Some weeks ago, a young lady from Swedish Television, SVT, called me. She said that SVT had understood that I had critical views of NATO and Sweden’s membership in the alliance (!) and was now calling around to get some critical voices and sound out possibilities of doing an interview. So, would I give her my main arguments?

I said, “With pleasure” and then gave her 6-7 reasons – from the bombing of Yugoslavia to the 4-5 main reasons why the alliance cannot be called ‘defensive.’ It took me a good 20 minutes. She asked some follow-up questions and ended our conversation by saying: “This was really-really interesting, thank you. Are you willing to be interviewed? And can I call you about it tomorrow?”

I said yes to both questions.

Nothing happened after that.

Here is the second case – this time by email so I have translated the correspondence:

February 27, 2024
“Hi Jan!
We at SVT Nyheter/News are looking for an international expert in peace and conflict studies who is a bit more critical of NATO than those we have interviewed recently. Would you be willing to do a phone inter view today or tomorrow? If not, do you know any other experts or researchers who you think would be suitable?
Thank you in advance!
Best wishes
Hjalmar Ekberg Skog

February 27, 2024
Hi Hjalmar
Thanks, that’s a good idea, better late than never.
In principle, I’m happy to do that, but I want to know – beforehand – how what I say will be used. As it is a telephone interview, it can not be on TV? How long and how much do you need and what are your main questions?
Here are two “old” analyses of me:

Det är dåraktigt av Sverige och Finland att gå med i NATO og ignorera både de verkliga orsakerna och konsekvenserna

The TFF Abolish NATO Catalogue

Kind regards
JAN

February 27, 2024
Hi Jan!
That’s great, thank you! The ideal would be an interview via Microsoft Teams of maybe 30 minutes. It is for publication on svt.se, so I will write a text with accompanying video clips.
There are questions like:
What are the risks of NATO, both for Sweden and more generally when more countries join?
Swedish politicians describe NATO as a “successful defence alliance”. Has NATO contributed to peace?
What do you think has been missed in the NATO debate?
Do you know any international person (preferably from non-NATO countries) that we could also interview?
Best wishes
Hjalmar

February 27, 2024
Hi Hjalmar
Thank you for that. I don’t know how Teams works, but I normally use Skype or Zoom.
I guess I can see the text before publishing?
Questions OK.
Can’t do it today but tomorrow or later in the week.
Experts – as many as possible, several of the following are Associates in our Foundation:

Prof John Mearsheimer (USA), Biljana Vankovska, (Macedonia), former foreign minister Zivadin Jovanovic (Serbia), Prof emeritus Ola Tunander (Norway), journalist, Russia expert and author Jens-Jørgen Nielsen (Denmark), peace researcher Jørgen Johansen (Norway/Sweden), Prof emeritus Princeton Richard Falk (USA/Turkey), Ahmet Davutoglu (former Prime Minister and Foreign Minister of Turkey), Gordon Dumoulin (Dutch businessman and cultural writer, Beijing), Thore Vestby, former mayor and China expert (Oslo), Dr Farhang Jahanpour, Oxford International Relations, Iranian origin (England), Chas Freeman, former US top diplomat, ambassador in many countries (USA), Jack F Matlock, former US ambassador in Moscow (USA), Tomas Magnusson, Lay Down Your Arms Foundation (Gothenburg), Ola Friholt, chairman Orust Peace Association (Orust), peace researcher and US expert Frida Stranne (Sweden), Hans von Sponeck, former Deputy Secretary-General of the United Nations (Germany), David Swanson, World Beyond War (USA), Mairead Maguire, Nobel Prize winner, peace activist and writer (Northern Ireland), Gunnar Westberg, Doctors Against Nuclear Weapons (Sweden), Professor Richard Zakwa, Kent University (England), Kristin Christman, peace researcher and video blogger (USA)…
Kind regards
JAN”

That turned out to be the end of the story — of just how “great” Mr Ekberg Skog and SVT thought it would be to interview me.

I sent two reminders that also went unanswered – and then I wrote this:

March 18, 2024
“Hi Hjalmar Ekberg Skog
I see no response to two reminders. I consider your silence unprofessional and unfriendly.
If I have not – by Wednesday at 12 noon – received an explanation for your/SVT’s cancellation of what was an agreement on an interview – or that you write that you intend to carry it out, I will publish our correspondence with comments as an example of how SVT at a probably higher organisational (not intellectual) level practices (self-)censorship – or simply does not or may not publish criticism of NATO.
I should add that how you have acted is not the first time. 6-7 weeks ago, a friendly woman took 45 minutes of my time and concluded that what I said was very interesting and that she would get back to me after talking to her boss. She did not come back.
I answered you immediately and kindly and also helped when you asked me for suggestions of experts, SVT could turn to.
Furthermore, SVT has recently used my media work for Chinese media in a way that shows a total inability to handle criticism of Sweden’s membership of NATO:
I can’t interfere with how SVT’s pro-US/NATO bias is determined and developed, but I can decide how I react to partially disrespectful and incompetent reports and inquiries.
I look forward to your response to the above in a couple of days.
Kind regards
Jan Oberg”

As you may have guessed by now, this, too, did not appeal to the intellect, morals or decency of SVT.

Why do I publish this?

For the reason mentioned above. Because this is how censorship is brought upon you. The problem is that you cannot know what has been dropped or omitted; you only see and read what you see and read. Not what could have been there.

I see it as my duty to report to anyone concerned about the trends and decay of free media and debate, democracy and journalism/reporting simply because I have experienced something that you cannot experience but which helps you to understand why so many media – including SVT – are so incredibly one-sided and violate all their own principles, values and methods.

How is this pro-US/NATO/militarist or pro-war perspective installed so systematically in 90% of all Western media? What are the messages editors get from whom? How do they benefit from their obedience to the ongoing anti-intellectual assault, or elimination, of diversity that the Western world once championed and was proud of? Well, certainly not you and I!

Please ask yourself every time you go to SVT or other state-financed and mainstream media: What story/perspective/information/historical perspective/experts did I not get here?

And what could be the reason? In whose interest?

And you’ll begin to see a pattern – on which I do not have to put words.