PressInfo #61 – PRIKRIVANJE NATO-OVE BALKANSKE BOMBARDERSKE BRLJOTINE

Zapadni lideri uzurbano prepravljaju istoriju da bi
mogli da opravdaju svoju balkansku bombardersku brljotinu.
Retorika, objasnjenja i informacije koje nam daju od 24.
marta kad je potpocelo bombardovanje, toliko su se promenili
da to jednostavno zbunjuje. Najverovatnije su se vec
uplasili da su ovim otvorili mracno poglavlje nove istorije
i da im zaplet lagano izmice iz ruku. Jedan od nacina kako
da svoj promasaj prikazu kao uspeh bio bi da izgrade do te
mere ubedljivu medijsku realnost kojom bi se onda razgradili
i zamenili pravu realnost. Bas to i jeste sustina medijskog
rata i upravo to se sada dogadja” kaze Jan Oberg, direktor
TFF-a.

“Jedan primer – mora da ste primetili kako OVK, ili ako
hocete KLA ili UCK, koja je do pre nekoliko nedelja
postojala i cak navodno ucestvovala u Rambujeu sada odjednom
kao da nikad nije postojala. I 13-to mesecni rat koji se
vodio na Kosovu je isto tako, kao da nikad nije bio, zgodno
izbrisan.

Predsednik Klinton, premijer Bler, NATO general Vesli
Klark, ministar inostranih poslova Kuk, njegov nemacki
kolega Fiser, drzavni sekretar Olbrajt, ministar odbrane
Robertson i brojni drugi zapadni lideri kroz

poslednjih nekoliko dana nam uporno objasnjavaju zbog
cega NATO bombarduje Jugoslaviju. Stavovi koje oni pominju
su uglavnom sledeci:

• Imamo dokaze kako je Jugoslavija, tj. predsednik
Milosevic, planirala da etnicki ocisti Kosovo od
Albanaca.

• Jedan od dokaza o postojanju ovakvog plana je i to
sto je ih je vec oko 700.000 isterano preko granica, a da
NATO nije preduzeo svoju akciju sigurno bi ih bilo jos i
vise, mozda cak i svih 2 miliona Albanaca.

• Milosevic je razmestio 40.000 svojih vojnika i oko
300 tenkova sirom pokrajine jos za vreme dok je njegova
delegacija bila u Parizu.

• “Imamo izvestaje” i “prica se” kako postoje
masovne grobnice, kako su organizovani logori za silovanja,
kako se dogadjaju bezbrojna zverstva. Nemamo doduse cvrstih
dokaza za to, ali izbeglice nam neprestano o tome
pricaju.

• Milosevic je sada “okrutni diktator” i “serijski
pokretac etnickog ciscenja.”

• Nevine civile sada izbacuju “samo zbog onoga sto
jesu (Albanci) a ne zbog bilo cega sto su uradili” kako su
to izgovorili i Bil Klinton i Toni Bler.

• Milosevic se ne pridrzava dogovora sa Holbrukom
koji je potpisao u oktobru prosle godine.

Zasto sve ovo zvuci tako neuverljivo? Zasto ova
“govorancija” ima za nameru da rasplamsa emocije, da nam
sludi percepciju, da kod nas stvori odredjenu predstavu o
neprijatelju i na kraju, da utice na odgovarajuce ponasanje
vlada, organizacija, grupa i pojedinaca?

Dozvolite mi da pred vas izlozim nekoliko cinjenica u
koje sam se sam osvedocio tokom mojih brojnih sasatanakasa
gradjanskim vodjstvom kosovskih Albanaca, sa opozicijom i sa
nezavisnim intelektualcima u Pristini odrzanim okom
poslednjih nekoliko godina” kaze Oberg. “Dr. Ibrahim Rugova
mi je vise puta ponovio, a siguran sam i svakom drugom
sagovorniku sa Zapada koji je hteo da ga saslusa, kako se
boji da nece jos dugo moci da odrzi podrsku koju je albanski
narod pruzao njegovoj pragmaticnoj strategiji nenasilja,
ukoliko Zapad “ne uradi nesto”, na pr. da ubedi Beograd da
otpocnu pregovori a koji bi se odrzali pod nadzorom
medjunarodne zajednice.

Pre puno godina sreo sam jednog kosovskog Albanca koji se
vrlo kriticki izrazavao o “pasivnom” vodjstvu dr-a Rugove
dok je istovremeno zagovarao gerilsku borbu kao jedini
izlaz, kojem ce se ionako morati pribeci ranije ili kasnije.
Jos 1996. sam od jednog dobro obavestenog albanskog
intelektualca cuo da oni ne iskljucuju mogucnost da je i
tada vec postojala jedna naoruzana frakcija. Prosle godine
sam od savetnika dr-a Rugove cuo da su oni za postojanje
oslobodilacke vojske culi jos 1993.

Kosovo je, rekao bih, godinama bilo policijska drzava.
Jedini odgovor koji je Beograd imao za legitimne albanske
prigovore bio je uvek iznova pojacavanje policijske
represije. Nimalo ne sumnjam da su se dogadjala velika,
sistematska narusavanja politickih, ekonomskih, kulturnih i
drugih ljudskih prava. Albanci su se bojali Beograda koji je
insistirao na tvrdnji da je to unutrasnje pitanje ali je u
isto vreme izbegavao da preduzme bilo kakve korake da
situaciju razresi. U isto vreme je i albanskim liderima
represija odgovorala, “bila je neophodna” kako bi animirali
medjunarodnu podrsku za svoj projekt nezavisnog Kosova. Zbog
toga su odbili da razgovaraju i sa umerenim, dijalogu
sklonim liderima poput Milana Panica 1993. i s njegovim
odlicnim ministrima.

Kako bilo da bilo, istina je da tada nije bilo rata, nije
bilo masovnih ubistava, nije bilo sistematskog etnickog
ciscenja i nije bilo genocida. Brojni Albanci su Kosovo
napustali zbog represije ali su ga i brojni drugi napustili
zbog siromastva i nedostatka mogucnosti za sebe a ni za
svoju decu u buducnosti. I Srbi su zbog ovoga napustali
Kosovo a ne zato sto su – kako ponekad znaju da tvrde – oni
bili zrtve Albanskog genocidnog plana.

Sukob za koji kazu da je poceo 1989. pretvorio se u pravi
rat tek 1998. kada je OVK stupila na scenu. Niko ne moze
poreci da je upravo pojava OVK situaciju premetnula iz
represije u pravi rat. Od svega najvise iznenadjuje da a)
Zapad zatvara oci pred ulogom koju Albanije ima kao poligon
za obuku i glavna baza za OVK, b) da je takva politika
Albanije, po svim posledicama koje proizvodi, narasla do
razmera de-facto agresije na Jugoslaviju, c) da se OVK
naoruzava prevashodno iz zapadnih izvora sto je u potpunoj
suprotnosti sa embargom na izvoz naoruzanja na prostore
bivse Jugoslavije koji je uveo Savet bezbednosti Ujedinjenih
Nacija, d) da se niko nije setio kako bi bilo pametno
zatvoriti granicu i time spreciti dotok ljudstva, oruzja i
municije i spreciti eventualno prelivanje jugoslovenskih
represalija i e) da su celokupne jugoslovenske oruzane snage
dozvoljavale da se ovakvi upadi dogadjaju mesecima i
mesecima a da nisu preduzele nista da ih sprece.

23. februara 1998. je Robert Gelbard, americki izaslanik,
rekao da je “duboko zabrinut zbog OVK” i da je ona
“nesumnjivo teroristicka organizacija.” Nedelju dana posle
toga pocinje jugoslovenska ofanziva protiv OVK. Eto toliko o
danasnjim pokusajima Zapada da se zataska centralnu ulogu
koju je OVK imala u ovoj krizi.

A sta reci o tezi da se Milosevic nije pridrzavao
obecanja koje je dao Holbruku u oktobru prosle godine? Ta bi
teza mogla opstati samo da to ne bi bio jednostrani
sporazum. Naime na Kosovu su se borile dve strane –
razlicite jedinice jugoslovenske/srpske vojske i policije s
jedne i OVK s druge strane – a jedino je Milosevic potpisao
sporazum. OVK jeste doduse sa svoje strane proglasila prekid
vatre ali pritom nije nista potpisala. A jednostrani prekidi
vatre su taman onoliko jedinstveni koliko su i
neodrzivi.

Pricali su nam i pokazivali slike rata koji je kroz
pokrajinu besneo 13 meseci. Koga god sam od albanskih
intelektualaca i urednika s kojima sam razgovarao za vreme
mojih poseta Pristini u jesen 1998. zapitao ko su borci OVK
oni bi mi ponosno odgovarali “to smo svi mi, mi smo narod
koji je uzeo oruzje u ruke.” Pod okriljem sporazuma Holbruk
– Milosevic OVK je zauzeo 30% teritorije pokrajine.
Radikalni Albanci su posetiocima kristalno jasno
nagovestavali kako je pobeda tu, tik iza ugla. Tako je i
izgledalo sve dok Beograd nije rekao “E, sad je dosta!”

Tokom tih 13 meseci ubijeno je oko 2000 ljudi a oko
250.000 raseljeno – oko 10% Albanaca iz pokrajine i 10%
njenih Srpskih gradjana – ali srecom, samo su retki medju
njima napustili teritoriju Kosova. Dve nedelje posle pocetka
NATO-ove akcije odjednom je 750.000 ljudi pohrlilo preko
granica a nama SAD GOVORE kako su to samo nevini civili,
kosovski Albanci koje, kako je predsednik Klinton izjavio
12. aprila, proganjaju iskljucivo zbog toga sto su Albanci a
niposto ne zbog necega sto su mozda napravili.

Meni licno izgleda mnogo verovatnije da ljudi beze zbog
tri istovremeno moguca razloga, a ne samo zbog jednog: a)
zbog etnickog ciscenja koje vrse Srbi/Jugosloveni koji
smatraju da je razaranje koje dozivljavaju upravo rezultat
politike (kosovskih) Albanaca, b) zbog ratnih dejstava i
jugoslovenskih snaga i OVK i c) zbog NATO-ovih bombi koje,
malo-malo pa pogode neki civilni objekat.

Da li je stvarno postojao plan da se podrucje etnicki
ocisti? Ko god je to tvrdio, do danas nije pokazao nikakav
cvrst dokaz u prilog toga. Pre 24. marta nijedan politicar
nam takav navodni Milosevicev plan nije ni spomenuo. Nijedna
humanitarna organizacija nije upozoravala o velikoj,
sistematskoj kampanji sa ciljem da se istera 1 do 2 miliona
ljudi. Ako je OEBS sa svojih 1500 verifikatora znao za taj
plan, a oni su prisluskivali jugoslovenska sredstva veze,
zasto niko nije o tome upozorio ceo svet? Da je Beograd
zeleo da se oslobodi svih Albanaca sa Kosova to je mogao da
uradi u bilo kom trenutku pocev od 1991. Nikada nijednog od
albanskih lidera nisu ni takli niti su sprecavali njihove
pokusaje da za to vreme stvore svoju paralelnu drzavu. Zasto
je NATO pretio da ce Jugoslaviju bombardovati ako ne potpise
dokument iz Rambujea a nije nikad ni pomenuo da bi je
bombardovao zbog toga sto ovakav plan postoji?

Da li 300 tenkova i trupe od 40.000 vojnika mogu da budu
indikacija da takav plan postoji? Malo verovatno. Prvo
pesadija i tenkovi nisu bas pravo orudje kojim se postize da
ljudi izbegnu. Drugo oni su se po Kosovu rasporedili tek
posto je NATO odlucio da prevari Jugoslaviju. Pogledajte,
Holbruk je po svoj prilici zaboravio da kaze Milosevicu kako
ce NATO da rasporedi svoje “jedinice za izvlacenje” po
Makedoniji. Njihov je zadatak bio da obezbede “izvlacenje” s
Kosova svih nenaoruzanih verifikatora OEBS-a ukoliko dodje
do NATO-ovog bombardovanja – do akcije koja bi mogla
izazvati Srbe da verifikatore uzmu za taoce. Dakle, NATO-ova
pretnja da ce poceti sa bombardovanjem postala je realna tek
od oktobra. Zapitajte se da li bi vasa zemlja ista preduzela
kad bi joj mesecima pretili da ce da je bombarduje vojni
savez snazniji od bilo cega sto je istorija ikada
videla?

Kada su se verifikatori u potpunom miru izvukli iz
Jugoslavije, NATO nije uklonio svoje “snage za izvalcenje”
iz Makedonije. Naprotiv, poceo je da ih pojacava, sa 3.000
na 12.000 vojnika (o cemu je zgodno “zaboravio” da se
konsultuje sa makedonskom skupstinom). Jugoslavija je s
pravom to shvatila kao izrazito neprijateljsku “poruku” i
premestila svoje vojnike blize makedonskoj granici dajuci
time “poruku” da je resena da opruzi otpor ukoliko bi ove
snage presle njenu granicu i usle na Kosovo. Pojacano
prisustvo Vojske Jugoslavije je privuklo OVK i sukobi su se
pojacali cak i u podrucjima u kojim ih pre toga nije bilo.
SVE SE OVO DOGODILO zbog NATO-ovih dejstava.

Ono sto zapadni lideri danas nazivaju dokazom grandioznog
prijekta etnickog ciscenja nije bilo nista drugo do odgovor
na upadljivo glupav, trapav i pustolovni pokusaj NATO-a da
Makedoniju prisili da odigra ulogu njegovog saveznika i da
posluzi NATO-u kao glavna baza. Bio je to potpuno prirodan
odgovor na ponovljene pretnje masivnom vazdusnom kampanjom.
Ovo je – sasvim predvidljivo – za rezultat imalo gotovo
potpunu politicku destabilizaciju makedonske vlade i pojavu
socijalnih i ekonomskih poremecaja koje je izazvala reka
izbeglica.

Na kraju, “Milosevic je okrutni diktator”? Pa ako i
jeste, zasto mu je onda sam Zapad pomogao da postane
centralna licnost, zasto je bas od njegovog potpisa zavisio
Dejton i zasto nikada nisu pomogli beogradskoj opoziciji –
cak ni u trenutku kada je 1,5 miliona ljudi danonocno
demonstriralo pokusavajuci da ga zbace pre nekoliko godina?
Zasto su ambasador Holbruk i citava plejada zapadnih
diplomata vodili “zanimljive” razgovore s njim? Zasto je
Zapad do poslednjeg trenutka ocekivao da bi on ipak mogao da
napravi ustupke kada se vec pocelo pretiti bombardovanjem?
Sta to mi treba da uradimo sa “okrutnim diktatorima” koje su
njihovi gradjani sami izabrali, pri cemu bi ga mnogi od njih
sigurno kvalifikovali za autoritarnog vladara ili bi njegovu
politiku nazvali katastrofalnom ali ga jednostavno ne bi
nazvali okrutnim diktatorom? I zasto NATO ponavlja svoju
gresku iz Iraka – bombarduje zemlju kako bi se ona onda
potpuno ujedinila oko svog vodje?

Da zakljucim, NIJEDAN OD ARGUMENATA KOJE DANAS NUDI NATO
JEDNOSTAVNO NE DRzI VODU. Oni su neusaglaseni s istinom,
nisu u saglanosti cak ni sa onim sto su nam Zapadni lideri
sami do juce govorili. Ovo cemu smo sad svedoci je jadan
pokusaj “manipulacije percepcijama” i medijski rat usmeren
protiv javnog mnenja.

“Treba da postanemo jako oprezni i sumnjicavi” zakljucuje
Jan Oberg, “kad najvisi zapadni civilni i vojni lideri
pokusavaju da u nekoliko dana iznova napisu i falsifikuju
istoriju, prenebregavajuci dobro poznate i dokumentovane
cinjenice i zaboravivsi neke od glavnih aktera, izvrnu
redosled dogadjaja i zaborave sve sto su sami izjavili pre
samo nekoliko nedelja. Posebno zabrinjava kad se vidi
sistematska pristrasnost i tendencioznost kojom se rukovode
u ovakvim pokusajima. I nimalo ne sluti na dobro, zaista ne
sluti na dobro, to sto vecina novinara raznim
glasnogovornicima Stejt departmenta i NATO-ovim majstorima
za ispredanje (lazi), postavljaju samo politicki korektna
pitanja i to u trenutku koji izgleda da ce postati jedan od
prelomnih u novijoj istoriji.”

© TFF 1999

• You are welcome to re-print, copy, archive, quote
from or re-post this item, but please retain the source.

• TFF’s website has all the relevant links to Iraq,
the Balkans, including media there + peace research, and
non-violence

• Teacher, activist, journalist?? You’ll always find
something interesting at TFF.

• Get your daily global news from the leading media
on TFF’s site, all in one place.

Peace & future researcher + ‌Art Photographer

Related Posts

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...
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...
Jan Oberg May 15, 2026 Go to this Fox News page and scroll the whole way down: President Donald Trump tells the world that his meeting with President Xi Jinping yielded a lot of very concrete political and economic results – of course, only where the Chinese side, according to him, agreed with him. He does not mention the Taiwan issue, but Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, says that it did not feature prominently in their talks and that the US policy on Taiwan has not changed. Then go to China Daily – or Global Times – and you will see that for the Chinese it is framework, principles, structure of cooperation etc. that matters – all embedded in the overall idea of “constructive bilateral relationship of strategic stability.” Nowhere is any concrete agreement or deal – all that Trump refers to – mentioned. At the general level, this gives you insights into the very different social...

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...