PressInfo 2002

U.S. foreign policy seems to be moving beyond the realm of political science textbooks. Washington today means ever more bellicose groupthink. It’s the theatre of the absurd. Statements without shared meanings are uttered from a moral void. With the spiralling integration of paranoia and megalomania, one must rather turn to textbooks of psychology for interpretation. We are living in increasingly dangerous times. How shall we react, intellectually and emotionally? How, for instance, shall we react to a surreal news bite like this? “The US has plans to establish an American-led military administration in Iraq, similar to the postwar occupation of Germany and Japan, which could last for several years after the fall of Saddam Hussein… Saddam would be replaced by US General Tommy Franks…” No, it is not fiction. Read the story here: New York Times, October 10, 2002 U.S. has a Plan to Occupy Iraq, Officials Report The Guardian,...

USAs udenrigspolitik synes at bevæge sig uden for statskundskabens lærebøgers rammer. Washington dyrker stadig mere krigerisk “groupthink”. Det er absurd teater. Udtalelser uden fælles betydning ytres ud fra et moralsk tomrum. Med den onde spiral af paranoia og megalomani skal man nok snarere finde en fortolkning i psykologiens lærebøger. Vi lever i stadig farligere tider. Hvordan skal vi reagere, intellektuelt og følelsesmæssigt? Hvordan skal vi f.eks. reagere på surrealistiske nyheder som for eksempeldenne: “USA har planer om at etablere en amerikansk ledet militæradministration i Irak, svarende til besættelsen af Tyskland og Japan efter krigen, en administration, der kunne vare adskillige år efter Saddam Husseins fald…. Saddam skulle erstattes af den amerikanske general Tommy Franks…” Nej, det er ikke fiktion. Læs historien her: New York Times, October 10, 2002 U.S. has a Plan to Occupy Iraq, Officials Report http://www.nytimes.com/2002/10/11/international/11PREX.html?todaysheadlines The Guardian, October 12, 2002 US plans military rule and occupation of...

USA:s utrikespolitik tycks hålla på att röra sig bortom sfärerna för statskunskapens läroböcker. Washington i dag innebär ett alltmer krigslystet grupptänkande.* Det är en scen för det absurda. Uttalanden utan innebörd för andra yttras i ett moraliskt tomrum. Med den eskalerande integrationen av paranoia och storhetsvansinne, blir man snarare tvungen att vända sig till läroböcker i psykologi för att få en tolkning. Vi lever i allt farligare tider. Hur ska vi reagera, intellektuellt och emotionellt? Hur ska vi till exempel reagera på en surrealistisk nyhetssnutt som denna? “USA har planer på att upprätta en USA-ledd militär administration i Irak, liknande ockupationen av Tyskland och Japan efter kriget, som kunde pågå i åtskilliga år efter Saddam Husseins fall. … Saddam skulle ersättas av USA-generalen Tommy Franks. ….” Nej, det är inte fiktion. Läs historien här: New York Times den 10 oktober 2002 USA har en plan för att ockupera Irak, rapporterar...

Danmark som så många andra allierade till USA måste börja revidera sin utrikes- och säkerhetspolitik och omorientera sig bort från sitt USA-beroende. USA s chockartade fall ifrån att ha varit en förtroendeingivande supermakt innebär att många länder nu står utan en fadersfigur i världspolitiken. George W. Bush’ regim representerar en mycket farlig kombination av en historiskt överväldigande fysisk makt, intellektuell fattigdom och en minskande legitimitet i världens ögon. Ansvarsfulla makter, stora som små, ser nu förgäves mot Washington efter ledarskap och visioner. Nu måste de lära sig att stå på egna ben. Med kalla krigets slut, uppkom en mängd möjligheter för att skapa ett fredligt och enat Europa, lösa konflikter utan våldsmedel, och för att stoppa användning av kärnvapen. Sovjetunionens fall och Warszawa-paktens upplösning innebar att Natos “raison d’etre” eliminerades; det hade varit naturligt att upplösa alliansen och det hade i sin tur kunnat stimulera ett helt nytt säkerhetstänkande. Men...

Skrevet på den af FN erklærede international Fredsdag, 21. september 2002. Forfatteren var medlem af den danske regerings Sikkerheds- og Nedrustningspolitiske Udvalg (SNU) fra 1981 til 1994, var generalsekretær for Fredsfonden, 1985 – 1987 og skrev sin doktordisputats om Danmarks sikkerhedspolitik efter 1945 i et globalt perspektiv med titlen “Myter om vor sikkerhed”, 1981. Fortsættelse af PressInfo 159. På grund af den indflydelse det amerikanske paradigme og en føjelig forskningstradition har haft, har der været en underprioritering af vigtige forskningsemner i Danmark og i resten af Skandinavien igennem de sidste få tiår. For eksempel: 1. En systematisk forskning i det amerikanske samfund og dets internationale rolle. Samtidig har de norske lande eksperter, som kender hvert land i Europa, Afrika og Asien. USA, vennen og lederen, har været opfattet som let at forstå, sympatisere med og som uproblematisk. 2. Studier af ikke-voldelig konfliktløsning blev opfattet som irrelevante i den kolde krigs...

Denmark, like many traditional allies of the United States, will have to rethink and reorient its foreign and security policies away from dependence upon the United States. For countries that have held the United States as their role model and authority in security affairs – and as a sort of protective father figure – the rapid demise of the United States as a responsible and respected super power is so shocking that it is likely to be denied. The regime of George W. Bush represents a very dangerous combination of historically overwhelming physical power, intellectual poverty, and decreasing legitimacy in the eyes of the rest of the world. Responsible powers, big or small, look in vain to Washington for leadership or vision. They must begin to learn to stand on their own feet. At the end of the old cold war, a wealth of new possibilities arose to create a...

Danmark må som mange andre af USAs traditionelle allierede omtænke og reorientere sin udenrigs- og sikkerhedspolitik væk fra afhængigheden af USA. For lande, der har haft USA som rollemodel og autoritet i sikkerhedsanliggender – og som en slags beskyttende faderfigur – er det hurtige fald af USA som ansvarlig og respekteret supermagt så chokerende, at det vil have en tendens til at blive benægtet. George W Bush’s regime udgør en meget farlig kombination af historisk set helt overvældende magt, intellektuel fattigdom og faldende legitimitet i resten af verdens øjne. Ansvarlige magter, store såvel som små, ser forgæves til Washington for lederskab eller visioner. Men de må nok begynde at lære at stå på egne ben.  Ved den kolde krigs afslutning opstod en mængde nye muligheder for at skabe et fredeligt forenet Europa, for at løse konflikter med et minimum af vold og for at afskaffe kernevåbnene. Med opløsningen af Sovjetunionen...

The author was a member of the Danish government’s Commission on Security and Disarmament Affairs (SNU) from 1981 to 1994, served as Secretary-General of the Danish Peace Foundation 1985-1987 and wrote his PhD on Denmark’s post-1945 security policy in a global perspective, entitled Myth of Our Security (1981). Continued from PressInfo 159 Due to the influence of the American paradigm and an acquiescing research orientation, important scholarly themes have been under-prioritised in Denmark and the rest of Scandinavia in the last few decades. For instance: 1) Systematic research of American society and its international role. At the same time, the Nordic countries have experts who know about every country in Europe, Africa and Asia. The US, friend and leader, was seen as easy to understand, sympathise with and as unproblematic. 2) Studies of non-violent conflict-resolution were perceived as irrelevant in the world of the old cold war and are seen...

George Bush may be averse to reading up on the Vietnam war, which he managed to duck, but how about recalling the famous  “rumble in the jungle” in the Congo, the heavy weight fight between the unbeatable George Foreman, none of whose opponents had lasted more than three minutes in the ring, and the up and coming, always boasting, Muhammad Ali? The fight was at 4.a.m so that the air was cooler and the American TV audience could watch it in prime time. In round two, the weaker Ali appeared to cower against the ropes and Foreman pounded him again and again, whilst Ali whispered taunts in his ear, “George, you’re not hittin'” and “George, you disappoint me”. Foreman lost his temper and his punches began to flow wild, while Ali let the spring in the ropes help him absorb those he landed. By the fifth round Foreman was exhausted...

The Iraq issue must get out of the “zone of silence” Scholars do empirical work based on theories and hypotheses. Journalists profess to describe reality. Diplomats are supposed to know countries and policies by being present. Western embassies in Moscow were particularly important during the Cold War. This has not been so with Iraq. Generally – a word that means that there are exceptions – Western scholars seem to think that they don’t have to go there to know or form their own opinions or influence those of others. Journalists and their editors don’t seem to think that they should go there before they write their articles and editorials. Governments are under-informed since many countries either have no representations, low-level representations or cover Baghdad by shuttling in and out from a neighbouring country from time to time. This is not as it should be. Reports everywhere tell us that the...

Ignoring conflict-resolution’s rules of thumb Any professional conflict-resolution expert will tell you that it is better to keep some channels open for communication with the adversary than to close them. She or he would also argue that the more we know about the other side – and about ourselves – the greater the chance that we will eventually make a compromise or otherwise solve the problem. That is, if we want to find a solution. The Bush regime obviously doesn’t, and the rest of the West – in particular the EU – doesn’t seem able to be able get its act together and decide on much more than criticising Iraq for one set of reasons and the U.S. for another. The United Nations, who ought to be the mediator, has been systematically marginalised by the U.S. and has little legitimacy in the eyes of the Iraqis. So, we are heading for war...

Irak spørgsmålet skal ud af “tavshedszonen”. Videnskabsmænd laver empirisk arbejde, der bygger på teorier og hypoteser. Journalister mener, at de beskriver virkeligheden. Diplomater formodes at kende lande og deres politik ved at være til stede. Vestlige ambassader i Moskva var særligt vigtige under den kolde krig. Sådan har det ikke været med Irak. I almindelighed – et ord, der betyder, at der er undtagelser – har vestlige videnskabsfolk tilsyneladende forestillet sig, at de ikke behøver tage dertil, danne sig en egen opfattelse eller prøve at påvirke andres. Journalister og deres redaktører synes ikke at mene, at de skal tage dertil før de skriver deres artikler og ledere. Regeringer er under-informerede fordi mange lande enten ingen repræsentation har, opretholder en forbindelse på lavt niveau eller dækker Baghdad ved at pendle ind og ud fra et naboland en gang i mellem. Sådan bør det ikke være. Rapporter alle steder fra fortæller os,...