Whatever one thinks of it, it’s a historic day for Sweden. After 205 years of neutrality, the country joins a military alliance. Of course, Sweden has also been deeply involved in international cooperation in recent years. Nevertheless, this step changes a lot, in cooperation with the NATO countries as well as in self-perception.
In Sweden, of course, many are asking whether the country is paying too high a price for Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s concession in blocking NATO membership. So far, Sweden has repeatedly criticized the Turkish government for dismantling democratic structures and the persecution of political dissidents, supported opposition groups within Turkey and granted many Kurds refuge. Since the NATO application, the government in Stockholm has regularly referred to Turkey as a democracy, the arms embargo has been lifted and the government has also canceled all support for the Kurds. In a joint statement on Monday evening, Sweden again pledged to support Turkey both in its fight against terrorism and in its efforts to restart EU accession talks. Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson also promised during talks with Erdoğan in Vilnius that they wanted to work towards liberalizing visas.
The Turkish President and the Swedish Prime Minister (right) sealed their agreement with a handshake on Monday evening in Vilnius. NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg, who mediated, looks satisfied.
(Photo: Filip Singer/WPA Pool/Getty Images)
In the course of the NATO application, a debate arose about freedom of expression and freedom of demonstration, which is broader in Sweden than in most other countries. Erdoğan has repeatedly said that as long as Korans are allowed to be burned in Sweden, he will refuse his commitment to join NATO. When a Swedish-Danish right-wing extremist burned Korans in Swedish migrant districts in 2022, Ebba Busch, leader of the Christian Democrats, defended him: “It should be possible to burn both the Bible and the Koran in all parts of Sweden.” Kristersson, leader of the moderates, also spoke out explicitly against a ban on burning: “Instead, we should protect the strong freedom of expression and demonstration that we have today.” As Prime Minister, Kristersson now condemns the burns “strongly,” Busch called the burns “reprehensible,” and Justice Minister Gunnar Strömmer is examining whether the freedom of speech clause can be changed.
But the commentators agree on one thing. Joining NATO marks the end of a great era. In the decades after the Second World War, Sweden sometimes referred to itself as a “great moral power”. As the writer Richard Swartz once put it: “My country was against militarism, the arms race, nuclear weapons and pro-disarmament of all kinds, all with an unspoken pacifist undertone. NATO was – in principle – no better than the Warsaw Pact. Neither of them wanted to we have something to do. At best, we would engage in ‘peacekeeping’ military operations led by the UN.”
At the same time, during the Cold War, Sweden spent more than three percent of its gross national product on armaments for many years and exported an enormous amount of weapons worldwide. There was general conscription, and conscientious objection was virtually unknown. The potential enemy was always clear: no other country has waged as many wars against Russia as Sweden. In 1809, the country lost a third of its landmass and a quarter of its population when Tsar Alexander I conquered what is now Finland.
As in other Western countries, the army was then greatly reduced after the collapse of the Soviet Union, and the share of defense spending in gross national product fell from 2.6 percent in 1990/91 to one percent in 2017. Compulsory military service was abolished in 2010, but it was decided the Reichstag seven years later to partially reintroduce it. At the moment there is a lack of personnel, including reservists, the army currently consists of just 55,000 men and women. By 2030, it is expected to increase to 90,000 people. The government wants to achieve NATO’s two percent defense spending target by 2026.
The material of the army is modern
Kjell Engelbrekt, professor of political science and dean of the Defense Academy in Stockholm, says in an interview with the SZ that the army is bringing “some of the world’s most modern submarines and combat aircraft that are on the market. The same applies to artillery, combat vehicles, tanks – and anti-ship weapons Gripen– Fighter jets come from our own production, the submarines are ideally designed for the shallow waters of the Baltic Sea.
But probably the most important contribution is the situation in the middle of Scandinavia, close to the Baltic States: Finland is no longer geopolitically isolated, Gotland is the central island in the Baltic Sea, transport routes to the Baltic countries are also becoming significantly shorter, the Suwałki Gap, the Corridor the Polish-Lithuanian border between Belarus to the east and Russia’s Kaliningrad to the west is no longer NATO’s Achilles’ heel.
What is now easily forgotten: As late as November 2021, the then Social Democratic Defense Minister Peter Hultqvist categorically rejected potential NATO membership: “I will definitely not take part in such a process as long as I am defense minister. I can guarantee that to everyone. ” Even when Russia invaded Ukraine, then-Prime Minister Magdalena Andersson initially thought that neutrality had to be maintained. “Now is not the time to shake,” she said shortly after the war began. At the time, the Swedish government wanted to strengthen the Finnish-Swedish military alliance.
A few weeks later, however, the neighboring Finns signaled that they would submit a NATO application, if necessary on their own. Then, on May 12, 2022, the same Peter Hultqvist said: “We cannot be the only country in the Nordic countries not involved. We will then not be able to be part of real defense planning.” Shortly thereafter, Sweden and Finland jointly submitted their applications to Brussels.