Af Jan Øberg

Et initiativ til grundlæggende forandring af Danmarks udenrigs- og sikkerhedspolitik

Motivering, formål og debatvejledning
Danmark for Fred med Fredelige Midler
Oprettet 14 February 2012

1) Dansk udenrigspolitik er blevet altfor voldsbetonet

I de sidste 20 år er dansk sikkerheds- og udenrigspolitik blevet orienteret mod voldsanvendelse i en grad, som vi både forundres og forstemmes over. Vi bombede i Jugoslavien i 1999, vi er i Afghanistan til ingen synlig nytte, vi var med endnu en folkeretsstridig krig mod Irak og optrådte som besættelsesmagt i 4 år og senest har hvert eneste medlem af Folketinget stemt for at Danmark deltog i bombningen af Libyen. En ny international opinionsundersøgelse viser at 37% af danskerne synes man skal bombe anlæg i Iran og 27% at der er brug for en troppeinvasion. Hvad er det for mentalitet og psykologi, hvad er det for viden denne militante opinion bygger på?

2) Alle partier for krig

Det var under en socialdemokratisk ledet regering, den “aktivistiske” volds-fremmende politik blev indledt, nemlig i Jugoslavien. Dagens Socialdemokrati prioriterer ikke en politik for nedrustning, reel konfliktløsning, atomvåbenfrie zoner eller ikkevold. Socialistisk Folkeparti er gået med på idéen om at der skal kunne interveneres hér og dér uden klart FN-mandat og var det eneste parti, der anbefalede landinvasion af Libyen. Enhedslisten gik med på Libyen; og dagens Radikale har smidt sin historiske anti-militarisme ud.

3) Fredsopinionen har ingen repræsentanter

Der er således intet dansk parti, der i praktisk politik respekterer det fornemste princip i FN-deklarationen, nemlig at krig skal afskaffes og at fred skal skabes med fredelige midler. I deklarationen siges også at alle civile tiltag skal være prøvet og vist sig resultatløse inden man kan gribe til våbenmagt – vel at mærke i FN’s regi og ikke af “koalitioner af villige” ledt af NATO-lande.

4) Ensrettet forskning og medieprofil

Parallelt med denne politisk-militære udvikling har vi set nedlæggelse af vigtige forskningsinstitutter, der kunne have ført alternativer på bane og bidraget til en bredere debat. Vi ser også ledende medier som f.eks. TV-Avisen og dagbladet Politiken stille sig mere på interventionismens end fredsskabelsens side, i politisk profilering såvel som i den journalistiske fremstilling af begivenheder. Internationale spørgsmål spiller idag en markant mindre rolle i vore medier og i den politiske debat end i f.eks. 1970-1980erne.

5) Denne gruppe

Vi der har dannet denne gruppe er dybt bekymrede over den udvikling, der ude i den lidt større verden uden for EU/NATO kaster en mørk skygge over Danmark – også i kølvandet på en exceptionelt dilettantisk håndterede Muhammedkrise. Vi tror det er muligt at opgradere de “store” spørgsmål i dansk debat, i uddannelse og medieverdenen. Vi tror Danmark – og de nordiske lande – kan bidrage til en hård tiltrængt nytænkning. Mens tid er.

6) Krig er en dårlig idé, intellektuel fattigdom

Krig har igen og igen vist sig at være en rigtig dårlig og uetisk idé. Alligevel har krigen tag i danskerne. Vi tror det udover et mangelfuldt vidensgrundlag skyldes at der er altfor få gode idéer, dvs. svar på spørgsmålet: Hvis ikke krig eller intervention, hvad vil I så?

7) Hér skal udelukkende konstruktive idéer drøftes

Vi er overbeviste om at det ikke nytter at blot være negativt kritiske og at det heller ikke er demokratiet værdigt at vi bare lader stå til – sandsynligvis i retning af krig snart med Iran. Det dur ikke at blot lufte sin harme eller frustration over en sygdom og dens årsager. Der bliver ikke fred af at man forbander krigen. Helbredelse kræver kundskab og idéer. Sådan er det også med freden.

Vi vil forsøge at bidrage til at mange danskeres krigssyge bliver helbredt. Til at vi får dem, der er ligeglade med den store verden, til at vågne op. Vi tror mange danskere vil vælge andre midler end bomber hvis de bliver præsenteret for andre og bedre idéer. Vi fører derfor hér en udelukkende konstruktiv dialog, udveksler positive ideer til en bedre politik for Danmark – og vi bruger fantasi, sund fornuft, bygger kundskab og koordinerer aktiviteter. Vi tænker ud mod 2025 og videre fordi ingen problemer kan løses inden for en 4-års horisont.

8. Mulige konkrete emner – lad tusinder idéer og vinkler blomstre!

Hvad bør Danmark gøre i stedet for at gå i krig?
Hvordan går vi i fred?
Hvorledes står vi fast på visse principper, f.eks. folkeretten? Hvordan støtter vi bedst FN og dets normsystem nu når så mange forsøger at underminere verdensorganisationen?
Hvordan introducerer vi den nødvendige kundskab om professionel konflikthåndtering i politik og medier?
Hvordan kommer vi igennem til beslutningstagere med forslag til hvad man skal gøre i steder for at indlede krig?
Og hvilke tiltag på forskellige niveauer vil der være brug for for at Danmark på længere sigt kan blive en aktør for fred og ikke for krig? Osv…

Vi mener at Danmark skal føre en aktivistisk udenrigspolitik, at verdens store problemer bør fylde langt langt mere i debatten.
Vi vil en politik, der klart prioriterer fred med fredelige midler, demokratisering med demokratiske midler og udvikling med gensidig læren og respekt på tværs af kulturelle og andre forskelle.

Peace & future researcher + ‌Art Photographer

Related Posts

LONDON – So far so good, at least on the wider level. While internally Iraq seems on the edge of chaos, the much heralded clash of civilizations between the Muslim and Judaeo-Christian worlds has yet to become apparent. We have anger and despair aplenty in the Arab and Muslim worlds. But very little rushing to the standard and there was no great pilgrimage of warriors to join the fight, as happened when the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan twenty years ago, and then, having driven the Red Army out, were left to ferment in that mountainous redoubt. With the armaments supplied by the CIA the mujahidin were transformed into Al Qaeda that became, for a relatively brief moment as these things go, ‘the greatest threat to the homeland that America has ever known.’ Nevertheless a ‘Cold War’ between much of the Muslim world and the West is certainly in full swing. Winston...
The Challenge of Nuclear Weaponsin the Twenty-first CenturyA Path Forward The peoples and governments of the world face an urgent challenge relating to weaponry of mass destruction and particularly to nuclear weaponry.  At the crossroads of technology, terrorism, geopolitical ambition, and policies of preemption are new and potent dangers for humanity. Despite ending the nuclear standoff of the Cold War era, nuclear weaponry is again menacing the peoples of the world with catastrophic possibilities.  We recognize the need for any government to pursue its security interests in accordance with international law; and further, we recognize that distinctive threats to these interests now exist as a result of an active international terrorist network having declared war on the United States and its allies. Nonetheless, we reject the assessment of the current US administration that upgrading a reliance on nuclear weapons is in any sense justified as a response. We find it...
By Karin Wegestal MP, the Social Democratic Partyon behalf of the Swedish Committee for Solidarity with the Yugoslav People During the last decade, the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia has received more than 500,000 refugees from Croatia and Bosnia, and another 300,000 internally displaced persons, mainly from the province Kosovo and Metohia. For a country with about ten million inhabitants, such an influx of homeless people is obviously a very heavy burden – even under peaceful conditions. But in addition to that, the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia has been the subject to sanctions from the western powers for close to ten years and its infrastructure was badly hurt through Nato’s intense bombardment during 78 days in 1999. The result of all this is that Yugoslavia, once the most developed industrial country in Eastern Europe, is today the poorest country in Europe. In Serbia excluding Kosovo, with about ten million inhabitants and...

Recent Articles

Tony Robinson October 4, 2026 Violence is easy to recognise when someone is being beaten, shot or killed. It becomes more difficult when nobody is holding a weapon. Poverty, discrimination, exploitation and repression can restrict a human life just as effectively, although they do so in very different ways and with very different consequences. Simply adding more categories to an ever-growing list of forms of violence does not really solve the problem. The more interesting question is what all these different situations have in common and why it makes sense to describe them using the same word. Human beings do not simply react to what happens around them. They remember the past, imagine things that do not yet exist, make plans and undertake projects. Workers organise because they imagine different working conditions; people migrate because they imagine another life somewhere else; social movements emerge because people refuse to accept the...
It’s a matter of principles, courage, vision and pulling together – while the militarist world is falling apart… Peter Langille October 3, 2026 “Here, then, is the problem which we present to you, stark and dreadful and inescapable: Shall we put an end to the human race; or shall mankind renounce war?”The Bertrand Russell—Albert Einstein Manifesto, July 9, 1955 ⁕ The forecast for what’s ahead is worrisome. The sharp rise in armed conflicts over the past three years is adding to what was already the highest level in over seventy years. Genocides, which should be prevented are supported. A shared climate emergency that jeopardises survival is ignored. Diverse polls now suggest that people are war-weary, worried and interested in a more effective United Nations. And, there are viable policy options for a more secure world! Yet governments are doubling-down, betting on more war and investing heavily. If current trends persist,...
Johan Galtung 1930-2024October 2015 Published here on October 3, 2026 Let us focus on Civilization for conflict analysis and remedies. Major forms of disorder use violence; war is state organized violence. The most belligerent states are the United States of America and Israel, both with civilization roots. National Evangelism, the US Protestant Christian civilization– more national than evangelical–justifies US warfare as exceptionalism of a people chosen by God, with a manifest destiny to run the world. Orthodox Judaism justifies Israeli warfare to conquer and expand from Nile to Euphrates as a religious right and duty to the Eternal One. The third most belligerent country, the UK, no longer believes it is God-chosen but chosen by the USA; not quite the same but something. But the root cause of global disorder lies in the Occident–with Islam–seeing itself as the single, universal civilization valid for all at all times, all others being...

TFF on Substack

Discover and subscribe to more peace materials on TFF Substack

Most Popular

Tony Robinson October 4, 2026 Violence is easy to recognise when someone is being beaten, shot or killed. It becomes more difficult when nobody is holding a weapon. Poverty, discrimination, exploitation and repression can restrict a human life just as effectively, although they do so in very different ways and with very different consequences. Simply adding more categories to an ever-growing list of forms of violence does not really solve the problem. The more interesting question is what all these different situations have in common and why it makes sense to describe them using the same word. Human beings do not simply react to what happens around them. They remember the past, imagine things that do not yet exist, make plans and undertake projects. Workers organise because they imagine different working conditions; people migrate because they imagine another life somewhere else; social movements emerge because people refuse to accept the...
It’s a matter of principles, courage, vision and pulling together – while the militarist world is falling apart… Peter Langille October 3, 2026 “Here, then, is the problem which we present to you, stark and dreadful and inescapable: Shall we put an end to the human race; or shall mankind renounce war?”The Bertrand Russell—Albert Einstein Manifesto, July 9, 1955 ⁕ The forecast for what’s ahead is worrisome. The sharp rise in armed conflicts over the past three years is adding to what was already the highest level in over seventy years. Genocides, which should be prevented are supported. A shared climate emergency that jeopardises survival is ignored. Diverse polls now suggest that people are war-weary, worried and interested in a more effective United Nations. And, there are viable policy options for a more secure world! Yet governments are doubling-down, betting on more war and investing heavily. If current trends persist,...
Johan Galtung 1930-2024October 2015 Published here on October 3, 2026 Let us focus on Civilization for conflict analysis and remedies. Major forms of disorder use violence; war is state organized violence. The most belligerent states are the United States of America and Israel, both with civilization roots. National Evangelism, the US Protestant Christian civilization– more national than evangelical–justifies US warfare as exceptionalism of a people chosen by God, with a manifest destiny to run the world. Orthodox Judaism justifies Israeli warfare to conquer and expand from Nile to Euphrates as a religious right and duty to the Eternal One. The third most belligerent country, the UK, no longer believes it is God-chosen but chosen by the USA; not quite the same but something. But the root cause of global disorder lies in the Occident–with Islam–seeing itself as the single, universal civilization valid for all at all times, all others being...
Read More
Living-Peace-Sign-Budapest-copy
Tony Robinson October 4, 2026 Violence is easy to recognise when someone is being beaten, shot or killed. It becomes more difficult when nobody is holding a weapon. Poverty, discrimination, exploitation and repression can restrict a human life just as effectively, although they do so in very different ways and with very different consequences. Simply adding more categories to an ever-growing list of forms of violence does not really solve the problem. The more interesting question is what all these different situations have in common and why it makes sense to describe them using the same word. Human beings do not simply react to what happens around them. They remember the past, imagine things that do not yet exist, make plans and undertake projects. Workers organise because they imagine different working conditions; people migrate because they imagine another life somewhere else; social movements emerge because people refuse to accept the...
b54a1f10-8c65-4f0b-9dd5-4abc0a7d04cc_2659x2659
It’s a matter of principles, courage, vision and pulling together – while the militarist world is falling apart… Peter Langille October 3, 2026 “Here, then, is the problem which we present to you, stark and dreadful and inescapable: Shall we put an end to the human race; or shall mankind renounce war?”The Bertrand Russell—Albert Einstein Manifesto, July 9, 1955 ⁕ The forecast for what’s ahead is worrisome. The sharp rise in armed conflicts over the past three years is adding to what was already the highest level in over seventy years. Genocides, which should be prevented are supported. A shared climate emergency that jeopardises survival is ignored. Diverse polls now suggest that people are war-weary, worried and interested in a more effective United Nations. And, there are viable policy options for a more secure world! Yet governments are doubling-down, betting on more war and investing heavily. If current trends persist,...
010
Johan Galtung 1930-2024October 2015 Published here on October 3, 2026 Let us focus on Civilization for conflict analysis and remedies. Major forms of disorder use violence; war is state organized violence. The most belligerent states are the United States of America and Israel, both with civilization roots. National Evangelism, the US Protestant Christian civilization– more national than evangelical–justifies US warfare as exceptionalism of a people chosen by God, with a manifest destiny to run the world. Orthodox Judaism justifies Israeli warfare to conquer and expand from Nile to Euphrates as a religious right and duty to the Eternal One. The third most belligerent country, the UK, no longer believes it is God-chosen but chosen by the USA; not quite the same but something. But the root cause of global disorder lies in the Occident–with Islam–seeing itself as the single, universal civilization valid for all at all times, all others being...
Screenshot 2026-10-02 011738
Jan ObergPhD, director, The Transnational Foundation for Peace and Future Research, TFFLund, Sweden October 2, 2026 This is my full original manuscript. The Chinese Academy of Social Science, CASS, makes two publications out if it. 1. China’s Five-year plan emphasized the capabilities of basic research and original innovation. It is regarded as the goal of the future social development, which, as required, should be significantly enhanced. Can you comment on the importance of original innovation in research and academic study? I believe it is easier to define “original innovation” in the natural sciences than in social sciences. The breaking points of what constitutes something new, or innovative, are not quite as sharp in the latter. But in both fields it is about opening up something that was closed, unseen, unexplored before – making manifest what was earlier latent. Innovations come in many forms and shapes – naming something that was not...
arctic-circle-map
The agreement is catastrophic both because of what it says and what it doesn’t mention. It reduces further the major asset of security policies: Freedom of action. Jan Oberg TFF director September 25, 2026 A couple of hours before the agreement was signed on September 22, 2026, I published the following 13 hypotheses about what it would most likely contain on TFF Substack (in English). I was wrong on only the first point. Contrary to what Trump had written on his Truth Social platform, it does not appear to come into force immediately. In fact, it turned out to be worse than even I had anticipated. After these hypotheses now come a number of reflections in light of what the agreement actually contains, and does not contain, as well as the way in which it has generally been presented by major media outlets and by the public-service broadcaster DR. My...
girl-5894831_1280
Below are TFF-related media mentions, comments, videos and social media posts published elsewhere but not on this homepage. We happen to catch and list only a fraction. Regarding video comments and debates, we recommend that you go to the TFF Video Channel on Substack where many of them are reproduced. Jan Oberg is a contributor to China Daily – 52 million daily clicks – and Global Times, CGTN and CCTV (the national television), China Investment, Xinhua News Agency and several others. Articles and videos on these media very often multiply into countless Chinese (and Western media) that re-post them from these main media. Thanks to The China Academy, his analyses, interviews and comments are frequently posted on YouTube channels such as Thinkers Forum and Wave Media. These videos are often re-posted on Bilibili (China’s YouTube), the China Content Center on TikTok, and on the Chinese edition of TikTok, Douyin.com. This means reaching hundreds of millions of viewers worldwide over a year. While there are too many to catch on all these...