The Transnational Foundation for Peace and Future Research: Innovative Approaches to Conflict Resolution

Most peace organisations either study conflict from a safe academic distance or rush into crisis zones with aid and good intentions. The Transnational Foundation for Peace and Future Research, better known as TFF, tries to do something harder: combine rigorous research with hands-on engagement in the world’s most violent places, while refusing a single rupee from any government or corporation. It is a tiny, all-volunteer think tank based in Sweden, yet its ideas about resolving conflict without weapons have travelled far beyond Scandinavia. For students of peace movements and civil society, TFF is a compact case study in what independent peace activism can look like.

What is the Transnational Foundation for Peace and Future Research? 🔗

TFF is an independent, not-for-profit think tank dedicated to peace research and conflict mitigation. It was registered under Swedish law in late 1985 and began operating on 1 January 1986, with its headquarters in the university town of Lund, Sweden. The organisation describes itself as a global network rather than a conventional office, and one of its most striking features is that it is entirely run by unpaid volunteers – nobody who works with TFF draws a salary.

Its guiding idea comes straight from the United Nations Charter: that peace should be achieved by peaceful means. To protect its independence, TFF follows a strict code of conduct that keeps it free of special-interest groups, commits it to nonviolence in everything it does, and bars it from accepting money tied to warfare or from governments and corporations. Funding comes only from ordinary citizens who support its work. This combination – small, independent, people-financed, and committed to nonviolence – is what gives TFF the freedom to criticise powerful states and institutions without fear of losing its backers.

The founders and their vision 🔗

TFF was co-founded by a husband-and-wife team whose backgrounds shaped the foundation’s dual identity as both a research body and an activist network.

Jan Oberg 🔗

Jan Oberg is a Danish-born peace researcher, mediator and commentator who has lived in Lund since the early 1970s. Within TFF he has served as chairman of the board and as director, and he personally led the foundation’s conflict-mitigation teams to former Yugoslavia, Georgia, Burundi and Iraq. He is also widely published, with thousands of pages of analysis on the wars in the Balkans alone. Oberg represents the side of TFF that goes into the field, talks to all parties in a conflict, and then publishes detailed alternatives to military intervention.

Dr. Christina Spännar 🔗

Dr. Christina Spännar is a Swedish sociologist and a long-time anti-nuclear activist. Her work has often focused on the human and social dimensions of peace, including projects to help refugees integrate into Swedish society. One such initiative, “Like Bridges Over Dark Water,” created dialogue between newcomers and locals and documented the hardships of young Afghan boys who reached Sweden alone, far from any family. Spännar’s contribution reminds us that peacebuilding is not only about wars between states – it is also about repairing the social fabric within communities.

The intellectual roots of TFF’s work 🔗

To understand why TFF works the way it does, it helps to know the academic tradition it grows out of. The modern field of peace research was largely shaped by the Norwegian scholar Johan Galtung, who founded the first peace research institute and the Journal of Peace Research, and who was for many years closely associated with TFF as one of its expert associates.

Galtung’s most influential idea is the distinction between two kinds of peace. Negative peace is simply the absence of direct violence – the guns fall silent. Positive peace, by contrast, is the presence of cooperation, justice and equality, where the deeper causes of conflict have been addressed. In a well-known interview, Galtung explained that negative peace stops violence, while positive peace means building relationships of mutual and equal benefit. He also introduced the concept of structural violence: harm built into unequal social and economic systems, even when no direct fighting is taking place.

From this grew the idea of conflict transformation rather than mere conflict settlement. Galtung’s approach to peace studies argued that a conflict, handled well, can be a “great teacher” that leaves societies more mature than before. This philosophy – that you reach security through peace, not peace through security – runs through everything TFF does. Indian readers will notice an obvious echo here of Gandhian nonviolence; Galtung’s early academic work was in fact on Gandhi’s political ethics, and TFF counts Gandhians among its network.

Innovative approaches to conflict resolution 🔗

TFF’s methods set it apart from both traditional academic institutions and large intergovernmental bodies. Its programmes cover conflict understanding and mitigation, alternative security, nonviolence, postwar reconciliation, education and advocacy, alongside practical field work and conflict-skills training.

On-the-ground analysis 🔗

Rather than relying on second-hand reports, TFF sends teams directly into conflict zones to gather first-hand information about the social, political and economic factors driving violence. The goal is to understand the root causes of a conflict, not just its symptoms. In the Balkans, for example, this meant studying the tangled mix of ethnic, religious and political tensions before proposing any solution.

Active listening and conflict-mitigation teams 🔗

A core TFF technique is what it calls active listening – speaking to every side in a dispute, including parties that outsiders prefer to ignore. Its conflict-mitigation teams deliberately avoid taking the position of one government against another. This is a demanding stance, because it often means defending dialogue with actors that powerful states have already decided to isolate.

Nonviolence and reconciliation 🔗

TFF holds that violence only breeds more violence, so it consistently promotes nonviolent solutions and post-war reconciliation. Reconciliation work focuses on rebuilding trust between communities after fighting ends – addressing trauma, restoring dignity, and creating conditions where people who were once enemies can live together again.

Education and advocacy 🔗

Because it is a think tank, TFF puts enormous weight on public education. It publishes a free newsletter, reports, books and online commentary aimed at decision-makers and ordinary citizens alike, arguing that an informed public is a precondition for lasting peace.

Where TFF has worked 🔗

TFF’s engagement spans several continents, with sustained, multi-year involvement rather than brief visits.

The Balkans 🔗

The breakup of Yugoslavia in the 1990s became TFF’s most intensive field of work. The foundation has been engaged there since 1991, producing thousands of pages of analysis and proposals. Oberg’s writing from this period sharply criticised the way major Western powers handled the crisis, arguing that outside intervention often worsened the situation instead of resolving it – a controversial but carefully argued position that captures TFF’s willingness to challenge mainstream policy.

The Middle East, Africa and beyond 🔗

Beyond the Balkans, TFF has carried out conflict analysis, education and peace proposals in Georgia, Burundi, Iraq, Iran, Somalia, Syria and China. Its work in Burundi and Somalia connects it to peacebuilding in Africa, while its engagement with Iraq, Iran and Syria places it firmly in Middle Eastern debates. Closer to home in Sweden, its refugee-integration projects show that the foundation treats the social inclusion of displaced people as part of the same broad peace agenda.

Why TFF matters for students of peace and conflict 🔗

For anyone studying global peace movements and the role of civil society in politics, TFF offers several lessons. First, it shows that influence does not depend on size or wealth – a small volunteer network can shape global debates through credible, independent research. Second, it demonstrates the practical meaning of nonviolence as a policy, not just a moral ideal. Third, its insistence on refusing government and corporate money illustrates how civil society organisations guard their independence and their right to dissent.

These themes are directly relevant in the Indian context, where a long tradition of nonviolent struggle, an active civil society and a strong interest in conflict resolution make TFF’s model especially instructive. The foundation’s blend of research, fieldwork and advocacy is a template that peace activists anywhere can learn from, even when they disagree with its specific political conclusions.

Like any organisation, TFF faces real constraints: limited funding, a reliance on volunteers, and the difficulty of influencing states that are committed to military solutions. Yet its survival for four decades on citizen support alone is itself an argument that an independent, nonviolent approach to conflict has a durable place in world politics.

What do you think? Can a small, independent, volunteer-run think tank realistically influence the behaviour of powerful states locked in conflict – or does meaningful peacebuilding require the resources and authority of governments and international bodies? And how relevant is Galtung’s idea of “positive peace” for addressing the structural inequalities you see around you?

References

1. https://transnational.live/about/organisation/
2. http://www.transnational.org/page1_4.php
3. https://www.peace-justice.org/introducing-jan-oberg/
4. https://www.peaceinsight.org/en/articles/interview-johan-galtung/
5. https://www.transcend.org/tms/2024/06/on-johan-galtungs-approach-to-peace-studies/
6. https://onthinktanks.org/think-tank/transnational-foundation-for-peace-and-future-research/
7. https://transnational.live/jan-oberg/