Militarism (MIMAC)

OK, Trump did not get it. But he got a full endorsement of a possible future US regime change in Venezuela. And that is what Ms Machado has advocated. On October 10, 2025, the Norwegian Nobel Committee awarded its Peace Prize to Venezuelan opposition figure María Corina Machado. The citation praised her “tireless work promoting democratic rights.” But Ms Machado has openly called for U.S. military intervention in Venezuela, stating on CBS: “The only way to stop the suppression is by force—U.S. force.” She or her party has received funding from the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), a U.S. government-backed body known as a CIA front organisation and for supporting regime-change operations worldwide. And in 2018, she sent a letter to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, asking him to use “force and influence” to help dismantle Venezuela’s government—citing alleged ties to terrorism, Iran and narcotrafficking. This year’s NATO Norwegian prize...

Officially, the drones were not identified. By simply thinking critically – which journalists and selected experts no longer do – there may be a good reason for that. And this article will never be mentioned in Denmark… Drones over Denmark. No damage. No trace. No answers. Yet the headlines scream “Russian threat,” and Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen speaks with a certainty that defies logic: “We don’t know they were Russian—but we know Russia is the biggest threat to Europe.” It could be nobody else – unless you make an interest analysis which I did two days ago. This is not security policy. It’s theatre. And the audience is being played. Let’s rewind. These drones—unphotographed, untracked, unclaimed—appear and vanish like ghosts. Airports shut down. Panic spreads. Military budgets swell. And the narrative hardens: Russia is behind it. But what if that’s not just wrong but deliberately misleading? Here’s a hypothesis for...

Drones over Nordic airports. No damage. No trace. No answers. Most assume Russia—but what if that’s not so? Why is there so much we are not told? This article explores the strategic ambiguity behind recent drone incursions and asks: Who else might benefit from sending drones into NATO airspace? From Ukraine’s surprising drone supremacy to Russia’s possible signalling, the silence itself may be the loudest message. These are the kinds of questions decent, intelligent investigative journalists and commentators could easily research. Why don’t they? Did you, dear reader, know or think of this? That the most powerful weapon in today’s conflicts might be the one that leaves no trace – and no answers. Just enough fear to justify the next move? Recently, drones have repeatedly appeared over Nordic airports and near some military facilities. They cause no damage – for which reason the designation “hybrid attack” is misleading but serves a purpose. These...

By World BEYOND War A new report by the global peace group World BEYOND War finds that military bases used by foreign militaries are growing in number, as are public protests and advocacy against those bases. Of 1,247 foreign military bases in the world, 877 of them, by latest count, are U.S. bases outside of the United States. Eighteen other nations, combined, have 370 bases outside their borders. The full report is available at https://worldbeyondwar.org/basesreport2025 While U.S. bases are in 95 foreign countries all over the globe and virtually encircling the borders of Russia and China, the nation with the second-most foreign bases, Türkiye, has them all near Türkiye, with the exception of one base in Somalia, and the majority of them in Syria and Iraq where Türkiye has been waging wars. During U.S. wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the United States added, and later closed, hundreds of bases. Türkiye and...

Foreword The Board of The Transnational Foundation in Sweden has decided to publish an easy-to-read, scholarly anthology that addresses one of the most important – and potentially dangerous – issues of our time: Why are the political, economic, and medialised Western images of China so consistently negative – and what can you do to understand China better? These images may be expressions of a political will to present only various shades of grey and black with the aim of building a consciousness about China as an enemy and not a partner. They may also be seen as a sort of world-dominating ethos of ignorance based upon the assumption that “we’ve-got-nothing-to-learn-from-others,’ we are the teacher. Another possibility is that the West, deep down, feels that it is getting relatively weaker from a macro-historical perspective and comforts itself with denial and accusations against “the other” of being the reason for its manifest...

Does she think we are idiots? Does Denmark’s foreign policy establishment? I am a Danish citizen, and this fraudulent speech with a gross lie through omission is morally and politically unacceptable. H. E. Ambassador, Christina Markus Lassen, spoke at the UN Security Council’s urgent meeting caused by Israel’s attack on Iran. Read her short – shocking – speech here. She is an experienced Danish diplomat, partly educated in the US (of course), and has been her country’s ambassador to Syria, where she collaborated with the US (the famous Mr Ford!), France, and the UK to shape a “Western approach” – to changing the government of Bashar al-Assad, one must assume. Perversely as hard to believe, she does not mention that Israel has attacked Iran! No, she starts with the US/Israeli mantra – they are both major nuclear powers, of course – that Iran shall never be allowed to have nuclear...

We’ve seen it repeatedly: You invent a pretext based on deliberate lies, fake news, exaggerations or a false flag operation which serves to construct a story that country or leader X is a threat to “us” which legitimates that we do a ‘preemptive’ strike against that – obviously invented – threat to eliminate it. Mainstream media’s task is to propagate the ploy, not to ask questions or reveal the lie. Take Serbia’s ‘genocide’ in Kosovo, Afghanistan’s responsibility for 9/11, Saddam’s possession of nukes in Iraq, Assad’s use of chemical weapons against the Syrians, Gaddafi’s ‘mass murder’ in Bengazi, Russia’s planning to occupy and administer not only Ukraine but also a series of European countries thereafter, Hamas’ attack on Israel – that Israel knew everything about before it happened – and now you have the blatant lie about Iran’s being just about to become a nuclear weapons power. Basic facts about...

War-preparation and militarism are now the main factors that keep the West together, and will make it fall faster. The Western world has lost its consciousness, perception, and instruments of conflict analysis, resolution, peace-making, and reconciliation. They’ve been squeezed out by militarism’s kakistocrats – a political science term that means government by “the worst, least qualified, or most unscrupulous people.” Consequently, there is now a risk of more than 50% that a major war will happen in Europe. I’ve been observing silently for weeks and months now how geopolitical experts – also very qualified ones – and people who comment independently as well as in the mainstream media and many others have worked on the tacit, implicit assumption that President Trump would help create peace in Ukraine; they seem to believe that what we have witnessed has anything to do with knowledge-based, professional peace-making or would have even the slightest...

And of course, they don’t tell their readers The development – or decline – of the Danish daily newspaper Politiken as a quality newspaper in the field of foreign policy pains me. Allow me a personal, somewhat nostalgic introduction. I wrote frequently for Politiken from 1971 to 1994. As a 20-year-old sociology student, I was naturally proud to be published in what was then a prestigious, liberal media outlet, which was initially shaped by Hørup’s anti-militarism and cultural radicalism. The broadest and best social debate took place in Politiken’s columns and on its debate pages. Over the years, I also got to meet some of the newspaper’s most important ‘influencers,’ editors such as Agner Ahm, not least the legendary feature editor Harald Mogensen, and later – believe it or not – I was invited to lunch with editor-in-chief Herbert Pundik himself at Hotel Kong Frederik, during which he told me,...

Naturally, nobody cares about that fraud in today’s Sweden. SIPRI is the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, established in 1966. Read about it here and see how it has twisted its aims to not include the words ‘peace research.’ Because here is what it should do according to § 2 of its statutes: “…to conduct scientific research on questions of conflict and cooperation of importance for international peace and security, with the aim of contributing to an understanding of the conditions for peaceful solutions of interstate conflicts and for stable peace. (My italics). The rather low intellectual level is indicated by the statement that “SIPRI’s vision is a world in which sources of insecurity are identified and understood, conflicts are prevented or resolved, and peace is sustained.” Sources of insecurity shall not be removed, they shall only be identified and understood. Conflicts shall be ‘prevented’ – what an absurd idea...

Today is 9 April. It marks the 80th Anniversary of Hitler’s invasion of Denmark. Denmark’s Radio reports today on how the country’s war museums have become ‘attractions’ where people queue to get in and go on guided tours, and ticket sales are booming. Of course, it never occurs to anyone to ask why Denmark and so many other countries are so preoccupied with war – monuments, anniversaries, museums, have so many bookshops with lots of books about war, war history, weapons, uniforms – use military-inspired fashion or drive city jeeps and other modern cars that look like armoured vehicles. Not to mention why there aren’t the same peace-inspired things – peace monuments, peace museums, bookshops with peace books… The answer is simple enough. The West as a culture, as a social cosmology and a collective way of thinking and behaving, is a terrible violence-based apparatus of world wars, armament, colonialism,...

Aannguaq Reimer-Johansen/facebook.com has created the popular hat My 20-year-old analysis of the military Igaliku Agreement signed between the US, Denmark and Greenland in 2004. I emphasise Greenland’s role as a leg in the Ballistic Missile Defence (BMD), suggest that it could drive a parallel international peace policy, and I raise the possibility of a future conflict with the US – which is now a fact. Donald Trump was out in 2019 to get Greenland. The Danish PM, Mette Frederiksen, replied that that was an ‘absurd’ proposal. Trump felt hurt and cancelled his planned visit to Denmark; in a follow-up phone conversation, I assume that he scolded her very seriously and I assume that, behind the scenes, this was one of the most serious foreign policy crises Denmark has faced – the alliance relations with the US being sacrosant in that country. They then, according to Trump, reconciled – but what...