Is Sweden safe now? Perspectives on NATO and Swedish security policy

In a newly published popular science anthology, 21 researchers in security studies and international politics contribute their perspectives on Sweden's changed security policy and NATO accession.

"In Sweden, NATO membership was portrayed as the only reasonable response to an increased threat from Russia. NATO proponents presented their arguments as rational and those of NATO opponents as emotional, grounded in nostalgia. I believe that both sides were based on a clear emotionality: sentimentality among NATO opponents and a fear of an unclear threat among NATO advocates," says Linus Hagström, professor of political science at the Swedish Defence University and editor of the anthology Is Sweden Safe Now?

Hagström emphasizes, among other things, that NATO advocates in the debate emphasized the feeling of "coming home" or being part of "the West":

"Both of these terms are clearly about identity rather than physical security.

Better security analytics

Is Sweden safe now, after NATO accession? That is the fundamental question in the book. The researchers note that other questions such as what security and uncertainty is and how it is possible to recognize such phenomena, and what, who or who should security policy actually protect?

"Security policy analysis and debate paradoxically often overlook these issues," says Linus Hagström.

Hagström also argues that it is common for security policy and security policy change to be interpreted as a result of rational considerations in relation to objectively defined threats.

Niklas Bremberg, associate professor of political science at Stockholm University and contributor to the anthology, believes that it is important that the security policy analysis and debate in Sweden benefit from international research on NATO and military alliances.

"Research on NATO indicates that the member states are convinced that they will not fight each other, but they are not quite as sure that they will actually assist each other in the event of war, despite Article 5. Sweden, as a new NATO member, must relate to this and take into account.

Is Sweden safe now?

"The question is deliberately both naïve and doubly provocative. It is linked to the prevailing assumption, in the spring of 2022, that continued nonalignment would expose Sweden to unbearable uncertainty, while NATO membership would bring security. Ironically, the assumption seems to have been forgotten and Sweden's security policy situation is still often described as more uncertain than ever," says Linus Hagström.

Hagström's point is that security policy debate and analysis present knowledge about security as if it were certain, even though in fact it is often uncertain.

"Incidentally, this applies not only to NATO advocates but also to many NATO opponents," says Linus Hagström.

Highlights security policy analysis and debate

The purpose of the popular science collection is to highlight perspectives that have been neglected in the public debate, despite their central place in the scientific study of security policy, says Linus Hagström.

"There is a hope that the book will be able to contribute to a more in-depth and democratic security policy analysis and debate than the one that has taken place so far," he says.

Niklas Bremberg:

"The fact that Sweden cooperated so closely with NATO for a long time that it was presented as virtually impossible not to apply for membership after Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine is something that should be discussed more, not least to promote analysis and debate about what issues Sweden should now pursue as a NATO member.

The book's 18 chapters challenge preconceived notions and interpretations about Swedish security policy in various ways. They explain Sweden's changed security policy and NATO application and offer historical background. The authors also discuss the consequences of a change in security policy and Swedish NATO membership and clarify what is important for Swedish security policy in the future.