TFF PressInfo

By Jan Oberg March 17, 2020 Defender Europe 20 is a huge, basically US military exercise, on European soil between February and May this year. It has already started. In the midst of a closed-down coronavirus Europe. And it is war-preparing, not peace- or confidence-building. The diagram above from the British Army offers you details of this perverse, surreal idea – take note of Italy being one of the planned participants! Most likely, you have not heard about Defender Europe 20. When it comes to US foreign and war policies, all Western mainstream media practise self-censorship. The media would hardly be able to write about this exercise of militarist madness in a way that would not cause an uproar and moral condemnation in these times of deep, widespread concerns about war risks, climate change and the coronavirus. So better not write at all and cause diplomatic troubles with the unpredictable,...

We hear next to nothing about these sanctions in the so-called free media – primary sanctions by the US hitting Iran directly, secondary sanctions by the US demanding other countries – the EU and NATO allies in particular – to implement its sanctions, i.e. to accept that US sanctions laws shall apply to them as sovereign states. The EU has not been able to get its acts together and respect the nuclear deal, or JCPOA: not in autumn 2015 when it could not find a way to temporarily host 1,5 million refugees arriving as asylum seekers from countries destroyed predominantly by the EU/NATO members themselves – and not now when the coronavirus hits Europe and they have let China be the one who helps their neighbour Italy. On March 15, 2020, I was asked by Iran’s PressTV to comment on these matters in the wake of Iranian foreign minister, Dr...

PhotoPainting by the author Diagnosis, prognosis and treatment in the light of Turkey’s invasion and the risk of a larger catastrophic war. By Jan Oberg March 7, 2020 Diagnosis The world looked at the violence but didn’t have the capacity to analyze the underlying conflicts in and around Syria. For sure, it is a civil war but, to a much larger extent, it is an international regime-change war. In 2006 William Roebuck, US chargé d’affaires in Damascus, advocated that US policy should focus on destabilizing the Syrian government and al-Assad. At a meeting in Marrakech on December 12, 2012, lots of countries under Western leadership – perversely calling themselves Friends of Syria on the initiative of French President Sarkozy – decided to oust President Assad by decree and establish a National Council which, from then on, was supposed to be the only legitimate Syrian governing body and representative of the...

Today TFF launches “Bootprint – Militarism and Environment” – a curated, free-of-charge online magazine that brings you quality knowledge about the connections between the two most urgent problems that humanity faces. These two main clusters of problems which, if not solved, threaten to destroy humanity, our Earth and all future potentials are: Environment – with catchwords such as climate change, global warming, CO2 footprint, non-sustainability, pollution, resource depletion, species extinction, variety and diversity reduction, rain forest destruction, overconsumption, fossil fuels economy, limitless material growth, etc. etc. – and Militarism – with catchwords such as warfare, nuclear weapons, arms production and trade, militarization of land, air, space and oceans, tension creating, interventionism, base networks, terrorism, cyber and propaganda warfare, other weapons of mass destruction, special forces operations, intelligence agency crimes, imperialism, etc. The two clusters a fundamentally connected – militarism is enormously destructive of the environment; climate change and other processes...

in May and June. This is “the largest deployment of U.S. troops to Europe in more than 25 years,” NATO’s Secretary-General, Jens Stoltenberg tells us. I assume, proudly. But wait … What on Earth is NATO and its Secretary-General saying and doing? Do they live in the same world as the rest of us? How low should the intellectual level sink before it becomes a security risk for the world? And just how do they get away with deceiving the world with their militarised mantra about stability, security and peace – no matter it is always about more weapons and offensive military strength – virtually without any important (if they are) mainstream media reporting it, not to mention ask questions about it? The last one is simple to answer: 1) Censorship; 2) Self-censorship; 3) Framing and 4) The Military-Industrial-MEDIA-Academic Complex (MIMAC) – that is, the very close relations between media,...

What’s the use of intellectual arguments? Reference to concepts and theories – and the need for being just a bit clear about their definition? What’s the use of pointing out the degree to which populist parlance, fake and omission has undermined public discussions and media reporting about international affairs? What’s the use of arguing for peace and nonviolence in these “interesting times” when we are closer to world annihilation than perhaps ever since 1945 – thanks to the dangerous combination of anti-intellectualism and militarism (“I am the biggest and strongest and therefore I don’t have to know, think or argue…”)? What’s the point in commenting on global affairs in a moment of Western multi-crisis where democracy is post-literate and threatens to slide into the darkness of kakistocracy? I think about that every single day these years. I didn’t before, since I began participating as a peace researcher in public debates...

Each and every problem humanity faces is rooted in violence. Why do so many continue believing in violence, the most counter-productive, unintelligent and expensive means of all? Violence invariably makes a problem between conflicting parties deeper and broader and every solution more difficult. It makes the original problem ten times bigger. All problems in this world are tied to one thing: Violence – the tacit or open acceptance of the use of violence in all its many forms. Think of wars, hatred, human rights violations, torture, poverty, injustice, prejudice, media profits (fake-omission-deception), arms trade, racism, regime-change, imperialism, nuclear weapons, environmental destruction, corruption – and hateful comments on social media… Will anybody, from social democrats and left out, listen better in 2020 as they once did? I mean, if we imagine it is still meaningful to talk about Left and Right. Will others? Or shall we leave them out of civilized...

. On December 12, 2012, on the day, 4 years earlier, Western countries and allies – perversely calling themselves ‘Friends of Syria’ – carried through a regime change by statement and set up a Syrian National Council of people never elected by anyone in Syria and told the world that it was, from now on, the only ‘legitimate representative of the Syrian people!’ During the 4 years, Western, Saudi, Turkish and the Gulf States supported innumerable illegal, destructive and mainly foreign terrorist groups with the goal to undermine the legitimate Syrian government and destabilise the country – as had been recommended by US ambassador William Roebuck (1) in Damascus as far back as in 2006 (WikiLeaks documentation here). December 12, 2016, marked a fundamental turning point. Aleppo did not “fall to the dictator/butcher/mass murderer” aka President Bashar al-Assad – no, it was liberated and the occupation by terrorist groups such...

Here is a good backgrounder with her speech and an interview at COP 25 in Madrid: Greta Thunberg Slams COP25, Says Response to Climate Crisis Is “Clever Accounting and Creative PR” What she says in her intro is really important, important as a criticism of the world’s media: If she does not say something personal and emotional, few will listen. This fact-oriented speech has received much less media attention – proving her important point: When you speak facts, rely on research and appear “dull”, the media cannot get their satisfaction in terms of drama, individual story/identity, smashing superficial headlines and sensationalism. While one can certainly point out that she says less-thought-through things about democracy and the Free World towards the end of this speech, she is growing better and better – and she obviously knows more than anyone in decision-making positions. And in the mainstream media. Now, what does that...

This is the digitalized version of a TFF Statement published by TFF’s Board almost 31 years ago. Could that be of any interest today? First, it reflects the situation and the issues discussed at the time as well as the hopes for a better future – now sadly lost. Secondly, it is one example of how peace researchers were thinking and made constructive political recommendations, available for anyone to take inspiration from – which virtually no one in power did. So, it’s a piece of international political as well as intellectual history. Third, it is an indicator of what the West could – and should – have done to have been in a much better situation than it is today. Admittedly, this is a contra-factual argument, but it can be defended on intellectual grounds although not empirically proven. Fourth, the authors pointed out a series of longterm priorities which match...

Here is the background – Germany’s, France’s and the UK’s letter to the UN Security Council accusing Iran of violating the 2015 nuclear deal. Iran’s PressTV asked me to comment on this issue in the larger framework of global nuclear policies.

Political NATO’s London Summit on December 3 and 4, 2019 displays the deep political crisis of the 70-year-old alliance: Only a dinner and a short meeting, no statement to be issued, quarrels among the leading military members, accusations, substantial differences on Syria and many other issues, the deepest-ever Transatlantic conflict and the usual issues of burden-sharing. Legal But the political dimension of NATO’s crisis is only one. There is also a legal crisis. You’ll recognize it if you care to read the NATO Treaty text – something academic and media people don’t generally seem to have done. They would then have noticed that the Alliance of 2019 consistently operates outside – indeed in violation of – its own goals, purposes and values. For instance, the UN Charter which should be NATO’s guideline has been violated on a permanent basis for decades – such as in its out-of-area bombings of Yugoslavia...