by Michael E. Salla, PhD
June 9, 2005

from Exopolitics Website


The rejection by voters in France and the Netherlands of the proposed European Union Constitution on May 29 and June 1, 2005, respectively, carries much exopolitical significance. The defeat means that a ’United States of Europe’ as a strategic counterweight to the United States is unlikely to emerge in the near future.



The result is that the European Union will continue to remain a common market with great economic integration and a single currency, but with minimal political cohesion, and even less military integration. The outcome is that NATO will continue as the preeminent military institution and Europe, and the United States will continue to dominate NATO as it has since its formation in 1949. The Supreme Allied Commander of Europe, for example, is an American and it was this issue of who would occupy the highest office in NATO that led to France under General de Gaulle removing itself from the integrated command structure of NATO in 1967 in protest at continued American dominance. The overall result is that the U.S. will continue to dominate European military affairs especially with the integration of former East European states that are strong allies of the U.S. as witnessed in their strong support of the Bush administration’s preemptive military action against Iraq.

The defeat of the idea of a ’United States of Europe’ that could rival the U.S. and be an independent military/political counterweight to it under the leadership of France and Germany means that another way of countering U.S. global dominance will be sought. French political leaders have clearly recognized, at least with the Bush administration’s explicit policy of preemptive military action, that the greatest danger to global peace is unrestrained American power that prioritizes national interests over global interests.

(see ).


American dominance is likely to be accentuated in the development and deployment of ’exotic technologies’ gained through retrieved extraterrestrial vehicles and information revealed by whistleblowers such as Col Phillip Corso in The Day After Roswell (1997). Another retired US Army veteran, Sgt Clifford, persuasively reveals in a book based on official documents gained through FOIA requests (UFO’s are Real, 1997), that U.S. military and diplomatic resources are covertly used to gather crashed UFOs and extraterrestrial artifacts around the world in covert programs known as Project Moondust and Project Blue Fly.

With the existence of exotic technologies secretly gained through five decades of covert political/military efforts at retrieving downed extraterrestrial vehicles, discovery of extraterrestrial artifacts and agreements with extraterrestrial races, the U.S. is in a position to increasingly dominate global affairs for decades to come. In the view of advanced democratic nations such as France, an unrestrained U.S. superpower that secretly uses its exotic technology to further its global dominance remains a great threat. Without an indigenous European political and military counterweight that is free of American dominance, and has the economic and technological base to develop its own exotic technologies, it is likely that French policy makers will increasingly adopt the view that the most effective restraint on the development, funding and deployment of exotic technologies that threaten global interests is an informed American citizenry.

Disclosure of the reality of the UFO phenomenon and truth of the extraterrestrial hypothesis that many UFOs are piloted by extraterrestrials from other worlds will do much to bring about greater transparency in how the U.S. manages and deploys the exotic technologies it has gained through its reverse engineering efforts. It can be predicted that with the temporary defeat of a ’United States of Europe’ free of American dominance, France will increasingly turn its attention towards more disclosure of information concerning the truth of the extraterrestrial hypothesis. Consequently, I will now briefly review France’s historic role in studying UFO sightings and how we might soon see changes in the rate and extent to which France discloses the truth concerning UFOs and the extraterrestrial hypothesis.

France and UFO Disclosure

France in 1977 created a department within its equivalent of NASA - the CNES (Centre National d’Études Spatiales - National Center of Space Studies) to undertake a civilian study of UFO reports. GEPAN (Groupe d’Études des Phénomènes Aérospatiaux Non-identifiés - Study Group for Unidentified Aerospace Phenomena) was initially well funded and represented a serious scientific investigation of the UFO phenomenon by French scientists. GEPAN was initially headed by Dr. Claude Poher and later headed by Dr Jean Jacques Velasco in 1983. With the closure of Project Blue Book by the US Air Force allegedly due to inconclusive evidence of UFO’s cited in the 1969 Condon Report, GEPAN represented continued global public interest in the UFO phenomenon, and the continuing number of UFO sightings that could not be explained. GEPAN was a model for the kind of rigorous scientific study of UFOs supported by prominent U.S. researchers such as Dr Allen Hynek and Dr James MacDonald where a civilian agency such as NASA would be more likely than the US Air Force to do a serious study of the UFO phenomenon.

The formation of GEPAN coincided with a United Nations initiative to promote a more coordinated international research into the UFO phenomenon. The initial report by Dr Poher to a CNES scientific committee certainly strengthened the importance of an internationally coordinated study of UFO’s where he claimed that in,

"60% of the cases reported here, the description of this phenomenon is apparently one of a flying machine whose origin, modes of lifting and/or propulsion are totally outside our knowledge"


In 1978, the UN General Assembly approved a resolution calling for a UN department to study UFO sightings around the planet. (see:


It is not coincidental that France’s initiative with GEPAN gave great legitimacy to efforts to establish a UN collection agency for UFO reports. While the UN resolution was passed by a committee vote in 1978, it was never implemented due to lack of major power support. The role of the U.S. in stifling this UN initiative has emerged with FOIA documents detailing telex communications between the State Department and the US representative to the UN (see Clifford Stone, UFO’s are Real). The creation of GEPAN was a significant initiative since it would presumably be instrumental in collection of a UFO database not only for France but for most if not all the nearly 30 Francophone countries.

In 1988, GEPAN was renamed SEPRA (Service d’Expertise des Phénomènes de Rentrées Atmosphériques - Atmospheric Re-entry Phenomena Expertise Department) and experienced a significant cut back in funding. The mandate of GEPAN/SEPRA became more general with it now studying anomalous atmospheric phenomenon in addition to UFO sightings. The cutback presumably signified a lack of interest in the UFO phenomenon by the French civilian space agency (CNES) which thought that the approximately 5% of UFO sightings that could not be explained didn’t warrant the kind of study and resources previously given to GEPAN. The case studies investigated by GEPAN arguably failed to provide the kind of conclusive evidence that would merit CNES investing further resources to French UFO research.

In 1999, the French COMETA Report appeared and gave fresh scientific legitimacy to the study of the UFO phenomenon. Composed by a group of senior scientists and military officials, the COMETA report emphasized the seriousness of a rigorous scientific investigation of the UFO phenomenon. It made a number of recommendations which included: an expansion of funding and investigations by SEPRA of the UFO phenomenon; establishing a unit at the highest level of government to deliberate on policy aspects of the UFO phenomenon; and establish close diplomatic relations with the U.S. to coordinate a policy response to the UFO phenomenon.

(for summary of COMETA see HERE).

While the COMETA report was not distributed widely in the English speaking world, it proved to be very popular in the Francophone world and attracted much interest and debate. However, any hope that SEPRA would witness a restoration of the kind of resources and focus it previously enjoyed on its inception was sorely disappointed. Not only did SEPRA fail to have any further resources given to it, but in January 2004, SEPRA experienced a further cut back in funding so that it presently continues in name only with its Director being the sole official responsible for SEPRA.

What might have occurred to have caused the cut back of SEPRA at the very time that the COMETA report was advising the opposite? Why was the COMETA report initiated in the first place if its key recommendations were going to be ignored by the French scientific and political community? Was SEPRA merely a public relations exercise as critics earlier contended was the case with the USAF Project Blue Book?

One explanation is that the virtual elimination of SEPRA as a functioning department in CNES was done to preempt possible damage by the publication of a book co-authored by its Director, Dr Velasco in April 2004 that concluded in favor both of the reality of the UFO phenomenon and of the extraterrestrial hypothesis. In UFOs... the Evidence, Velasco was able to draw upon an extensive database of 5800 case studies in the files of SEPRA (13% of which were of ’unknown’ origin), and the book promised to have great impact in shaping French public opinion on UFO’s.


Another explanation to the virtual elimination of SEPRA was confidence by French policy makers at the highest level that France had a vital interest in maintaining a rigid non-disclosure policy concerning UFO reports and the truth behind the extraterrestrial hypothesis. This was likely a result of policy coordination and technology sharing with the U.S., Russia and other major states that made secrecy a price for major states such as France gaining information and technology gained from extraterrestrial artifacts retrieved and discovered around the planet. France thus had much to gain from continued participation in a covert global political system created to coordinate national policy on UFOs and the truth of the extraterrestrial hypothesis arguably dated from the World War II era when Nazi Germany came into possession of extraterrestrial technologies (see HERE).


Central to the French policy of non-disclosure was anticipation of a smooth ratification process of the European Constitution that had been signed on October 29, 2004 after three years of negotiation. The Constitution offered the kind of political centralization that would have enabled France and other major European states to build up a ’United States of Europe’ that would be sufficiently independent and powerful to counter the U.S. in the economic and political spheres, and to achieve an independent military force.



Perhaps more importantly, the coming ’United States of Europe’ would give France and other European powers the means by which American dominance in exotic technologies gained through covert projects dealing with downed extraterrestrial material would be at least restrained if not bridged.

The rejection of the European Constitution has put on hold these ambitions of a politically integrated Europe, and very likely led to alarm at the highest levels in France that there will not be the emergence of a strategic counterweight to American dominance in exotic technologies. As a consequence, the geo-strategic balance of forces is firmly behind U.S. technological dominance that will continue to expand as the U.S. has the lion’s share of extraterrestrial technologies and information retrieved through its network of global agreements and influence.

Without a politically powerful and independent ’United States of Europe’ to rival and restrain the U.S. in developing and applying exotic technologies, it is likely that French policy makers will decide that it is in France’s national interest to promote public awareness of the reality of the UFO phenomenon and the extraterrestrial hypothesis. As the American public becomes aware of the extraterrestrial hypothesis and the exotic technologies gained over the last five decades, there will understandably be a public desire for transparency and accountability in the developing, funding and application of these exotic technologies. Such an eventually will be in the national interest of France and other major nation states since they do not have the means to restrain or bridge the gap between the exotic technologies possessed by the U.S. and the technological base of other major states.


The rejection of the European Constitution by French and Dutch voters has put indefinitely on hold the French/European dream of an integrated Europe that has one voice in the political arena, and has an independent military force. In the absence of a strategic counter balance to U.S. dominance in the sphere of exotic technologies, it can be predicted that France will move decidedly forward in promoting disclosure of the UFO phenomenon and the truth of the extraterrestrial hypothesis. This is likely to occur in a number of ways described in the COMETA report.

  • First, reinstating serious financial support for CEPRA.

  • Second, creating an office at the highest political level to coordinate national policies on UFOs and the truth of the extraterrestrial hypothesis.

  • Third, diplomatic relations with the U.S. in public disclosure of the extraterrestrial hypothesis.

Finally, newer initiatives such as that recently undertaken by the Brazilian Air Force of opening military files on UFO reports to civilian researchers (see may be adopted and make possible a coordinated public disclosure campaign that makes the citizenry of France and other major nations aware of the reality of UFOs and truth of the extraterrestrial hypothesis.

The unrestrained use of exotic technologies by the U.S. is an unacknowledged threat to global peace. Major democratic nations such as France who fail to restrain covert U.S. policies through political processes such as the creation of a politically integrated European Union, can be predicted to more vigorously promote public disclosure of UFO’s and the extraterrestrial hypothesis. This would acknowledge that an informed US citizenry is best able to restrain U.S. excesses in the development and deployment of exotic technologies. The ’No’ vote by French citizens to the proposed European Constitution is likely to have great exopolitical significance. It can be anticipated there may not be much delay in French policy makers making some surprising policy announcements concerning the reality of UFOs and the extaterrestrial hypothesis.