International UAP Research: The Strategic Lessons of AARO and GEIPAN
The issue of Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena (UAP) has transformed in recent years from a fringe phenomenon to a priority for national security and aviation safety. Major powers worldwide recognize that unidentified objects in airspace pose a real risk. For the development of robust Dutch and European policies, it is important to learn from two leading international models: the American All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO) and the French GEIPAN.
The international field of UAP research demonstrates that an effective approach rests on two pillars: technological superiority and scientific transparency. The Netherlands and the European Union are now at a crossroads where these international best practices can be integrated into their own aviation culture.
A Cross-Border Security Problem
UAPs don't stop at national borders. Whether it's the 11 recorded "near misses" in the United States in 2022 or the navigational challenges pilots face over the North Sea, the operational impact is universal. The international shift The shift from the term “UFO” to “UAP” marks a fundamental change: it is no longer about speculation, but about understanding anomalous phenomena in all domains (air, space and sea) through advanced sensor detection.
The biggest obstacle to effective UAP research internationally is currently the lack of standardized metadata and the absence of a central European reporting point within systems like ECCAIRS2. This results in a critical "data gap" that undermines aviation safety.
The American Model: AARO and the Focus on Security
In the United States, UAP research is firmly established within the Pentagon through AARO. Its primary focus is on national security and identifying technological threats.
- Legal Obligation: The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) mandates reporting for defense personnel. Air traffic controllers (ATCs) are required by FAA guidelines to immediately report sightings through the Domestic Events Network (DEN).
- Large Scale Analysis: With access to over 1,800 reports and collaborations with institutions such as MIT and NASA, AARO focuses not only on analysis but also on developing sensor architectures such as the 'GREMLIN system' for real-time sensing.
- Lesson for the Netherlands and the EU: Structural political backing and funding are prerequisites for unlocking high-quality sensor data and performing in-depth technical analyses.
The French Model: GEIPAN and Scientific Openness
France, through GEIPAN (part of the CNES space agency), uses a model based on public trust and scientific rigor.
- Methodology: GEIPAN correlates visual evidence with hard technical data from the Gendarmerie and the Air Force. Their classification system (from categories A to D) provides a clear framework for validation.
- Transparency: By scientifically declaring approximately 97% of the reports as prosaic objects, GEIPAN creates the credibility needed to isolate the remaining 3% (Category D – the 'true' anomalies) as legitimate scientific questions.
- Lesson for the Netherlands and the EU: Public transparency and collaboration with the scientific community are crucial to breaking the stigma surrounding UAP reporting.
Towards a Dutch Model: The Polder Culture of Safety
The Netherlands has the unique opportunity to merge the American focus on operational safety with French scientific openness. The first steps have already been taken: since 2024, the Dutch Safety Board (OVV) has officially accepted UAP reports from aviation personnel.
An effective Dutch model requires:
- Integration into Just Culture: Reports by aviation professionals should be protected from professional or medical repercussions to lower the reporting threshold.
- Multidisciplinary Collaboration: A synergy between Defence (in the context of the 1ATM airspace review), science and civil aviation.
- Data-driven Terminology: Replacing stigmatizing language with technical terms, making UAP analysis a standard part of flight safety procedure.
The UAP Coalition Netherlands acts as an independent bridge between these international models and national practices. By closing the data gap, we not only strengthen our own security but also contribute to the broader global research landscape.
Would you like to learn more about the technical foundation on which these international models base their analyses? Then read our Scientific Framework for UAP and Aviation Safety, which forms the blueprint for the Dutch strategy.