We've been telling you about the project for a long time. Index, moreover, we must not forget in the background the project Clean IT which is even more invisible to him but will impact you just as much. What I retain is that these industrialists, soldiers, and other members of theEuropean elite, are in the process of killing two birds with one stone, as USA. They "create" a market themselves and pass contracts to it (for your safety of course), as for the dangerous jihadists of Al-Qaeda in the USA (besides, I will still see a good "False Flag" in Europe to justify all this, a bit like what still happens in the United States). Still, these 195 programs represent 2,1% of Europe's research budget, and it is increasing. Don't you think they better do some research on the cold fusion and free energy, or on the practical application of Thorium nuclear power plants ? Or even rapidly develop the pyrolysis we talked about for waste management ? All I see is that this little world is sharing 1,6 billion euros on our backs, to “police” us even better. Notwithstanding that NO ONE talks about it in the "mainstream media", this research is financed by our governments and therefore our taxes. So why let them do it and give them even the slightest legitimacy?
By (December 19, 2012)
Biometrics, video surveillance, drones, detection of abnormal behavior, mathematical models to identify suspects... The European Union finances more than 190 research programs on security and surveillance. To the great benefit of industrialists, who recycle military technologies to monitor populations. While a new research program is being discussed in Brussels, will Europe continue to give in to industrial lobbies and invest billions in the security market?
They have strange names: Tiramisu, Pandora, Lotus, Emphasis, Fidelity, Virtuoso… On the surface, these are harmless acronyms. In reality, they hide 195 European research projects in the field of security and surveillance. Relatively worrying projects for our freedoms. And financed by Europe within the framework of public-private partnerships.
The most emblematic example: the Indect project (“Intelligent information system supporting observation, research and detection for the safety of citizens in urban areas”), launched four years ago, denounced at the end of October by demonstrations in all of Europe. Indect aims to enable “automatic detection” of threats and dangerous situations – such as burglaries – or “use of dangerous objects” – knives or firearms. Everything is good to fight " terrorism and other criminal activities like human trafficking or child pornography ". And ensure the safety of citizens... Except that it is also with Index to detect "automatically" (sic) suspicious behavior, from video surveillance images, audio data or data exchanged on the net. Welcome in Minority Report !
Detect “abnormal” behavior
Concretely, Indect is a surveillance system, which, from images and sounds captured in the public space and information gleaned from the Internet, would alert the police services in the event of a situation deemed dangerous: people immobile in a busy street, crowd movement, vehicles idling, a suspicious call on a social network. These “abnormality” criteria will be defined by the security forces... All of this will feed a search engine. In addition to spying on public space, Indect will ensure “the automatic and continuous monitoring of public resources, such as websites, discussion forums, P2P networks or individual computer systems”. But rest assured: tools to hide certain private data, such as faces or license plates on video images, are provided. Information must be encrypted before transmission to authorized services. Phew!
Among the research institutes participating in the project, alongside several police and companies [1], that of the University of Wuppertal in Germany specializes in transport safety and civil protection against disasters. The university praises the positive effects that these techniques could have to prevent a situation like that of the Love Parade of Duisburg, in 2010, where 21 people died in a crowd movement. Within the framework of Indect, he develops mathematical models to evaluate, from video surveillance images, the speed of objects, or "to detect movement in a dangerous area, such as the tracks in a station", explains the spokesman of the university, Johannes Bunsch – the only one officially authorized to speak about the project. Run to catch a train, react with a sudden gesture, and here you are in the search engine to which the police services connect.
“The system can very well detect a person tying their shoelaces in a store or taking photos in an airport hall, and consider this as 'abnormal' behavior. In reality, the system does not know if this is unwanted behavior. It simply detects behavior that deviates from the normal behaviors we have taught it”, illustrates Professor Dariu Gavrila (quoted by the site Owni) who, within the University of Amsterdam, is working on algorithms to detect aggressive behavior.
Because the stated goal of Indect is to fight against crime and terrorism, not to avoid pileups on the highways or tragic panic movements. And this, thanks to the European Union which finances 75% of the project (15 million euros in total). “We only develop technical processes, the spokesperson cautiously defends himself. The competence to decide how to use the technology rests with the politicians”. That is the problem: who controls these research programs and who will benefit from them?
Police and companies in the ethics committee
To respond to criticism, Indect has set up an ethics committee. Its composition leaves you wondering: among the nine members, there are two heads of the police services involved and an industrialist from one of the participating companies... Its principle seems ambiguous to say the least: “The maxim 'if you have done nothing wrong, then you have nothing to fear' is only valid if all aspects of criminal justice work perfectly, on all occasions. » [2] Are we to understand that a citizen who mistakenly falls into Indect's security nets will have little chance of getting out!? "The ethics committees that accompany projects like that of Indect are rather alibis, says German MEP Jan Phillip Albrecht (Green), who was part of the ethics committee of the Addpriv project, which aims to create tools to limit the storage of data deemed useless and make video surveillance systems "more compatible" with citizens' right to privacy.
Indect is far from the only spy program generously funded by the EU. Arena [3] aims to create a mobile surveillance system, and is subsidized to the tune of 3 million euros. Subito locates owners of unidentified luggage. Samurai stands for "monitoring suspicious and abnormal behavior using a network of cameras and sensors for better situational awareness" [4], in airports and public spaces. It is a video surveillance system with fixed and mobile cameras – on police officers on patrol for example – equipped with sensors allowing to follow a person, to find the owner of an abandoned piece of luggage or that of a vehicle parked in a public place. Tests took place in 2009 at London's Heathrow airport. Brussels granted him 2,5 million euros.
The European envelope for these schemes amounts to 1,4 billion euros over five years [5]. This future generalized surveillance is available in rail transport, airports, and on the seas, with projects designed in particular to turn back migrants. This program raises many questions, especially since it escapes any democratic control and any objection from civil society. “Representatives of civil society, parliamentarians, as well as organizations in charge of civil liberties and fundamental freedoms, including data protection authorities, have largely been sidelined”, warns a report commissioned by the European Parliament in 2010 [6]. Long live the Europe of citizens!
A surveillance policy shaped by manufacturers
No elected officials or non-governmental organizations, but an omnipresence of large companies in the security and defense sector! In particular the French: the Franco-German aeronautics group EADS, and its subsidiaries Cassidian and Astrium, are involved in nearly 20 different projects. Thales France is monitoring 22 projects and coordinating five. Sagem and Morpho, two subsidiaries of the French group Safran, are involved in 17 projects, which include the development of surveillance drones, or the design of passports and biometric files. Each with millions of euros in grants. Research that will undoubtedly ensure many outlets for these security technologies, in Europe and beyond.
Why such a presence? “It is mainly large defense companies, the same ones that participated in the definition of the European Research Program in terms of security, who are the main beneficiaries of the funds”, points out the study of the European Parliament. Several multinationals – including, on the French side EADS, Thales, or Sagem [7] – were closely involved in defining the research program itself. Since 2003, their representatives and CEOs have been advising the European Commission on the subject, via various working groups and committees, whose mission is to establish the priorities of European security research policy [8]. One wonders who, multinationals or elected institutions, defines European security policy! “What interests companies in the sector is not so much to monitor populations as to make money”, analyzes Jean-Claude Vitran, of the League of Human Rights.
Recycle military technologies
It's because the European security market is worth gold. Between 26 and 36 billion euros. And 180.000 jobs, according to the European Commission, which estimates that over the past ten years, the size of the global security market “has grown almost tenfold, from around €10 billion to around €100 billion in 2011.” [9] But Brussels fears for the competitiveness of European firms. The solution ? Develop “a genuine internal market for security technologies”, explains Antonio Tajani, Vice-President of the Commission in charge of enterprises. An essential market to consolidate the position of companies in the sector. To achieve this, Brussels wants to exploit the synergies “between (civilian) security research and defense research”. A dual strategy: technologies developed for military purposes can also be sold on the internal civil security market, for the surveillance of migrants, citizens, transport and public spaces.
« Defense manufacturers are aware that the military market can apply to civil security. And that they can make a fuss of it”, adds Jean-Claude Vitran. Companies in the sector benefit from research support funds at all levels. In addition to the security component of the European research programme, at least seven European countries have since launched national programmes, including France, with the Programs “Concepts, systems and tools for global security” from the National Research Agency. The sector is obviously not subject to austerity.
Towards greater parliamentary control?
And it's not finished ! This seventh European framework program will end in 2013. But the security industry has nothing to worry about. The budget for the next programme, Horizon 2020, valid for the period 2014-2020, should increase. The Committee on Research and Industry of the European Parliament adopted on November 28 a first proposal [10]. The overall amount allocated to research will depend on discussions between heads of government of member countries. One thing is certain: an entire section will once again be dedicated to civil security, which should receive 2,1% of the overall amount of the framework programme. Or 1,6 billion euros. The security industry has an ally at the heart of the European legislative process. One of the rapporteurs of the Horizon 2020 text, the German Conservative MP Christian Ehler, is chairman of the board of directors of the german european security association (GESA), a lobbying organization that brings together representatives of the German security industry, research and politics.
“2% of the research package is way too much. If it had been up to us, there would have been no "safety" chapter in this program., underlines Philippe Lamberts, Belgian MEP (Green), another rapporteur of the Horizon 2020 project. The European research budget is not huge. You have to choose your priorities. There are other areas of research that are more pressing for European security, such as energy or resource independence. »
The Green elected representatives of the European Parliament succeeded in introducing social impact criteria into the programme. All calls for projects in the field of security must be subject to a prior assessment of their consequences, on fundamental rights for example. “Previously, the main factor for choosing projects was the potential growth of the branch, recalls Green MP Jan Philipp Albrecht. Guidelines are needed, linked to the respect of freedoms. We have similar ethical restrictions in the field of stem cell research. It must be clearly established in what framework one has the right to seek in order to receive European funds, and within what limits. » And above all allow citizens to keep control over a set of projects that can seriously challenge public freedoms. Unless the “competitiveness” of large groups in the security sector takes over once again.
Rachel Knaebel
Photo: CC Solo (A) / CC L'N'Y (camera) / CC makerbot (Lego)/CC Photography
Notes
[1] Twelve research institutes, including the INP engineering school in Grenoble – which did not respond to our request for information –, four German and Austrian companies and the police in Poland and Northern Ireland.
[3] Architecture for the Recognition of threats to mobile assets using Networks of multiple Affordable sensors, Sand.
[4] Suspicious and abnormal behavior monitoring using a network of cameras and sensors for situation awareness enhancement
[5] The European framework program has a budget of 51 billion euros allocated to research for the period 2007-2013, including 1,4 billion for the “Security” component.
[7] But also BAE Systems, Ericsson, Saab, Siemens…
[8] The “Group of Personalities” (GoP) in 2003, then the European Security Research Advisory Board (Esrab) in 2005. In 2007, a third committee was created to support this time the 7th research framework program – the European Forum for Security Research and Innovation (Esrif).
[9] Read their press release.
[10] Based on a first Commission draft. The text will be voted on in plenary in the European Parliament in the course of 2013.
This article has interested you ? Basta! needs its readers
to continue his work, donate.
source: Bastamag.net
Further information :
Terms & Conditions
Subscribe
Report
My comments