Stop giving the West a bad name!

Milano

There it is, that fantastic duomo, the fourth in size in the Christian world, honoring their God, exuding self-confidence, and the beauty of the marble stones of the huge façade. Founded six hundred years ago, took five centuries to build, a marvel of engineering and architecture. A major concert with a choir does not manage to fill the inner space of the dome, but of the listeners, yes, with awe.

Conceived in the “dark ages” as those masters of cultural violence, our historians, call them, the “middle ages”, presumably between two “shiny ages”, the Roman Empire and Western colonialism, “modern times”. Will anything built today be visited by people in five hundred years, filling them with awe? Some banks, corporations? Some corrupted national assemblies? Some stadiums, shopping centers sloppily made, collapsing, built with no love, except for money? Some huge missile ramps to sow death and harvest hatred and revenge?

Do they ever think of that, the “leaders” in the most aggressive parts of the West, Anglo-America, UKUSAF–adding F for that center of “enlightenment” and “modernity”, France – do they think of the harm they do to all of us, in the West? To our past, to our legacy?

But soon it is over; they are losing Afghanistan and Iraq, Libya and Mali–no democracy, no economic growth, no human rights arising from the ashes of the most basic human right, to life, insulted. All over even mainstream media are filled with negativism; crying failure.

Be careful; do not fall into the trap of confusing the real goals with pretexts. Among the real goals in Iraq and Syria was destruction of a Ba’ath Arab socialism, challenging reactionary Gulf monarchies exploiting immigrants and others, but delivering fossil fuels and support to USA-Israel. To hell with alphabetization and welfare state. As a US State Department man put it: “We did not care how they treat women as long as we got the Caspian-Indian Ocean pipeline”.

And the bases. Encircling Russia-China in Afghanistan and Iraq; for Africom in Libya and Mali. For Western supremacy economically against the worst threat of them all, an aging, psychopathic Gaddafi, but with an excellent scheme for Africa, their own Monetary Fund, a common currency, lifting the bottom up, respect for nations brutally suppressed by Western colonialism–Berbers, Tuaregs among them.

Better face it: UKUSAF has won the first round. Libya destroyed, the proud projects for Africa shelved for now, decentralized Islamic Courts compatible with the complex clan structure in a Muslim country, Somalia, destroyed; the same rights for Pashtuns and Tuaregs to have their own lands with imposed borders lifted as for Jews in the Middle East, destroyed. Bases all over–to be kept beyond “withdrawal” for a possible war with the Shanghai Cooperation Organization. And to secure Africa against the sneaky, subversive Chinese tricks of paying for resources extracted by building roads, railroads, dams, helping lift the bottom up as opposed to Western economics increasing inequality.

True, the giant railroad now financed by the Chinese runs East-West, from Mombasa-Dar to Kinshasa and the Atlantic coast–and from there container ships to South America. South-South-South trade in the best tradition of Third World politics–not against North-South trade in the worst tradition of colonialism; but adding to it.

Anglo-America and France winning? The first run yes, but a Pyrrhus victory with defeat built into it. They probably think they are clever promoting security for Americans and wealth for Britons, with an incredibly brainwashed, monopolized media betraying the freedom of expression–with the laudable exceptions of The Guardian and the Washington Post for information about Anglo-America and the other three of the “Five Eyes” betraying the best of the West by spying, insulting privacy, spreading fear and apathy, undermining democracy instead of promoting transparency and dialogue about all these issues.

A US client country, Norway, did a major part of the bombing in Libya. Did the handful of decision-makers believe in the pretexts, and then apologized for the highly predictable result, the opposite? Certainly not. Did they believe in the real US goals, promoting them by killing? Probably not. What did they believe, then?

In double obedience: internationally to their chosen superpower; nationally to the foreign policy-military hierarchy. “The banality of evil”, in other words; “thoughtlessness”, Hannah Arendt’s way of characterizing Adolf Eichmann. And that after the Nürnberg and Tokyo judgments ruled out “obeying orders from above” and “ignorance of what those below were doing”. But was this democracy against dictatorship? Was it? All decisions behind closed doors with the people not knowing the premises for the decision or any debate? Against a dictator, yes. Does that justify massive killing for predictable anarchy?

That same country responded to the chemical arms issue by giving a Nobel Peace Prize to an NGO for the prohibition of chemical weapons; in line with Nobel’s testament, reduction of standing forces. But why not shared with Putin, the politician who focused on the arms not on “who done it” (with two good candidates), and WMD-Weapons of Mass Destruction to boot, when Obama had nothing but missile attacks on Assad strongholds to offer? But no; a NATO country gives a prize to the West, not to Russia.

Nevertheless, Mandela they all celebrate as universal icon. Forgotten is the past, not a word, no apology, no awakening, no “how could we have been so wrong”. Massive governmental support for Apartheid against ANC-African National Congress and Mandela till the last decades–but then came Cold War, anti-communism against both (for instance for a Norwegian prime minister).

Well, better late than never. But when will the West show its beauty rather than its ugly, violent–military and economic–face? Why not cut off the last imperial tentacles before forced to do so? Opting maybe more for the better middle than for those two imperial ages?

Share

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Related Posts

A donors’ conference, co-sponsered by the Burundian government, the Belgian government and UNDP will be held in Brussels January 12-13, 2004. This PressInfo offers a perspective on its urgency. See also TFF’s new Burundi Forum. Imagine for a moment that politics is about goodness and generosity. Where could a few million dollars of government aid and a few civil society organisations – guaranteed – win the hearts of extremely poor millions who want peace and already work hard to achieve it after 10 years of war and genocide? The answer is Burundi, the heart-shaped country in the heart of Africa. Burundi makes a good story from Africa. But what does the world know about Burundi, its problems and struggles? Burundi’s tough reality Here are the basic facts. Burundi’s population is about 7 million and it is number 171 out of the 175 countries on the UNDP’s human development index. Their life...
This is not another geopolitical commentary on the Arctic. It is a visionary peace proposal that can save the region from militarised rivalry and ecological ruin. A blueprint for shared security, sustainable development, and human dignity — benefitting Greenland, the Arctic, and the rest of us. Jan Oberg TFF director Lund, Sweden, February 17, 2026 I. Four Principles for a New Arctic Vision The Arctic is often framed as a cold arena of rivalry — a place where great powers test each other’s resolve. But this worldview is outdated, unimaginative, and ultimately self‑defeating. The Arctic is not a vacuum waiting to be militarised; it is a living region, a climate stabiliser, and a cultural homeland whose future will shape the future of humanity. If we begin from that understanding, a far more rational Arctic order becomes possible — one that is peaceful, cooperative, and centred on the people who actually live there. This vision rests...
Peace is promoted by constructive proposals and dialogue Four preceding PressInfos have expressed concern over — and criticised — the ongoing, militarisation of the EU. Some will say: but there are no alternatives. We believe that there are always alternatives, that democracies are characterised by alternatives and choice, and that openly discussed alternatives will improve the quality and legitimacy of society’s decision–making. In addition, it is an intellectual and moral challenge to not only criticise but also be constructive. If we only tell people that we think they are wrong, they are not likely to listen. However, if we say: what are your views on this set of ideas and steps? — we may sometimes engage them in dialogue and sow a seed. Most people in power circles live their daily lives in in a time frame and a social space where certain ideas, viewpoints and concepts are just not...

Recent Articles

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...
Lena Petrova of “World Affairs In Context” with more than half a million subscribers on YouTube wanted to explore what a peace researcher like me has to say about, among other things, the First and the Second Cold War and why eethics has disappeared from politics. I am particularly happy about this conversation that also yielded an amazing number of very appreciative comments on YouTube. No doubt, people are longing for alternatives, including peace perspectives.
The MIMAC – Military-Industrial-Media-Academic Complex – drives the world’s rampant militarism and wars without end. Here is a short reflection of how it works against all interests of humanity. #5 deals with why there is no real enemy or threat images/analysis. It’s all ex-post constructions. And, btw, theTFF Peace Pulse is now on Rumble.

TFF on Substack

Discover more from TFF Transnational Foundation & Jan Oberg.

Most Popular

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...
Lena Petrova of “World Affairs In Context” with more than half a million subscribers on YouTube wanted to explore what a peace researcher like me has to say about, among other things, the First and the Second Cold War and why eethics has disappeared from politics. I am particularly happy about this conversation that also yielded an amazing number of very appreciative comments on YouTube. No doubt, people are longing for alternatives, including peace perspectives.
The MIMAC – Military-Industrial-Media-Academic Complex – drives the world’s rampant militarism and wars without end. Here is a short reflection of how it works against all interests of humanity. #5 deals with why there is no real enemy or threat images/analysis. It’s all ex-post constructions. And, btw, theTFF Peace Pulse is now on Rumble.
Read More
Screenshot-2026-05-15-103534
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...
Screenshot-2026-05-12-104023
Lena Petrova of “World Affairs In Context” with more than half a million subscribers on YouTube wanted to explore what a peace researcher like me has to say about, among other things, the First and the Second Cold War and why eethics has disappeared from politics. I am particularly happy about this conversation that also yielded an amazing number of very appreciative comments on YouTube. No doubt, people are longing for alternatives, including peace perspectives.
Screenshot-2026-04-13-154551 (2)
The MIMAC – Military-Industrial-Media-Academic Complex – drives the world’s rampant militarism and wars without end. Here is a short reflection of how it works against all interests of humanity. #5 deals with why there is no real enemy or threat images/analysis. It’s all ex-post constructions. And, btw, theTFF Peace Pulse is now on Rumble.
Screenshot-2026-04-13-154551 (1)
Jan Oberg, TFF director April 28, 2026 In this third TFF Peace Pulse, I make the important distinction between the violence and the conflict that violence is a symptom of. If you want peace, focus on the underlying conflict because that is the key to resolution, peacemaking, and a better future for the parties. The West is obsessed with violence, just look around you – and 90+ per cent of the public debate is about military issues and other violence – totally wasted for peace. These Peace Pulses will only be published here a few times. You will also not find them on YouTube and Vimeo because both platforms have blocked TFF and me; you know, peace is dangerous these days. Most TFF’s videos since 2007 are now on Rumble.
Screenshot-2026-04-13-154551
In contrast to most, we’ll bring alternatives, solutions, hope and strategies for a better future. Times are dangerous, yes, but that only intensifies the need for constructive thinking and action! Jan Oberg, TFF director April 13, 2026 The new TFF Peace Pulse uses video messages in a new way: Max 3-5-minute-long comments, ideas or perhaps mini-lectures, all about peace – positive peace. We launch them today on April 13, 2026 with a carefully crafted visual aesthetic fitting the content. We hope to publish them regularly from now on. We launch Peace Pulse (PP) – for a number of reasons. The world is in chaos, and there are countless reasons to feel concerned, frustrated, even angry. The atmosphere is saturated with doom and gloom, with negative energy and rear‑mirror thinking, while vision, imagination, alternatives, strategies and genuine future‑mindedness remain in short supply. And without them, we simply can’t save the world. Looking at problems from a hundred angles will...
IMG_5165 (1)
PART II — Publishing Peace in a System That Prioritises Militarism Jan Oberg, TFF director April 10, 2026 How TFF Maintains a Daily Voice in a Digital World Built for Noise This article is part of the series “TFF at 40″ and it invites you to learn about Four Decades of Publishing Peace. It takes a look at how a small, people‑financed peace foundation has communicated across four generations of technology — from wax stencils and fax machines to mass email and Substack — and why TFF continues to publish every single day in a system that rewards noise, conflict, and militarism. ◆ What it means to publish peace every single day in a digital system built for 24/7 news and other noise, confrontation, and militarism. How TFF’s independence, continuity, and global readership defy algorithms, donor cycles, and Western media censorhip — and why the Majority World keeps listening. When the...