Sweden to increase military spending by 40% as tension with Russia grows

mAcOdIn · Oct 24, 2020

I don't mind you, anyone really, not wanting to join our foreign escapades, as you shouldn't, however joining NATO or not doesn't really mean you would be forced to join. Afghanistan you might have felt obligated to some degree to if you had been a member as we evoked the treaty then but Iraq as a counter example was basically nothing but countries wanting a seat at the table for contracts after we went in and was "open" to anyone with some NATO members taking part and some not. Libya was a NATO led intervention and something like only half the NATO members took part in that, and Sweden did as well despite not being a member of NATO.

Of course how strong your country would be to resist that drumbeat from the United States every time we wanted to intervene somewhere, I dunno, I know nothing about Sweden's politics but joining NATO doesn't mean you'd be forced to join every NATO led mission as really almost everything the US/UK/France do together is going to be a NATO led effort and use the NATO command structure even if most of the members have told us to fuck off and don't come along.

Dennis8K · Oct 24, 2020

Russia is not going to invade Sweden. Come on.

There is no way NATO could sit by and let fucking Sweden, a modern Western European country, be overrun by Russia. It would immediately be WW3 which would either be a total defeat for Russia or nuclear Armageddon all around.

fanboi · Oct 24, 2020

I am all for a EU joint military branch for defence and deterrence.

SmartBase · Oct 24, 2020

Just develop some nuclear weapons and let the poor 20-somethings go to school.

TheCarrotKiller · Oct 24, 2020

Ugh... hope they put this into research if so.

Pikachu · Oct 24, 2020

The dynamics of Northern Europe, like Norway being in NATO but not EU and Sweden being in EU but not NATO don't make no sense

kueijin · Oct 24, 2020

SmartBase said:
Just develop some nuclear weapons and let the poor 20-somethings go to school.

Much cheaper to press a button

Trilobite · Oct 24, 2020

Being Swedish myself i think I can give, at least, a semi-informed opinion on this development.

First of all, I did my mandatory military service the last year it was in effect. I spent 10 months in the army and it was a great experience even though I hated most of it. I did learn a lot about myself and it solidified my opinion that people should not have access to guns.
I am not pro army or against, something that I was clear about with the sergeant that gave me my assignment.

Back in the day and up until the late 80´s Sweden spent a lot of money on a pretty sizable army, considering the size of the population, and our main threat was Russia (still is).
Since the fall of the Soviet Union there has been a lot of people wanting to downsize the military due to cost and the fact that we only have about 10 million people anyways, which would make it hard for us to defend ourselves from foreign invaders.

It was decided that the military needed to cut spending in favor of other welfare interests, and so the "dismantling" of the Swedish armed forces begun.
During the 90`s and 00´s the military sent peace keeping soldiers to the UN forces, and also "helped" out in Afghanistan and Iraq together with NATO forces.
The Swedish armed forces pivoted to train military personnel to work with NATO and the UN, as the domestic army shrunk drastically. The mandatory military service was scrapped in favor of voluntary service.

And let´s face it, why pay for an army that has no use in that geopolitical climate?

Later, When Russia kept violating Swedish airspace and waters the army wanted more funding to rebuild our defense. If I recall correctly this really came to a head with Russia annexing Crimea. This swung the opinion towards investing in our military again.
Mind you, our military is at this point heavily downsized, with something around 44 000 active service members total.

As it stands, the armed forces said a few years ago that we could hold off the Russians for about 48 hours with the capabilities of today.

I don´t think it realistic that Russia would invade us, that would only happen if we had a global conflict like WWIII.

When it comes to NATO and why Sweden does not want become a member:
Sweden has a long standing tradition of being a neutral country. Sweden´s neutrality can of course be discussed since we are a very "pro-western country".
If i remember a random poll from a few years ago correctly, most Swedes did not want to leave that neutrality behind, I think it was something like 54 against and 46 for, don't quote me on that. This is changing however, as the parties on the right, that are pro NATO, gain in popularity.

I would not be surprised of Sweden joins NATO within a 10 year period or so, but I would hate seeing it.

TLDR: Sweden´s military spending is abysmal compared to other countries, and only matters if we join NATO. I am not a fan of NATO.

Shodan14 · Oct 24, 2020

Trilobite said:
Being Swedish myself i think I can give, at least, a semi-informed opinion on this development.

First of all, I did my mandatory military service the last year it was in effect. I spent 10 months in the army and it was a great experience even though I hated most of it. I did learn a lot about myself and it solidified my opinion that people should not have access to guns.
I am not pro army or against, something that I was clear about with the sergeant that gave me my assignment.

Back in the day and up until the late 80´s Sweden spent a lot of money on a pretty sizable army, considering the size of the population, and our main threat was Russia (still is).
Since the fall of the Soviet Union there has been a lot of people wanting to downsize the military due to cost and the fact that we only have about 10 million people anyways, which would make it hard for us to defend ourselves from foreign invaders.

It was decided that the military needed to cut spending in favor of other welfare interests, and so the "dismantling" of the Swedish armed forces begun.
During the 90`s and 00´s the military sent peace keeping soldiers to the UN forces, and also "helped" out in Afghanistan and Iraq together with NATO forces.
The Swedish armed forces pivoted to train military personnel to work with NATO and the UN, as the domestic army shrunk drastically. The mandatory military service was scrapped in favor of voluntary service.

And let´s face it, why pay for an army that has no use in that geopolitical climate?

Later, When Russia kept violating Swedish airspace and waters the army wanted more funding to rebuild our defense. If I recall correctly this really came to a head with Russia annexing Crimea. This swung the opinion towards investing in our military again.
Mind you, our military is at this point heavily downsized, with something around 44 000 active service members total.

As it stands, the armed forces said a few years ago that we could hold off the Russians for about 48 hours with the capabilities of today.

I don´t think it realistic that Russia would invade us, that would only happen if we had a global conflict like WWIII.

When it comes to NATO and why Sweden does not want become a member:
Sweden has a long standing tradition of being a neutral country. Sweden´s neutrality can of course be discussed since we are a very "pro-western country".
If i remember a random poll from a few years ago correctly, most Swedes did not want to leave that neutrality behind, I think it was something like 54 against and 46 for, don't quote me on that. This is changing however, as the parties on the right, that are pro NATO, gain in popularity.

I would not be surprised of Sweden joins NATO within a 10 year period or so, but I would hate seeing it.

TLDR: Sweden´s military spending is abysmal compared to other countries, and only matters if we join NATO. I am not a fan of NATO.

This is a nice analysis. I think the only bit I'd add is that Russia has no interest in "invading" Sweden, but it does have an interest in invading Gotland to secure their air denial capacities in the Baltic Sea region. Othewise Russia has gotten all it wanted from Sweden back in 1809.

Deleted member 11413 · Oct 24, 2020

Euler said:
It's not about making it impossible for Russia to take control, it's about making it more cumbersome and expensive for Russia so that they might deem it not worth the hassle and money.

That said, idk if that's the case with or without this increase of spending.

You seriously think the rest of Europe would just...let Russia invade Sweden, an EU member country? Not to mention the US and other allies. It's completely unnecessary.

Trilobite · Oct 24, 2020

Shodan14 said:
This is a nice analysis. I think the only bit I'd add is that Russia has no interest in "invading" Sweden, but it does have an interest in invading Gotland to secure their air denial capacities in the Baltic Sea region.

Yes, very good point, I agree.

Here is Gotland in relation to neighboring countries:

Deleted member 11413 · Oct 24, 2020

Pikachu said:
The dynamics of Northern Europe, like Norway being in NATO but not EU and Sweden being in EU but not NATO don't make no sense

They make plenty of sense, NATO is an explicitly military alliance and Sweden tries to maintain some level of neutrality, which is impossible to do under NATO. The EU is primarily an economic/trade/cultural alliance. Norway has no qualms about NATO but isn't part of the EU for multiple economic reasons, a big one is probably that joining the EU means you cede control of your monetary policy by adopting the Euro.

Trilobite · Oct 24, 2020

Lord of Ostia said:
You seriously think the rest of Europe would just...let Russia invade Sweden, an EU member country? Not to mention the US and other allies. It's completely unnecessary.

Well, NATO has said that Sweden cannot expect any support from NATO countries, should it be attacked. (https://www.thelocal.se/20180115/na...to-come-to-swedens-aid-says-secretary-general)

Dennis8K · Oct 24, 2020

Good lord people, if Russia took possession of Gotland it would be WW3. They are not going to be taking any chunks of any Western European countries without war with NATO.

Deleted member 11413 · Oct 24, 2020

Trilobite said:
Well, NATO has said that Sweden cannot expect any support from NATO countries, should it be attacked. (https://www.thelocal.se/20180115/na...to-come-to-swedens-aid-says-secretary-general)

This article says the exact opposite of what you are saying it does. Direct quote from NATO Secretary General as per this article:

"We are prepared to cooperate if a conflict were to break out," he said.

That seems pretty cut and dry to me. Of course there is no legal obligation, the only legal obligation is to NATO members. Strategically both the EU member states and NATO would be morons to just...let Sweden be invaded (Russia is not invading Sweden anyway).

Trilobite · Oct 24, 2020

Lord of Ostia said:
This article says the exact opposite of what you are saying it does. Direct quote from NATO Secretary General as per this article:

That seems pretty cut and dry to me. Of course there is no legal obligation, the only legal obligation is to NATO members. Strategically both the EU member states and NATO would be morons to just...let Sweden be invaded (Russia is not invading Sweden anyway).

Could not find a good source, just skimmed it. Thank you for pointing that out. I will try and find a Trump qoute I read a few years ago (not that Trump´s word means anything).

Deleted member 11413 · Oct 24, 2020

Trilobite said:
Could not find a good source, just skimmed it. Thank you for pointing that out. I will try and find a Trump qoute I read a few years ago (not that Trump´s word means anything).

Trump has nothing to do with whether the rest of Western Europe just allows Sweden to be invaded by Russia though.

Keikaku · Oct 24, 2020

Dennis8K said:
Good lord people, if Russia took possession of Gotland it would be WW3. They are not going to be taking any chunks of any Western European countries without war with NATO.

Russia invading Finland and / or Sweden is very much a possibility. The first thing they will do is take the Åland and Gotland islands to control the whole baltic sea.

Unfortunately EU and NATO will do nothing but condemn Russia.

Sumio Mondo · Oct 24, 2020

Don't Latvia have a bigger chance of being invaded than Sweden? Russia's tactic would be doing takeovers piecemeal, starting with countries of former Soviet/Russian rule rather than Sweden, I would have thought. That's a bit too close to other powerful European nations. The EU/NATO would condemn some but when it comes to Sweden/Finland, the fear for the other European countries would set in and action would probably be taken.

Ocean Bones · Oct 24, 2020

Tovarishch Nix said:
Why would they? They're a European Union member country so if Russia actually attacks them (which will never happen) they'll get supported anyway.

Most likely someone is getting very rich from the increased spending.

Who in the EU can stand up to Russia in armed conflict ?

Deleted member 62221 · Oct 24, 2020

Does Sweden have a small region populated by ethnic russians? I don't discard anything because the world is getting madder every year but I would imagine Russia would use their traditional tactics instead of making a conventional invasion.

Trilobite · Oct 24, 2020

Ocean Bones said:
Who in the EU can stand up to Russia in armed conflict ?

Well, no one, unless the EU makes a joint strike with the US for backup. That would mean WWIII, and nobody wants that so it ain't happening.
So to repeat your point with a small alteration:

Who in the EU would stand up to Russia in armed conflict?

Trilobite · Oct 24, 2020

Lautar0 said:
Does Sweden have a small region populated by ethnic russians? I don't discard anything because the world is getting madder every year but I would imagine Russia would use their traditional tactics instead of making a conventional invasion.

Depends on how the Russians identify Finns. I am only being half serious but still.

DBT85 · Oct 24, 2020

kueijin said:
Much cheaper to press a button

tekomandor · Oct 24, 2020

Ocean Bones said:
Who in the EU can stand up to Russia in armed conflict ?

The EU as a whole could probably do it, though less so after the departure of the UK. Both they and France are nuclear powers with extensive navies, and plenty of EU nations could put the bodies together to fight the Russians conventionally. Coordination is the issue, of course, but a theoretical "EU Army" could probably thump Russia pretty convincingly in a conventional war.

ChippyTurtle · Oct 24, 2020

Dennis8K said:
Russia is not going to invade Sweden. Come on.

There is no way NATO could sit by and let fucking Sweden, a modern Western European country, be overrun by Russia. It would immediately be WW3 which would either be a total defeat for Russia or nuclear Armageddon all around.

Why would we launch nuclear armageddon over sweden?

GYODX · Oct 24, 2020

I doubt the Swedes are under any illusion that they can hold off a serious military invasion or other conventional attack. The real threat today is asymmetric warfare: cyber attacks, little green men, influence operations, etc. You still need a military budget to defend against those.

Remember it was only 3 years ago Russia tried to stage a coup in Montenegro.

supercommodore · Oct 24, 2020

Trilobite said:
Who in the EU would stand up to Russia in armed conflict?

You are right that this is the question to ask. Would the EU countries show a unified response of force. Combined, the EU countries (+U.K.) do have the capabilities to potentially match Russia but it would come down to a number of factors. This economist article highlights some of them and outlines the EU's desire to become less dependent on the US, particularly after Trump's language regarding Article 5.

Deleted member 31817 · Oct 24, 2020

Midas said:
Haha, yeah. How many people live in Sweden? Like 10 million? It's not a big country. If Russia wanted to take over Sweden they would do so, without problems.

If Russia tried to take over Sweden they would get absolutely fucked by all of Western Europe and the US.

Ether_Snake · Oct 24, 2020

Dennis8K said:
Good lord people, if Russia took possession of Gotland it would be WW3. They are not going to be taking any chunks of any Western European countries without war with NATO.

Let's say tomorrow Russia justifies attacking and then invading Gotland. How does that lead to WW3? Please explain how that would play out.

Pinku · Oct 24, 2020

SmartBase said:
Just develop some nuclear weapons and let the poor 20-somethings go to school.

Sweden was actually really close to develop nuclear weapons but cancelled everything in 1966 when signing the non-proliferation treaty. Strongly influenced by the United States.

Pinku · Oct 24, 2020

Also, the Russian threath to Sweden is a tradition. I remember the 80's with all the russian submarines in the Swedish archipelago. Started a hypochondria and media frenzy.

Trilobite · Oct 24, 2020

supercommodore said:
You are right that this is the question to ask. Would the EU countries show a unified response of force. Combined, the EU countries (+U.K.) do have the capabilities to potentially match Russia but it would come down to a number of factors. This economist article highlights some of them and outlines the EU's desire to become less dependent on the US, particularly after Trump's language regarding Article 5.

Great points!
It would also probably stress test the union when it comes to "togetherness", it feels that the EU could break at the seams if it were to be tested in this fashion.
Most of EU loves the EU as long as we don´t have to support one another in regards to critical things.

DefectiveReject · Oct 24, 2020

The UK is currently playing cyber war with Russia.

UK has mounted covert attacks against Russian leadership, says ex-mandarin

Former cabinet secretary Mark Sedwill says UK used offensive cyber-capability to exploit Moscow’s ‘vulnerabilities’

www.theguardian.com

BringBackSonics · Oct 24, 2020

Dennis8K said:
Russia is not going to invade Sweden. Come on.

There is no way NATO could sit by and let fucking Sweden, a modern Western European country, be overrun by Russia. It would immediately be WW3 which would either be a total defeat for Russia or nuclear Armageddon all around.

NATO might have a moral obligationto intervene, but that's it. There is no collective defense treaty here.

There's some doubts if Russia would attack the Baltic states, would all the nato counties jump in.

there is a reason why many European countries can afford to spend so little on national defense, it's because of the benefit of a collective defense treaty

BringBackSonics · Oct 24, 2020

Sumio Mondo said:
Don't Latvia have a bigger chance of being invaded than Sweden? Russia's tactic would be doing takeovers piecemeal, starting with countries of former Soviet/Russian rule rather than Sweden, I would have thought. That's a bit too close to other powerful European nations. The EU/NATO would condemn some but when it comes to Sweden/Finland, the fear for the other European countries would set in and action would probably be taken.

no, because Latvia is in NATO.

russia might not want to invade all of Sweden. But Gotland? I believe there is only a token Swedish force there.

also if Belarus allows Putin to build bases there, russia could effectively cut off the Baltic states from the rest of NATO

apocat · Oct 24, 2020

Ether_Snake said:
Let's say tomorrow Russia justifies attacking and then invading Gotland. How does that lead to WW3? Please explain how that would play out.

Not claiming that WW3 is happening any time soon, but the gist of this line of reasoning would probably be as follows. Taking Gotland would allow Russia to control the airspace around the baltic sea, essentially being able to quickly deploy missiles and planes over large parts of Europe.

And since this would be the only reason for them to take Gotland (justifying it would be impossible), doing so wouldn't just be an incredibly aggressive action against Sweden, but against large parts of the EU, including Germany.

disparate · Oct 24, 2020

lvl 99 Pixel said:
Why is Russia so agro?

performative masculinity; lack of confidence in other's belief of their own strength so they feel the need to make deliberate demonstrations of it

ChippyTurtle · Oct 24, 2020

with America First, i would caution you against relying on the U.S completely for defense.

John Caboose · Oct 24, 2020

Sumio Mondo said:
Don't Latvia have a bigger chance of being invaded than Sweden? Russia's tactic would be doing takeovers piecemeal, starting with countries of former Soviet/Russian rule rather than Sweden, I would have thought. That's a bit too close to other powerful European nations. The EU/NATO would condemn some but when it comes to Sweden/Finland, the fear for the other European countries would set in and action would probably be taken.

Russian interest in the baltic states is much larger than for Sweden, yes. Baltic states being in NATO means Russia would have to block them being reinforced by NATO. This is where invading the Swedish island Gotland becomes interesting for them. Taking Gotland would allow Russia to use it to control the baltic sea and block sea/air support of baltic states. Expect little green men and russian denial. NATO then abandoning baltics would result in NATO disbanding, NATO helping them would probably cause WW3.

Most likely scenario would be none of this happening of course. But it is a scenario that needs to be prepared for.

Lautar0 said:
Does Sweden have a small region populated by ethnic russians? I don't discard anything because the world is getting madder every year but I would imagine Russia would use their traditional tactics instead of making a conventional invasion.

It does not. Russian interest in annexing Swedish territory would likely be limited to Gotland.

HybridEidolon · Oct 24, 2020

BigEvilTurtle said:
"We have a situation where the Russian side is willing to use military means to achieve political goals,"

What military means and what political goals specifically? Like cyber warfare similar to what has been done to the US? Genuinely uninformed here and curious.

Russia's war with Georgia in 2008 and annexation of Crimea in 2014 were the first major indicators that Russia intends to use military force to get a stranglehold on global natural gas production, although obviously both are complicated situations that can't be completely reduced to one issue. Natural gas is the next Big Thing in fossil fuel energy, and it is also the primary reason for most of the drama around Ukraine lately, which itself has large natural gas reserves that everyone wants access to. Georgia also has a major natural gas pipeline. I wouldn't be surprised if most of Europe wasn't at least somewhat nervous about the prospect of Russia getting even more aggressive about this.

MnM · Oct 24, 2020

Tovarishch Nix said:
Say about the European Union what you want, but they won't stand by if one of their members gets invaded.

You can't be this naive.

Razgriz-Specter · Oct 24, 2020

BigEvilTurtle said:
"We have a situation where the Russian side is willing to use military means to achieve political goals,"

What military means and what political goals specifically? Like cyber warfare similar to what has been done to the US? Genuinely uninformed here and curious.

Ukraine
Syria
Georgia

Cyber stuff with the US is probably worrying as well to much smaller countries right around Russia

Russia putting bounties on American troops

Sweden to increase military spending by 40% as tension with Russia grows

Self-requested ban

Traded his Bone Marrow for Pizza

User requested account closure

User requested account closure

User requested account closure

User requested account closure

User requested account closure

Resident Thread Mechanic

Prophet of Truth

Deleted member 31817

Alt-Account