The following is a look at the person Jan Top Christensen as far as google and internet allow it within a short time frame. The aim is to have a note at hand for future use and to share the information with whoever it may concern.
As for the time from 7 years old until his years at university he gives in a interwive this:
”Den antiautoritære tankegang har fulgt Jan længe. som ung studerende var han gennem et par år medlem af studenterfronten på aarhus universitet, hvis mål blandt andet lød på lige medbestemmelse for studerende og oprettelsen af fagkritiske grupper, og han
var medstifter af og redaktør på det samfundsvidenskabelige og -kritiske tidsskrift grus. i
studieårene brugte han også en stor del af sin fritid på at oprette trøjborg Beboerforening i
aarhus. foreningens formål var at mobilisere de lokale beboere til at forbedre levevilkårene i kvarteret gennem byfornyelse, trafikregulering og oprettelse af beboerhus; alt sammen skete i tæt samarbejde med kommunen, der i første omgang var modstræbende, men senere tog initiativerne til sig og gennemførte dem.
evnen til at mobilisere på tværs af befolkningen var en nyttig erfaring. Jan lærte dog allerede fra syvårsalderen, hvordan tingene faktisk kan fungere rigtig godt, når hierarkierne blødes op, og alle får medbestemmelse. inspireret af sin far og sine to ældre søskende blev han’ulveunge’ hos kfuM spejderne i svendborg.”
English extract:
At seven he joined the Y.M.C.A scout group upon inspiration from father and his two elder siblings. The text then, is silent until university years.
He declares himself ”Anti-authoritarian” and a member of ”Studenterfronten” for a couple of years.
He was a co-founder of periodical ”GRUS”, along he participated in founding ”Trøjborg Beboerforening.
The keywords here; anti-authoritarian, Studenterfronten, GRUS and Trøjborg Beboerforening, begs for a explanatory note:
Anti-authorian
It can very well be, that Mr. Christensen actually is anti-authorian in the sense of the word that he first and foremost believe in leadership by encouragement, soft-power and so on. It seams so. But the term also refer to how the campus political environment was divided in the 1970s. Very roughly, on leftist side there where to wings; die hard marxist such as leninist, maoists, moscow communist and the alike, but also a soft wing, more flower-power like. Even today some of the participants at the two wings, now retired professors, are fighting each other in public. (Helmuth Nyborg and Jens Mammen). But, the other possible opportunity, that Mr. Christensen was actually a hard core leftist and now wants to downplay that by using the word anti-authorian has to be considered in the lack of material that place him, at one of the two wings.
Studenterfronten
Was and is now regarded as a extreme left militant organization at Aarhus University. There method or SOP was to act as parasites to other student groups along with bullying out opponents. They where at a point under surveillance by the intelligence unit of the police. A police officer concluded in his report, that there was 15 active members, able to call in 200 for support and that the group was run by psychopaths. This is known because the police intelligence unit, PET, later on became subject to investigation itself. At that time Aarhus University had a total number of 12.000 students.
Link to the relevant part of this investigation.
GRUS
Was/is? a periodical for critical social sience and the humanities. The word ”critical” means that in reality the periodical was a organ for marxism applied as a science. Credit to be given; they had success in putting work-environment and conditions on the agenda. But as well it must be mentioned, that they in cooperation with MSM acted bullish to opponents.
Trøjborg Beboerforening
Was a offspring from ”Studenterfronten” meant to ”mobilize” the masses (the working class) as the hidden agenda, and a front agenda to improve life conditions in a certain area. Some credit must be given, they actually ended up being a catalyst for improvements in said area.
After university mr. Christensen was employed as a researcher at university SDU. There seams not to be any specifics about this employment, but some articles and two books appears.
One book, about french politics, indicates some interest in the french revolution.
At the other two rewives are available.
https://tidsskrift.dk/index.php/politica/article/view/9779/18512
First one is written by mr. Christensen’ later on colleague as a danish ambassador, Carsten Søndergaard. The poor reader quality (mis spelling etc.) due to later PDF’ing. The version in the link is recommended.
Jan Top Christensen, USA-Vesteuropa-relationerne under forandring, sovjetiskee a synspunkter, Esbjerg: Sydjysk Universitetsforlag, 1987, 132 s., kr. 120,00.
Carsten Søndergaard
”I fortsættelse heraf skal anføres, at en central hypotese i bogen er, at »akademiske i Sovjet ofte forudskikker ændringer i sovjetisk udenrigspolitik« (p. 112). Selvom udsagnet svækkes efterfølgende ved, at der tales om et komplekst samspil mellem forskellige grupper fra det akademiske miljø, partisekretariatet og udenrigsministeriet, står essencen i hypotesen stadig. Spørgsmålet er selvfølgelig, ikke Top Christensen tillægger forskningsinstitutterne – som for eksempel og USA-Canada Instituttet – alt for stor indflydelse. Det burde ikke være ukendt, at der er adskillige amerikanske forskere, der er af en anden opfattelse. behøver således kun at henvise til den stående diskussion om, hvilken Georgi Arbatov har på udenrigspolitikken. Den er uden tvivl overvurderet i Vesten.
For det andet er det ofte ganske svært at adskille de refererende afsnit i bogen fra forfatterens egen opfattelse. Af og til fristes man til at tro, at der ikke er nogen forskel. Dette gælder for eksempel karakteristikken af den vesttyske politiker Franz Josef Straus som revanchist (p. 101). Det er muligt, at det er forfatterens egen vurdering. Den forekommer imidlertid mildest talt at være udtryk for en mangel på forståelse af vesttysk politik.” Link
From the review it appears that Mr. Christensen’ thesis has been that the foreign policy of the former soviet union has emerged from academic institutions.
1) Mr. Søndergaard then crack down that this is not what mr. Christensen shows in his book.
2) Mr. Christensen solely use of soviet sources written in western lingo.
3) Not taking the natural consequences or 2) by discussing this problem in depth
4) difficulties for the reader to distinguishes between whats rm. Christensen’ own opinion and his sources tell. Example being that mr. Christensen denounce late German politician Franz Josef Strauss a ”revanchist” (towards soviet union). mr. Søndergaard noting that this take a person without knowledge of German politics.
5) Mr Christensen then deals with SDI (soviet/west arms race) simply taking the soviet stand.
6) And arrive at the conclusions that soviet foreign policy have tendencies away from being ideological driven towards realistic driven and this will result in 1) a more unpredictable* soviet and 2) less dramatic policy. * (more likely, mr. Søndergaards has meant predictable.(
Mr. Søndergaard then comment that 1) seams likely but that 2) is unfounded in mr. Christensen’ work. And finally deem the work ”problematic”.
More friendly to Mr. Christensen’ work is this very short reviwe:
Link, text not copyble.
Note on context of mr. Christensen’ book.
There has since ”1800something” been a ”peace movement” in the western world. It’s partly founded in christianity and partly in socialism/marxism. The latter had been good in making this movement as a political tool and using it as propaganda to reach own ends. After WWII soviet union was seeking to make it’s influence through thees movements, using them as trojan horses.
Logic of thees movements was simple and stupid: In order to motivated the adversary to disarm by himself the west should simply disarm them self to the level where the west did not have capability to answer an aggression effectively; because if so; the adversary would not attack, but adjust himself to a lower level of capability.
This peeked in the 1980s in the west as well as in Denmark where most academics and journalist, who for some reason are mainly left leaning, if not leftist, was supportive to this setup.
It seams mr. Christensen with no regrets, as an academic, has served as an argument provider, for said setup.
After his university career mr. Christensen became a UN employee 1987 – 1990. He was a UN station chief for a refugee camp at Palawan for Vietnamese boat escapees. (the reason for calling them ”escapees” instead of ”refugees” is they was strictly not so, BUT they had very good reason to escape and expect help from western countries, not alone the unsuccessful protection against the communist war mongers in north, western leftists was backstabbing them in their hate against USA and love towards the socialist in north)
And relevant because mr. Christensen as UN employee, and later on, has a co-responsibility for twisting the term ”refugee” to something its not, and towards a person with a wish to emigrate, and at the same time making it a big industry.
He made videos on the life in the camp. Link to video.
Since 1990 he has been an employee of the Danish Foreign Service in various positions and since 2001 in top-positions.
At 9. may 2008 in danish newspaper ”Kristeligt Dagblad”, mr. Christensen then ambassador in Lebanon, his judgment on Hezbollah is: they are reasonable and not war seeking. Link.
He has hold talks with Hezbollah on a regular basis with the approval from then foreign secretary Per Stig Møller. Link.
Excuse for freedom of speech. Via Snaphanen.dk and link to Snaphanen’ post by LFPC
When it comes to the controversial cartoons, Christensen feels that the freedom of speech enjoyed by Danish citizens should be balanced with an understanding of how that speech echoes abroad.
“Denmark is a country where the constitution includes freedom of expression,” he said, adding, however, that the Danish government has openly criticized the republication of the cartoons and “expressed respect for Islam as a world religion.”
“We live today in a global village. Technology makes it possible that comments meant to be heard nationally can end up in a village in Afghanistan. Danes have to understand that we have to take this into consideration,” he added.”
Link to article.
Click to access militaert_tidsskrift_140.aargang_nr.3_2011.pdf
In danish periodical ”Militært Tidsskrift” he has an analysis with the title ”Lebanon: Possibility of a arabic awkening?”
Militært Tidsskrift, 140. årgang – nr. 3 – oktober 2011, s. 73 – 80
Libanon: muligheder for en arabisk vækkelse?”Militært Tidsskrift
Ambassadør i Libanon, Jan Top Christensen
Et signalement af en region i bevægelse
De arabiske lande har i alt for mange år være præget af politisk forstening og mange af dem af økonomisk stagnation, misrøgtet af en række diktatorer, der ved stærk repression var i stand til at holde befolkningen nede. Flere af disse lande er i mange år blevet betegnet ”moderate arabiske lande” og har været vigtige partnere for Vesten, mens styrernes modstandere blev dæmoniseret. Var Vesten reelt interesseret i demokrati i Mellemøsten, eller var det mere hensigtsmæssigt at have autoritære regimer, der sikrede vestlige interesser?
Den arabiske verden var i vidt omfang gåe ti stå. Mange mente, at demokrati ikke kunne forenes med islam. Andre fokuserede på staternes historiske oprindelse og strukturer, der var vanskelige at fjerne. Men omsider ser der ud til at ske noget, som måske vil ændre regionen uafvendeligt gennem de kommende år. Arab Revolution, Arab Uprising, Arab Awakening, Arab Spring er termer, vi alle har stødt på det sidste halve år hver gang, vi har åbnet aviser, internet og TV. De mange forskellige betegnelser signalerer både forskellige opfattelser af, hvad der sker og måske også forskellige forhåbninger. Mange er bange for, at ”foråret” vil blive afløst af ”efterår”, hvor nye ekstreme, udemokratiske religiøse styrer afløser de gamle regimer. Andre er mere optimistiske, og taler om, at man har passeret ”the point of no return”, hvor de folkelige krav om mere indflydelse og større lighed vil sætte sig igennem på et tidspunkt. Måske det er nyttigt at have den franske revolution i erindring og huske, at opgøret med det royale enevælde i 1789 kort efter blev afløst af et styre, der massivt undertrykte anderledes tænkende, og at vi skal frem til 1848, før der blev plads til noget, der bare ligner vore dages demokrati, som i øvrigt hurtigt blev afløst af kejserdømme for en tid.”…
“Tahrir-pladsen fandt store arbejderdemonstrationer sted i Kairo og Alexandria, der trodsede Mubarak-styrets repression og dermed banede vejen for de unges krav om frihed og indflydelse.
Rami Khoury, leder af Issam Fares Institute for Public Policy and International Affairs, AUB, Libanon, har i sine mange analyser af den arabiske vækkelse kaldt termen ”det arabiske forår” for neo-orientalisme. Termen signalerer ifølge RK en opfattelse af, at alle arabere er ens og kan grupperes som en enkel kategori, der tænker og handler på samme måde. Vesten mangler at forstå implikationerne af de frie araberes egen søgen efter selvbestemmelse og definition af deres egenart i nationale politikker. En tid så Levanten ud til at blive mindre berørt af den folkelige protest og opstand, og mange troede i lang tid, at de eksisterende styrer i Syrien og Jordan havde tilstrækkelig folkelig opbakning til at ville være i stand til at tilpasse sig situationen med mindre justeringer. Præsidenten i Syrien udtrykte i et interview i januar 2011 med Wall Street Journal med stor selvtillid, at hvis de arabiske lande ikke havde reformeret allerede, så var det for sent. Den udtalelse har efterfølgende ramt ham hårdt i nakken som en boomerang. I dag anvender hans sikkerhedsstyrker brutale metoder til at bekæmpe de folkelige demonstrationer, som er ved at have bredt sig til de fleste større byer. Styret henviser til bevæbnede grupper med støtte udefra, som vil fjerne det sekulære styre. Styret har spillet ud med en række reformforslag, men mange tror efterhånden, at det er ” for lidt og for sent”. Der er stor usikkerhed mht., hvordan Syrien kommer ud af krisen. Vil det lykkes – i første omgang, som i Teheran i 2009 mht. ”den grønne bevægelse” – at svække protesten ved massiv repression, eller vil Syrien ende med at gå op i den sekteriske limning og komme ud i et kaotisk forløb, hvor det er svært at se noget egentligt alternativ til det nuværende styre?”…
“Den arabiske vækkelse vil ikke foreløbig sætte sig store spor i Libanon af de mange grunde, der er givet ovenfor. Men det sekteriske politiske system vil fortsat give anledning til utilfredshed og på sigt gradvist kunne udgøre et mobiliseringsgrundlag for en bredere bevægelse i takt med, at uddannelsesniveaet hæves og hvis en række af de andre lande får succes med etableringen af et moderne demokrati. Libanon har fortsat behov for at komme fuldt ind i moderniteten. Libanon er reelt ikke en efterlignelsesværdig model for religiøs sameksistens, ”a message” som en katolsk pave højtideligt formulerede det. Consociationalismen fungerer ikke. En gennemførelse af Taef-aftalen fra 1989, der lagde op til at etablere et sekulært Libanon er vejen frem. Vil eksterne interesser tillade det?
Indførelse af forholdstalsvalgmetoden, som den nye indenrigsminister har lagt op til skal drøftes i parlamentet efteråret 2011, vil kunne bidrage til at begynde at demontere de gamle sekteriske ledere og traditionelle politiske familier. Realistisk skal man forvente mange forsøg på benspænd i forhold til den proces. Mange af de kræfter, der i dag har fordel af nuværende system vil åbent eller skjult forsøge at sætte en kæp i hjulet. ”…
“Men Libanon står over for en udfordring, der her og nu kræver en umiddelbar mediering for at undgå, at særligt sunni-shia-modsætningen skærpes. Processen for det Særlige Tribunal for Libanon, der behandler mordet på Rafik Hariri i 2005, er startet. Hizbollah-medlemmer er blevet anklaget og sagen vil gå sin gang, uanset om de anklagede giver fremmøde i retten i Haag. Hvis Hizbollahs generalsekretær Hassan Nasrallah og Saad Hariri kunne genoptage den tætte dialog, som der var mellem Saads fader og Nasrallah, så kunne konsekvenserne af en proces, der af mange libanesere frygtes kan destabilisere Libanon, måske inddæmmes i tide. ”
The article is infested with well known marxist lingo, such as suppressed and class.
It’s not clear what he wants to show, but it seams to be something like ”Lebanon has prosperity.” and ”the arab spring might be a good ”development””, given passion from all party’s concerned, arguing the french revolution took a hundred years before democracy evolved. Since Lebanon has a huge population of muhammedanians, islam and the role islam wants to play is, of cause of importance. Mr. Christensen hardly touch the subject. Apart from this: ”Mange mente, at demokrati ikke kunne forenes med islam.” [Many held the opinion that democracy could not applies/unite with islam] note the past presences ”could”.
However, mr. Christensen seams to have a safe hand when it comes to mapping the political landscape, which is described in terms of sectarianism, which is a term that to a filipino or dane bears another meaning, namely small religious/political group. mr. Christens use it synonymously with political clan, -family and -dynasty. Maybe it’s used as a sub-group to those categories.
Also prominet in his article is inconsistencies. Exampel being that in mr. Christensen’ opinion, at one hand Lebanon is not suitble for “Consociationalismen”, on the other it must be brought to work.
Career
It may seams strange that a person who is related to the militant left can reach high office. Not in in Denmark many others there, has done that too. In the case of mr. Christensen it’s notably that his shift from a leading position to a high, occurs when Mogens Lykketoft are the secretary of foreign affairs. This position has later on been held by other figures known for extremist and/or wiered wives such as Per Stig Møller, (Lene Espersen, exseption), Villy Søvdal, Holger K. Nielsen and Martin Lidegaard.
Personal life
Not much, but wife should be Kieu Phung supposedly MD, and maybe one offspring.
Link
To summerize/conclude
Until his late 30′ mr. has held and worked for extreem leftist wive points. This continues to this day where he must be seen as apologetic towards islam, founded in the fact, that he refuse discussing islam where it’s actually relevant. And that’s a typical leftist feature. (the equivalent right side, is to say; yes there is problems, but…)
He pride himself with being “anti-authorian”. UH don’t think thats the case. He’s a person very good in mapping the social landscape sourounding him, and then his style of control and management is not giving direct orders, but instead using intriques, let others say the hard words and so forth. Remember, he has never been outside a environment (school, university, UN, political administration) where this style take a seriouse risk of loose. His career moore shows he’s a master in it. More over, in he’s time, and the places where he had been acting, the danish policy has been to give money away. Sinces this is about non-material issues, it’s diffecult for any one to see if it was a reasonable bargin. See from the point of anyone in mr. Chritensen’ chair, it might be easier to covince those in the backoffice that the deal was ok, rather than ask for more. It’s called “the problem of moral hazard”.
From a Philippine perspective…e filipino one must hav
Let a side commercial trade and other normal functions of a embassy and an ambassador. He will bring with him money for NGO’. The way projects are prioritiezed, are in order to what benefit can it bring to the danish NGO the filipino counterpartner must have. At the money side the rule of 2/3 applies. It means that of a certain allocation 2/3 goes for salary in the danish NGO or there contractors. Of the left 1/3 2/3 goes for salary in the filipino NGO and there contactors. The remaining then goes for whatever in question. Kids, humanrights etc. The upcomming election in denmark (whith in one year) will allmost for sure change the political landscape for good, the political left will loos momentum. This means, in case you are seeking theese money, don’t corner yourself with a leftish agenda. If you are so much on the right wing, that it’s hard to down play, then wait and see what election bring.
A side from Jan TopChristensen himself, it worth to notice one of his journalistic aides: Nina Trige Andersen.
UH’ 7′ sense will not be surprised to see her as a staff at the danish Manila embassy.
She will be potraited later on but in brief:
She’ a journalist focusing on the Philippines among other topics, aminly NGO’, social stuff and alike. Member of extreme left party ”interNationalsocialist Party” a subsidiary to british Socialist Workers Party and danish ”Enhedslisten”.
”interNationalsocialist Party” are known for the following (among others):
A party member, Henrich Nielsen, got killed in a bomb incident, must likely when he was working on that bomb at the party office.
Trotskyism.
Supportive to Hezbollah and Hamas and islam in general.
Racistic hate toward jews and israel.
Other links:
http://www.uriasposten.net/archives/23384#comments (contains pictures of Studenterfronten’ associates at work)
Undskabens Hotel 
7 comments