Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena (UAP)—a term replacing the older and more culturally loaded “UFO”—have traditionally been a topic of intrigue, mystery, and often skepticism. While attention to UAPs has intensified recently in the United States through the activities of the All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO) and high-profile disclosures by the U.S. Department of Defense, other nations around the world have also engaged with UAP reports, albeit in diverse and often less-publicized ways.

From Latin America to Europe, Asia to Africa, countries have adopted a variety of approaches to UAP phenomena—ranging from formal investigations led by military agencies to passive monitoring or outright dismissal. These differences stem from political cultures, defense priorities, scientific infrastructure, and public transparency norms.

This article reviews how countries across the globe have responded to UAP incidents, how they manage data collection and analysis, and whether their defense institutions view these phenomena as security concerns, scientific curiosities, or mere distractions.

Argentina: Military Oversight and Public Transparency

Argentina is one of the few nations that has openly engaged with UAPs through its defense infrastructure. In 2011, the Argentine Air Force created the Comisión de Estudio de Fenómenos Aeroespaciales (CEFAe), a commission designed to analyze aerial anomalies using a multidisciplinary team.

CEFAe and Its Mandate

• CEFAe included members from the military, meteorological offices, and civilian academia.
• Its stated goal was not to confirm extraterrestrial presence but to scientifically assess unidentified observations and inform national airspace policy.
• The commission has released occasional reports and encourages civilian submissions.

Argentina’s approach is notable for its hybrid structure: military authority overseeing a scientific process with some level of public transparency. This model offers a formalized but balanced investigative framework.

Brazil: Open Files and Historic Engagement

Brazil has a long-standing engagement with UAPs, including historical military encounters, civilian interest, and public transparency.

Operation Saucer

In 1977–78, the Brazilian Air Force conducted Operation Saucer (Operação Prato) in response to a wave of sightings in the Amazon region, particularly in the town of Colares. Military personnel reportedly observed unexplained lights and collected testimonies of alleged radiation injuries.

The operation’s documents were classified for decades but were partially declassified in the 2000s. While they contain no definitive conclusions, they demonstrate systematic investigation by state authorities.

Air Force Decree in 2010

In 2010, the Brazilian Air Force issued a decree requiring all military branches to collect and archive UAP reports. These documents are preserved in the National Archives and are open to the public. This makes Brazil one of the most transparent countries in handling UAP records.

France: A Government-Backed Scientific Inquiry

France is one of the few Western nations with a formal government-funded scientific body dedicated to UAPs.

GEIPAN

Established in 1977, GEIPAN (Groupe d’Études et d’Informations sur les Phénomènes Aérospatiaux Non-identifiés) operates under the French National Centre for Space Studies (CNES).

• GEIPAN investigates UAP reports with assistance from civilian and military aviation authorities.
• It classifies cases into categories based on confidence level and available data.
• All case files, including radar plots and witness interviews, are made publicly available through the GEIPAN website.

COMETA Report

In 1999, a semi-official report titled “UFOs and Defense: What Should We Prepare For?“—also known as the COMETA Report—was published by retired French military officers and defense experts. It concluded that many UAPs could not be explained by current technologies and called for further scientific investigation.

France’s method represents a unique model of state-supported civilian science applied to national airspace anomalies.

United Kingdom: Declassification and Disbandment

The United Kingdom historically investigated UAPs through its Ministry of Defence (MOD), primarily via DI55, an intelligence branch concerned with airspace security.

The British UFO Desk

• Operated from the 1950s until 2009, the UK’s “UFO desk” processed reports from civilians and military personnel.
• In 2009, the MOD officially closed the desk, stating UAPs posed no defense threat and did not justify further expenditure.
• Since then, thousands of files have been declassified and made available through the UK National Archives.

Defense Posture

The UK’s approach emphasizes documentation and archival over active investigation. UAPs are generally viewed as curiosities unless directly affecting aviation safety or air defense operations.

Russia and the Soviet Union: Military Sensitivity and Censorship

The former Soviet Union and contemporary Russia have both shown considerable interest in UAPs, particularly during the Cold War.

Soviet Era Investigations

Soviet military and scientific authorities secretly investigated thousands of cases, many of which were classified. Notable incidents include:

• 1982 Byelokoroviche Incident: UAP allegedly interfered with nuclear missile launch systems.
• Petrozavodsk Phenomenon (1977): A massive glowing object was observed over multiple cities and recorded by civilian witnesses.

Post-Soviet Russia

While the Russian military continues to monitor its airspace for anomalies, little public disclosure has emerged. Unlike Brazil or France, Russia treats UAP incidents as sensitive military intelligence and rarely issues statements.

China: Emerging Interest and Strategic Framing

The People’s Republic of China has only recently acknowledged public awareness of UAPs. However, internal military and scientific interest appears significant.

PLA Reporting System

According to Chinese media reports, the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) has implemented an AI-driven system for UAP analysis. The purpose is to:

• Correlate sightings with known aircraft or atmospheric conditions
• Detect potentially foreign surveillance vehicles
• Protect sensitive military zones from unknown intrusions

The PLA’s concern is less about unknown phenomena in general and more about maintaining the integrity of its air defense identification zones (ADIZ).

While Chinese officials rarely comment publicly on UAPs, strategic interest appears strong, especially in relation to U.S. and allied military activity in the Indo-Pacific.

Chile: Civilian-Military Cooperation

Chile has adopted a mixed civilian-military model in UAP investigations. The country’s mountainous terrain and high-altitude skies have made it a hotspot for aerial observations.

CEFAA

Established in 1997, the Committee for the Study of Anomalous Aerial Phenomena (CEFAA) operates under the General Directorate of Civil Aviation.

• CEFAA accepts reports from commercial pilots, air traffic controllers, and military personnel.
• It uses radar, video, and eyewitness data to classify incidents.
• CEFAA maintains open cooperation with international organizations, including GEIPAN.

Unlike the U.S. approach, CEFAA has historically published summaries of high-confidence cases in which no conventional explanation was found.

Japan: Aviation Safety and Cautious Observation

Japan does not have a formal UAP research program, but the issue has been addressed by the Ministry of Defense in recent years.

Ministry of Defense Statement (2020)

Following U.S. disclosures, the Japanese Ministry of Defense directed the Japan Self-Defense Forces (JSDF) to:

• Record and analyze UAP sightings
• Establish incident reporting procedures for fighter pilots
• Coordinate with allies on information sharing

Though there is no public agency like GEIPAN or CEFAA, Japan’s increasing concern reflects broader Indo-Pacific security trends.

India: Surveillance Under Intelligence Umbrella

India has not established a formal UAP investigative body, but its air defense systems and space agency (ISRO) monitor aerial anomalies.

Reports from Ladakh and Northeast India

UAP sightings have occasionally been reported in disputed regions near the Chinese border. In several cases, the Indian Army investigated unexplained aerial objects and coordinated with the Indian Air Force (IAF). Drones or meteorological balloons were often cited as explanations.

However, Indian authorities treat such events under the rubric of national defense and intelligence, not scientific curiosity. There is little civilian transparency or open discussion.

Germany: No National UAP Program

Germany has no national body or defense agency assigned to study UAPs. Most references to UAPs come from historical documents or academic research, not official investigations.

In 2011, the German government responded to a parliamentary inquiry stating that there was no national interest in UFO studies.

Italy: Fragmented but Persistent Interest

Italy has a patchwork of government and civilian UAP involvement, often led by researchers collaborating with police and aviation authorities.

Italian Air Force Reports

Italian air defense systems do record aerial anomalies, particularly in sensitive regions like Sicily or Sardinia. However, no formal structure like CEFAA exists.

In 1978, the Italian government briefly established a UAP study commission under academic leadership. Though it dissolved quickly, historical interest remains in academic circles and civilian UFO organizations.

Australia: Military Archival but Minimal Engagement

Australia does not currently operate a UAP investigation program. The Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) maintained a registry of sightings until 1996, after which public reports were redirected to civil aviation authorities.

Recent Developments

In response to U.S. developments, the Australian Department of Defence confirmed that any military UAP sightings would be logged internally and that no formal policy has been adopted. Academic and civilian interest remains strong, particularly through archives and media.

Canada: Collaboration with NORAD and Historical Openness

As a NORAD partner, Canada shares radar data and participates in aerospace defense operations. Historically, Canada has collected and archived thousands of UAP reports.

Between the 1950s and 1990s, the National Research Council (NRC) analyzed civilian reports. Declassified documents are available through Library and Archives Canada.

Today, military UAP sightings are classified, but Canadian air traffic authorities continue to receive and record unusual aerial reports.

Sky Canada Project

The Sky Canada Project, led by the Office of the Chief Science Advisor of Canada, evaluated how the Canadian government currently handles reports of unidentified aerial phenomena (UAP). The study, published in 2025, found that data collection is fragmented across agencies like Transport Canada, National Defence, and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, with no centralized coordination, unified standards, or public reporting portal. To address these issues, the project recommended creating a dedicated science-led office, implementing a bilingual reporting system, releasing declassified data to the public, and aligning Canada’s efforts with international UAP programs such as AARO and GEIPAN. The initiative also promoted a shift in language from “UFO” to “UAP” to reduce stigma and encourage broader participation from scientists, aviation personnel, and the general public.

Scandinavian Nations: Passive Monitoring

Denmark, Sweden, Norway, and Finland generally adopt a passive approach to UAPs, focusing on air safety rather than investigative programs.

However, Sweden in particular has a long history of UAP encounters, including the Ghost Rocket phenomenon of the 1940s. While mostly attributed to Soviet missile tests, the events remain part of national folklore.

African Nations: Limited Infrastructure and Civilian Reports

Few African governments maintain the air defense or scientific infrastructure to support formal UAP investigations. However, occasional sightings—especially in South Africa, Nigeria, and Egypt—have sparked public curiosity and media attention.

Most African UAP discourse is driven by civilian organizations and religious interpretations rather than state-sponsored science or defense.

Middle East: Strategic Concerns Over Public Inquiry

In the Middle East, UAPs are treated through the lens of air defense and foreign surveillance rather than open scientific inquiry.

Israel and Iran

Both nations maintain sophisticated air defense systems and have occasionally tracked unidentified targets. However, these are generally classified as security issues related to regional adversaries.

Public or civilian discourse about UAPs is minimal, and state secrecy norms limit documentation.

Summary

Around the world, nations engage with UAPs through diverse lenses: defense, science, public curiosity, or strategic security. Some, like France and Chile, maintain formal investigative bodies with transparent procedures. Others, such as Russia and China, handle UAPs behind layers of military secrecy. Still others—India, Germany, and Japan—acknowledge UAPs within the context of aviation safety but stop short of institutional research.

The global diversity of responses underscores the complexity of integrating UAP analysis into standardized international frameworks. Nevertheless, recent developments, such as the formation of the U.S.-based AARO, and increased NATO interest suggest that international dialogue on UAPs is both emerging and necessary.

As airspace becomes increasingly contested and sensor technologies continue to improve, a unified or at least cooperative international approach to UAP investigation may become an operational necessity—driven by science, strategy, and shared airspace integrity.