- Hubert Walas
Neutrality or NATO?
For centuries, Sweden has managed to stay away from global conflicts - thanks to both skillful strategic neutrality and the effective use of its own geography. Years of the peace dividend allowed the Swedes to build one of the best organized and richest countries in the world. However, the third decade of the 21st century presents Stockholm with new geostrategic challenges.
Geostrategic Pause
Sweden, despite a relatively large area, compared to most European countries, is a small country in terms of population. With 10 million people, Sweden is at the end of the top 100 populous countries in the world alongside Hungary, the Czech Republic, and Azerbaijan. However, a strong, innovative economy makes Sweden one of the richest nations in the world. Its nominal GDP is close to 4 times bigger than Poland and 8 times bigger than Iran.
The Swedes, like many other Western nations, took advantage of the United States-based security architecture that developed after the collapse of the Soviet Union. The focus was primarily on the quality of life, health and prosperity, while the unipolar world allowed for a drastic reduction in defense spending. Stockholm has reduced its army, adapted it to fit more easily into the collective security architecture of the West with less focus on protecting its own territory. The previously developed civilian components of the Total Defense Concept were simply disbanded. The attention to issues of readiness and preparation for war has completely disappeared as the topic was widely regarded as completely obsolete and irrelevant.
However, the Swedes now see a sharp decline in the certainty of the world order due to the aggressive policies of Russia, an emerging China, and the decline of US hegemony. All these make national defense issues a top priority again and incline Stockholm to re-address these challenges with its own grand strategy.
The main driver of change, in the opinion of analysts of the Swedish Defense Research Agency (FOI), is the increasingly dangerous attitude of the Russian Federation in the Baltic Sea basin. The first red flag was Moscow's aggressive stance in 2008, but Stockholm and the rest of the West prolonged their geostrategic nap. Only in 2014, the then Prime Minister, Fredrik Reinfeldt, announced that a war between two countries in Europe was no longer unimaginable and just two months later Russia annexed Crimea.
Although Sweden is almost 2,000 kilometers away from Crimea, the Swedes understood that the current balance of power and geography force them to take part in this game whether they like it or not. By rejecting the security architecture designed by NATO, Russia is revising the current system. The Achilles' heel of the North Atlantic alliance is the defense of the Baltic states, which are in Russia's immediate neighborhood. Therefore, the Baltic Sea region is the most vulnerable to testing by Moscow, and for this Stockholm must have its own response prepared. Sweden does not belong to NATO, but their geography means that Swedes will not be able to avoid these challenges. That is why such notions as national defense, the ability to conduct military operations and mobilization, operational capability and readiness have returned to the agenda. Moreover, conscription was restored to the structures of Sweden’s military.
The Key to the Baltic’s Defense
The modern Swedish political class is reluctant to join the realist school in international relations. Since the 1980s, Stockholm's foreign policy has been progressive with greater attention to global rather than purely national politics. The national interest was about the so-called “cautious neutrality.”
However, such a policy is now undergoing internal testing in Sweden. The Ukrainian crisis of 2021 clearly shows the tendency of the Russian Federation to conduct hostilities in order to achieve political goals. One of the most important long-term efforts is to undermine NATO's unity and the position of the United States as a global power. While NATO is unequivocally on the side of Kyiv, it has no official obligations to help Ukrainians. Hence, although Russia is successfully undermining NATO's unity in Ukraine by highlighting the divergent interests of member states, it cannot make a final verification of the alliance. This can only be done by attacking a NATO State. And there is no better option for this than the exposed Baltic states next to which is the heavily militarized Kaliningrad Oblast. If Russia is ultimately willing to challenge the West and American primacy, it is easiest to do so with a limited attack on any of the Baltic states. No decisive intervention by the US and NATO would in fact end the existence of the alliance and severely undermine Washington's global position as a security provider. However, if a decisive reaction occurred, then the territory of Sweden would certainly be in the cauldron of events, namely due to the particular importance of Gotland as possibly the only 'aircraft carrier' in the Baltic Sea. Since it is highly probable that American aircraft carrier strike groups would not enter the Baltic Sea due to the high risk of sinking by Russian anti-access area denial, or A2/AD, capabilities. Each variant presents major security challenges. Should the Americans withdraw, the fundamental question arises again about the nuclear security umbrella that Washington is spreading over Europe, including Sweden.
However, the Baltic region is not the only important area from Stockholm's perspective. The Swedes also recognize the growing importance of the Arctic and 15% of Sweden's territory lies within the Arctic Circle. In practice, the Arctic region competes with the Baltic Sea basin for strategic attention and limited resources. This pushes Sweden to develop an effective strategy that serves two fronts. Striking the right balance will not be easy and internal clashes of interests can be expected.
The whole picture that is coming into focus allows us to understand the recent change in Swedish security policy - sharp criticism of the aggressive stance of the Kremlin, constant improvement of the armed forces, and an increasing emphasis on military cooperation with neighboring countries and with NATO and the USA. The reform took the name of the "Hultqvist doctrine," after the minister of defense who initiated it.
Nevertheless, Sweden's national defense strategy is still, for the most part, a wish list. Despite the government's assurances that state defense is a national priority, the organization of the budget says something else - for many years defense spending has fluctuated around 1% of GDP. Some improvement will be brought about with the budget for the years 2021-2025, which was passed at the end of 2020 and includes a 40% increase in military spending. Still, it will not be equal to the NATO recommendation of 2%, but it will bring significant changes. Such as, an increase in the armed forces from 55,000 to 90,000 troops in 2030. Previously disbanded regiments will return, and the number of conscripts will be doubled up to 8,000. It should be noted, however, that the Swedish armed forces, despite relatively low financial outlays allocated to the army over the past decades, represent a significant combat value. It is enough to mention the great, silent submarines that were able to sink American aircraft carriers in war games, or the airforce equipped with one of the best fighters in the world - Gripen.
Breaking Strategic Neutrality?
Sweden has not been involved in a major conflict for over 200 years, namely not since 1814 when Napoleon marched through Europe. This historically long period of peace and stability has left its mark on a nation that now presents itself as peaceful and conflict-averse. But, such rhetoric was possible only thanks to its own geography. Avoiding invasion was made possible mainly by the existence of Finland as a key buffer between Russia and Sweden. Therefore, the security of Finland is also in Sweden's national interest. In addition, their own location on the Scandinavian peninsula was skillfully played by Swedish decision-makers. It offers a direct entrance both into the depths of the Russian heartland and in the center of Europe. The Swedes could always play this card, threatening invasive forces to break the balance of power by allying with their opponent.
The 200 year long neutral character of Sweden also derives from its internal conditions. A relatively large territory with low population density is in practice difficult to defend. By hitting major human centers or key bridges, one can quickly paralyze most of the country. Thus, the reluctance of the Swedes to enter into alliances is due to a cold calculation: there’s a lower chance of entering into a conflict by remaining outside of agreements than there is in the case of being bound by them. Over the decades of American domination, many have forgotten that alliances are also a burden. However, the Swedes remembered.
That said, the world today is very different from what it was 200 years ago and you cannot apply similar mental maps to modern threats. Stockholm does not feel threatened by the United States or any of the European Union countries. And so playing the strategic balancing card is no longer relevant. Moreover, the center of gravity of tensions in Europe has shifted, to the detriment of the Swedes, dangerously close to Swedish home territory. Hence, now the lack of membership in a collective alliance is beginning to be viewed as a weakness by a part of Sweden’s political class. In a word - the possibility of joining NATO has returned to the agenda.
There is currently an internal discussion between the pro-membership camp and the anti-NATO faction, with the latter referring to the 200+ years of neutrality. The former, in turn, points to the "dangerous position of Stockholm," which is treated by Russia as part of the European security system, but does not have the security guarantees enjoyed by NATO members. While research by the University of Gothenburg shows that Swedish society is practically equally divided between the two options.
At the end of 2020, the pro-NATO faction achieved considerable success in which the previous stance against accession to the North Atlantic Alliance was voted down and Sweden's move towards the adoption of the so-called NATO option was supported. This is not a definitive vote to join NATO, Finland, for example, passed a similar law in 1995 and is still not in NATO, but it facilitates and brings Stockholm closer to accession into the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.
Much will be revealed in 2022, when the Riksdag elections are held in Sweden. If the center-right parties gain the upper hand, Sweden may after 200 years, break its principle of strategic neutrality and join NATO, thus changing the balance of power in the Baltic Sea basin. It would certainly be good news for the Baltic States, Poland, and NATO as a whole and it would present a concrete response to Russian revisionism. On the other hand, it would force the Swedes into greater military involvement, while Gotland would become a key geostrategic point for the defense of the Baltic States. Whichever option is chosen, Sweden must again take a firmer stance within Europe’s security architecture.
https://www.foi.se/report-summary?reportNo=FOI-R--4124--SE
https://www.foi.se/report-summary?reportNo=FOI-R--4456--SE
https://www.foi.se/report-summary?reportNo=FOI-R--4802--SE
https://www.gu.se/sites/default/files/2020-06/7.%20Swedish%20trends%20%281986-2019%29_v2.pdf
https://www.thearcticinstitute.org/small-non-aligned-sweden-strategic-posture-arctic-part-i/
https://www.politico.eu/article/sweden-nato-membership-dilemma/
https://euobserver.com/foreign/150363
https://www.reuters.com/article/sweden-nato-idUSKBN28J1UL
https://neweasterneurope.eu/2020/09/29/cold-friendship-or-tepid-panic-behind-the-scenes-of-the-swedish-narrative-on-russia-and-nato/
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-01-10/sweden-shuns-nato-as-stability-outweighs-worries-about-russia
https://thebulwark.com/why-sweden-should-join-nato/
https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2021/04/08/sweden-clings-to-its-neutrality-amid-substantial-defense-budget-boost/
https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/new-atlanticist/with-a-little-help-from-my-friends-how-sweden-is-balancing-its-security-in-the-baltics/
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/how-did-swedens-gripen-earn-title-worlds-best-least-known-fighter-jet-127817
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/war-games-swedish-stealth-submarine-sank-us-aircraft-carrier-116216
