How Peace-Oriented Norway Learned to Stop Worrying and Love War
By Prof. Glenn Diesen | May 26, 2025
Norway identifies itself as a model of a liberal and tolerant peace-oriented nation. Yet, a collective mindset has developed with intense distrust and loathing of anyone who deviates from the government’s official truth and war narratives.
Here is a social experiment to test the claim above. I am a professor of political science, but I am also a politician running for Parliament. My recently established political party is primarily an anti-war party, and we started a poster campaign on public transportation in Oslo. The core message was that we are for negotiations and against weapons for the war in Ukraine. This seemed like a reasonable position as Norway previously had a policy of not sending weapons to countries at war (as it escalates and can make us a participant), and our country used to advocate for diplomacy and negotiations as the path to peace. Norway has abandoned these policies and unified under the new mantra that “weapons are the path to peace”, and we have boycotted basic diplomacy with Russia even as hundreds of thousands of young men died in the trenches. Was our peace-oriented nation ready to at least consider the argument that we should return to our former policies of negotiating instead of fueling the war with more weapons to fight the world’s largest nuclear power?
The country lost its collective mind… Politicians called it a dangerous Russian influence operation. I had taken the side of Russia in supporting the invasion. I am an agent for Russia spreading Russian propaganda. It was argued that the national intelligence services should get involved, as I am likely financed by the Russian state. Soon thereafter, the national intelligence agency, PST, reassured the public that they are looking into people who may, at the behest of a foreign power, attempt to make Norwegians critical of the government’s policies on sending weapons to Ukraine.[1] Almost every media outlet in the country framed the issue on the premise that I am “pro-Russian” and “anti-Ukrainian”. People began tearing down the posters, and some compared their political vandalism with liberating the country from Hitler during the Second World War. People were intoxicated with self-righteousness and moral superiority as the tribe united in virtue and the fight for freedom. Their hatred of the evil “other” was celebrated as evidence of their righteousness as they formed a resistance against us, fascist agents of Russia who support the destruction of Ukraine and would like to see Russia conquer Europe.
At this point, it should be noted that I consider myself a friend of Ukraine. I have warned against war in Ukraine for the past 20 years, and I have obviously not supported the invasion of Ukraine. Much like many political leaders across the West have argued over the past 30 years, I believe that NATO expansion triggers a security competition and eventually war, much like it would if Russia established its military infrastructure in Mexico. My argument is that Russia considers NATO expansion an existential threat and responds based on these convictions, irrespective of NATO not agreeing with Russia’s threat assessments. I therefore argue for diplomacy and against sending weapons, as it will only escalate the war, destroy Ukraine, and take us closer to nuclear war.
I consider this to be a pro-Ukrainian position and a pro-Western position, to speak in the language of my tribal countrymen who do not care for arguments about security competition. It should be noted that our own Prime Minister argued after the Russian invasion that it was “out of the question” to send weapons, yet this position has since been criminalised and reserved for agents of Russia. I discovered that my position is not sufficiently anti-Russian, since I believe the broken security architecture is the source of the war, and the discourse in Norway is reduced to basic tribal loyalties of picking one side or the other. Norwegian society only tolerates arguments that are based on the premise that we are not to blame and our solidarity must be based on condemning the “other”. The premise of an “unprovoked invasion” is therefore sacred. Consequently, enhancing our security by mitigating the security competition with Russia is impossible, as we are not allowed to discuss Russian security concerns. War predictably becomes the only path to peace.
The political campaign resulted in a televised public debate where our former defence minister / foreign minister was represented on the other side. In what resembled a show from Jerry Springer rather than a debate, her tactic was to be condescending and accuse me of being a propagandist for Russia. Whatever could have resembled an actual argument was premised on the idea that I am “pro-Russian”, while the government is “pro-Ukraine”. My dissent was thus a threat to national security. The purpose was never to discuss whether Russia is pursuing an empire or responding to what it considers to be an existential threat, and the purpose was certainly not to discuss whether weapons and boycott of diplomacy are the path to peace.
Then the media, functioning as a branch of government, stepped in to “fact-check” the debate. Or more precisely, the media only “fact-checked” one side, while the obvious lies told by our former defence minister / foreign minister went unchecked. Also, the “fact-checkers” were more like narrative checkers, as I was accused of “using several arguments that fit Russia’s most important narratives about the war in Ukraine”.[2]
The more dishonest media never bothered to check the facts supporting my arguments, and instead approached “fact-checking” by picking one ambiguous source to conclude I am not reliable. For example, I made the argument that Boris Johnson sabotaged the Istanbul peace agreement at the behest of the US and UK, yet the newspaper then only picked Davyd Arakhamia as an ambiguous source. Why did they not mention the two mediating sides, the Turkish (the foreign minister and President Erdoğan) or the Israeli (former Prime Minister Bennett), who confirm the negotiations were sabotaged to use Ukrainians to weaken a strategic rival? Why did they not cite the former head of the German military, General Kujat, who says the same? Why not reference interviews with American and British leaders who argued that the only acceptable outcome was regime change in Moscow? Why did they not cite the words of Boris Johnson himself as he expressed his disdain for the negotiations and warned against a “bad peace”?
The more honest media had the decency to at least publish the facts I presented, although they still had to muddy the waters. For example, I argued that the West knew that we backed the coup in Kiev in 2014 and pushed NATO expansion, despite knowing that only a small minority of Ukrainians (about 20%) wanted NATO membership and despite knowing it would likely trigger a war. The evidence cannot be disputed, so the fact-checker argues the Ukrainians were “ignorant” of NATO’s mission and had been propagandised, and points out that after the Russian invasion, there has been a majority support. This information and these claims have absolutely nothing to do with the argument that we knew only a small minority wanted NATO membership in 2014, and we knew it would likely result in war. All the “fact-checking” was intended to discredit.
The considerations of the rational individual have been defeated in Norway by the tribal mindset and groupthink. The government’s policies and war narratives represent virtue and truth, and all opposition is thus immoral and deceptive. The premise of every argument from politicians and their stenographers in the media was that they were on the side of the innocent Ukrainian victim, and I represented the evil Russian aggressor. There is no interest in engaging with arguments; rather, there is an obsession with exposing the hidden evil intentions of their opponents. Toward this end, anything is permitted in the “good fight”. The national intelligence services warned, with a not-so-subtle hint to me, that they are aware of efforts to polarise the public. Not only is it completely unacceptable for me to enter Parliament as I allegedly represent Putin, but my employment as a professor at a Norwegian university is also problematic, as I repeat “Russian narratives. How did Norway become authoritarian and gung-ho about war?
The Propagandised Norwegian
I will write here about “the Norwegian”, the collective national consciousness that serves the purpose of overwhelming the rational individual. Sigmund Freud famously recognised that the individual is rational, although human beings are also influenced by an irrational group psychology. Human beings have throughout their entire history organised in groups for security and meaning, and adjusting to the group is one of the dominant instincts in human nature. Carl Jung famously wrote about the limits of reason: “Free will only exists within the limits of consciousness. Beyond those limits there is mere compulsion”.[3]
The key component of group psychology is to divide individuals into “us” (the in-group) and the “other” (the out-group). When human beings are exposed to uncertainty and fear, there is an instinct to demand internal solidarity and denounce the out-group. Authoritarian tendencies tend to thrive when exposed to external threats.
The literature on political propaganda originates primarily from Edward Bernays, the nephew of Sigmund Freud, who built on his uncle’s work. Bernays recognised that manipulating the stereotypes of what represents “us” and the “other” diminishes the relevance of objective reality and the considerations of the rational individual. When we use military force, is it for freedom, and when our adversaries do the exact same thing, it is to advance empire and destroy freedom. The core of propaganda is therefore to present the world as good versus evil, and as superior versus inferior. The Western political propaganda that previously framed the world as the civilised versus the barbaric has been recast as the struggle of liberal democracy versus authoritarianism. If the public accepts this basic premise, the complexity of the world is simplified and dumbed down to the extent that dissent is immoral and dangerous. All that matters then is that you display loyalty to the in-group.
Walter Lippmann famously argued that political propaganda had the benefit of mobilising the public for conflict, yet it had the disadvantage of preventing a workable peace. When the public has bought into the premise that they are in a struggle between good and evil, how could they accept mutual understanding and compromise? The propagandised public reaches the conclusion that peace depends on the good defeating the evil. In almost every conflict and war of the West, the opponent is presented as a reincarnation of Hitler, and the Western political-media establishment lives perpetually in the 1930s as negotiations are appeasement and war is peace. This is profoundly problematic as the first step in reducing the security competition is recognising mutual security concerns.
Carl Schmitt, the scholar from Hitler’s Nazi Party, argued that organising politics along the friend-enemy binary also enabled governments to purge dissent. Schmitt’s concept of the enemy within strengthens political unity by purging those who do not display in-group loyalty and fail to conform to the beliefs and behaviour of the social order. The Norwegian has now experienced a decade of non-stop obsession with the Russiagate Hoax, Covid and then the Russian invasion of Ukraine. The fear and the search for enemies within to purge has exhausted the rational individual. We have now outsourced our critical thinking to the government and seek comfort in Orwell’s two-minute hate, in which we join the media-fuelled moral outrage against the enemies of the state. The moral indignation gives safety, meaning and unity.
The problem is spreading across Europe. In France, the main opposition leader has been arrested in what is seemingly a politically motivated attack. In Germany, the largest political opposition party has been labelled an “extremist organisation”, which enables the intelligence agencies can go after members. It is likely also a first step to banning the opposition party. In Romania, the election results in the presidential election were cancelled, and the winner was not allowed to run again. In the do-over of the Romanian elections, France and the EU were accused of interfering in the election to make sure the Romanians would [not] vote the wrong way again. Interference in Moldova and Georgia was also done under the banner of defending democracy from Russia. The irony is that the internal solidarity of the West as a “liberal democratic community” is, to a large extent, reliant on the Russian “other” playing the role of the bogeyman, which creates the groupthink that tears away at the liberal character of the West.
People tend to exaggerate what they have in common with the in-group, and exaggerate the differences with the out-group. The Norwegian has some contempt for America when compared with Norway, especially when they vote the wrong way. The Norwegian can, for example, not understand why the Americans would vote for Trump. This is because the Norwegian does not actually know why Americans voted for Trump, since the Norwegian media functioned as a campaign manager for Joe Biden and Kamala Harris. It is common to portray Americans as stupid, aggressive, and under Trump, it is not uncommon to introduce the word fascism. However, when in conflict with Russia, the American transforms into the in-group. With the simplistic division of good versus evil, the American is cast as the good guy. The US has a security strategy of global primacy, yet the Norwegian is suspicious of arguments that the US security strategy does not consist of advancing liberal democratic values. By extension, NATO is a “force for good”, and you would not question it unless you are seeking to sow divisions to undermine our goodness. NATO occupied Afghanistan for 20 years in a strategic part of Central Asia so small girls would be allowed to go to school, Libya and Syria were destroyed to defend human rights, and the expansion of the military bloc is solely motivated by the goal of offering protection to other peoples. Moscow could not possibly think the US would ever attack Russia, while ignoring the current proxy war and the continuous talk of possible wars with Iran and China. The Norwegian must refer to NATO as a defensive alliance even whilst it is bombing countries that never threatened a NATO country. Leading NATO countries are now complicit in genocide in Gaza, yet the benign liberal democratic identity we have assigned to ourselves is impervious to reality. If you criticise the West, it is not because you advocate for course correction, but because you stand with our enemies.
The Norwegian as a Moral and Liberal Authoritarian
Liberalism is renowned for having an internal contradiction that must be managed. Liberalism is based on tolerance to accommodate the rights of the individual to deviate from the group, yet liberalism is also based on the assumption of universalism in terms of all societies conforming to the liberal ideals.
The Norwegian accepts that all people are different and tolerate diversity, yet his liberal convictions are universal and more developed in Norway, others must thus follow the same path. We are all equal, but some are more equal than others. The Norwegian has embraced liberal principles such as mass immigration, radical secularism, gay marriage, gender ideology and humanitarian wars, and will ostracise and crush anyone who does not follow the same conviction. For example, believing that marriage is between a man and a woman was an acceptable opinion 15 years ago, but today it makes you intolerant and there is no tolerance for your intolerance. The Norwegian politician may not know the first thing about China, with its thousands of years of history and population of 1.4 billion, yet the Norwegian politician has a remarkable confidence in knowing exactly how China should be run as a country.
The Norwegian has been trained to speak in the language of morality to suppress factual discussion. Framing all arguments as moral implies that the opponents are immoral. Critical debate and open debate suffer as rational arguments, and nuance is replaced with moral righteousness and condemnations.
“Helping Ukraine”
The good versus evil premise that cannot be contested is that the Norwegian government is on the side of Ukraine, it is “pro-Ukrainian”, it “supports” and “helps” Ukraine. In contrast, dissidents such as myself who criticise the government’s policies are “anti-Ukrainian” who legitimise or support the invasion in solidarity with Russia. For the Norwegian, even a democratic debate between the two sides is morally repugnant as it gives voice to Russian propaganda.
I usually counter the false premise by arguing that NATO’s “help” entailed supporting the toppling of Ukraine’s government in 2014, which did not have the support of the majority of Ukrainians or their constitution. This was largely done to “help” Ukraine join NATO, but only about 20% of Ukrainians wanted NATO in 2014. The US merely “helped” when it took control over key governmental positions in Ukraine and had to rebuild Ukrainian intelligence services from scratch as an ally against Russia, from the first day after the regime change in 2014.
When 73% of Ukrainians voted for the peace platform of Zelensky in 2019, NATO decided to “help” destroy the popular peace mandate as it represented “capitulation”. Nationalists, supported by the “NGO” Ukraine Crisis Media Centre, presented “red lines” that Zelensky was not allowed to cross.[4] Zelensky had his life threatened repeatedly and publicly if he dared to cross these red lines, and he eventually abandoned his peace mandate. Several Western governments, including the Norwegian government, finance this “non-governmental organisation”.[5] There is an abundance of evidence that the US sabotaged the Istanbul peace negotiations in April 2022 and wanted a long war that uses Ukrainians to bleed Russia, yet the proxy war is fought under the banner of solely “helping” Ukraine. Criticising the idea that NATO, the world’s largest military alliance and an important instrument to advance US global hegemony, is solely preoccupied with helping Ukraine, is a key premise that cannot be challenged. Anyone attempting to question it is met with vicious attacks and accusations of standing with the enemy.
To ensure that the groupthink is managed, “democratic institutions” such as government-funded NGOs are tasked to herd the masses. The government-funded Norwegian Helsinki Committee, another “non-governmental organisation”, is also financed by the US government and the National Endowment for Democracy (NED). Reagan and the CIA Director established NED in 1983 as a “human rights organisation” to manipulate civil society in other countries. It is an ideal propaganda arm for the government, as competing power interests in the world and subsequent conflicts can be sold to the public as a struggle between good and evil. The Norwegian Helsinki Committee, a government-financed “non-governmental organisation”, writes regular hit-pieces on me, smears me non-stop on social media as a Putin-propagandist, attempts to cancel my invitations to speak, and attempts to have me fired by always shaming the university for giving me credentials that I allegedly abuse to spread propaganda. This includes calling and sending letters to the university. I must hide my address and phone number as the public is regularly told I am “anti-Ukrainian”, while an employee at this “human rights organisation” posted a picture of the sales advertisement of my house on social media. The leader of this NGO that has spent more than four years to smear, intimidate, censor and cancel me explained to the media that it was done as a nice gesture to help me sell my house. When I compared their intimidation to the intimidation of the brownshirts at universities, the scandal was that I compared this virtuous “democratic institution” to the brownshirts.
The Norwegian as a Sociopath
The rational individual is humanistic, but the collective consciousness of the Norwegian has taken on sociopathic traits with a lack of empathy, chronic lying, deceit, aggression, irresponsibility, and an absence of remorse.
The Norwegian is taught to express empathy for Afghans when it justifies occupation, Syrians when it justifies regime change, Libyans when it justifies military intervention, etc. However, once the strategic objective is achieved, there is no attention or empathy expressed. As we leave behind death and destruction, there is no remorse, as our alleged intentions were good. In Ukraine, the Norwegian is taught to have great empathy when it comes to advancing the war efforts. In contrast, the Norwegian will react with suspicion and anger if anyone mentions the suffering of the people in Donbas over the past decade, “military recruiters” dragging people off the streets and out of their homes, the attacks on the media, the denial of political rights, language rights, cultural rights or religious rights. The empathy for Ukrainians is instrumental, it is evoked or suppressed based on the purpose it serves.
Ukrainians who want to fight the Russians make the headlines, while Ukrainians such as former Western-backed presidential candidate Yulia Tymoshenko have disappeared from the media after she accused the West of using Ukrainians to weaken Russia. Ukrainians who fail to play the role of wanting to fight to the last man are also met with suspicion and should not be allowed to speak on behalf of their country. The narrative must be defended from facts, and in the good fight, it is virtuous to lie and deceive. Irresponsibility is now framed as being principled, as, for example, Russia’s nuclear deterrent must be referred to as an unacceptable nuclear blackmail that must be rejected. Insisting on continuing to fight a losing war in which Ukrainians lose more men and territory every day is “pro-Ukrainian”, because the alternative is a Russian victory that is “pro-Russian”. The deeper the belief in the righteousness of the cause, the easier it becomes to love the war that serves it.
[1]
PST snakker om utenlandsk påvirkning etter FOR-debatten
[2]
Faktasjekk: Partiet Fred og rettferdighet (FOR) og russiske påstander om krigen i Ukraina
[3] Jung, C.G., 1973. Letters 1: 1906-1950. Princeton University Press, Princeton, p.227.
[4]
[5]
Von der Leyen hopes to turn EU into ‘defense union’ for $867bln
Al Mayadeen | March 9, 2025
European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen stated that she believes her proposed new 800 billion euro ($867 billion) military plan will transform the European Union into a “defense union”.
During Thursday’s EU leaders’ conference on defense, ReArm Europe received unanimous support, according to von der Leyen.
“You are familiar with the 800 billion [euro] package for defense, and that is historic, this can be the foundation of a European defense union,” she said.
“We will drive the ReArm Europe plan forward with full force,” she stated at a news conference in Brussels marking the first 100 days of her second term as President of the European Commission.
Von der Leyen went on to say that the EU should “team up with other like-minded countries,” such as the United Kingdom, Norway, and Canada, to “unleash the full potential in the face of concrete threats.”
Von der Leyen recently put forward an initiative to attract loans of up to 150 billion euros to the defense industry over the next four years and to allow EU countries to free up another 650 billion euros to increase defense purchases and develop the defense industry.
The European Union is ramping up efforts to develop its military-industrial sector, drawing insights from the Ukraine war. A statement issued following a European Council meeting on Thursday outlined key areas for defense investment, particularly in air defense, advanced drone technology, and precision-guided weaponry.
According to the European Council’s conclusions, the bloc is focusing on strengthening its military capabilities in coordination with NATO and the European Defence Agency. The document specified that priorities include air and missile defense, long-range artillery, missile stockpiles, and anti-drone technologies.
“[The European Council] identifies the following first list of priority areas for action at EU level in the field of capabilities taking into account the lessons learned from the war in Ukraine, in accordance with the work already done in the framework of the European Defence Agency and in full coherence with NATO: air and missile defence; artillery systems, including deep precision strike capabilities; missiles and ammunition; drones and anti-drone systems…,” the statement read.
This move comes as part of a broader strategy known as ReArm Europe, an initiative aimed at significantly boosting the EU’s defense capabilities while reducing reliance on external allies. Under this plan, EU leaders have proposed unlocking up to €800 billion to finance military advancements, primarily through defense loans, budget repurposing, and private capital mobilization. The European Investment Bank (EIB) may also lift restrictions on lending to defense firms to support this push.
Von der Leyen has described this as a necessary response to “a clear and present danger” facing the region, marking a shift in the EU’s traditional defense posture. The initiative also aligns with recent calls from the US for Europe to take greater responsibility for its own security, especially amid concerns about potential shifts in American foreign policy under a future administration.
USAID and NGOs for Narrative Control and War
By Professor Glenn Diesen | February 10, 2025
President Trump’s decision to cut funding to USAID revealed the extent to which the US government has been financing media, protests and other means to hijack the civil society around the world. In Ukraine, USAID had a key role in toppling President Yanukovych in 2014 and has since financed between 85-90% of Ukrainian media to ensure narrative control. The Georgian Prime Minister has also been warning that Western NGOs have been activated to topple the government and convert Georgia into a second front against Russia. There is also overwhelming evidence that the US government established “non-governmental organisations” (NGOs) since the 1980s that are financed by the US government, staffed with people linked to the US intelligence community, and pursue US geopolitical interests under the guise of promoting democracy and human rights. One of these “NGOs” is the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) established by Reagan to take over some of the tasks of the CIA. These organisations are instruments for the US to govern the societies of other nations and pursue regime change when necessary.
Subverting Democracy and Pursuing War
When Zelensky won a landslide victory in the 2019 presidential election on a peace platform, the US activated its NGOs to ensure that Zelensky would reverse and abandon his peace mandate. Zelensky had won 73% of the votes by promising to engage in talks with Donbas, make peace with Russia, and implement the Minsk peace agreement. Furthermore, Zelensky argued in favour of preserving language rights and religious rights to prevent divisions in society. Immediately, protests emerged with NGOs presenting Zelensky’s peace platform as “capitulation”.
One of the US-financed “NGOs” was the Ukraine Crisis Media Centre which had been established allegedly to “promote the development of a self-sufficient Ukrainian state and society”, something I would certainly support. However, this is yet another NGO created by the US to subvert society and prevent peace from breaking out.
The Ukraine Crisis Media Centre threatened Zelensky, and warned him against delivering on his election promises: “As civil society activists, we present a list of ‘red lines not to be crossed’. Should the President cross these red lines, such actions will inevitably lead to political instability in our country and the deterioration of international relations”.[1]
These red lines included “holding a referendum on the negotiations format to be used with the Russian Federation and on the principles for a peaceful settlement”; conducting negotiations without the Western states; “making concessions to the detriment of national interests”; failing to implement the security and defence policies of the former government; “delaying, sabotaging, or rejecting the strategic course for EU and NATO membership”; “initiating any actions that might contribute to the reduction or lifting of sanctions against the aggressor state by Ukraine’s international partners”; attempting to review the language law or supporting the Russian Orthodox Church in Ukraine; “ignoring dialogue with civil society” etc. Simply put, the peace platform supported by the overwhelming majority of the population or the NGOs would make sure Zelensky was also ousted from power.
This threat from the US-financed NGO was countered with death threats from US-financed far-right groups. Zelensky eventually abandoned the peace mandate, ignored the Minsk peace agreement and fell in line with US policy.
The donors to the Ukraine Crisis Media Centre that financed the cancellation of Zelensky’s peace mandate include USAID, the National Endowment for Democracy, the US embassy, and various Nordic governments. On the list of donors is also The Institute for Statecraft, the discredited organisation behind the Integrity Initiative, which was caught in the covert operations of creating “clusters” of loyal politicians, journalists and academics to manufacture the impression of an established consensus to control the narrative. The integrity initiative was also working with UK intelligence agencies to target dissent in politics and the media.
My Encounter with these “NGOs”
USAID, NED and other NGOs also operate in countries allied with the US to prevent dissent and preserve bloc discipline. The Ukraine Crisis Media Centre wrote an entire article smearing me in its project of “shady horses of Russian propaganda”, which listed false accusations such as being a “defender of Russia’s aggression”. The evidence for the absurd accusations included conversations with Professor John Mearsheimer and former US Senator Ron Paul, which are labelled Kremlin “mouthpieces”.[2] The Norwegian government (my own government) is also listed as a donor to this project of intimidation and smears.
The US foreign ministry, the National Endowment for Democracy, and my own government also finance the Norwegian Helsinki Committee, another “human rights NGO”, which has pursued a project of systematic intimidation against me for the past 4 years. Their tactics against me include regular smear pieces in the media, almost weekly tweets labelling me a propagandist for Russia, letters and phone calls to the head of my university to end my position as a professor, calls on other academics to go against me, efforts to cancel me from events where I have been invited to speak, etc. After successfully whipping up hatred in the public, the police advised me to hide my address and phone number. At this point, an employee at the Norwegian Helsinki Committee published a picture of my house on social media. These are the activities that my own government finances under the guise of supporting an “NGO” that promotes democracy and human rights. In response to the purge of academic freedom, I am now in the process of acquiring another citizenship to relocate to a country where civil society is not outsourced to fake NGOs pushing war propaganda and censorship.
What was my great crime? I have been deeply critical of NATO’s policies towards Ukraine since the NGO-backed “Orange Revolution” in 2004. For years I criticised the efforts to pull Ukraine into NATO’s orbit when only a small minority of Ukrainians wanted to join the military alliance, and NATO was aware it would likely trigger a war. I criticised the EU’s rejection of Ukraine’s proposal for a trilateral EU-Ukraine-Russia agreement in 2013 that would have made Ukraine a bridge rather than a frontline. I warned that the NGO-backed toppling of Yanukovych in 2014 would result in Russia’s seizing Crimea and war. For 7 years, I insisted that sabotaging the Minsk peace agreement would result in a military solution to the conflict. Since 2022, I have argued that the sabotage of the Istanbul peace agreement and the boycott of all diplomacy and negotiations would result in Russia destroying Ukraine in a war of attrition. From my perspective, these are pro-Ukrainian arguments that would have preserved Ukrainian sovereignty, territory and lives.
The people who advocated for the policies that created this disaster have a monopoly on the media, and all dissent is crushed with smears, censorship and cancellation. We have more newspapers than I can count, yet they all write the same thing and cite the same “NGOs”. Even now, it is still considered controversial and suspicious to argue for peace negotiations, even as the majority of Ukrainians want negotiations, the war has been lost, and Ukraine suffers greatly with the loss of men and territory every day. Criticism of the NATO war narratives is not met with counterarguments, rather it is met only with accusations of having evil intentions, being “controversial” and “pro-Russian”, legitimising the invasion, not caring about Ukrainians, spreading propaganda etc. These crude and pathetic attacks do not have to be substantiated as the assault on free speech and academic freedom are always wrapped in moralistic language and claims about defending democracy.
Everything I have argued played out as predicted, including why the sanctions were destined to fail. I can confidently argue why my analyses have been correct and why my policy recommendations would have prevented this disaster. However, I do not live in an open society with the free exchange of ideas. I live in a society where government-sponsored smears, censorship and cancellation are permitted as long as an NGO is used as a middleman.
[1] Joint statement by civil society representatives on the first political steps of the President of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelensky | UACRISIS.ORG
[2] Kremlin Shady Horse’s: Glenn Diesen – Russian propaganda aligned rhetoric, defender of Russia’s aggression, blames NATO for expansionism | UACRISIS.ORG
Moscow accuses EU state’s leaders of ‘whipping up war psychosis’
RT | February 7, 2025
The Finnish authorities have been churning up an atmosphere of “war psychosis” and urging people to prepare for a possible war with Russia, according to Moscow’s ambassador to the EU country, Pavel Kuznetsov.
In an interview with RIA Novosti published on Thursday, Kuznetsov said that Finland’s leadership is instilling fear in the population using claims of “Russia’s aggressive plans.”
Helsinki is promoting various initiatives to strengthen military preparedness among civilians, the envoy said.
“There is increased media coverage of bomb shelter renovations, the expansion of shooting club networks, and the extension of the maximum age for reservists,” Kuznetsov observed, adding that such measures are being “widely promoted.”
According to the ambassador, such actions are part of the Finnish government’s attempt to justify the country’s “hasty” NATO accession and increased defense spending.
Finland, which shares an almost 1,300-kilometer-long border with Russia, officially joined the US-led military bloc in April 2023 following the escalation of the Ukraine conflict. The Finnish government has since strengthened its defense policies, including expanding military training and civil preparedness programs.
Multiple outlets have reported a sharp rise in interest among Finns in weapons training. Shooting ranges have seen membership soar, and the government has announced plans to open more than 300 new shooting facilities to encourage the trend.
In November 2024, Finland issued guidance on how to prepare for an armed conflict, emphasizing the importance of readiness in the face of potential threats.
Several other Nordic countries have also published information advising their populations on how to prepare for a possible war or other unexpected crises.
Sweden has sent out millions of updated booklets entitled “In case of crisis or war,” while Norway has issued pamphlets urging people to be prepared to survive on their own for a week in the event of extreme weather, war, or other threats.
Denmark’s emergency management agency has informed the public how much water, food, and medicine individuals need to get through a crisis lasting three days. In December, Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen told a local broadcaster that she has been stocking canned food and other essentials in case of a Russian attack.
NATO has long declared Russia to be a direct threat, and Western officials have repeatedly claimed that if Moscow wins the Ukraine conflict, it could attack other European countries.
Russian President Vladimir Putin has dismissed any possibility of a military advance against NATO as “nonsense.”
Putin told US journalist Tucker Carlson last February that the bloc’s leaders are trying to scare their people with an imaginary threat from Moscow, but that “smart people understand perfectly well that this is a fake.”
At the same time, Russia has repeatedly warned against what it describes as NATO’s unprecedented military activity near its western borders in recent years.
Israel wants European nations to take displaced Palestinians
RT | February 6, 2025
Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz has instructed the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) to prepare a plan to encourage Palestinians to emigrate from Gaza, according to a post he made on X on Thursday.
The minister also suggested that refugees should be taken in by European countries that opposed West Jerusalem’s military action in the enclave. Katz said that it would reveal their “hypocrisy” if these nations declined to accept Gazans.
It follows US President Donald Trump’s remarks on Tuesday that the US would “take over the Gaza Strip” and take charge of reconstruction. He added that Palestinians living there should leave, to be provided for by “neighboring countries of great wealth.”
Katz has praised Trump’s “bold initiative” to relocate Palestinians from Gaza.
Among possible destinations, he mentioned Spain, Ireland, and Norway, claiming they have “falsely accused Israel” over its war against the Gaza-based Hamas militant group and therefore are “legally obligated to allow Gazans to enter their territory.”
Commenting on Katz’s remarks, Spanish Foreign Minister Jose Manuel Albares has rejected the suggestion that Spain should accept displaced people from Gaza.
”Spain makes decisions sovereignly and independently. No third party should tell us what to do,” Albares told broadcaster RNE.
The minister stressed that “Gazans’ land is Gaza” and that “Gaza should be part of the future Palestinian state.” He added that the debate about whether Palestinians should leave Gaza is “closed,” and Spain “is introducing our humanitarian aid as much as possible to help the people.”
Ireland, which formally recognized Palestine as a state last year, also rejected Katz’s comments about receiving war refugees.
In an emailed statement to Reuters, the Irish Foreign Department stressed that “The objective must be a massive scale-up of aid into Gaza, return of basic services and a clear framework under which those displaced can return,” adding that “any comments to the contrary are unhelpful and a source of distraction.”
Norway closes its Palestine office after Israel revokes status of diplomats
Press TV – August 16, 2024
Norway has announced the closure of its Representative Office in al-Ram, Palestine, after Israel’s “extreme” decision to revoke the diplomatic status of several Norwegian diplomats.
Norwegian Foreign Minister Espen Barth Eide said it was an “extreme and unreasonable” decision made by the regime.
“This decision seeks to target the Palestinians and the Palestinian Authority and all those who defend international law, the two-state solution and the Palestinians’ legitimate right to self-determination.”
The minister vowed that his country will continue to support the Palestinian people “with full force.”
“We will do our utmost to ensure that this does not affect our work for Palestine and for a viable Palestinian state. Our commitment will continue with full force.”
He noted that the Israeli decision obviously “has consequences for our work in Palestine.”
“It affects our locally employed staff. Many of them have worked at the representative office for several years. It also affects our diplomats and their families. We are now fully focused on how to safeguard our employees and our work in the best possible way,” Eide said.
Earlier this month, Israel revoked the diplomatic status of eight Norwegian diplomats who had been working in Norway’s representative office to the Palestinian Authority.
Ties between Oslo and Tel Aviv have been deteriorating since Norway recognized the state of Palestine in May.
More than two-thirds of the United Nations, approximately 140 countries, already recognize a Palestinian state.
Norwegian fund drops stake in US construction giant over Palestinian home demolitions
(Photo Credit: Kobi Gideon/Flash90)
The Cradle | June 26, 2024
Norway’s largest private pension fund, Kommunal Landspensjonskasse Gjensidig Forsikringsselska (KLP), has dropped its stake in US construction giant Caterpillar Inc, citing “concerns” the company is contributing to the destruction of Palestinian homes in the occupied West Bank.
“Although Caterpillar has shown itself willing to engage in a dialogue with KLP, the company’s responses failed to credibly substantiate its ability to actually reduce the risk of violating the rights of individuals in situations of war or conflict, or of violating international law,” Kiran Aziz, the firm’s head of responsible investments, told Bloomberg.
Aziz highlighted that KLP dropped $69 million worth of Caterpillar shares and bonds earlier this month over the Texas-based company’s equipment being used “to demolish Palestinian homes and infrastructure to clear the way for Israeli settlements.”
She also cited allegations that Caterpillar equipment is being used by the Israeli army in Gaza.
The UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights last week named Caterpillar among several corporations supplying Israel with military equipment and urged investors with stakes in these companies to “take action.”
“These companies, by sending weapons, parts, components, and ammunition to Israeli forces, risk being complicit in serious violations of international human rights and international humanitarian laws,” the UN statement reads.
The UN report also urged western financial institutions and investing firms like Bank of America, BlackRock, Citigroup, JP Morgan Chase, Harris Associates, Morgan Stanley, State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance, and Wells Fargo & Company – among many others – to “take action” and prevent funding the mass killing of Palestinians in Gaza.
The decision by KLP comes one month after the Norwegian government officially moved to recognize a Palestinian state alongside Spain and Ireland.
“For more than 30 years, Norway has been one of the strongest advocates for a Palestinian state. Today, when Norway officially recognizes Palestine as a state, is a milestone in the relationship between Norway and Palestine,” Foreign Minister Espen Barth Eide said on 28 May.
On Wednesday, Palestinian media reported that the Israeli army demolished nine homes in the occupied West Bank, including Jerusalem, and another in the Palestinian territories occupied since 1948.
According to the Wall and Settlement Resistance Commission, Israel conducted “47 demolitions, affecting 66 facilities, including 35 inhabited homes, five uninhabited, and 15 agricultural and other facilities,” across the West Bank in May.
Protests and demonstrations around the world condemn the Israeli massacres in Gaza
Palestinian Information Center – May 29, 2024
European and Arab cities and capitals on Tuesday witnessed solidarity protests, marches, and vigils with the Gaza Strip, condemning the ongoing Israeli massacres against the displaced in Rafah in the south of the enclave.
The protesters demanded an end to the war and the punishment of the Israeli officials responsible for the genocide in Gaza, and also called for a halt to supplying Israel with the weapons it uses to kill women and children and destroy residential buildings in the enclave.
In Britain, thousands of supporters of Palestine demonstrated in the streets of the British capital London, condemning the continued Israeli massacres in the city of Rafah.
The protesters rallying in the vicinity of Downing Street, the official residence and office of the prime minister, called on the British government to condemn the Israeli aggression and stop arms exports to Tel Aviv. They raised banners condemning the continued aggression on Gaza and demanding an immediate ceasefire.
Dozens of protesters blocked the entrance to the Israeli arms factory belonging to the “Elbit” company in the British village of Chineham, in support of Gaza and condemning the crimes of genocide.
In Belgium, the Belgian police dispersed protesters in the capital Brussels with water cannons as they tried to reach the Israeli embassy as part of a protest against the bombardment of Rafah.
In Ireland, Palestinian, Arab and Irish activists supporting the Palestinian cause demonstrated in front of the Irish Parliament in Dublin, coinciding with the Irish government’s recognition of the State of Palestine.
The protesters raised the Palestinian flags and banners in support of Palestinian rights in front of the parliament garden, which witnessed the raising of the Palestinian flag for the first time.
In France, thousands of people demonstrated on Tuesday evening in Paris for the second day in a row, protesting the Israeli massacres in Rafah.
The place de la République in the center of the capital was crowded with people, and Palestinian flags were placed on the statue in the center, with a large banner reading “Stop the Genocide”.
In Norway, a demonstration was held in front of the Norwegian Parliament building to celebrate the government’s recognition of the State of Palestine, and to demand the withdrawal of Norwegian investments from Israel and pressure for an immediate and sustainable ceasefire.
The demonstrators raised Palestinian flags and banners calling for an immediate ceasefire, and banners accusing Israel of committing a war of extermination. The demonstrators called for the punishment of those responsible for the genocide in Gaza.
In the Netherlands, dozens of supporters of Palestine held a silent protest in front of the city hall in Utrecht, to condemn the burning of tents and the killing of civilian children and women in Tel Sultan, west of Rafah.
The protesters laid on the ground in front of the building to represent the scene of the victims’ deaths in Gaza, raising Palestinian flags and chanting slogans condemning the Dutch government’s support for Israel since the beginning of the aggression, and calling for the protection of Rafah.
In Canada, the city of Toronto witnessed a massive demonstration on Monday evening to condemn the massacre of the tents committed by the Israeli army in the Palestinian city of Rafah.
The activists marched through the streets of the city, chanting slogans condemning the ongoing Israeli crimes, and calling for an end to the ongoing genocide in Gaza and a ceasefire.
In Mexico, pro-Palestinian supporters held a protest demonstration in front of the Israeli embassy in Mexico City, condemning the Israeli massacre in Rafah and rejecting the continued aggression on Gaza.
Many of the demonstrators tried to storm the embassy building and pelted it with stones, amid clashes with the Mexican police.
In Jordan, hundreds of Jordanians demonstrated around the Israeli embassy west of the capital Amman, condemning the ongoing genocide in Gaza against the besieged civilian population.
The protesters chanted slogans supporting the Palestinian resistance, calling for the need to deliver humanitarian and medical aid.
They also condemned normalization with Israel and called on the Jordanian government and Arab governments to end all diplomatic and economic agreements with Israel.
In Yemen, protesters organized rallies and marches condemning the Israeli massacres in Rafah, according to the Saba news agency.
Hundreds of students participated in marches in the governorates of Sanaa, Amran and Hajjah, in support and solidarity with the resistance in Gaza and in solidarity with the oppressed Palestinian people.
In Morocco, hundreds of Moroccans, including human rights activists, organized a rally in front of the Parliament building in the capital Rabat, in solidarity with Gaza and condemning the recent massacres in Rafah.
Through banners calling to “Stop the Rafah Massacres”, the participating protesters expressed their rejection of Israel’s defiance of all international conventions and rulings of the International Court of Justice through its continued massacres in Rafah, calling on international institutions to activate their mechanisms to deter it.
Many Moroccan cities, including Tangier, are witnessing similar protest marches, at an almost daily pace, in solidarity with the Palestinian people and rejecting normalization.
Norway, Spain, Ireland to formally recognize Palestinian statehood
The Cradle | May 22, 2024
Norway, Ireland, and Spain announced on 22 May that they will formally recognize Palestine as a state next week, drawing the ire of Israel as the country immediately recalled its ambassadors to Dublin and Oslo.
“There cannot be peace in [West Asia] if there is no recognition … In the midst of a war, with tens of thousands killed and injured [in Gaza], we must keep alive the only alternative that offers a political solution for Israelis and Palestinians alike: Two states living side by side, in peace and security,” Norwegian Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Store said on Wednesday.
Shortly after Oslo’s announcement, Irish Prime Minister Simon Harris said his country would also recognize a Palestinian state.
“Today, Ireland, Norway, and Spain are announcing that we recognize the state of Palestine,” Harris said at a news conference. “I’m confident that further countries will join us in taking this important step in the coming weeks,” he added.
Foreign Minister Micheal Martin said via social media that the recognition will become official on 28 May.
Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez followed suit, announcing Wednesday that the country’s council of ministers would also recognize an independent Palestinian state on 28 May. He also accused his Israeli counterpart Benjamin Netanyahu of putting the two-state solution in “danger” with his policy of “pain and destruction” in Gaza.
In response to the news, Tel Aviv immediately recalled its ambassadors to Ireland and Norway and pledged to recall its envoy to Spain. The foreign ministry also summoned the ambassadors from the three European nations to “reprimand” them.
Israeli foreign minister Israel Katz called the show of support for Palestinians a “folly,” adding that recognizing Palestinian statehood “[sends] a message to the Palestinians and the world: Terrorism pays.”
Palestinian officials welcomed the announcement by three European nations, with Hamas calling it an “important step.”
“We welcome the announcement by Norway, Ireland, and Spain of recognition of the State of Palestine, and we consider it an important step on the path to consolidating our right to our land and establishing our independent Palestinian state with Jerusalem as its capital,” the statement by the Palestinian resistance says.
“Historical moments in which the free world triumphs for truth and justice after long decades of Palestinian national struggle, suffering, pain, occupation, racism, murder, oppression, abuse and destruction to which the people of Palestine were subjected,” the Secretary-General of the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) said via social media.
Nine European countries — Bulgaria, Poland, the Czech Republic, Romania, Slovakia, Hungary, Sweden, Malta, and the Greek Cypriot administration — have already recognized Palestine as a state.
Nord Stream Sues Insurance Companies in London Court – Reports
Sputnik – 12.03.2024
The operator of Nord Stream gas pipelines has sued its insurers in a London court for 400 million euros ($436 million) for their refusal to cover damages following the explosions, the Financial Times reported, citing court documents.
The operator reportedly sued Lloyd’s of London and Arch Insurance companies in February.
The Nord Stream and Nord Stream 2 gas pipelines, built to deliver gas under the Baltic Sea from Russia to Germany, were hit by explosions in September 2022. Nord Stream’s operator, Nord Stream AG, said that the damage was unprecedented, and it was impossible to estimate the time repairs might take.
Russia considers the explosions of the two pipelines an act of international terrorism. There are no official results of the investigation yet, but Pulitzer Prize-winning US investigative journalist Seymour Hersh published a report in February 2023, alleging that the explosions had been organized by the United States with the support of Norway. Washington has denied any involvement in the incident.
To date, none of the Western countries involved in the subsequent investigation – Sweden, Denmark, and Germany – have presented explanations of what happened or named a culprit. Moreover, Sweden announced on February 7 that it would drop its investigation into explosions.
Four Norwegian universities cut ties with Israeli institutions over Gaza genocide
Press TV – February 24, 2024
Four Norwegian universities have decided to suspend ties with Israeli universities they deem complicit in the occupying regime’s genocidal war in Gaza.
The Palestinian Campaign for the Academic & Cultural Boycott of Israel (PACBI) welcomed the decisions, hailing them as a crucial step in supporting the Palestinian struggle.
The move aligns with the campaign’s call for international academic and cultural institutions to sever ties with Israeli counterparts involved in Israel’s genocide in Gaza.
Among the universities taking action, OsloMet has announced the termination of its ties with Haifa University and vowed not to engage in any new agreements with Israeli universities complicit in the war.
Additionally, OsloMet has committed to discontinuing procurement contracts with suppliers linked to the Israeli military or illegal settlements.
The University of South Eastern Norway has followed suit, cutting off relations with Haifa University and Hadassah Academic College.
Similarly, the University of Bergen has severed cooperation agreements with Bezalel Academy of Arts and Design, citing the academy’s involvement in providing uniforms and gear for the Israeli military.
The Bergen School of Architecture has also joined in this action, ending its collaboration with Bezalel Academy over its ties with the Israeli military.
This move echoes the sentiments expressed by 15 Palestinian universities, which have called for Israeli universities to face international isolation for their complicity in Israel’s crimes against Palestinians.
Meanwhile, Norway’s pension fund, with some US$95 billion worth of assets, announced that it was divesting from their entire Israel Bond holdings over their links with the Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank.
Featured Video
Seyed M. Marandi: U.S. Intel Warns Iran Is Preparing a MAJOR Escalation
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
From the Archives
No Proof MMR Vaccine Is ‘Safer’ than Measles, Mumps or Rubella Infection, Physician Group Says
By Suzanne Burdick, Ph.D. | The Defender | January 14, 2025
The risk of permanent disability or death from the MMR vaccine may be greater than the risk posed by measles, mumps or rubella infection because large enough vaccine safety studies haven’t been done, according to a collection of new documents released by Physicians for Informed Consent (PIC).
The collection includes disease information statements for measles, mumps and rubella, and a vaccine risk statement for the MMR vaccine.
According to the Mayo Clinic, measles is a viral infection typically accompanied by a skin rash, fever, cough, runny nose, sore throat, inflamed eyes and tiny white spots on the inner cheek.
Mumps and rubella also are viral infections. According to PIC, all three viral infections typically resolve on their own with proper rest and hydration in almost all cases.
Dr. Shira Miller, PIC’s founder and president, told The Defender, “The main takeaway is that the MMR vaccine has not been proven safer than measles, mumps and rubella.”
PIC is a nonprofit that delivers data to doctors and the public so they can “evaluate the data on infectious diseases and vaccines objectively, and voluntarily engage in informed decision-making about vaccination.”
Miller explained that the MMR vaccine clinical trials didn’t include enough subjects to be able to prove that the risk of permanent disability or death from the vaccine is less than the risk of permanent disability or death from measles, mumps or rubella. … continue
Blog Roll
Aletho News- Lebanese man tells RT how Israeli strike killed his bride
- On deadly sectarianism pushed on Syria and elsewhere by NGOs and media
- Is America preparing a tactical nuke for Iran?
- “We Are Being Drawn Into a War We Don’t Want to Fight”: What Jordan’s Alliance with Washington Is Costing It
- Trump Slaughters Wedding Guests, Zelenskyy Threatens Airliners
- Climate Extremists Target, Attack Large-Scale Power Grid Infrastructure In Germany
- Seyed M. Marandi: U.S. Intel Warns Iran Is Preparing a MAJOR Escalation
- Anti-War Activists Are Getting ‘Debanked’ In The UK
- US approves $5 billion arms sale to Saudi Arabia as it renews aggression against Iran
- Israel’s destruction of Gaza’s sewage system triggers algal bloom, shutting down Israeli desalination plants
- If Americans Knew
- Israeli settlers are a menace across West Bank – Daily Update
- US rejects Israel’s plan to ethnically cleanse Gaza: Daily Update
- ‘What About Gaza’s Amputees?’ Adidas Under Fire Over Israeli Soldier’s Disability-Inclusive Shoe Ad
- ‘They Keep Beating Me’: Dr. Hussam Abu Safiya Gives New Testimony from Israeli Prison
- Palestinian American returns to besieged West Bank home but Israeli settlers remain
- US House passes bill penalizing universities that participate in boycott of Israel
- Israeli Defense Minister Ben Gvir posts Palestinians on conveyor belts to detention camps. The world is silent
- “Board of Peace” Billionaire Backs AIPAC Fund Targeting Pro-Palestine Candidates
- What do you do when you can’t hear the bombs? Being deaf during the Gaza genocide.
- Ben Gvir: After Gaza genocide, we ethnically cleanse the rest – Daily Update
- No Tricks Zone
- Climate Extremists Target, Attack Large-Scale Power Grid Infrastructure In Germany!
- New Study: Antarctic Ice Melt Has Contributed Less Than 1 Centimeter To Sea Level Rise In The Last 30 Years
- Fear Of Debate: Alarmist German Climate Scientist Calls On Mainstream Media To Discredit Skeptic Voices
- End-Of-August Arctic Sea Ice Extent Hasn’t Fallen In 20 Years, Official Data Show!
- News-Making Nepal Region Has Had As-Warm Or Warmer Periods Than The 2000s In The 1600s, 1700s, 1800s
- 2025 Study: ‘There Exists No Unequivocal Experimental Evidence For The CO2 Greenhouse Effect’
- 2026 Atlantic Cyclone Energy Index Running At 85% Below Normal!
- New Research Shows Soil Respiration And Temperature Drive CO2 Change, Not Humans
- Comparison Of Two German Weather Forecasts: From 25 Years Ago And From Today
- Veteran Swiss Meteorologist On Germany’s Recent Heat Wave: “You’re A Really Crazy Country”
Aletho News 