Brain Brinksmanship - Neurotechnology in National Security and Defense - page 118

are intended to influence, direct, weaken, suppress, or neutralize human thought,
brainwave functions, perception, interpretation, and behaviors to the extent that the
target of such weaponry is either temporarily or permanently disabled, mentally
compromised, or unable to function normally.
Those who would argue that neuroweapons verge on obscene science fiction
would have to demonstrate that such devices and approaches are technically impos-
sible to create, that cleverly designed collaborating systems could never produce neu-
roweapons, or that they are so far beyond the scope of human reason and intelligence
as to stand at the threshold of being beyond human capability. Some may argue
that neuroweapons could potentially negate human thought, redirect will, or weaken
spirit and therefore should be outlawed before they are created. They may even
expect society and government to enact systems and security measures to thwart
their present development, before further research brings us closer to the realities of
weaponization. (Rees and Rose 2004; Glannon 2006; see also Chapter 14).
The problem is that none of those statements about neuroweaponry are reliable,
valid, or true. Neuroweaponry is, in fact, possible to create. It seems likely that
sophisticated engineered systems' integration of biophysical, nanochemical, cyber-
dynamic, and related elements could—or more accurately will—be engineered to
produce a neuroweapon. To claim that neuroweaponry is beyond human intelligence
and logic also fails to address or acknowledge the current state of engineered inte-
gration and merging of diverse technologies. Such trends must be seen as possible,
probable, and a strategic risk of epochal global impact that must prepared for, else
we should expect instead to suffer dire consequences for collective ignorance of its
import (Giordano et al. 2010).
If the central goal is to manipulate human thought, emotions, and behavior through
a combination of psychopharmacological, biotechnical, and cybernetic activities and
synergized systems to steer, influence, and shape thought and conduct—then we
must be and remain alert to such potential goals and progress toward them to date.
Bringing the perfect mixture of scientific, engineering, psychological, behavioral,
and medical properties to influence, redirect, sublimate, subdue, and repress any
thoughts or actions that would ordinarily be seen as aggressive, hostile, or murderous
merits global interest. What nation would hesitate to develop and field a weapon that
could control, shape, or redirect human thoughts and actions—given the power such
a weapon would yield?
Nations that currently possess sophisticated or advanced weapons have built
arsenals based upon knowledge that military forces on all sides pose both offensive
threats and defensive capabilities, while simultaneously offering deterrent potential
against attacks. Nations may be hesitant to be overtly provocative, engage in hostili-
ties, or even consider preemptive attacks knowing that some form of retaliation is
likely. Instead, they may engage in elaborate postures that foster rising tensions, but
that may also inadvertently yield some unexpected advantages. For example, new
offensive missiles unveiled by one nation may stimulate deployment of advanced
missile defense systems in other states, while others may choose instead to deploy
their own rival missile systems. Nevertheless, nations may—and often do—go to
extraordinary lengths to avoid inadvertent warfare and seek to increase pressures
without resorting to a military strike or some form of preemptive action. There is a