Psychology – war and peace

Beyond Russia, NATO/EU policies will prove morally wrong, unrealistic, dangerous and self-destructive. Jan Oberg February 23, 2023 Introduction: 1 year of violence on top of 30 years of conflict: Too much wrong thinking The world’s focus is on the war. On February 24, it is one year since Russia launched its so-called special military operation. Much more important is to focus on the underlying conflicts – because there exists no war or other violence without root causes. The focus on war, by definition, won’t lead to a solution or wider, sustainable peace – like feeling the pain in a patient without diagnosing where it comes from can never lead to healing. Unless you ask: What is the problem, the conflict, that stands between the conflicting parties – NATO and Russia – it will end with escalation until one of the sides feel that the nuclear button is the only way...

Image from searchwizards This rather long text was written on the invitation of the distinguished “China Investment” magazine, which is sponsored by China’s National Development and Reform Commission. In spite of its name, it has consistently asked me to write on subjects that are not often connected with economics in general and investment issues in particular. I find that – much broader – approach to economics very interesting, and I am very pleased to cooperate with such broad-minded people. Here is the original version – a cover story – in both English and Chinese Introduction – The enigma of good things Like many other positive things in this world, there is little research available on what trust is and how it works. Human beings study war and other violence much more than nonviolence and peace; evil more than goodness; aggression more than forgiveness and reconciliation. It is quite strange because...

Evil is easy to identify and fight against; not so with stupidity. Key Takeaways Jonny Thomson January 28, 2023 There’s an internet adage that goes, “Debating an idiot is like trying to play chess with a pigeon — it knocks the pieces over, craps on the board, and flies back to its flock to claim victory.” It’s funny and astute. It’s also deeply, depressingly worrying. Although we’d never say so, we all have people in our lives we think of as a bit dim — not necessarily about everything, but certainly about some things. Most of the time, we laugh this off. After all, stupidity can be pretty funny. When my friend asked a group of us recently what Hitler’s last name was, we laughed. When my brother learned only last month that reindeer are real animals — well, that’s funny. Good-natured ribbing about a person’s ignorance is an everyday part...

Maria Popova December 20, 2022 “No matter how large the tissue of falsehood that an experienced liar has to offer, it will never be large enough … to cover the immensity of actuality.” The possibilities that exist between two people, or among a group of people,” Adrienne Rich wrote in her beautiful 1975 speech on lying and what truth really means, “are a kind of alchemy. They are the most interesting thing in life. The liar is someone who keeps losing sight of these possibilities.” Nowhere is this liar’s loss of perspective more damaging to public life, human possibility, and our collective progress than in politics, where complex social, cultural, economic, and psychological forces conspire to make the assault on truth traumatic on a towering scale. Those forces are what Hannah Arendt (October 14, 1906–December 4, 1975), one of the most incisive thinkers of the past century, explores in a superb 1971 essay titled “Lying in...

Abolish NATOOr Convert ItTo ServePeace 30 Arguments & 100s of Inspirations This report can be reproduced or quoted freely,but only when referring clearly to TFF, the author and the link Read and download as PDF at the end of the catalogue • Read as Flipbook Media & other inquiries to tff@transnational.live or +46 738 52 52 00 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Catalogue contains 30 arguments for the abolition of NATO. Each argument is based on rational peace research analysis, in contrast to the fact-resistant propaganda that NATO and mainstream politics and media promote about the ’defensive’ peace alliance. The Catalogue is based on the democratic assumption that diverse perceptions and concepts can exist – for instance, about what peace is – and that this hugely influential Western organisation is not sacrosanct and shall, therefore, not be exempt from critical analysis. While set up in 1949, NATO passed its ”best before” date long ago. The alliance of...

The Guardian of April 25, 2022, and several other media brought the news top front page about the Russia-Ukraine war: US ‘wants to see Russia weakened’ – the sensational headline statement by US Secretary of Defence, Lloyd Austin, after his and Secretary of State, Antony Blinken’s surprise visit to Kyiv. It was stated also in connection with yet another US arms package for Ukraine (US$ 738 million – making total US military assistance to Ukraine pass US$ 3,4 billion) and before the meeting on April 26 in Ramstein, Germany where more than 40 countries gathered to intensify their cooperation about further militarizing the conflict with Russia played out of Ukraine. Please note – there has been no similar meeting about how to de-escalate, mediate or whatever else to stop the war. Here is the Pentagon transcript of what Austin said and Blinken endorsed: “SECRETARY AUSTIN: I’ll just start and I’ll...

, as Op-Ed for China Daily * One description of the contemporary world is more accurate and ominous than any other, namely that we live in the nuclear age or the age of nuclearism, i.e. the weapons plus the thinking and power structures that surround these doomsday weapons. In 1946, Albert Einstein stated that “the unleashed power of the atom has changed everything save our modes of thinking and we thus drift toward unparalleled catastrophe.” Even limited use of nuclear weapons would lead to a global human and environmental catastrophe. It is enigmatic that everybody talks about the much slower climate change, while the numerous destructive links between militarism and environmental destruction are hardly ever made even by leading experts, politicians or civil society leaders. Therefore, it must be welcomed that the five nuclear weapons states of the UN Security Council have issued a joint statement. They know there is...

Secretary of State Antony Blinken and NATO’s chief Jens Stoltenberg January 13, 2022 Jan Oberg To deceive, telling half-truths, or a complete lie is nothing new in politics, particularly security in politics. But until some 20-30 years ago, I would – perhaps naively – see it as an exception. Tragically – and perhaps to many readers’ surprise – it is now the rule. At least in U.S. and NATO circles, and that is particularly regrettably since The West professes to be a democratic system with specific values and even a moral leader to The Rest. Lying systematically about facts – historical facts – and other countries and cultures should be incompatible with The West’s perception of itself. But, today, it isn’t. Lies are widespread in so-called security politics when some militarist project doesn’t make any (common) sense to intelligent people, when the real motives have to be covered up and...

Jan Oberg October 27, 2021 I’m 70 now and all my life, I’ve heard that the Russians would one day make a surprise attack and, within 48 hours, occupy the Eifel Tower. Fait accompli! We in the West were weak – perhaps not right now but we would be within the next 5 years if we did not invest much more in ”defence”. Well, these damn Russians haven’t come yet – another reason we shouldn’t trust them, I assume! The latest variation on that bizarre and irrational theme is that Swedish military spokespersons maintain that Sweden has to plan for an isolated Russian attack on the island of Gotland – and that China aims to conquer Taiwan and Biden telling the world that the US is committed to defend Taiwan. This is a slightly revised version of an editorial for the Transcend Media Service, October 25, 2021 The time when...

We at TFF are proud to present one of our most amazing Associates who – in so many different ways – has worked for peace over 67 years. His knowledge is encyclopaedic and covers so many fields that it is hard to grasp. Even at the age of 88 and with various health problems and failing eyesight, he writes every day, most of the day – in the belief that we are all responsible for doing all that we can and that it is only through knowledge, humanity and vision we can survive in the long-term perspective as one humanity. The book you can download below runs over 500+ pages – and it’s just one of John’s many. It contains much more than the story of Avery’s work for peace: articles, essays, comments and whole books on various aspects of global affairs. Better scroll and browse and be inspired than...

, in Washington and New York, everybody talked about who could have done it, how they did it and with what means. The only thing never brought to the fore was: WHY would somebody want to do something like 9/11 to the United States of America? By not asking the Why question, the US could stand as the innocent victim of cataclysmic violence. It would not have to do any soul searching and therefore no change of its global militarist policy. 9/11 was not a response to US foreign policy – but it needed a response. The world felt sympathy for the American suffering – much more so than for the suffering and deaths in other countries around the world. The fact is that the 9/11 attack targeted the US’ global finance-capital (World Trade Center), its global military (Pentagon) and its political (White House, however not hit) centres – not...

First version – to be revised I was recently asked by Abhishek Bhaya at CGTN – China Global Television Network, see Wikipedia here and the network itself here with about 150 million followers across the globe – whether, as a peace researcher, I had any ideas what decision-makers in both the West and in China could do to avoid the worst possible scenario – given the present confrontation, or Cold War-like atmosphere. It’s the first time in a very long time that any media asked me a question about peace – that discourse has disappeared or been disappeared. In preparing my answer, I wrote this: It seems pretty unlikely that the US under Biden/Blinken should come to its senses quickly, if at all. Policy documents, statement and budget laws point in the direction of a well-planned long-term Cold War-like campaign against anything China – 7-8 standard negative stories, perhaps some...