[ EXECUTIVE SUMMARY with links to text at NAP website ]
Date: Nov. 4, 2002 Contacts: Barbara J. Rice, Deputy Director Corbin Arberg, Media Relations Assistant (202) 334-2138; e-mail <news@nas.edu>
For Immediate Release
WASHINGTON -- The U.S. Department of the Navy should move toward integrating non-lethal weapons -- designed to incapacitate people or materiel while minimizing unintended death and damage -- into naval warfighting requirements, research and development programs, acquisition plans, and operations, says a new report from the National Academies' National Research Council. In addition, the joint program conducted since 1996 by all the services to develop non-lethal weapons should change significantly to foster the needed research for development within a reasonable time frame.
"Though this study was originally requested prior to the bombing of the U.S.S. Cole, it was conducted in its aftermath, when a more urgent need for non-lethal weapons emerged for the Navy," said Miriam E. John, chair of the committee that wrote the report and vice president, California Division, Sandia National Laboratories, Livermore. "In particular, non-lethal weapons are an additional way to provide greater security for military bases and protect our forces. Our report gives the Navy and Marine Corps specific recommendations to improve their non-lethal capabilities."
Recognizing the value of non-lethal weapons in a variety of military operations, such as urban peacekeeping efforts, counterterrorism, and force protection, the U.S. Department of Defense created the Joint Non-Lethal Weapons Directorate under the purview of the U.S. Marine Corps. Since its implementation, the directorate has operated with modest funding. The Department of the Navy has made little investment in non-lethal weapons science and technology, even though these weapons are well-suited to the needs of naval expeditionary forces, the committee found.
The directorate has made some progress in laying the groundwork for weapons development, such as acquiring existing technologies and demonstrating a vehicle-mounted system that uses heat produced by high-power microwaves to stop vehicles and vessels. However, significant shifts in emphasis and resources are now required to meet the program's goals.
One obstacle to progress is a lack of new ideas developed cooperatively between the directorate and the military services' science and technology programs, the committee found. Because of its high visibility and small budget, the directorate has been forced to focus too much on relatively mature technologies while investing little in developing new capabilities. In addition, the process for introducing non-lethal weapons into the development and acquisition cycle for each of the military services needs to be improved. Most important is a greater emphasis on understanding the effects of non-lethal weapons on intended targets and whether those effects are useful for military operations and within the bounds of treaty constraints.
The committee recommended that highest priority should be placed on four science and technology areas of non-lethal weapons research and development, to support naval expeditionary forces. These include developing calmatives and malodorants in accordance with treaty obligations to control crowds and clear facilities; more advanced directed-energy systems for stopping vehicles or vessels; novel and rapidly deployable marine barrier systems to stop attack vessels and protect perimeters; and unmanned or remotely piloted vehicles and sensors to provide warning, localization, and tracking of potential enemy threats.
The study was sponsored by the Joint Non-Lethal Weapons Directorate and the Office of Naval Research. The National Research Council is the principal operating agency of the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering. It is a private, nonprofit institution that provides science and technology advice under a congressional charter. A committee roster follows.
Copies of An Assessment of Non-Lethal Weapons Science and Technology will be available this winter from the National Academies Press; tel. (202) 334-3313 or 1-800-624-6242 or on the Internet at http://www.nap.edu. Reporters may obtain a pre-publication copy from the Office of News and Public Information (contacts listed above).
NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences Naval Studies Board
Committee for an Assessment of Non-Lethal Weapons Science and Technology
RESEARCH COUNCIL STAFF
source: http://www4.nationalacademies.org/news.nsf/isbn/0309082889?OpenDocument 5oct02
WASHINGTON -- Weapons that don't kill people should be given a higher priority by the military, especially the Navy and Marines, the National Research Council says.
The long-awaited report on nonlethal weapons, ranging from sticky or slippery sprays to bad smells and psychological methods to calm crowds, called for establishment of special research centers and high-level oversight to encourage their development.
Miriam E. John of Sandia National Laboratories, chairwoman of the committee that wrote the study released Monday, said nonlethal weapons could provide added security to American bases and vessels and help soldiers on peacekeeping missions better deal with unruly crowds.
But the recommendation drew sharp criticism from the Sunshine Project, a chemical and biological weapons monitoring group that is the chief critic of nonlethal weapons programs.
Edward Hammond, a project staff member, charged the research council with providing cover for military research programs.
"The panel's findings will be used by the Pentagon to redouble their chemical weapons development efforts with potentially disastrous results for arms control," he said. "Other countries will follow suit and controls on chemical weapons could quickly destabilize."
The United States signed the chemical weapons treaty in the early 1970s.
The armed services have operated a joint nonlethal research program since 1996 and the committee urged that it be sped up.
The recommendation for additional research comes just over a week after about 120 captives died when Russian forces pumped incapacitating gas into a theater where about 40 Chechen separatists had taken more than 750 people hostage. Russian officials said the gas was not supposed to cause deaths.
The goal of nonlethal weapons is to incapacitate people or equipment while minimizing unintended fatalities and damage, the Research Council said.
"What we're saying is that we're putting our soldiers in harm's way, doing humanitarian and peacekeeping missions, without the tools to deal with these large crowds that can turn on them in a minute," John said in a telephone interview.
She said calming methods that would have a psychological impact on people -- perhaps using music or speaking to crowds appropriately in their language -- have not been well studied.
As for using chemicals to calm crowds, she said international treaties are complicated. "The lawyers have got to get together on this. There is so much latitude for interpretation, it needs a very, very careful look."
The report noted that while chemicals that have a physical effect, such as putting people to sleep, may be banned under treaties, materials that have a psychological impact, calming people down, may be legal.
Marine Capt. Shawn Turner, spokesman for the military's Joint Non-Lethal Weapons Directorate, said he has not yet seen a copy of the study and could not comment on it.
The study was done after the October 2000 bombing of the USS Cole, although it was requested before then, John said. Seventeen U.S. sailors were killed when a dinghy loaded with explosives rammed the destroyer as it was refueling in Aden.
Taking that into account, the report stressed the need for accelerated research into barrier and entanglement systems that could be deployed to stop vessel movement.
Other possibilities suggested were solid-state lasers and chemicals that stop engines and calmatives to stop such attackers.
Researchers at a Pentagon-funded institute at Pennsylvania State University prepared a 50-page report in 2000 saying that developing calmative weapons "is achievable and desirable" and suggesting drugs like Valium for further research.
One hurdle for using such drugs for riot control, the researchers wrote, is finding a way to deliver the substances to large groups, such as in a spray or mist.
Other problems are figuring out how to prevent other injuries, such as from people falling down if they are knocked unconscious, as well as determining the proper strength of a spray depending on whether it is to be used indoors or outside.
Material collected by the National Research Council disclosed a wide range of proposed nonlethal weapons ranging from liquid projectiles to microorganisms that gobble up highways and runways, making them unusable, sticky sprays that make floors and stairs a gummy mess and foul-smelling fogs.
Some examples are already in use, including tear gas, rubber bullets and flash-bang grenades.
The National Research Council is an arm of the National Academy of Sciences, an independent organization chartered by Congress to provide scientific advice to the government.
The U.S. military needs to hasten funding and development of nonlethal weapons, including chemicals that could be used to calm or control crowds who might threaten U.S. bases abroad, according to a report by the National Research Council.
The report released Monday drew a harsh reaction from peace activists, especially in light of the unintended civilian casualties last week in Moscow, where Russian soldiers used a sleep-inducing gas against Chechen hostage- takers in a Moscow theater. The gas killed many civilians in the theater, especially the very young and the elderly.
Gases and other "nonlethal weapons are an additional way to provide greater security for military bases and protect our forces," said Miriam E. John, vice president of Sandia National Laboratories's California branch in Livermore. She chaired the committee that wrote the report.
Especially worthwhile would be the development of "calmative" gases that can calm large groups, or "malodorant" -- foul smelling -- gases that can repel them, says the report, titled "An Assessment of Nonlethal Weapons Science and Technology."
The report also urges the military to beef up its development of other so- called nonlethal weapons, which would "incapacitate people or materiel while minimizing unintended death and damage."
These include "a vehicle-mounted system that uses heat produced by high- power microwaves to stop vehicles and vessels" without harming the occupants, and robotic vehicles and sensors that can track potential enemy threats.
The NRC is the principal operating arm of the National Academy of Sciences and National Academy of Engineering, which advise Congress on science and technology.
The report's conclusions are intended for perusal by the military in general, although the report itself was developed by an NRC branch with ties to Navy and Marine Corps operations.
Peace activists attacked the report as unwise and ill-timed, particularly in the aftermath of the Moscow tragedy.
"They're talking about upgrading a whole new piece of the military- industrial complex," charged Andrew Lichterman, a spokesman for Oakland-based Western States Legal Foundation, one of the leading peace groups in the western United States. "We're not having the national debate we need about what these massive military forces are for."
The NRC report is "terribly, terribly irresponsible" and biased by its ties to the military, said Edward Hammond, head of The Sunshine Project. The Austin,
Texas-based group has critiqued U.S. weapons developments including so-called nonlethal technologies.
The Pentagon agency charged with developing nonlethal weapons is the six- year-old Joint Nonlethal Weapons Directorate (JNLWD). That agency "got what it wanted in the (NRC) study: a green light to continue development of gas weapons," Hammond charged.
In the late 20th century, U.S. military futurists began advocating research and development of such nonlethal weapons to minimize civilian and enemy casualties in wartime. On Congressional order, the U.S. Defense Department responded in 1996 by creating the JNLWD as a branch of the U.S. Marine Corps.
However, the Navy "has made little investment in nonlethal weapons science and technology," complained the NRC report. The report was sponsored by two of the agencies that would benefit from increased funding: the Directorate and the Office of Naval Research.
In a phone interview, John, a chemist by training, said the directorate spends roughly $30 million a year. So far it has spent its money largely on low-tech nonlethal devices such as rubber bullets and "sticky foam," which can bog down crowds.
Although the report doesn't recommend a specific amount of increased spending for R&D on nonlethal weapons, John said the military should consider doubling the amount -- especially on higher-tech weapons such as the calming or smelly gases.
|
If you have come to this page from an outside location click here to get back to mindfully.org |