resolution within the context of forthcoming meetings of the United Nations, its agencies and bodies, notably the 1999 Preparatory Committee of the NPT, the Conference on Disarmament and all other relevant international fora;

37. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the Member States of the European Union and to the United Nations.


A defence against environmental threats

The security scenario has undergone considerable change in a relatively short period of time. It is less than 10 years since the Iron Curtain divided a nuclear Europe in half. Europe is now uniting as the European Union enlarges to include former Warsaw Pact countries. The Cold War has ended and a major war in Europe would now seem impossible. At the same time new threats are emerging. Massive displacement of refugees, ethnic conflicts, terrorism and international crime are just some examples of current threats to security. Another serious threat is posed by natural disasters and environmental problems caused by nature itself and the human race's methods of exploiting the earth's resources.

A number of environmental catastrophes have brought the human race new problems, the latest of these being the dam disaster in Spain. The landslides in Italy, the devastation wrought by El Ni?o and the Chernobyl nuclear accident are other contemporary examples of the devastating consequences of natural and environmental disasters. In certain parts of the world, drought can wipe out several years' harvests bringing starvation, and in many cases death, to much of the population. Mankind's defences against these disasters look very fragile at the present time.

Environmental and natural disasters have tragic consequences for individuals and may have catastrophic repercussions for societies and entire nations. The cost of this type of disaster is huge both in terms of the lives they claim and the cost of repairing the material damage. When such disasters occur, it is obvious that there have not been sufficient resources to detect and/prevent them. The efforts that are made are often far too late. Preventive work must therefore be strengthened. The investment required for this is enormous but the available resources are very limited. A new approach is required to exploit the available resources, while new resources are developed at the same time. It is obvious that a nation alone cannot protect itself against environmental disasters; environmental problems call for international cooperation. The threatening scenarios are global and international cooperation is fundamental.

Local and regional ecological problems can have considerable implications for international relations. Radioactive fallout, floods and drought are not held in check by national frontiers. Environmental refugees cross national boundaries to equally poor or even poorer nations. These new causes of instability and insecurity must be reflected in the content and form of how nations create and maintain peace and security. Since environmental and ecological problems constitute serious threats to peace and security, this fact must also be reflected in foreign, defence and security policy. There is a need to analyse how military resources can be used against this growing threat to security and to eliminate these new sources of instability and unrest. There is an urgent need to mobilise resources to meet the environmental challenge.

The change in the security situation has resulted in military d?tente, disarmament and confidencebuilding measures between the former enemies, the USA and Russia. This has led to intensive scaling down of military forces, units have been disbanded and military equipment has, therefore, become superfluous. Russia and the USA, above all, have radically reduced their armed forces though military expenditure has also fallen in Europe(1).

The freeing-up of military resources has given the armed forces a unique opportunity and plenty of capacity to deal with the increasing number of environmental problems. The armed forces have a highly efficient organisation and extensive technical resources which can be used for environment enhancement at no great cost by redeploying or rechannelling resources. The European Union can unite around a new environmental strategy in which military resources are used for joint protection of the environment. The European Union can play an important role in furthering a joint global assumption of responsibility for the environment and at the same time promote peace and confidencebuilding measures.

The Member States of the European Union have both the technical and economic wherewithal to take wide-ranging responsibility for the environment. They are also aware of the implications of ignoring the environmental challenge. The destruction of the environment affects the underlying conditions determining growth and economic development but despite that, military expenditure worldwide is three to five times greater than spending on the environment.(2)

The armed forces themselves caused enormous damage to the environment and should, therefore, also take considerably more responsibility for the environment.

Modern security threats

There is a growing international awareness of the extent of environmental problems. This is illustrated in particular by the UN follow-up conferences on water (Mar del Plata), desertification (Nairobi), the environment and development (Rio de Janeiro) and climate change (Kyoto). Environmental problems can lead to such serious difficulties that they endanger the security of both individuals and countries. Environmental problems may also have repercussions in terms of a country's international relations. Air and water know no national boundaries. Specific examples of potential or already-existing environmental threats are:

Limited water resources

As the world's population increases, so does demand for clean water. Fresh water is a very unevenly distributed natural resource, fewer than 10 countries possess 60% of the total fresh water resources on earth(3) and several countries in Europe are dependent on imports of water. In future conflicts, attacks on sources of fresh water may not only be an objective per se but may also be the cause of conflict. Conflicts over water rights may result in increased international tension and local and/or international conflicts. For example, disputes over the river Indus could trigger an armed conflict in the tense relations between India and Pakistan. There is a long list of potential conflicts over fresh water. An estimated 300 rivers, lakes and sources of ground water are located in international border areas.(4) In the Middle East, nine of 14 countries have a shortage of water resources and there is a great risk that the others will also be affected.(5) In 1995, a fifth of the earth's population had no access to clean water and it is estimated that the figure will rise to two thirds by the year 2025.(6)

Climate change

Through an increase in carbon dioxide(7) and other emissions, the average temperature on earth has risen by five degrees this century. The heat has also become more intense. Research has found that humidity has risen by 10% over the last 20 years. The increase in humidity can cause stronger and more frequent storms in certain regions at the same time as others are stricken by drought. Up to two decades of intensive research into global climate change may be needed before more detailed decisions can be taken as to which measures should be adopted.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), an international organisation comprising 2000 of the world's most eminent researchers, predicts that the earth's temperature will rise by 1.5 - 4.5 degrees and that sea level will have risen by 50 cm by the year 2100 if carbon dioxide emissions continue at present levels. It is estimated that up to 1/3 of the world's population and over 1/3 of its infrastructure are located in coastal areas. A rise in sea level would submerge large areas of land and several million people would be affected by famine owing to the loss of extensive areas of agriculture.

These and other environmental threats may give rise to an exodus of refugees. Environmental refugees are increasingly attracting international attention. An estimated 25 million people are refugees from drought, soil erosion, and other environmental problems, which may be compared with approximately 22 million 'traditional' refugees. Experts claim that environmental refugees may cause 'one of the worst humanitarian crises of our time'.(8)

They suffer from social, political and economic problems that may result in conflicts and violence. Environmental refugees must be given official recognition. There is a need for greater international cooperation to curtail these problems and more aid to the countries affected and their inhabitants.

Military impact on the environment in war and peace

Military activity is responsible for widespread environmental destruction in society. Military activities have a wide-ranging negative impact on the environment, in peace and in war, both intentionally and as an unintentional consequence. Destroying the environment has been an established method of waging war since ancient times. War is also far and away the most serious threat to the environment. A topical example is the devastating consequences of the Gulf War with hundreds of oil wells on fire and large quantities of toxic substances rising uncontrolled into the atmosphere. It will take a long time for the environment to recover. Some damage may be irreparable.

The military are developing ever more powerful weapons which inflict widespread and devastating damage on the environment. A modern war entails greater environmental destruction than any other environment-destructive activity. Below is a description of some weapons systems which also have seriously damaging effects on the environment in peace time.


Mines are enormously damaging to the environment. According to the UNEP (United Nations Environment Programme), landmines are one of the most widespread items of material war debris and may affect the ecological balance. Mine-laying destroys large areas, often agricultural, which are rendered unusable far into the future. Mines are the greatest obstacle to development in many of the poorest regions of the world. 80-110 million mines are deployed in 65 countries throughout the world. They can detonate several decades after being laid and the majority of those who fall victim to them are civilians, above all children. Mine clearance is a very dangerous, time-consuming and costly process. The development of new mine-clearance methods is progressing far too slowly and must be stepped up.

One positive achievement is that the 1997 Oslo Conference agreed that all antipersonnel mines should be banned without exception, that stocks of mines should be destroyed within four years and that countries affected by mines should be given more aid. A large number of countries signed the 1997 Ottawa Convention but several countries, including the USA, Russia, India and China have not done so. The European Union must work to persuade these countries to become parties to the agreement immediately. The EU should do more to assist the victims of mines and to support the development of mine-clearance techniques.

'Non-lethal' weapons(9)

So-called 'non-lethal' weapons are not a new type of weapon but have existed for many years in such forms as water cannons, rubber bullets and tear gas. However, at the present time, more and more advanced weapon techniques have been developed which are labelled non-lethal despite the fact that they can cause extensive damage and even result in invalidity or death.

Both material and antipersonnel technologies have been developed. One example is acoustic weapons which are capable of confusing and disorientating and thereby neutralising an enemy by producing a low level of sound, known as infra-sound. Other examples are adhesive foam and blinding lasers. Chemicals which discolour water can affect both agriculture and the population. With the aid of electromagnetic beams it is possible to knock out the enemy's computer, navigation and communication systems. Non-lethal weapons can also be used against a country's infrastructure and authorities, bring the railway system to a standstill or cause chaos in a country's financial world. What these weapons have in common is that they are intended to delay, obstruct and overcome a potential enemy at 'strategic level'.(10)

The fact that these different types of weapon are all categorised as non-lethal is seriously misleading and deluding. The term 'non-lethal' is intended to portray these weapons as more humane than conventional weapons - but there are no humane weapons. The use of any type of weapon involves a risk of injury or death, which is of course the purpose of weapons. 'Non-lethal' weapons tend to be used at an early stage of a conflict and may actually serve as a catalyst for the conflict. The use of violence by soldiers and police may increase because the weapons appear to be less dangerous. The inherent risk is that these weapons reduce the threshold for the use of violence to settle conflicts.

The aim is to neutralise the enemy without sustained suffering and without fatalities. But how and against whom 'non-lethal' weapons are used is an important consideration in terms of the implications of these weapons. A weapon that can render a soldier harmless, may injure or even kill a child or an elderly person. The distance from which they are fired and in what quantity are other factors with a bearing on the effects of the weapon. By way of comparison, conventional weapons result in 'only' 25% mortality.(11)

Non-lethal weapons are used as an effective aid in modern warfare, either independently or in conjunction with conventional weapons. For example, the USA used radiofrequent weapons in the Gulf War to knock out Iraq's energy system(12), despite not knowing the antipersonnel effects of RF weapons. Non-lethal weapons should, therefore, not be regarded as separate from a lethal system but rather as a component thereof. The development of non-lethal weapons increases both their options. The result is therefore greater use of force rather than the opposite. 'Non-lethal' weapons do not result in non-lethal conflicts.

As a wider range of non-lethal weapons are developed, the military, police and politicians become more and more interested in testing how they work. Non-lethal weapons must not be used as an instrument of political interference and dominance of the northern over the southern countries.

There is no effective legislation governing non-lethal weapons. Only a small number of non-lethal weapons and techniques can be banned through the interpretation of various arms control regulations, e.g. adhesive foam (which was used in Somalia and Bosnia). Certain types of laser (which blind people) have also been restricted in the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons. Biological toxins (e.g. salmonella and other bacteria) are banned by the Biological Weapons Convention. Several of these weapons may have serious environmental implications. International law must therefore be strengthened to regulate the new weapons which are under constant development.

The International Red Cross Committee's Cyrus project could be used in the absence of other reliable international standards for non-lethal weapons. The Cyrus project has classified and established criteria for conventional weapons in relation to mortality, invalidity, necessary treatment, blood supply, etc. The European Union should pursue a policy to extend international conventions to cover new weapons technologies and the development of new arms strategies.

Chemical weapons

The United Nations' commitment to destroying chemical weapons and other weapons of mass destruction in Iraq has resulted in serious concern about the environmental impact of military activities and has strengthened the need to seek out ecologically sound methods of disarming weapons. The Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) entered into force in April 1997. Under the terms of Article 1, the states which have ratified the Convention undertake never and under no circumstances to develop, produce or export chemical weapons. They also undertake never to use chemical weapons and to destroy already existing chemical weapons. Under Article 3, states shall, no later than 30 days after the Convention enters into force, notify whether they possess chemical weapons and their location and submit a plan for destruction of those weapons. Destruction should begin with the oldest stocks. 165 states have signed the Convention and 110 have ratified it. 26 states have not signed the CWC, including some important countries in the Middle East.

The destruction of chemical weapons is a cause for serious concern over the environment - they include tens of thousands of tonnes of mustard gas, nerve gas and other chemical substances. Chemical weapons can be destroyed by incineration but very few countries have suitable facilities to do this. To disarm chemical weapons is expensive, three to ten times more expensive than to produce them. If Russia, which has very large stocks, is to be able to do so, it needs financial aid from other countries. In Kambarka, a town in Russia, there are 6000 tonnes of chemical weapons stored in wooden sheds 2 km from a densely populated area. Handling the considerable quantities of hazardous substances calls for a substantial input of resources and they will take a considerable number of years to destroy. There is a clear risk of accidents and of weapons falling into the wrong hands.

It has been confirmed that approximately 150 000 tonnes of bombs, artillery shells and mines filled with chemical weapons, chiefly mustard gas, phosgene, tabun and arsenic-based weapons were dumped in the Skaggerak at the end of the Second World War. The corresponding figure for the Baltic is 40 000 tonnes. Many of the containers have rusted through and the chemical weapons are in direct contact with the sea water. It has nevertheless been decided that they should remain on the seabed for the time being as the risk of extensive leakage during salvage is considered to be appreciably greater.

Nuclear weapons

The environmental impact of a nuclear war would be enormous. It is likely that the combined effects of radioactive fall-out over large areas, the depletion of the ozone layer through nitrogen oxides, from nuclear explosions and climate change caused by widespread and sustained fires would cause largescale environmental disasters over large areas of the globe.

Test explosions also have manifestly destructive effects on the environment. The total quantity of radioactive fall-out emitted into the atmosphere by atmospheric tests is estimated to be between 100 and 1000 times greater than that discharged by the Chernobyl disaster.(13) The 1963 partial test ban treaty between the USA, the USSR and the UK bans nuclear testing in the atmosphere, outer space and under water, i.e. in all environments except under ground.

France has carried out more than 180 nuclear test explosions at the Mururoa atoll in the Pacific Ocean since 1966 with significant impact on the environment.(14) Several kilos of hazardous plutonium have been recovered from the sediment at the bottom of the lagoons at the Mururoa and Fangataufa atolls. Plutonium particles have also been spread across the land on three islands in the vicinity of Mururoa.(15) India and Pakistan have also recently carried out test explosions.(16) Their technical development is not considered to be sufficiently controlled, which means that these nuclear tests may have an impact on the environment far beyond the region itself. An independent international investigation into the environmental impact at the test locations and their surroundings should be carried out immediately.

Plutonium is the absolutely most hazardous substance known to man. Many countries possess large quantities of military plutonium and nuclear weapons can be produced relatively simply from 'civilian' plutonium. Facilities which at present have a civilian function can be converted within a short space of time to produce weapons. When plutonium is manufactured, a large quantity of highly radioactive liquid waste is produced. The handling of nuclear waste causes immense problems. The large-scale production of weapons of mass destruction which has taken place during recent decades has produced large quantities of waste. There is no known serviceable method of storing radioactive waste. It is usually stored in tanks, but large quantities have been discharged directly into the environment. This radioactive waste is extremely flammable and may explode if it is not ventilated or cooled. In 1957 an accident occurred at the Chelyabinsk-65 nuclear plant close by the town of Kystym in the Ural mountains, a radioactive tank exploded and radioactive waste dispersed over an area of 1000 square kilometres. 10 000 people had to be evacuated. At Lake Karachai near Chelyabinsk-65, it is still possible, merely by standing at the edge of the lake, to absorb so much radioactive radiation as to die on the spot.(17) In the Baltic states there are large areas which are polluted by previous Soviet military activities. In Estonia, Lake Sillanm?, also known as the 'atomic lake', contains radioactive military waste equivalent to thousands of atomic weapons. Sillanm? is 100 metres from the Baltic Sea. Any leak into the Baltic would have devastating repercussions for the environment in the entire Baltic Sea region.

At the end of the 1980s, Russia had more nuclear submarines than all other countries in the world together. The Kola Peninsula and Sevrodvinsk in Russia currently have the largest concentration of nuclear reactors in the world (240 units).(18) Large quantities of radioactive waste and nuclearpowered submarines have been stored at the shipyards on the Kola Peninsula. Russia and the Russian fleet are in an impossible position to deal with the scrapped reactors. They have no financial resources to pay for safe decommissioning. Low wages have resulted in highly qualified staff leaving the shipyards, which has led to a severe shortage of skills.

Even in central Moscow, 1200 sources of radioactive poisoning have been found, including in sandpits, air-raid shelters, private flats, garages and sports facilities.(19) The possibility of coming across nuclear weapons, chemical and biological weapons from military stores and substances from research institutions or industry in Russia must not be underestimated.

It is of serious concern that there is no adequate equipment to dispose of the waste in an environmentally safe manner. Both from an economic and an environmental point of view, any accident that may occur would have devastating repercussions. With every year that passes without sufficient measures being taken, the risk and scale of a serious accident increase.

A practical and realistic proposal for a method of phasing out the world's nuclear weapons does, in fact, exist. The proposal was presented in August 1996 by the independent group of experts making up the Canberra Commission.(20) In July 1996, the International Court at The Hague delivered a unanimous opinion to the effect that Article 6 of the Non-Proliferation Treaty commits nuclear states to initiate negotiations on nuclear disarmament. The Court also ruled that the threat or use of nuclear weapons was not consistent with international law. The European Union should actively work towards the implementation of the Canberra Commission's proposal and Article 6 of the NonProliferation Treaty.

HAARP - a weapons system which disrupts the climate

On 5 February 1998 Parliament's Subcommittee on Security and Disarmament held a hearing the subject of which included HAARP. NATO and the US had been invited to send representatives, but chose not to do so. The Committee regrets the failure of the USA to send a representative to answer questions, or to use the opportunity to comment on the material submitted.(21)

HAARP (High Frequency Active Auroral Research Project) is run jointly by the US Air Force and Navy, in conjunction with the Geophysical Institute of the University of Alaska, Fairbanks. Similar experiments are also being conducted in Norway, probably in the Antarctic, as well as in the former Soviet Union.(22) HAARP is a research project using a ground based apparatus, an array of antennae each powered by its own transmitter, to heat up portions of ionosphere with powerful radio beams.(23) The energy generated heats up parts of the ionosphere; this results in holes in the ionosphere and produces artificial 'lenses'.

HAARP can be used for many purposes. Enormous quantities of energy can be controlled by manipulating the electrical characteristics of the atmosphere. If used as a military weapon this can have a devastating impact on an enemy. HAARP can deliver millions of times more energy to a given area than any other conventional transmitter. The energy can also be aimed at a moving target which should constitute a potential anti-missile system.

The project would also allow better communications with submarines and manipulation of global weather patterns, but it is also possible to do the reverse, to disrupt communications. By manipulating the ionosphere one could block global communications while transmitting one's own. Another application is earth-penetrating, tomography, x-raying the earth several kilometres deep, to detect oil and gas fields, or underground military facilities. Over-the-horizon radar is another application, looking round the curvature of the earth for in-coming objects.

From the 1950s the USA conducted explosions of nuclear material in the Van Allen Belts(24) to investigate the effect of the electro-magnetic pulse generated by nuclear weapon explosions at these heights on radio communications and the operation of radar. This created new magnetic radiation belts which covered nearly the whole earth. The electrons travelled along magnetic lines of force and created an artificial Aurora Borealis above the North Pole. These military tests are liable to disrupt the Van Allen belt for a long period. The earth's magnetic field could be disrupted over large areas, which would obstruct radio communications. According to US scientists it could take hundreds of years for the Van Allen belt to return to normal. HAARP could result in changes in weather patterns. It could also influence whole ecosystems, especially in the sensitive Antarctic regions.

Another damaging consequence of HAARP is the occurrence of holes in the ionosphere caused by the powerful radio beams. The ionosphere protects us from incoming cosmic radiation. The hope is that the holes will fill again, but our experience of change in the ozone layer points in the other direction. This means substantial holes in the ionosphere that protects us.

With its far-reaching impact on the environment HAARP is a matter of global concern and we have to ask whether its advantages really outweigh the risks. The environmental impact and the ethical aspect must be closely examined before any further research and testing takes place. HAARP is a project of which the public is almost completely unaware, and this needs to be remedied.

HAARP has links with 50 years of intensive space research for military purposes, including the Star Wars project, to control the upper atmosphere and communications. This kind of research has to be regarded as a serious threat to the environment, with an incalculable impact on human life. Even now nobody knows what impact HAARP may have. We have to beat down the wall of secrecy around military research, and set up the right to openness and democratic scrutiny of military research projects, and parliamentary control.

A series of international treaties and conventions (the Convention on the prohibition of military or any other hostile use of environmental modification techniques, the Antarctic Treaty, the Treaty on principles governing the activities of states in the exploration and use of outer space including the moon and other celestial bodies, and the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea) casts considerable doubt on HAARP on legal as well as humanitarian and political grounds. The Antarctic Treaty lays down that the Antarctic may be used exclusively for peaceful purposes.(25) This would mean that HAARP is a breach of international law. All the implications of the new weapons systems should be examined by independent international bodies. Further international agreements should be sought to protect the environment from unnecessary destruction in war.

Impact of military activities on the environment

Not only military weapons systems but, by and large, all military activities, including peace-time exercises, have some form of environmental impact. However, when environmental destruction has been discussed, the role of the military has not in general been touched upon, only the impact of civilian society on the environment has been criticised. There are at least two explanations for this.(26) Owing to its secrecy, military activity is more difficult to discuss and it is difficult to set the nation's top priority - its security and defence - against the environment. At the present time, however, when environmental and natural disasters constitute a serious threat to security, these arguments are more dubious. The armed forces endeavour to prepare themselves in peace time for operations in war in as realistic conditions as possible. They therefore carry out their exercises under warlike conditions, which involves subjecting the environment to great stress. This is illustrated, for instance, by the withdrawal of Soviet troops and the abandoned military bases in Eastern and Central Europe which have left deep scars on the local environment. Military exercises entail widespread damage to the landscape and animal life. Troop exercises subject large tracts of land to extensive environmental destruction. Test sites for artillery and tactical missiles tend to require larger surfaces for military purposes. Likewise, production of munitions and the industry that manufactures military equipment cause widespread environmental problems.

The military is responsible for emissions of several gases affecting the climate, primarily carbon dioxide, but also incineration of fossil fuels and emissions of freons, which results in the depletion of the ozone layer.(27) Consumption of aviation fuel is a major source of emissions of acidifying substances such as nitrogen oxides and sulphur oxide. The armed forces account for much of all consumption of aviation fuel and are responsible for a very large proportion of all aviation emissions.(28) High-flying planes and rockets have a particularly damaging impact on the environment, both in the form of noise and fuel emissions. All rockets using solid fuel emit large quantities of hydrochloric acid in their exhaust emissions and every flight of a space shuttle injects around 75 tonnes of ozone-destroying chlorine. Likewise, noise from military exercises using heavy calibre ammunition may bring about environmental disruption.

Metal pollution is dispersed into the environment through shooting practice; often large quantities of small calibre ammunition containing lead is used and large quantities of lead are dispersed into the environment. Unfortunately, there is no comprehensive information about consumption of metals.

Consequences in the form of environmental problems caused by disarmament is only a recently observed phenomenon. Every year, large quantities of explosive substances are destroyed, mostly through industrial processes. Some ammunition cannot be destroyed in this way for various reasons but must be detonated. Obviously, scaling down is a necessary and positive process but it must be carried out in environmentally acceptable ways. Environmentally sound technology must be developed for the purpose of destroying weapons.

Several nations have already begun to exploit the opportunities for using military-related resources to restore the environment destroyed by the armed forces. All other sectors in society have to take responsibility for the environment and the military sector should also do so. As in other sectors of society, environmental issues must form an integral part of the armed forces' activities and be incorporated in the decision-making and budgetary processes.

In May 1993, the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) took a decision - 'application of environmental norms to military establishments' - to encourage national governments to enact national laws for the military sector. Finland, for example, has drawn up a green paper to regulate the impact of military activities on the environment. Sweden has followed suit.(29) In June 1996 Sweden, in conjunction with the USA, also drew up environmental guidelines for military activities.(30) The military should establish environmental targets and proposals for measures to help reduce the impact on the environment in accordance with Agenda 21 and the Rio Declaration.(31) They should also submit reports identifying factors affecting the environment within the armed forces. Environmental impact assessments must be drawn up before new projects commence and when procuring material for civilian and military use.

Every government should take stock of its environmental requirements and identify the military resources which are available for environmental purposes, draw up national environment plans and report their experience to an appropriate body within the European Union and the United Nations.

All military personnel, including conscripts, should receive basic training in environmental matters. The US armed forces are considered to be quite advanced in this respect, particularly in terms of equipment, but also in regard to training. The European Union should cooperate and exchange experience in this sector with the USA to a greater extent.

Strategies for using military resources for environment-enhancing purposes

Prevention of environmental crises requires infrastructure, organisation and increased resources. These are available in the armed forces. Many resources within the military sector could be used to protect, improve and restore the environment. Essentially, this would be based on two stages: a stocktaking stage to assess the suitability of the military resources and a political action plan to guarantee their availability.

Obviously, military-related resources vary a great deal from one country to another but they comprise skilled personnel, engineers, sophisticated hi-tech equipment, organisational ability and military research and development. In many ways, the military sector is in a unique position to strengthen international civilian capacity to implement environmental strategies. Military personnel are wellequipped to intervene in the event of disasters. As distinct from civilian forces, the military are trained to carry out missions under extreme conditions. They can also be called out in the event of environmental accidents and to clear up and destroy high-grade toxic, radioactive and other hazardous substances.

The armed forces also possess a great quantity of information which can help in detecting changes in the atmosphere, the sea and in the earth's surface and thereby provide an early warning and forestall environmental disasters. Military satellites, aeroplanes, surface vessels and submarines are capable of collecting further information on climate changes and on currents and temperature changes in the sea. Radar, which was developed for military purposes, can be used for environmental objectives. Infrared radar can detect temperature changes in the earth's surface. For example, American military satellites have been used to establish the number of whales, classify them and save them.

Environmental problems are global in nature and international cooperation is therefore crucial to prevent future environmental disasters. Joint international work can also serve a 'dual' purpose; it can build confidence for the very reason that it is carried out jointly - countries assist each other. It can also enable countries to shoulder a reasonable amount of responsibility for the environment in proportion to their strength.(32) Some important areas for joint undertakings might be technology transfer, joint training and education.

Environmental strategies might comprise monitoring the earth's environment, evaluating the data collected, coordinating scientific work and disseminating information. As a special form of international aid, national resources should be made available to the EU and the UN so that they may be used on request by a country stricken by an environmental disaster. Environmental strategies must also include a global stocktaking of resources suitable for environmental protection.

A disaster force composed of both civilian and military personnel could be set up for deployment in emergency situations. Taking part in international peace-keeping and humanitarian missions is already an important task for the military. However, a distinction must be made between such missions within national boundaries and within another state's jurisdiction. Lessons can be learned from UN experiences in this respect and, clearly, exercises or deployment on the territory of another nation must take place in accordance with international laws. We should consider which resources can be made available to the UN or the European Union, temporarily, long-term or on a standby basis as instruments for joint cooperation in the event of environmental disasters and environmental crises.

Military bilateral and multilateral cooperation has increased tremendously. Within NATO, a DanishGerman-Polish force is being developed which it will also be possible to use for civilian disaster aid, in addition to having traditional tasks. It is expected to be operational by spring 1999.

Technological resources within the military establishment

The military sectors of the EU Member States tend to be research and development-intensive. In the case of the major military powers, technological capacity is not only extensive but has also largely remained unaffected by budget cutbacks in comparison with conventional weapons. The process of developing new sophisticated weapons is ongoing. The military sector will probably be a leading consumer of advanced technology in the immediate future.

Most modern technologies are double-edged, i.e. they can be used both for military and civilian purposes. This means that military-related technologies can be transferred to the civilian sector without expensive modifications. However, it must be borne in mind that the highly complicated military systems which are based on advanced technologies are not designed for environmental purposes but require certain adjustments.

The technological capacity of military organisations in most developing countries is not a match for the environmental problems they face. The CIS and African countries have tremendous shortages of technology and environmental know-how. In an international perspective, therefore, transfer of technology and know-how is an extremely important task for the military.

Collection of environmental data and observations can be facilitated by the use of vessels, aeroplanes and spacecraft to identify and trace environmental abuse such as the dumping of waste and oil or natural hazards such as forest fires.

Another possible application of military-related resources is to use military capacity to monitor activities which are potentially damaging to the environment. Military resources can also be used to monitor agriculture, drought, afforestation and other forms of land conservation. Other areas of application might be as aid in developing countries, e.g. in the form of transport and disaster work, liming of lakes and forest with the aid of military aircraft and vessels but also combating of oil discharges and research and development resources for global environment work.

Military personnel on environment duty - an example

The Swedish Parliament decided on 13 December 1996 to make environmental protection a special part of its defence policy and, in the long-term, to train 10 000 conscripts per year with
Anunna330 views
Quebec, 1972 - Canada330 views
Chemtrails Utrecht 7 maart 2005330 viewsGrote Spinnenwebben weven ze in de luchten.

Een Hopi Indianen profetie luidt: "Als De Grote Schoonmaak nadert, dan zullen er spinnenwebben aan de lucht geweven worden."
Volgens UfodeWaarheid.com ziet dat er naar uit als het zo doorgaat boven heel Nederland en overal ter wereld en alle grote streden en wij vragen ons werkelijk af waarom niemand dit opvalt???
de Chemtrailers in beeld - 7 maart 2006, 15.00u330 viewses - espa?ol

INFORME 140k 109k

14 de enero de 1999 PE 227.710/def. A4-0005/99

sobre medio ambiente, seguridad y pol?tica exterior
Ponente de opini?n: Sr. Olsson, Comisi?n de Medio Ambiente, Salud P?blica y Protecci?n del Consumidor
(Procedimiento "Hughes")
Comisi?n de Asuntos Exteriores, Seguridad y Pol?tica de Defensa
Ponente: Maj Britt Theorin

En la sesi?n del 13 de julio de 1995, el Presidente del Parlamento anunci? que hab?a remitido la propuesta de resoluci?n presentada por la Sra. Rehn Rouva, conforme al art?culo 45 del Reglamento, sobre la utilizaci?n potencial de recursos de car?cter militar para estrategias medioambientales, (B4-0551/98), a la Comisi?n de Asuntos Exteriores, Seguridad y Pol?tica de Defensa, para examen del fondo, y, para opini?n, a la Comisi?n de Medio Ambiente, Salud P?blica y Protecci?n del Consumidor.
Anexo I

En la sesi?n del 13 de julio de 1995, el Presidente del Parlamento anunci? que hab?a remitido la propuesta de resoluci?n presentada por la Sra. Rehn Rouva, conforme al art?culo 45 del Reglamento, sobre la utilizaci?n potencial de recursos de car?cter militar para estrategias medioambientales, (B4-0551/98), a la Comisi?n de Asuntos Exteriores, Seguridad y Pol?tica de Defensa, para examen del fondo, y, para opini?n, a la Comisi?n de Medio Ambiente, Salud P?blica y Protecci?n del Consumidor.

En la reuni?n del 15 de noviembre de 1996 y tras la petici?n de la Conferencia de Presidentes de Comisi?n, el Presidente del Parlamento anunci? que la Comisi?n de Asuntos Exteriores, Seguridad y Pol?tica de Defensa estaba autorizada a presentar un informe a este respecto.

En la reuni?n del 19 de noviembre de 1996, la Comisi?n de Asuntos Exteriores, Seguridad y Pol?tica de Defensa design? ponente a la Sra. Maj Britt Theorin.

En la reuni?n del 19 de junio de 1998, el Presidente del Parlamento anunci? que este informe deb?a ser elaborado, de acuerdo al procedimiento Hughes, por la Comisi?n de Asuntos Exteriores, Seguridad y Pol?tica de Defensa y por la Comisi?n de Medio Ambiente, Salud P?blica y Protecci?n del Consumidor.

En las reuniones de los d?as 5 de febrero de 1998, 29 de junio de 1998, 21 de julio de 1998, 3, 23 y 28 de septiembre de 1998, 13, 27 y 29 de octubre de 1998 y 4 y 5 de enero de 1999, la Comisi?n de Asuntos Exteriores, Seguridad y Pol?tica de Defensa examin? el proyecto de informe, as? como la Subcomisi?n de Seguridad y Desarme en las reuniones de los d?as 5 de febrero de 1998 y 3 y 23 de septiembre de 1998.

En la ?ltima de estas reuniones, la Comisi?n de Asuntos Exteriores, Seguridad y Pol?tica de Defensa aprob? la propuesta de resoluci?n por 28 votos a favor y 1 abstenci?n.

Estuvieron presentes en la votaci?n los diputados: Spencer, presidente; Theorin, ponente, Aelvoet, Andr?-L?onard, Bar?n Crespo, Bertens, Bianco, Burenstam Linder, Carnero Gonz?lez, Carrozzo (suplente de Colajanni), Dillen, Dupuis, Gahrton, Goerens (suplente de Cars), Graziani, G?nther (suplente de Gomolka), Lalumi?re, Lambrias, Pack (suplente de Habsburg-Lothringen), Pettinari (suplente de Imbeni, de conformidad con el apartado 2 del art?culo 138 del Reglamento), Piha, Rinsche, Sakellariou, Salafranca S?nchez-Neyra, Schroedter (suplente de Cohn-Bendit), Schwaiger (suplente de Lenz), Speciale, Swoboda (suplente de Hoff), Tindemans, Titley y Truscott.

La opini?n de la Comisi?n de Medio Ambiente, Salud P?blica y Protecci?n del Consumidor se adjunta al presente informe.

El informe se present? el 14 de enero de 1999.

El plazo de presentaci?n de enmiendas a este informe figurar? en el proyecto de orden del d?a del per?odo parcial de sesiones en que se examine.


Resoluci?n sobre medio ambiente, seguridad y pol?tica exterior

El Parlamento Europeo,

- Vista la propuesta de resoluci?n presentada por la Sra. Rehn Rouva sobre la utilizaci?n potencial de recursos militares para las estrategias medioambientales (B4-0551/95),

- Visto el estudio de las Naciones Unidas "Registro de los usos potenciales de los recursos asignados a actividades militares para esfuerzos civiles de protecci?n del medio ambiente" (UN A46/364, 17 de septiembre 1991),

- Vista su resoluci?n de 17 de julio de 1995 sobre "Las minas antipersonal: un obst?culo mort?fero para el desarrollo"(1),

- Vistas sus anteriores resoluciones sobre ensayos nucleares y no proliferaci?n de armas nucleares, as? como el informe de la Comisi?n de Camberra de agosto de 1996 sobre la abolici?n de las armas nucleares,

- Vista la resoluci?n un?nime del Tribunal Internacional sobre la obligaci?n de los Estados en posesi?n de armas nucleares de negociar una prohibici?n de las armas nucleares (dictamen consultivo n? 96/22, de 8 de julio de 1996),

- Vista su resoluci?n de 19 de abril de 1996 sobre la propuesta de decisi?n del Consejo para la creaci?n de un programa de acciones comunitarias en favor de la protecci?n civil(2),

- Vistas sus anteriores resoluciones sobre las armas qu?micas,

- Vistos los resultados de las conferencias de las Naciones Unidos de Kyoto de 1997 y de R?o de Janeiro de 1992,

- Vista la audiencia sobre el programa HAARP y las armas no letales celebrada por la Subcomisi?n de Seguridad y Desarme de la Comisi?n de Asuntos Exteriores en Bruselas el 5 de febrero de 1998,

- Visto el art?culo 148 de su Reglamento,

- Visto el informe de la Comisi?n de Asuntos Exteriores, Seguridad y Pol?tica de Defensa y la opini?n de la Comisi?n de Medio Ambiente, Salud P?blica y Protecci?n del Consumidor (A40005/99),

A. Constatando que el final de la guerra fr?a ha modificado sustancialmente la situaci?n geopol?tica en materia de seguridad y que la distensi?n militar ha dado lugar a un desarme considerable en el sector militar en general y en el sector de las armas nucleares en particular, lo que ha supuesto una considerable liberaci?n de recursos militares;

B. Considerando que, pese a esta transformaci?n total de la situaci?n geoestrat?gica desde el final de la guerra fr?a, no ha disminuido sensiblemente el riesgo de un atentado catastr?fico contra la integridad y durabilidad del medio ambiente global, en particular su biodiversidad, tanto en lo que se refiere a la activaci?n accidental o no autorizada de armas nucleares, como a la utilizaci?n autorizada de armas nucleares por miedo, aunque infundado, a una amenaza de ataque inminente,

C. Considerando que este riesgo podr?a reducirse considerablemente en un plazo muy corto de tiempo si todos los Estados que poseen un arsenal nuclear aplicaran r?pidamente las seis medidas incluidas en el informe de la Comisi?n de Camberra relativas, en particular, a la retirada de todas las armas nucleares del actual dispositivo de alerta roja y la transferencia progresiva de todas las armas a la reserva estrat?gica,

D. Considerando que el art?culo VI del Tratado sobre la no proliferaci?n de las armas nucleares (TNP) de 1968 compromete a todas las partes a "celebrar negociaciones de buena fe... sobre un tratado de desarme general y completo" y que los principios y objetivos adoptados en la Conferencia TNP de 1995 reiteraban que el objetivo ?ltimo del Tratado era la eliminaci?n completa de las armas nucleares,

E. Observando que las amenazas sobre el medio ambiente, los flujos de refugiados, los antagonismos ?tnicos, el terrorismo y la delincuencia internacional constituyen nuevas y graves amenazas para la seguridad y que, al cambiar la situaci?n de seguridad, cobra cada vez mayor importancia la capacidad de enfrentarse a distintas formas de conflictos y, dado que las amenazas para la seguridad son tambi?n de car?cter no militar, es importante que los recursos de car?cter militar se utilicen tambi?n para fines no militares;

F. Constatando que los recursos del planeta se est?n utilizando como si fueran inacabables y que esto ha producido una mayor frecuencia de cat?strofes naturales y medioambientales; constatando asimismo que esto estos problemas ecol?gicos locales y regionales pueden tener consecuencias importantes en las relaciones internacionales, y lamentando que esto no se haya reflejado m?s claramente en la pol?tica exterior, de seguridad y de defensa de los Estados miembros;

G. Considerando que los conflictos en el mundo son predominantemente conflictos dentro de los Estados en lugar de entre Estados, y que, cuando surgen conflictos entre Estados, ?stos est?n cada vez m?s relacionados con el acceso a recursos vitales b?sicos o su disponibilidad, especialmente agua, alimentos y combustible,

H. Considerando que el acceso a dichos recursos naturales vitales y su disponibilidad est?n intr?nsecamente relacionados, como causa y efecto, con la degradaci?n y contaminaci?n del medio ambiente, de lo que se deduce l?gicamente que la prevenci?n de conflictos debe centrarse m?s en estas cuestiones,

I. Considerando que la presi?n sobre la tierra, tanto f?rtil como habitable, que hist?ricamente ha sido una de las principales causas de tensi?n y conflictos, es cada vez m?s el resultado de la degradaci?n del medio ambiente, especialmente del cambio clim?tico y del consiguiente aumento de los niveles del mar,

J. Considerando que todos estos factores, que afectan sobre todo a las poblaciones m?s pobres y m?s vulnerables del mundo, producen un incremento constante de la incidencia de los denominados "refugiados medioambientales", lo que produce una presi?n directa en las pol?ticas de inmigraci?n y justicia de la UE, en la ayuda al desarrollo y en el gasto de ayuda humanitaria e, indirectamente, hace que aumenten los problemas de la UE en materia de seguridad en forma de inestabilidad regional en otras partes del mundo,

K. Considerando que, seg?n resultados detallados de la investigaci?n internacional filtrados y publicados por el Climate Institute de Washington, el n?mero de "refugiados medioambientales" es actualmente superior al n?mero de "refugiados tradicionales" (25 millones frente a 22 millones) y que se prev? que esta cifra se duplique para el a?o 2010 o que, en el peor de los casos, sea mucho mayor,

L. Considerando que la cuesti?n de los "refugiados medioambientales" es simplemente el s?ntoma de un desastre humanitario de una amplitud mucho mayor teniendo en cuenta que, seg?n la definici?n de las Naciones Unidas, 1.300 millones de personas viven en absoluta pobreza; que una cuarta parte de estas personas tratan de subsistir en zonas del mundo que son extremadamente vulnerables desde un punto de vista medioambiental y que son las que m?s contribuyen a problemas medioambientales globales como la deforestaci?n y la desertizaci?n,

M. Considerando que, desde el final de la Guerra Fr?a, la gesti?n de cuestiones globales se ha desprovisto de su aspecto ideol?gico previamente dominante y est? actualmente menos determinada por la cuesti?n del equilibrio militar pero que esto no se ha reflejado a?n en el sistema de gobernaci?n global de las Naciones Unidas mediante un mayor ?nfasis en la coherencia y efectividad de los componentes militar y no militar de la pol?tica de seguridad,

N. Considerando, no obstante, el ?nfasis en el hecho de que una parte cada vez mayor del trabajo de las Naciones Unidas sobre cuestiones pol?ticas y de seguridad es esencialmente no militar y se refiere especialmente a la relaci?n entre comercio, ayuda, medio ambiente y desarrollo sostenible,

O. Considerando que existe una urgente necesidad de movilizar recursos adecuados para hacer frente a los retos medioambientales y observando que los recursos disponibles para la protecci?n del medio ambiente son muy limitados, lo cual obliga a una nueva forma de pensar en lo que respecta a la utilizaci?n de los recursos existentes;

P. Observando que, a la vez que se liberan los recursos militares, se ofrece a los militares la oportunidad ?nica de contribuir con su enorme capacidad a los esfuerzos civiles para enfrentarse a los crecientes problemas medioambientales;

Q. Constatando que los recursos militares son recursos nacionales y que el desaf?o medioambiental es global; que, por consiguiente, existe la necesidad de encontrar formas de cooperaci?n internacional para la reasignaci?n y utilizaci?n de recursos militares en favor del medio ambiente;

R. Observando que los costes a corto plazo de la protecci?n del medio ambiente deben compararse con los costes a largo plazo que implicar?a la falta de acci?n en este ?mbito, y que existe una creciente necesidad de realizar un an?lisis de la relaci?n coste/beneficio de las distintas estrategias medioambientales, que deber?a incluir potenciales reasignaciones, reorientaciones y transferencias de recursos militares;

S. Considerando que el objetivo com?n de reparar el da?ado ecosistema terrestre no puede conseguirse sin tenerse en cuenta tambi?n la cuesti?n de una utilizaci?n justa de los recursos globales, y que existe la necesidad de facilitar la cooperaci?n t?cnica internacional y apoyar la transferencia de tecnolog?as militares adecuadas;

T. Considerando que, pese a los convenios existentes, la investigaci?n en el sector militar sigue basandose en la manipulaci?n medioambiental como arma, tal y como pone, por ejemplo, de manifiesto el sistema HAARP con base en Alaska,

U. Considerando que la experiencia adquirida con el desarrollo y la utilizaci?n de la energ?a nuclear "para fines pac?ficos" constituye una advertencia contra la invocaci?n del secreto militar para impedir una evaluaci?n y supervisi?n claras de las tecnolog?as combinadas civil/militar cuando la transparencia se encuentra, en cualquier caso, comprometida,

V. Considerando que la inquietud general sobre la degradaci?n ecol?gica y las crisis medioambientales exigen prioridades en la toma de decisiones nacionales y que el conjunto de las naciones debe reaccionar de forma eficaz ante las cat?strofes medioambientales.

1. Pide a la Comisi?n que presente al Consejo y al Parlamento una estrategia com?n tal como se prev? en el Tratado de Amsterdam, que a?ne los aspectos de la PESC en la pol?tica de la UE con el comercio, la ayuda al desarrollo y las pol?ticas internacionales en materia de medio ambiente entre los a?os 2000 y 2010 con el fin de hacer frente a las siguientes cuestiones y a su interrelaci?n:

a) producci?n agr?cola y alimentaria y degradaci?n del medio ambiente;

b) escasez de agua y suministro transfronterizo de agua;

c) deforestaci?n y restablecimiento de las cuencas carbon?feras;

d) desempleo, subempleo y pobreza absoluta;

e) desarrollo sostenible y cambio clim?tico;

f) deforestaci?n, desertizaci?n y aumento de la poblaci?n;

g) la relaci?n entre estas cuestiones con el calentamiento del planeta y el impacto humanitario y medioambiental de acontecimientos clim?ticos cada vez m?s extremos;

2. Constata que las acciones medioambientales preventivas son un instrumento importante de la pol?tica de seguridad; pide en consecuencia a los Estados miembros que establezcan objetivos medioambientales y sanitarios en sus evaluaciones, investigaci?n militar y planes de acci?n a largo plazo en el ?mbito de la defensa y de la seguridad;

3. Reconoce el importante papel del ej?rcito en la sociedad democr?tica y sus tareas en la defensa nacional, as? como el hecho de que las iniciativas destinadas a garantizar y fomentar la paz pueden contribuir de forma considerable a evitar los da?os en el medio ambiente;

4. Considera que las pruebas nucleares atmosf?ricas y subterr?neas han diseminado, como consecuencia de la lluvia radiactiva, importantes cantidades de cesio-137 radiactivo, estroncio 90 y otros is?topos cancer?genos en todo el planeta y han ocasionado importantes perjuicios medioambientales y para la salud en las zonas en que se han realizado las pruebas;

5. Considera que algunas partes del mundo se encuentran amenazadas por el almacenamiento y la inmersi?n incontrolados, inseguros y poco profesionales de los submarinos nucleares, as? como por su combustible radiactivo y las fugas de los reactores nucleares; considera que, a causa de ello, son muchas las posibilidades de que grandes regiones puedan verse pronto contaminadas por la radiaci?n;

6. Considera que todav?a se ha de encontrar una soluci?n adecuada al problema de las armas qu?micas y convencionales sumergidas despu?s de las dos guerras mundiales en numerosos puntos de los mares que rodean a Europa como una soluci?n "f?cil" para deshacerse de estas reservas, sin que nadie sepa todav?a hoy en d?a cu?les pueden ser las repercusiones ecol?gicas a largo plazo, en particular para la fauna marina y la vida costera;

7. Considera que la Uni?n Europea deber? contribuir a encontrar una soluci?n al problema de que, como consecuencia de las actuales guerras en regiones enteras de ?frica, se hayan arruinado estructuras agr?colas y humanas, con lo que las tierras est?n sufriendo ahora un desastre medioambiental, en particular a causa de la deforestaci?n y la erosi?n, con la consiguiente desertificaci?n;

8. Pide, en consecuencia, al ej?rcito que ponga fin a todas aquellas actividades que contribuyen a perjudicar el medio ambiente y la salud y que tomen todas las medidas necesarias para limpiar y descontaminar las zonas contaminadas;

Utilizaci?n de recursos militares con fines medioambientales

9. Considera que los recursos disponibles para restablecer y preservar el medio ambiente deteriorado no son suficientes para hacer frente a la amenaza ecol?gica mundial y, por consiguiente, pide a los Estados miembros que utilicen los recursos militares en favor del medio ambiente mediante la adopci?n de medidas destinadas a:

a) establecer una formaci?n de soldados del medio ambiente, con vistas a crear una brigada medioambiental coordinada a nivel europeo;

b) realizar un inventario de sus necesidades medioambientales y de los recursos militares disponibles para fines medioambientales y utilizar dichos recursos en los planes medioambientales nacionales;

c) examinar los recursos militares que se pueden poner a disposici?n de las Naciones Unidas

o de la Uni?n Europea, de forma puntual, a largo plazo o listos para intervenir en caso de necesidad, como instrumento de la cooperaci?n internacional ante cat?strofes o crisis medioambientales;

d) desarrollar planes para la creaci?n de grupos de protecci?n internacionales y europeos con utilizaci?n de personal, equipos e instalaciones del sector militar, que est?n disponibles en el marco de la Asociaci?n por la paz para su intervenci?n en situaciones de emergencia relacionadas con el medio ambiente;

e) integrar en su concepto de seguridad los objetivos de conservaci?n del medio ambiente y desarrollo sostenible;

f) garantizar que el sector militar respete determinadas normas medioambientales y se corrijan los efectos de los da?os medioambientales debidos a actividades militares;

g) tomar en consideraci?n el medio ambiente en sus programas militares de investigaci?n y desarrollo;

10. Pide a los Estados miembros de la Uni?n Europea que, dado que las experiencias pr?cticas en este ?mbito son limitadas:

a) establezcan centros de intercambio de informaci?n sobre experiencias nacionales de aplicaci?n medioambiental de recursos militares;

b) faciliten la divulgaci?n mundial de informaci?n medioambiental, incluyendo la informaci?n que se consigue a trav?s de sat?lites militares y otras plataformas de recogida de informaci?n;

11. Pide a los Estados miembros que apliquen a la actividad militar la legislaci?n medioambiental aplicable a la sociedad civil y que el sector militar se responsabilice y financie la investigaci?n, el saneamiento y descontaminaci?n de las zonas da?adas por anteriores actividades militares, de manera que dichas zonas puedan volver a ser utilizadas con fines civiles, lo cual es especialmente importante en lo que se refiere a los grandes dep?sitos de municiones qu?micas y convencionales a lo largo de las costas de la UE;

12. Pide a todos los Estados miembros que establezcan objetivos medioambientales y sanitarios y planes de acci?n para mejorar la protecci?n del medio ambiente y la salud en el ?mbito de sus fuerzas armadas respectivas;

13. Pide a los Gobiernos de los Estados miembros que mejoren la seguridad medioambiental en el ?mbito militar mediante la formaci?n, el desarrollo tecnol?gico y una formaci?n medioambiental b?sica de todo el personal militar y de remplazo;

14. Pide a la Uni?n Europea que una sus esfuerzos para establecer una nueva estrategia medioambiental en la que se utilicen recursos militares para una protecci?n del medio ambiente com?n;

15. Considera que las estrategias medioambientales deben incluir la vigilancia del medio ambiente mundial, la evaluaci?n de la informaci?n recogida, la coordinaci?n del trabajo cient?fico y la divulgaci?n de la informaci?n, aprovechando la informaci?n relevante de los sistemas de alerta y vigilancia nacionales, con el fin de disponer de una visi?n de conjunto permanente de la situaci?n medioambiental;

16. Subraya que la importante reducci?n de los gastos militares puede dar lugar a problemas regionales graves y pide a los Estados miembros que intensifiquen sus esfuerzos con vistas a reconvertir la producci?n y la tecnolog?a militar para fines civiles mediante programas nacionales e iniciativas comunitarias como el programa KONVER;

17. Subraya la importancia de reforzar el trabajo medioambiental preventivo con el fin de poder enfrentarse a las cat?strofes naturales y medioambientales;

18. Pide a la Comisi?n que elabore un estudio exhaustivo de las amenazas medioambientales para la seguridad en Europa y que elabore un "libro verde" sobre las repercusiones en el medio ambiente de la actividad militar;

19. Insta al Consejo a que intervenga en?rgicamente para que los EEUU, Rusia, India y China firmen sin demora el Convenio de Ottawa de 1997 sobre la prohibici?n y destrucci?n de minas antipersonas.

20. Considera que la UE debe ayudar en mayor medida a las v?ctimas de las minas, apoyar el desarrollo de tecnolog?as para la retirada de minas y acelerar el desarrollo de m?todos de retirada de minas;

21. Considera que debe lucharse contra el secreto que rodea la investigaci?n militar y que debe promoverse el derecho de transparencia y control democr?tico de los proyectos de investigaci?n militar;

22. Pide a los Estados miembros que desarrollen tecnolog?as limpias y ecol?gicas para la destrucci?n de armas;

23. Subraya que una de las amenazas medioambientales m?s graves en zonas pr?ximas a la UE es la falta de control de los residuos de la industria nuclear, de las existencias de armas biol?gicas y qu?micas, as? como el saneamiento de zonas en las que se han desarrollado actividades militares; subraya que es importante que los Estados miembros act?en en favor del refuerzo de la cooperaci?n internacional, por ejemplo en el marco de las Naciones Unidas

o de la Asociaci?n por la Paz, con vistas a destruir estas armas de una manera tan respetuosa con la protecci?n del medio ambiente como sea posible;

24. Considera que todas las negociaciones que se celebren en el futuro sobre la reducci?n y posible eliminaci?n de las armas nucleares deber?n basarse en los principios relativos a los compromisos contra?dos para una reducci?n mutua y equilibrada;

25. Considera que, dadas las circunstancias de especial dificultad que afectan a los pa?ses de la antigua Uni?n Sovi?tica, la amenaza al medio ambiente mundial y local planteada por la degradaci?n de las condiciones de las armas y materiales nucleares a?n en posesi?n de estos pa?ses hace m?s urgente la prioridad de alcanzar un acuerdo sobre la eliminaci?n progresiva de las armas nucleares;

Aspectos jur?dicos de la actividad militar

26. Pide a la Uni?n Europea que act?e de manera que las tecnolog?as de armas denominadas no letales y el desarrollo de nuevas estrategias de armas est?n cubiertas y reguladas por convenios internacionales;

27. Considera que el HAARP (Programa de Investigaci?n de Alta Frecuencia Auroral Activa) es un asunto de inter?s mundial debido a sus considerables repercusiones sobre el medio ambiente y exige que los aspectos jur?dicos, ecol?gicos y ?ticos sean investigados por un ?rgano internacional independiente antes de continuar la investigaci?n y los ensayos; lamenta que el Gobierno de los Estados Unidos se haya negado reiteradamente a enviar a un representante que preste declaraci?n, ante la audiencia p?blica o cualquier reuni?n posterior que celebre su comisi?n competente, sobre los riesgos medioambientales y para la poblaci?n del Programa de Investigaci?n de Alta Frecuencia Auroral Activa (HAARP) que se est? financiando en la actualidad en Alaska;

28. Pide que el grupo encargado de evaluar las opciones cient?ficas y tecnol?gicas (STOA) acepte examinar las pruebas cient?ficas y t?cnicas disponibles en todos las conclusiones de las investigaciones que se est?n llevando a cabo en la actualidad sobre el programa HAARP, con el objeto de evaluar la naturaleza exacta y el grado de riesgo de este programa para el medio ambiente local y mundial, as? como para la salud p?blica en general;

29. Pide a la Comisi?n que, en colaboraci?n con los Gobiernos de Suecia, Finlandia, Noruega y la Federaci?n Rusa, examine las repercusiones medioambientales y para la salud p?blica del programa HAARP para el Ant?rtico y que le informe de sus conclusiones;

30. Pide, en particular, que se celebre un convenio internacional para la prohibici?n global de toda la investigaci?n y desarrollo, ya sea militar o civil, que tenga como finalidad aplicar los conocimientos qu?micos, el?ctricos, de vibraci?n de sonido u otro tipo de funcionamiento del cerebro humano al desarrollo de armas que puedan permitir cualquier forma de manipulaci?n de seres humanos, incluyendo la prohibici?n de cualquier despliegue actual o posible de dichos sistemas;

31. Pide a la Uni?n Europea y a sus Estados miembros que se esfuercen por conseguir un acuerdo internacional para, en caso de guerra, proteger al medio ambiente de da?os innecesarios;

32. Pide a la Uni?n Europea y sus Estados miembros que act?en en favor del establecimiento de normas internacionales aplicables a la actividad militar en tiempo de paz en relaci?n con sus repercusiones sobre el medio ambiente;

33. Pide al Consejo de la UE que act?e en favor de la aplicaci?n de las propuestas de la Comisi?n de Camberra y del art?culo 6 del Acuerdo de no proliferaci?n sobre eliminaci?n de armas nucleares;

34. Pide al Consejo, y en particular a los Gobiernos del Reino Unido y de Francia, que tomen la iniciativa en el marco del TNP y de la Conferencia sobre Desarme de proseguir las negociaciones destinadas a lograr la plena aplicaci?n de los compromisos sobre reducci?n y eliminaci?n de armas nucleares lo m?s r?pidamente posible hasta un nivel provisional en el que las existencias mundiales de armas nucleares no planteen una amenaza a la integridad y sostenibilidad del medio ambiente mundial;

35. Pide a la Presidencia del Consejo, a la Comisi?n y a los Gobiernos de los Estados miembros que aboguen en favor del enfoque adoptado en esta resoluci?n en todas las pr?ximas reuniones de las Naciones Unidas que se celebren bajo los auspicios o en el marco del TNP, as? como de la Conferencia sobre desarme;

36. Pide a la Presidencia del Consejo y a la Comisi?n que, de conformidad con el art?culo J.7 del Tratado de la Uni?n Europea, informen sobre la posici?n de la Uni?n respecto a los puntos espec?ficos incluidos en la presente resoluci?n en el contexto de las pr?ximas sesiones de las Naciones Unidas, sus agencias y organismos, especialmente el Comit? preparatorio del TNP de 1999, la Conferencia sobre Desarme y otros foros internacionales relevantes;

37. Encarga a su Presidente que transmita la presente resoluci?n al Consejo, a la Comisi?n, a los Estados miembros y a las Naciones Unidas.

(1) () DO C 183 de 17.7.1995, p?g. 47 (A4-0149/95).
(2) () DO C 141 de 13.5.1996, p?g. 258 (A4-0100/96).


Una defensa contra los peligros medioambientales

La situaci?n en materia de pol?tica de seguridad ha cambiado considerablemente en un tiempo relativamente corto. Hace menos de 10 a?os el tel?n de acero atravesaba una Europa saturada de armas nucleares. Actualmente, Europa se unifica y la Uni?n Europea se est? ampliando para incluir a los antiguos pa?ses del Pacto de Varsovia. La guerra fr?a ha terminado y una guerra generalizada en Europa parece hoy d?a imposible. Simult?neamente, surgen nuevos peligros. Los importantes flujos de refugiados, los antagonismos ?tnicos, el terrorismo y la delincuencia internacional son algunos ejemplos de las actuales amenazas a la seguridad. Otra grave amenaza la constituyen las cat?strofes naturales y los problemas medioambientales, causados por la propia naturaleza y por la manera en que los hombres utilizan los recursos naturales.

Una serie de cat?strofes ecol?gicas han situado a la humanidad ante nuevos problemas; el ?ltimo caso fue el accidente de la presa en Espa?a. La erosi?n de la tierra en Italia, los estragos causados por el fen?meno natural El Ni?o y el accidente nuclear de Chernobil son otros ejemplos actuales de las terribles consecuencias de las cat?strofes naturales y ecol?gicas. En algunas partes del mundo la sequ?a ha destruido las cosechas de varios a?os, con sus consecuencias de hambre y muerte de gran parte de la poblaci?n. La defensa de la humanidad ante estas cat?strofes es hoy en d?a muy d?bil.

Las cat?strofes naturales y ecol?gicas suponen una tragedia para las personas concretas y pueden tener consecuencias catastr?ficas para la sociedad y para todas las naciones. Los costes que este tipo de cat?strofes producen son considerables, tanto en t?rminos de vidas humanas como en recursos para restaurar los da?os materiales. Cada vez que ocurre una de estas cat?strofes resulta evidente que no existen suficientes recursos para detectarla y/o prevenirla. Los esfuerzos se realizan normalmente demasiado tarde. Por consiguiente, debe reforzarse el trabajo preventivo. El esfuerzo que se exige para ello es enorme y los recursos disponibles son muy limitados. Esto exige una nueva manera de pensar para utilizar los recursos disponibles, a la vez que se echa mano de nuevos recursos. Es evidente que una naci?n por s? misma no puede enfrentarse a las cat?strofes ecol?gicas y que los problemas medioambientales exigen que las naciones colaboren. Las amenazas son mundiales y la cooperaci?n internacional es fundamental.

Los problemas ecol?gicos locales y regionales pueden tener consecuencias importantes para las relaciones internacionales. La lluvia radiactiva, las inundaciones o la sequ?a no se detienen ante las fronteras nacionales. Los refugiados medioambientales cruzan las fronteras nacionales hacia naciones igual o m?s pobres. Estas nuevas causas de inestabilidad e inseguridad deben reflejarse en el contenido y la forma del modo en que las naciones crean y mantienen la paz y la seguridad. Dado que los problemas medioambientales y ecol?gicos constituyen graves amenazas para la paz y la seguridad, estos problemas deben reflejarse en la pol?tica exterior, de defensa y de seguridad. Existe la necesidad de analizar la manera en que los recursos militares pueden utilizarse contra esta creciente amenaza y para eliminar estas nuevas fuentes de inestabilidad e inseguridad. Existe una necesidad urgente de movilizar recursos para hacer frente al desaf?o medioambiental.

El cambio de la situaci?n en la pol?tica de seguridad ha dado como resultado la distensi?n militar, el desarme y medidas de confianza entre los antiguos enemigos EE.UU. y Rusia. Esto ha resultado en una reducci?n sustancial de fuerzas militares y en la disoluci?n de unidades militares y esto a su vez ha hecho que el material militar se haya convertido en superfluo. Especialmente Rusia y los EE.UU. han reducidos sustancialmente su defensa militar, pero tambi?n en Europa se han reducido los gastos militares (1).

La liberaci?n de recursos militares proporciona a los militares una oportunidad ?nica y una gran capacidad para enfrentarse a los crecientes problemas medioambientales. Los militares tienen una excelente organizaci?n y considerables recursos t?cnicos que pueden utilizarse sin grandes costes para fines de protecci?n del medio ambiente. Esto se puede conseguir mediante una reasignaci?n o transferencia de recursos. La Uni?n Europea puede unirse en torno a una nueva estrategia medioambiental en la que los recursos militares se utilicen en una defensa medioambiental com?n. La Uni?n Europea puede jugar un importante papel de promoci?n de una responsabilidad ecol?gica mundial y, al mismo tiempo, fomentar la paz y la confianza.

Los Estados miembros de la Uni?n Europea disponen de los requisitos t?cnicos y econ?micos para asumir una responsabilidad medioambiental considerable. Tambi?n saben lo que significar?a hacer caso omiso del desaf?o medioambiental. El deterioro ecol?gico influye en las condiciones de crecimiento y desarrollo econ?mico, pero, a pesar de ello, los gastos militares mundiales son de 3 a 5 veces superiores a los gastos de protecci?n del medio ambiente (2).

El sector militar en s? mismo constituye un importante factor de destrucci?n medioambiental. Por esta raz?n, deben asumir una especial responsabilidad con el medio ambiente.

Las modernas amenazas a la seguridad

Existe una conciencia internacional cada vez mayor sobre la importancia de los problemas medioambientales, como lo muestran las conferencias de seguimiento de las Naciones Unidas sobre el agua (Mar del Plata), la desertificaci?n (Nairobi), el medio ambiente y el desarrollo (R?o de Janeiro) y los cambios clim?ticos (Kyoto). Los problemas medioambientales pueden dar lugar a problemas tan graves que pueden poner en peligro la seguridad de las personas y de los Estados. Los problemas medioambientales tambi?n pueden tener consecuencias para las relaciones entre los Estados. El aire y el agua no se detienen ante las fronteras nacionales. Veamos algunos ejemplos concretos de amenazas medioambientales potenciales o existentes:

Recursos acu?feros limitados

A la vez que aumenta la poblaci?n mundial, aumenta tambi?n la demanda de agua limpia. El agua dulce es un recurso natural repartido muy desigualmente, menos de 10 pa?ses poseen el 60% de los recursos mundiales de agua dulce (3) y algunos Estados de Europa dependen de las importaciones de agua. En futuros conflictos, un ataque contra las fuentes de agua dulce puede ser no s?lo un objetivo en s? mismo sino tambi?n la causa de conflictos. Los conflictos sobre qui?n tiene derecho al agua pueden resultar en una mayor tensi?n internacional, as? como en conflictos locales y/o internacionales. Por ejemplo, las disputas sobre el r?o Indo podr?an desencadenar un conflicto armado en las tensas relaciones entre la India y el Pakist?n. La lista de potenciales conflictos causados por el agua puede hacerse muy larga. Se calcula que 300 r?os, lagos y fuentes de agua subterr?nea se encuentran en zonas fronterizas internacionales (4). En el Oriente Medio 9 de 14 pa?ses tienen escasez de agua y existe el peligro real de que los otros pa?ses puedan verse afectados (5). En 1995 una quinta parte de la poblaci?n mundial no ten?a acceso a agua limpia y se calcula que esta cifra aumentar? en el a?o 1995 (6).

Cambios clim?ticos

La temperatura de la Tierra ha aumentado 5? en este siglo debido a un aumento de las emisiones, sobre todo de di?xido de carbono (7). El calor tambi?n se ha hecho m?s intenso. Los investigadores han descubierto que la humedad del aire ha aumentado en un 10% en los ?ltimos 20 a?os. La mayor humedad del aire puede ser la causa de que en algunas zonas se produzcan tormentas cada vez m?s fuertes y con mayor frecuencia, a la vez que otras zonas se ven afectadas por la sequ?a. Se necesitar?n dos d?cadas de investigaci?n intensa sobre los cambios clim?ticos mundiales para poder tomar decisiones m?s concretas sobre las medidas que es necesario adoptar.

El Panel Intergubernamental sobre el cambio clim?tico (IPCC), una organizaci?n internacional con 2.000 de los m?s eminentes investigadores del mundo, prev? que las temperaturas de la tierra aumentar?n entre 1,5 y 4,5 grados y que el nivel del mar se habr? elevado en 50 cm para el a?o 2100 si las emisiones de di?xido de carbono contin?an como hasta ahora. Se calcula que un tercio de la poblaci?n mundial y algo m?s de un tercio de las infraestructuras se encuentran en las zonas costeras del mundo. Un aumento del nivel del mar sumergir?a extensas zonas y varios millones de personas estar?an afectadas por el hambre debido a la p?rdida de grandes extensiones agr?colas.

Estas y otras amenazas medioambientales pueden dar lugar a un ?xodo de refugiados. Cada vez en mayor medida los refugiados medioambientales est?n siendo objeto de la atenci?n internacional. Se calcula que 25 millones de personas son refugiados de la sequ?a, la erosi?n terrestre, la desertificaci?n y otros problemas medioambientales, frente a 22 millones de refugiados "tradicionales". Los refugiados medioambientales pueden, seg?n los expertos, ser la causa de una de las peores crisis humanitarias de nuestra ?poca (8). Estos refugiados sufren problemas sociales, pol?ticos y econ?micos que pueden dar lugar a conflictos y violencia. Debe reconocerse oficialmente a los refugiados medioambientales. Es necesaria una mayor cooperaci?n internacional para limitar estos problemas y una mayor ayuda a los pa?ses afectados y a sus habitantes.

Impacto militar sobre el medio ambiente en ?poca de guerra y de paz

La actividad militar es la causa de una considerable destrucci?n medioambiental en la sociedad. Las actividades militares tienen consecuencias muy negativas para el medio ambiente, tanto en tiempo de paz como en tiempo de guerra, tanto intencionalmente como de manera no deseada. La destrucci?n del medio ambiente ha sido desde la antig?edad un m?todo de guerra. La guerra tambi?n constituye la amenaza m?s grave para el medio ambiente. Un ejemplo actual son las devastadoras consecuencias de la guerra del Golfo, con cientos de pozos de petr?leo en llamas y grandes cantidades de sustancias t?xicas liberadas en la atm?sfera de forma incontrolada. Pasar? mucho tiempo hasta que se restablezca el medio ambiente. Algunos de los da?os pueden ser irreparables.

Los militares desarrollan armas cada vez m?s potentes que producen extensos y devastadores da?os en el medio ambiente. Una guerra moderna conlleva mayores da?os medioambientales que cualquier otra actividad perjudicial para el medio ambiente. A continuaci?n se describen algunos sistemas de armas que pueden tener consecuencias graves para el medio ambiente tambi?n en tiempo de paz.


Las minas son enormemente da?inas para el medio ambiente. Seg?n el programa de las Naciones Unidas para el Medio Ambiente (PNUMA) las minas terrestres son unos de los restos de material de guerra m?s extendido y puede afectar al equilibrio ecol?gico. La colocaci?n de minas puede destruir extensas zonas, a menudo zonas agr?colas, que durante mucho tiempo ser?n inutilizables. Las minas constituyen el mayor obst?culo para el desarrollo en muchas de las zonas m?s pobres del mundo. Hay colocadas entre 80 y 110 millones de minas en 65 pa?ses, que pueden detonar d?cadas despu?s de su colocaci?n y la mayor?a de las v?ctimas son civiles, sobre todo ni?os. El levantamiento de minas es un proceso peligroso, lento y costoso. El desarrollo de nuevos m?todos de levantamiento de minas se est? produciendo muy lentamente y debe acelerarse.

Un dato positivo es que la Conferencia de Oslo de 1997 tuvo como resultado la prohibici?n sin excepci?n de todas las minas antipersonas, la obligaci?n de destruir las existencias de minas (9) en un plazo de 4 a?os y la concesi?n de mayor ayuda a los pa?ses afectados por las minas. Un gran n?mero de Estados firm? el Convenio de Ottawa de 1997, pero algunos Estados, entre los que se encuentran los EE.UU., Rusia, India y China, no lo han hecho. La Uni?n Europea debe actuar para que estos pa?ses se adhieran al acuerdo. La Uni?n Europea debe ayudar en mayor medida a las v?ctimas de las minas y apoyar el desarrollo de t?cnicas de levantamiento de minas.

Armas denominadas no letales(10)

Las denominadas armas no letales no son un nuevo tipo de armas sino que han existido en muchos a?os en forma de, por ejemplo, ca?ones de agua, balas de goma y gas lacrim?geno. Pero actualmente se han desarrollado t?cnicas m?s avanzadas que, a pesar de que pueden causar da?os graves e incluso la invalidez o la muerte, se denominan no letales.

Se han desarrollado tecnolog?as contra material y contra personas. Un ejemplo son las armas ac?sticas que, al producir un ruido de bajo nivel, pueden confundir y desorientar, y de esa manera neutralizar, al enemigo. Otros ejemplos son la espuma adhesiva y el l?ser cegador. Los productos qu?micos que decoloran el agua pueden afectar tanto a la agricultura como a la poblaci?n. Mediante rayos electromagn?ticos se pueden destruir los sistemas de informaci?n, navegaci?n y comunicaci?n del enemigo. Las denominadas amas no letales tambi?n pueden utilizarse contra las infraestructuras y las autoridades de un Estado, pueden destruir el sistema de ferrocarril o producir el caos en el sector financiero de un pa?s. La caracter?stica com?n de estas armas es que tienen como objetivo retrasar, obstruir y vencer a un potencial enemigo a "nivel estrat?gico"(11).

El hecho de que estos tipos de armas se conozcan con la denominaci?n com?n de no letales es gravemente enga?oso. La denominaci?n de "no letales" pretende presentar estas armas como m?s humanas que las armas convencionales -pero no hay armas humanas. La utilizaci?n de un tipo de armas constituye un peligro de da?os o muerte que es precisamente el objetivo de las armas. Las denominadas armas no letales se aplicar?an en los primeros momentos de un conflicto y pueden en s? mismas ser la causa del conflicto. El recurso a la violencia por parte de soldados y polic?as puede aumentar debido a que las armas se presentan como menos peligrosas. Existe el riesgo real de que estas armas reduzcan el umbral del recurso a la violencia para la soluci?n de conflictos.

El objetivo es neutralizar al enemigo sin sufrimientos prolongados y sin muertes. Pero c?mo y contra qui?n se utilizar?n las armas no letales es un aspecto importante para los efectos que puedan tener dichas armas. Un arma que puede neutralizar a un soldado puede herir e incluso matar a un ni?o o a una persona anciana. La distancia a la que se disparen y en qu? cantidad son otros factores que hay que tener en cuenta al calcular los efectos de las armas. Como punto de referencia se puede mencionar que las armas convencionales "s?lo" producen un 25% de muertes (12).

Las denominadas armas no letales se utilizan como medio efectivo en la guerra moderna, aisladamente o junto con las armas convencionales. Por ejemplo, los EE.UU. utilizaron armas de radiofrecuencia en la guerra del Golfo para destruir el sistema energ?tico de Iraq (13), a pesar de que no se conoc?an los efectos antipersonas de las armas de radiofrecuencia. Por lo tanto, las armas no letales no deben considerarse separadamente sino como un componente de un sistema letal. El desarrollo de las denominadas armas no letales ofrece un mayor n?mero de opciones en la guerra. El resultado es, por lo tanto, una mayor utilizaci?n de la fuerza en lugar de lo contrario. Las denominadas armas no letales no dan como resultado conflictos no letales.

A la vez que se desarrollan m?s tipos de armas no letales, aumenta el inter?s de los militares, la polic?a y el ?mbito pol?tico de probar la manera en que funcionan. Las armas no letales no deben utilizarse como un instrumento de interferencia y dominio pol?tico de los pa?ses del norte sobre los pa?ses del sur.

Hace falta una legislaci?n efectiva para las armas no letales. S?lo una peque?a parte de las armas y t?cnicas no letales pueden prohibirse en virtud de la interpretaci?n de normas de control de armas, por ejemplo la espuma adhesiva, que se utiliz? en Somalia y Bosnia. Algunos tipos de l?ser (el l?ser cegador) tambi?n se ha limitado en el Convenio sobre determinadas armas convencionales. Las toxinas biol?gicas (por ejemplo, la salmonela y otras bacterias) est?n prohibidas por el Convenio sobre armas biol?gicas. Algunas de estas armas tienen graves consecuencias para el medio ambiente. Por consiguiente la legislaci?n internacional debe reforzarse para regular las nuevas armas que siguen desarroll?ndose.

El proyecto Cyrus del Comit? de la Cruz Roja Internacional podr?a utilizarse a falta de otras normas internacionales adecuadas para las armas no letales. El proyecto Cyrus ha clasificado y establecido criterios m?s estrictos para las armas convencionales en lo que se refiere a mortalidad, invalidez, tratamiento necesario, transfusi?n de sangre, etc. La Uni?n Europea debe actuar de manera que los convenios internacionales regulen tambi?n las nuevas tecnolog?as de armas y el desarrollo de nuevas estrategias de armas.

Armas qu?micas

Las medidas de las Naciones Unidas destinadas a destruir las armas qu?micas y otros tipos de armas de destrucci?n masiva en Iraq ha producido una grave preocupaci?n sobre las repercusiones medioambientales de las actividades militares y ha subrayado la necesidad de buscar m?todos ecol?gicos para neutralizar las armas. El convenio sobre armas qu?micas (CWC) entr? en vigor en abril de 1997. El art?culo 1 obliga a los Estados que han ratificado el convenio a no desarrollar, producir o exportar armas qu?micas en ninguna circunstancia. Tambi?n obliga a no utilizar armas qu?micas y a destruir las armas qu?micas existentes. En virtud del art?culo 3, los Estados deber?n notificar, en un plazo de 30 d?as tras la entrada en vigor del convenio, informaci?n sobre la posesi?n de armas qu?micas y su localizaci?n, as? como presentar un plan para la destrucci?n de dichas armas. La destrucci?n debe comenzar con las existencias m?s antiguas. 165 Estados han firmado el convenio y 110 lo han ratificado. 26 Estados no han firmado el convenio, entre ellos algunos pa?ses importantes del Oriente Medio.

La destrucci?n de armas qu?micas ha dado lugar a una grave preocupaci?n por el medio ambiente - estas armas representan decenas de miles de toneladas de gas de mostaza, gas nervioso y otras sustancias qu?micas. Las armas qu?micas pueden destruirse mediante incineraci?n, pero muy pocos pa?ses tienen instalaciones adecuadas para ello. La neutralizaci?n de las armas qu?micas es un proceso caro, entre 3 y 10 veces m?s caro que el proceso de producci?n de dichas armas. Para que Rusia, que tiene existencias muy importantes, pueda hacerlo, es necesaria la ayuda econ?mica de otros pa?ses. En Kambarka, una ciudad rusa, se encuentran 6.000 toneladas de armas qu?micas almacenadas en construcciones de madera a 2 kil?metros de una zona muy poblada. El tratamiento de estas cantidades de sustancias peligrosas exige esfuerzos importantes y el proceso durar? algunos a?os. Existe un claro riesgo de que se produzcan accidentes o de que las armas caigan en poder de destinatarios no deseados.

Se ha confirmado que aproximadamente 150.000 toneladas de bombas, obuses y minas con armas qu?micas, principalmente gas de mostaza, fosgeno, tabun y ars?nico, se depositaron en Skagerack al final de la segunda guerra mundial. En el Mar B?ltico la cifra es de 40.000 toneladas. Muchos de los contenedores se encuentran completamente oxidados y las armas qu?micas est?n en contacto directo con el agua del mar. De todas formas, se ha decidido que deben permanecer en el fondo del mar ya que el riesgo de recuperarlas se considera a?n mayor.

Armas nucleares

Las repercusiones medioambientales de las armas nucleares podr?an ser enormes. Es probable que el efecto combinado de la lluvia radiactiva en extensas zonas, el deterioro de la capa de ozono por los ?xidos de nitr?geno de las explosiones nucleares y el cambio clim?tico producido por extensos y continuos incendios dar?a lugar a graves cat?strofes ecol?gicas en grandes zonas del planeta.

Los ensayos nucleares tienen tambi?n efectos perjudiciales sobre el medio ambiente. La cantidad total de radiactividad liberada a la atm?sfera en los ensayos atmosf?ricos se calcula entre 100 y 1.000 veces mayor que la producida en Chernobil (14). El acuerdo de 1963 entre los EE.UU., la URSS y el Reino Unido sobre prohibici?n parcial de ensayos nucleares proh?be los ensayos en la atm?sfera, en el espacio exterior y subacu?ticos, es decir todos los ensayos menos los subterr?neos.

Francia ha realizado 180 ensayos nucleares en el atol?n Mururoa en el Oc?ano Pac?fico desde 1966 con importantes repercusiones sobre el medio ambiente (15). Se ha encontrado una peligrosa cantidad de varios kilos de plutonio en el fondo de las lagunas en Mururoa y Fangataufa. Tambi?n se han esparcido part?culas de plutonio en la tierra de tres islas en las proximidades de Mururoa (16). La India y el Pakist?n tambi?n han realizado recientemente ensayos nucleares (17). Su desarrollo t?cnico no se considera lo suficientemente controlado, lo que supone que los ensayos nucleares pueden tener repercusiones medioambientales en zonas muy lejanas de estas regiones. Debe efectuarse inmediatamente una investigaci?n internacional independiente del impacto medioambiental en los lugares donde se realizaron los ensayos y en las zonas pr?ximas.

El plutonio es ciertamente la sustancia m?s peligrosa que se conoce. Muchos pa?ses poseen grandes cantidades de plutonio militar y pueden producirse armas nucleares de una forma relativamente simple a partir de plutonio "civil". Las instalaciones que actualmente tienen una funci?n civil pueden convertirse r?pidamente en f?bricas de armas. En la fabricaci?n del plutonio se producen grandes cantidades de residuos l?quidos altamente radiactivos. El tratamiento de los residuos radiactivos causa problemas enormes. La producci?n en gran escala de armas de destrucci?n masiva durante las ?ltimas d?cadas ha producido grandes cantidades de residuos. No existe ning?n m?todo adecuado conocido para almacenar los residuos radiactivos. Se almacenan normalmente en contenedores, pero grandes cantidades se liberan en la naturaleza. Los residuos radiactivos son extremadamente inflamables y pueden explotar si no est?n ventilados o refrigerados. En 1957 ocurri? un accidente en la planta nuclear Chelyabinsk-65 cerca de la ciudad de Kystym en los Urales. Un contenedor radiactivo explot? y los residuos radiactivos se extendieron en una zona de 1.000 Km2. Fue preciso evacuar a 10.000 personas. Cerca del lago Karachay, en las proximidades de Chelyabinsk-65, todav?a es posible recibir, situ?ndose simplemente en la orilla del lago, un nivel de radiactividad tal que produce la muerte instant?nea (18).

En la zona del B?ltico existen extensas ?reas contaminadas por antiguas actividades militares sovi?ticas. En Estonia, se encuentra el lago Sillanm?, tambi?n llamado el lago nuclear, que acoge residuos militares radiactivos equivalentes a miles de armas nucleares, el lago Sillanm? se encuentra a 100 metros del mar B?ltico. Cualquier vertido al mar B?ltico podr?a tener consecuencias devastadoras para el medio ambiente en toda la regi?n del B?ltico.

A finales de la d?cada de los ochenta Rusia dispon?a de m?s armas nucleares que todos los dem?s pa?ses juntos. En la pen?nsula de Kola y en Sevrodvinsk en Rusia se encuentra actualmente la mayor concentraci?n de reactores nucleares del mundo (240 unidades) (19). Grandes cantidades de residuos radiactivos y de submarinos nucleares se han almacenado en astilleros de la pen?nsula de Kola. Rusia y la flota rusa se encuentran en una situaci?n imposible para tratar los reactores fuera de servicio. No tienen posibilidades econ?micas para financiar un desmontaje seguro. Los bajos sueldos han tenido como consecuencia que el personal cualificado abandone los astilleros, lo que produce una gran escasez de personal cualificado.

Incluso en el centro de Mosc? se han encontrado 1.200 fuentes de envenenamiento radiactivo, incluyendo canteras de arena, refugios antia?reos, viviendas privadas, garajes e instalaciones deportivas (20). La posibilidad de que Rusia pueda liberarse de las armas nucleares, qu?micas y biol?gicas de los arsenales militares y de las sustancias de los institutos de investigaci?n o la industria no deben subestimarse. Es preocupante que no existan equipos adecuados para tratar los residuos de una forma que respete el medio ambiente. Tanto desde un punto de vista econ?mico como medioambiental cualquier accidente que pueda ocurrir podr?a tener repercusiones devastadoras. Cada a?o que pasa sin haber adoptado medidas suficientes hace que aumente el riesgo y la gravedad de un accidente.

Existe una propuesta concreta y realista para eliminar progresivamente las armas nucleares del mundo. La propuesta fue presentada en agosto de 1996 por el grupo de expertos independiente que constitu?a la Comisi?n de Camberra (21). En julio de 1996 el Tribunal Internacional de la Haya emiti? el dictamen un?nime de que el art?culo 6 del Tratado de no proliferaci?n obliga a los Estados nucleares a iniciar negociaciones sobre el desarme nuclear. El Tribunal tambi?n decidi? que la amenaza de la utilizaci?n de armas nucleares no era conforme con el Derecho internacional. La Uni?n Europea deber?a actuar en favor de la aplicaci?n de la propuesta de la Comisi?n de Camberra y del art?culo 6 del Tratado de no proliferaci?n.

HAARP - un sistema de armas destructor del clima

El 5 de febrero de 1998 la Subcomisi?n de Seguridad y Desarme del Parlamento Europeo celebr? una audiencia sobre, entre otras cosas, el HAARP. Se invit? a representantes de la OTAN y de los EE.UU., pero declinaron la invitaci?n.

La subcomisi?n lamenta que los EE.UU. no enviaran a un representante para responder a las preguntas o aprovechar la oportunidad de comentar el material presentado (22).

El HAARP (Programa de Investigaci?n de Alta Frecuencia Auroral Activa) es un proyecto que llevan a cabo conjuntamente la fuerza a?rea y la marina de los Estados Unidos, junto con el Instituto Geof?sico de la Universidad de Alaska, Fairbanks. Experimentos similares se est?n realizando tambi?n en Noruega, probablemente en el Ant?rtico, as? como en la antigua Uni?n Sovi?tica (23). El HAARP es un proyecto de investigaci?n que utiliza instalaciones terrestres y una red de antenas, cada una equipada con su propio transmisor, para calentar partes de la ionosfera (24) con potentes ondas de radio. La energ?a generada calienta partes de la ionosfera, lo que produce agujeros en la ionosfera y "lentes" artificiales.

El HAARP puede utilizarse para muchos fines. Mediante la manipulaci?n de las caracter?sticas el?ctricas de la ionosfera se puede controlar una gran cantidad de energ?a. Si se utiliza como arma militar, esta energ?a puede tener un impacto devastador sobre el enemigo. El HAARP puede enviar muchos millones m?s de energ?a que cualquier otro transmisor convencional. La energ?a tambi?n puede dirigirse a un blanco m?vil, lo que podr?a constituir un potencial sistema antimisiles.

El proyecto permite tambi?n una mejor comunicaci?n con submarinos y la manipulaci?n de condiciones clim?ticas globales. Ahora bien, tambi?n es posible hacer lo contrario e interferir las comunicaciones. Mediante la manipulaci?n de la ionosfera se pueden bloquear las comunicaciones globales a la vez que se transmiten las propias. Otra aplicaci?n es la penetraci?n de la tierra (tomograf?a) con rayos X a una profundidad de varios kil?metros para detectar campos de petr?leo y gas o instalaciones militares subterr?neas. Otra aplicaci?n es el radar sobre el horizonte, y definir objetivos a larga distancia. De esta manera, se puede detectar la aproximaci?n de objetos m?s all? del horizonte. Desde la d?cada de los cincuenta los EE.UU. han realizado explosiones de material nuclear en los cinturones Van Allen (25) para investigar el efecto de las explosiones nucleares a esa altura sobre las comunicaciones de radio y la operaci?n del radar gracias al pulso electromagn?tico que desprende una explosi?n. Estas explosiones crearon nuevos cinturones de radiaci?n magn?tica que cubrieron pr?cticamente todo el planeta. Los electrones se movieron en l?neas magn?ticas y crearon una Aurora Boreal artificial sobre el Polo Norte. Con estos ensayos militares se corre el peligro de destruir gravemente el cintur?n Van Allen durante mucho tiempo. El campo magn?tico de la tierra puede destruirse sobre grandes extensiones e impedir las comunicaciones por radio. Seg?n cient?ficos norteamericanos. Pueden pasar muchos a?os antes de que el cintur?n Van Allen se estabilice de nuevo. El proyecto HAARP puede resultar en cambios de la situaci?n clim?tica. Tambi?n puede influir en el ecosistema, especialmente en la regi?n sensible del Ant?rtico.

Otra consecuencia grave de HAARP son los agujeros de la ionosfera causados por las potentes ondas de radio. La ionosfera nos protege de la radiaci?n c?smica. Se espera que los agujeros se cierren de nuevo, pero la experiencia con la capa de ozono hace pensar lo contrario. Esto quiere decir que hay agujeros considerables en la ionosfera que nos protege.

Debido a sus considerables efectos sobre el medio ambiente, HAARP es un asunto de inter?s mundial y debe cuestionarse si las ventajas de este sistema realmente son superiores a los riesgos. Hay que investigar los efectos ecol?gicos y ?ticos antes de proseguir con la investigaci?n y los ensayos. HAARP es un proyecto casi desconocido y es importante que la opini?n p?blica sepa de qu? se trata.

El HAARP est? vinculado a 50 a?os de investigaci?n espacial intensiva de marcado car?cter militar, incluyendo el proyecto "guerra de las estrellas", para controlar la alta atm?sfera y las comunicaciones. Este tipo de proyectos deben considerarse como una grave amenaza para el medio ambiente, con un impacto incalculable sobre la vida humana. Incluso ahora, nadie sabe el impacto que podr? tener el proyecto HAARP. Debemos luchar contra el secreto en la investigaci?n militar. Hay que fomentar la transparencia y el acceso democr?tico a los proyectos de investigaci?n militar y el control parlamentario de los mismos.

Una serie de leyes internacionales (el Convenio sobre la prohibici?n de la utilizaci?n militar o de cualquier utilizaci?n hostil de las t?cnicas de modificaci?n el medio ambiente, el Tratado Ant?rtico, el Tratado sobre los principios que rigen las actividades de los Estados en la exploraci?n y utilizaci?n del espacio exterior, incluyendo la luna y otros cuerpos celestes, as? como el Convenio de las Naciones Unidas sobre la ley del mar) ponen en duda no s?lo la base humanitaria y pol?tica del proyecto HAARP sino tambi?n su base jur?dica. El Tratado Ant?rtico dispone que el Ant?rtico debe utilizarse exclusivamente para fines pac?ficos (26). Esto significa que el proyecto HAARP infringe el Derecho internacional. Todas las implicaciones de los nuevos sistemas de armas deben ser investigadas por ?rganos internacionales independientes. Deben elaborarse tambi?n nuevos acuerdos internacionales para proteger al medio ambiente de su destrucci?n innecesaria en tiempo de guerra.

Impacto de las actividades militares sobre el medio ambiente

No s?lo los sistemas de armas sino todas las actividades militares tienen en general consecuencias sobre el medio ambiente, incluso los ejercicios que se realizan en tiempo de paz. Ahora bien, cuando se debate la destrucci?n medioambiental no se menciona en general el papel de los militares, sino que se critica ?nicamente el impacto sobre el medio ambiente de la sociedad civil. Hay por lo menos dos explicaciones de esto (27). Las actividades militares son m?s dif?ciles de discutir debido al secreto que las rodea y es dif?cil enfrentar las m?s altas prioridades nacionales, la seguridad y la defensa, con el medio ambiente. Hoy en d?a, cuando las cat?strofes naturales y medioambientales constituyen una grave amenaza a la seguridad, este argumento se ha vuelto m?s dudoso.

Las fuerzas armadas se esfuerzan en tiempo de paz por prepararse para situaciones de guerra de la manera m?s realista posible. Por ello, realizan sus maniobras en condiciones similares a las condiciones de guerra, lo que implica una enorme presi?n sobre el medio ambiente. Un ejemplo de ello es la retirada de las tropas sovi?ticas y las bases militares abandonadas en la Europa Central y Oriental, que han dejado una profunda huella en el medio ambiente local. Los ejercicios militares implican da?os generalizados al paisaje y a la vida animal. Los ejercicios con tropas someten extensas ?reas de tierra a una destrucci?n medioambiental generalizada. Los campos de ejercicio de la artiller?a y de misiles t?cticos exigen extensas ?reas para fines militares. De la misma manera, la producci?n de municiones y la industria de fabricaci?n de equipos militares causan considerables problemas medioambientales.

Las fuerzas armadas son responsables de la emisi?n de gases que afectan al clima, principalmente di?xido de carbono, pero tambi?n la incineraci?n de combustibles f?siles y las emisiones de freones, que destruyen la capa de ozono (28). El consumo de queroseno es una de las principales fuentes de emisi?n de sustancias acidificantes como los ?xidos de nitr?geno y el ?xido de azufre. Las fuerzas armadas representan una gran parte de todo el consumo de queroseno y producen una gran parte de todas las emisiones de aviones (29). Los aviones que vuelan a gran altitud, as? como los misiles, causan un impacto especialmente perjudicial sobre el medio ambiente, tanto en forma de ruido como de emisiones de combustible. Todos los misiles que utilizan combustible s?lido emiten grandes cantidades de ?cido clorh?drico y cada vuelo de una nave espacial inyecta aproximadamente 75 toneladas de clorina, que destruye el ozono; de la misma manera, el ruido causado por los ejercicios militares en los que se utiliza munici?n de gran calibre puede tambi?n destruir el medio ambiente.

Los ejercicios de tiro contaminan la naturaleza con metales. A menudo se utilizan grandes cantidades de munici?n de peque?o calibre que contiene plomo y se dispersan en la naturaleza grandes cantidades de este metal. Por desgracia, no existe una investigaci?n exhaustiva sobre el consumo de metales.

Las consecuencias en forma de problemas medioambientales causados por el desarme es un fen?meno que s?lo se ha observado recientemente. Cada a?o, se destruyen, principalmente de forma industrial, grandes cantidades de explosivos. La munici?n que, por distintas razones, no puede destruirse de esta manera, debe hacerse explotar. Evidentemente, el desarme es necesario y positivo pero debe efectuarse de una forma que respete el medio ambiente. Deben desarrollarse tecnolog?as limpias para la destrucci?n de armas.

Algunas naciones ya han empezado a aprovechar la oportunidad de utilizar recursos militares para restaurar el medio ambiente destruido por las fuerzas armadas. Todos los sectores de la sociedad deben responsabilizarse del medio ambiente y el sector militar no debe ser una excepci?n. Como en otros sectores de la sociedad, las cuestiones medioambientales deben ser parte integral de las actividades de las fuerzas armadas y deben incluirse en los procesos presupuestario y de toma de decisiones. En mayo de 1993, el programa de las Naciones Unidas para el medio ambiente (PNUMA) instaba a los gobiernos nacionales a establecer leyes nacionales para el sector militar, "aplicaci?n de normas medioambientales a las actividades militares". Finlandia, por ejemplo, ha elaborado un "Libro Verde" para regular el impacto de las actividades militares en el medio ambiente. Lo mismo ha hecho Suecia (30). En junio de 19996, Suecia elabor? tambi?n, junto con los EE.UU., directrices medioambientales para las actividades medioambientales (31). Las fuerzas armadas deben establecer objetivos medioambientales y proponer medidas para contribuir a la reducci?n del impacto sobre el medio ambiente de conformidad con la Agenda 21 y la Declaraci?n de R?o (32). Tambi?n deben presentar informes en los que se definan los factores que afectan al medio ambiente dentro de las fuerzas armadas. Antes de comenzar nuevos proyectos y de adquirir material para uso militar o civil deben realizarse evaluaciones de su impacto ambiental. Cada gobierno debe realizar un inventario de sus necesidades medioambientales y definir los recursos militares que est?n disponibles para fines medioambientales, elaborar planes medioambientales nacionales e informar de su experiencia a un ?rgano adecuado en la Uni?n Europea y de las Naciones Unidas.

Todo el personal militar, incluyendo el personal de reemplazo, debe recibir una formaci?n b?sica en materia de medio ambiente. Las fuerzas armadas de los Estados Unidos han avanzado mucho
Vril 1922-1945330 views
Yorkshire, UK - 2003330 views
Dummy - 16 March, 2002 Vandenberg AFB - CA330 viewsThe dummy warhead was fired from Vandenberg Air Force Base in the US missile test in 2002.
329 viewsDISCLAIMER:

The posting of videos, stories, commentaries, reports, documents, and links (embedded or otherwise) on this site
does not in any way, shape or form, implied or otherwise, necessarily express or suggest endorsement or
support of any of such posted material or parts therein.

The myriad of facts, conjecture, perspectives, viewpoints, opinions, analyses, and information in the videos,
articles, stories, and commentaries posted on this site range from cutting edge hard news and comment to
extreme and unusual perspectives. We choose not to sweep uncomfortable material under the rug - where it
can grow and fester. We choose not to censor skewed logic and uncomfortable rhetoric. These things
reflect the world as it now is - for better and worse. We present multiple facts, perspectives,
viewpoints, opinions, analyses, and information.

Journalism is (or used to be) the profession of gathering and presenting a broad panorama of news about
the events of our times and presenting it to readers for their own consideration. We believe in the
intelligence, judgment and wisdom of our visitors to discern for themselves among the data which appears
on this site that which is valid and worthy... or otherwise.

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized
by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of
environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc.
We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107
of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is
distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included
information for research and educational purposes.

For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

Copyright and trademarks on this site belong to their respective owners, even if not clearly identified.

1385 files on 9 page(s) 4