With his speech today – half an hour ago – U.S. President Trump has taken a huge step into uncharted territories. (Here on video). One that implies a 60-75% risk of leading to a US attack on Iran. Behind him stands the hardline militarists whom he has himself appointed. Secondly, neo-conservative individuals and think tanks who have brought the world only a series of failed wars and unspeakable human misery since the invasion of Afghanistan. Third, the Military-Industrial-Media-Academic Complex, MIMAC, that is outside real democratic control and pushes relentlessly for ever-increasing armament and wars and serves the public all kinds of weird, fake images of what threatens the US. Further, pro-Israeli and pro-Saudi lobby organisations and extremely wealthy individuals who buy political influence and thereby destroy the very foundations of democracy and free opinion formation. • Against these numerically tiny elites stand virtually the rest of the world, including NATO allies and the EU.
Does the U.S. have anything constructive and benign to offer the world anymore? In this comment on PressTV I list a series of arguments against these new sanctions which were passed by the US Senate two days later.
I read dozens of articles every day about various conflict zones, commentaries, war reports and – the few times it happens – possibilities of peace. I read about Syria in particular as I have since I visited Damascus and Aleppo in December 2016. It’s important that one does not, over time, develop the disease called “psychic numbing” – an excellent […]
Amnesty International lader i disse uger en bus udsmykke med et reklameslogan hvilket er blevet opfanget af Adweek Adfreak som “remarkable” markedsføring. Det er det skam – men af andre grunde end den der fremhæves i artiklen. Dette billede pryder også hele forsiden på Amnesty’s hjemmeside. Har Amnesty ikke lagt mærke til at Aleppo blev befriet for godt 7 måneder […]
Min klumme i Arbejderen den 7. juli 2017.
There should be a lower intellectual level to the statements by a US Secretary of Defence. There should be a debunking of the unethical behaviour that repeatedly state that there is only a political solution to Syria and continue to use only violence. There should be a discussion about international law here. There should be a discussion of what is […]
“The Debate” with Jim Walsh, MIT and Jan Oberg, TFF Lund, Sweden – May 30, 2017 Last night “The Debate” on PressTV was devoted to the future of European-US relations in the wake of the NATO Summit, President Trump’s words and omissions and the – historic – words, in particular, of Chancellor Angela Merkel immediately after. Undoubtedly, we are at a turning point in these relations in general and for the NATO alliance in particular. To discuss these issues – past, present and future perspectives – were Jim Walsh, senior research associate at MIT’s Security Studies Program, Massachusetts, and Jan Oberg, director of TFF, Lund. Thanks to PressTV’s excellently structured program and interviewer we touched upon a series of aspects and dimensions around which we found both agreements and slight disagreements – all in a sober tone fit for public education and personal reflection. We hope this debate will stimulate your own thoughts about the future of war, security and peace. We’d be grateful for your sharing it to media people, students and other academics as well as to decision-makers in the field that you may know. See it here – The Debate