1.INTRODUCTION Several European organisation are currently developing and implementing non-lethal capabilities. This enables many emerging and non-traditional threats(which may appear in low intensity, asymmetric conflits,peace support, and anti-terrorism operations) to be countered with an innovative solution. Non-lethal weapons are of interest to both the military and law enforcement agencies as in many cases, the character of the scenarios might be similar. Non- lethal weapons can be seen as having dual-use appliaction and they provide armed forces, law enforcement agencies, and policy makers with additional options to respond in a tailored and graduated manner. Non-lethal Weapons authorised civilian and military organisations. 2.NATO Non-lethal weapons Non-lethal Weapons are weapons which are explicitly designed and developed to incapacitate or repel personnel, with a low probability of fatality or permament injury, or to disable equipment, with minimal undesired damage or impact on the environment. 3.Background Founded in 1998.Present members: Austria, Belgium, Czech Republic, Finland, France,Germany, Italy, Netherland, Portugal, Russia, Sweden, Switzerland, United Kingdom The working Group is open to all European organizations working in the area of Non- Lethal Weapons. 4.AIMS of the EWG-non-lethal Weapons There are two complementary strategies of the Non-lethal Weapons to improve awareness of NLW: 1. Holistic approach, i.e. by considering all essential aspects(legal, ethical, 157 sociological, technological, medical… 2. High Tech solutions 5.WHEN Non-lethal Weapons to be used? When it is deemed safe to do so and it is believed any life maybe saved. The benefits of using non-lethal technologies must be balanced against the risks to military or law enforcement peronnel and the general population. It should be recognized that no technology or device can be quaranteed to be completely nonlethal and injuries may still occur, even when used with minimal force according to the rules of proportionality. 6.What types Non-lethal Weapons be used? Any option considered to be appropriate, acceptable and lawful given the situation. Develompment of new non-lethal technologies will alow military and law enforcement personnel to exploit alternative means of countering potentially hazardous threats, aexpanding their capabilty with new options that offer an acceptable alternative to lethal force. Introduction: Nonlethal Weapons U.S. Electromagnetic technology is a new emerging weapon with significant importance to international politics. Electromagnetic technology has been developed internationally as a weapon of war for at least forty years, but it has been highly classified.(Pasternak,1997). The weapons are designed to target any and every nerve of the body including the human brain. There are many independent sources that verify this little-publicized fact. “Research work in this field [directed energy weapons] has been carried out in almost all industrialized countries, and especially by the great powers, with a view to using these phenomena for anti-materiel or anti-personnel purposes.” (Doswald-Beck,1990,18). …“[U.S.] scientists, aided by government research on the 'bioeffects' of beamed energy, are searching the electromagnetic and sonic spectrums for wavelengths that can affect human behavior.” (Pasternak,1997,38). A 1993 Defense News article entitled “U.S. Explores Russian Mind-Control Technology” described “acoustic psycho-correction, the capability to control minds and alter behavior of civilians and soldiers…” It uses “transmission of specific commands via static or white noise bands into the human subconscious…” The article further stated that U.S. and Russian sources were planning “…discussions aimed at creating a framework for bringing the issue under bilateral or multilateral controls” (Opall,1993,4). These are just a few examples of the dozens of articles available on this topic. International Use of Nonlethal Weapons The public is now beginning to hear the debates on the strategic development of electromagnetic weapons. While much of the technology is still classified, the nonlethal weapon debate is reflective of international concerns about electromagnetic weapons. Many countries plan to use nonlethal weapons for low intensity conflict, international terrorism and peace- keeping missions. The many articles on this topic describe the great interest in and funding of nonlethal weapons and the possibilities for it's misuse. For example in Harvard International Review, Ethan Mollick described a nonlethal weapon catastrophe in the Gulf War, the use of carbon-fiber 158 bombs which caused widespread civilian deaths as a result of the electrical and water pump failures. Military proponents have stated that one of the main goals is to limit deaths. Proponents claim nonlethal weapons will provide more options in conflict situations but opponents argue that more military interventions may occur based on misperceptions about nonlethal weapons. Mollick effectively argues for an international consensus and exploration of nonlethal strategies.Mollnick does repeatedly discuss the problem of unrealistic expectations by the military and the public and stated that this is a very important issue for the future successful use of nonlethal weapons. For example, in OOTW or operations other than war, the apolitical nature of the armed services may be compromised and in a similar way there are concerns that nonlethal weapons will require new strategies and will fulfill new roles in war and will substantially change the nature of fighting. These are important issues that the strategic experts are beginning to work out. A 1996 report by the Institute for Foreign Policy Analysis was extremely thorough and detailed about the role of nonlethal weapons on an international level. This study pointed out the important factors in developing the United States policy framework on nonlethal weapons. Nonlethal weapons were considered an asset to military operations. This report recommended further development of a clearly worded nonlethal weapons policy so that the opponent would take the U.S. stance seriously and know that the U.S. could stand behind it's stated capability. Nonlethal weapons were discussed as part of the U.S. arsenal and there were questions about issues of proliferation and problems of countermeasures. The consensus was that the U.S. should continue staying one step ahead of other countries in nonlethal weapons technology and not worry about using the classified technology. Public discussions on this issue were encouraged and nonlethal weapons cooperation with NATO members was encouraged. Multinational cooperation is an area of concern. Discussions concerning deterrence policy and the role of nonlethal weapons are currently being discussed. The U.S. seems to be leading the way for international policy formulations, based on the quantity and quality of the U.S. information on nonlethal weapons. The Dangers of Nonlethal Electromagnetic Weapons In an article commissioned by the European Parliament, concerns about “less- lethal' weapons were discussed. The European Union is concerned about nonlethal weapons and protecting civil rights. The article concluded that further research on such topics as proliferation and control are needed. “Formal liaison arrangements between the EU and the USA” on nonlethal weapons was investigated. This further demonstrates the international importance of nonlethal weapons. Many countries are seriously incorporating the use of nonlethal weapons into their arsenals. Accordingly, concerns about maintaining a lead other countries and of the abuse of the new technologies are being discussed by most countries today.The European Parliament complained of the dangers of HAARP, a U.S. electromagnetic defense project and of being uninformed about the dangers after NATO and U.S. officials had declined invitations to the discussions on HAARP (Tigner,1998,3). This is a good example of the possible global implications of electromagnetic weapons and the problems involved with classified weapons programs such as miscommunication. Several articles point out similar concerns.The discussions on nonlethal weapons has increased dramatically since the 1990s. Most articles present a pro and con picture and that the 159 nonlethal arsenals are increasing in many countries. Nonlethal weapons will play a significant role in international strategies, according to the cited articles above. And they have already been deployed in Somalia during the United Nations peacekeeping missions in 1995.(Schmitt,1995) This is indicative of nonlethal international strategies on the use of the still very classified nonlethal weapons that is now in effect.Another example of the importance of electromagnetic weapons was clearly stated as follows. “In a much quoted speech made in 1974, Fleet Admiral Groshkov of the USSR, considered the “father” of modern Soviet navy, stated that “the country that best exploits the electromagnetic spectrum will win the next war.” (Herron,1984,64) Proliferation and the development of countermeasures have led to an escalating arms race. To a certain extent, the country with the money can buy this technology, but the superpowers have the leading edge technology. It is available on the international market and is proliferating at a very fast pace. (Dunigan,1996,15). This is another factor that will affect nonlethal strategic policy development.