What Sweden Brings to NATO: Military Strength Behind 200 Years of Neutrality

It will be the moment when 200 years of defense policy are ripped up. A shift in northern Europe so seismic, it will almost have to be measured on the Richter scale. Since the end of the Napoleonic era, Sweden has maintained a policy of strict neutrality.

In both WWI and WWII, Stockholm managed to keep itself apart from the bloodshed. Throughout the Cold War, the Swedes likewise remained independent of the two great blocs, wearing their non-aligned status as a badge of honor. Following Vladimir Putin’s unprovoked invasion of Ukraine, Sweden’s government applied — alongside Finland — to join NATO.

Most analysts believe Stockholm will eventually become NATO’s 32nd member. And that raises a vital question: what will Sweden bring to the alliance? On paper, a country of 10.4 million peaceniks might not sound like a great addition.

Yet while Sweden’s standing army may be small, the military punches way above its weight. In domains as disparate as cyber, air, and naval capacity, Stockholm commands serious forces.

The End of Two Centuries of Non-Alignment

On May 18, 2022, in a wood-panelled room in Brussels, the ambassadors from Finland and Sweden jointly handed application letters to NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg. In doing so, they transformed the security architecture of Europe for decades to come. Prior to this moment, the two Nordic nations had been famous for their nonalignment.

Helsinki had maintained neutrality for nearly 75 years. But what was a massive psychological shift for the Finns was on a whole other level for the Swedes. While Finland had been steadfastly neutral for over seven decades, Sweden had clung to its nonaligned status for over two centuries.

Beginning in the last years of the Napoleonic Wars — when Stockholm was forced to cede Finland to Russia after the Finnish War — that neutrality had survived some of the greatest conflagrations to sweep Europe. Even the continent-wide murder-suicide pact that was WWII managed to leave the Swedes relatively unscathed. And the Cold War was nothing if not a demonstration of how a non-aligned Sweden could happily prosper.

The key question is: what changed? What about the present moment is so volatile that Stockholm feels more vulnerable than it did even during the era of blitzkrieg? On the face of it, the answer seems simple.

Vladimir Putin’s genocidal war in Ukraine has overturned decades of defense planning in Europe, sending non-NATO countries racing for the shelter of the nuclear umbrella. But that is only the surface-level answer, the catalyst for this shift, rather than the underlying cause. Unlike Finland, Sweden shares no land border with Russia.

It has no significant Russian-speaking population Vladimir Putin might hope to “protect.” More to the point, Stockholm went the entire Cold War without feeling the need for a nuclear umbrella, comfortable in its ability to defend itself.

The Erosion of Sweden’s Heavily-Armed Neutrality

The deeper-level answer for Sweden abandoning neutrality lies in the steady erosion of the nation’s defense capacity. The key to Sweden’s non-aligned status was a policy variously known as “deterrence through strength” or “heavily-armed neutrality.” Similar to what Taiwan’s military planners now call the porcupine strategy, the idea was to make Sweden such a nightmare to conquer that even the Soviet Union would judge the costs to vastly outweigh the benefits.

Like Finland, that meant maintaining a conscription model that provided a highly-trained reserve force that could be activated at a moment’s notice. In Sweden’s case, that force totalled 850,000 men. It also meant investing in weaponry far beyond what a nation of its size might normally wield.

Unlike Finland, though, Sweden’s heavily-armed neutrality didn’t survive the biggest geopolitical shift of the last 35 years: the end of the Cold War. While Helsinki continued to maintain a vast reserve army, Stockholm allowed its one to wither in the soft glow of peace. The defense budget was slashed, the funds redirected.

The navy and air force shrank by around 70 percent. The army by a staggering 90 percent. In no time at all, that 850,000 strong reserve force had dropped to a mere 10,000.

By the mid-2010s, the military had seen such deep cuts that garrisons were being shuttered even in regions vital to the nation’s defense — like the island of Gotland. Conscription had been scrapped. Military spending dropped to barely a single percentage point of GDP.

All this on the back of the idea that peace in Europe was here to stay. On February 24, 2022, Vladimir Putin unleashed his brutal assault on Ukraine. As missiles pounded Kyiv, it was like the lights had finally flicked back on at Europe’s post-Cold War party.

And Sweden was among those nations sheepishly caught with its trousers down. As director of studies at the Swedish Defense Research Agency, Robert Dalsjo, bluntly told the New York Times: “We had our dream and now it’s time to wake up.” Given all that, one might be under the impression that Stockholm is going to be a drag on the alliance.

That the Swedes are running for NATO protection because their modern military consists of little more than token forces. But that impression couldn’t be more wrong. Because — while Stockholm doubtless regrets its deep military cuts — that doesn’t mean the Swedes have nothing to offer.

What the Nordic kingdom lacks in manpower, it more than makes up for with cutting-edge technology.

Naval Stealth, Armor, and a World-Class Defense Industrial Base

One of Finland’s few highlighted problems was Helsinki’s lack of a solid defense industrial base. In a war of attrition, Finland would quickly become dependent on other NATO allies for resupply. In Sweden, the situation is more or less reversed.

While its tiny standing army and reserve forces wouldn’t even be a rounding error compared to what Helsinki can field, Stockholm has the capacity to produce both small arms and hi-tech defensive kit. So much so that Sweden is both one of the world’s leading arms exporters, and one of the largest arms manufacturers per capita. This kit isn’t just built for foreign markets.

In pretty much all domains, Stockholm is able to combine internationally-purchased kit with homegrown weapons platforms to compete with the best. The Swedish Navy, while relatively small compared to other coastal nations, fields a navy with an excellent reputation for stealth. Central to this is the domestically-produced Gotland class of submarines, of which five are currently known to be in operation.

A diesel-electric sub, the Gotland has been called “one of the most advanced submarines in the world.” It is also one of the few non-nuclear submarines capable of staying underwater for weeks at a time, rather than days. Its biggest claim to fame comes from wargames conducted with the USA in 2005.

One Gotland sub managed to score direct hits on the $6 billion aircraft carrier USS Ronald Reagan without ever being detected. This, despite the Americans fielding antisubmarine escorts and an entire carrier taskforce. That stealth capacity carries over into Sweden’s Visby-class corvettes.

The five Visbys are designed to remain hidden to enemy radar, undetectable at range, even as they pack serious firepower — like the naval gun Bofors 57 mm Mk3. These are locally-designed and built machines, armed mostly with weapons built by Swedish firms — principally Saab Bofors Dynamics. The same Saab that used to be best-known for building cars is today more focused on supplying NATO armies.

This defense industrial base doesn’t mean the Swedes don’t also buy from partner countries. The army’s main battle tank comes from Germany: Stockholm has something in the region of 120 Leopard 2A tanks. Air defense likewise relies on foreign tech.

In 2021, Sweden became the first non-NATO nation to receive Patriot systems from the US. Yet even in the domains where they rely on outside systems, the Swedes still produce their own powerful machines. Those 120 Leopard 2As are backed by something in the region of 500 CV90 infantry fighting vehicles — among the best in their class in the entire world.

In the event of a shooting war between NATO and Russia, Stockholm’s homegrown equipment — designed with the frigid climate of north Europe in mind — would be instrumental in securing the alliance’s northern flank. This includes in the cyber domain. Unlike most Western countries, Sweden has been actively pursuing offensive cyber capabilities for years.

The Atlantic Council wrote in 2022: “If recent exercises are any indicator, Swedish cyber capabilities are already among the most advanced in Europe.”

The Swedish Air Force: Punching Several Classes Above Its Weight

It is not for Sweden’s cyber efforts that NATO is desperate to get Stockholm in the door. Nor is it for what the army or navy field, impressive as their kit is. There is one single domain where the Swedes really shine — one area where their expertise and equipment could make a crucial difference in any Europe-wide conflagration.

CNN called Sweden “one of the top ranked air forces.” After all, this is a country with only 10.4 million citizens, a nation with a GDP on a par with Ireland, on a continent that boasts the British RAF, the French Air Force, and Italy’s sizeable Aeronautica Militare. The idea that tiny Sweden can compete in the air domain should be laughable.

It should be, but isn’t. Stockholm really does possess an air force that could put many of its peers to shame. The main reason for this is the nation’s homemade fighter jet: the Gripen JAS-39.

Designed when the Cold War was still ongoing, Gripens had to work to a very specific set of requirements. They had to be cheap, since Sweden couldn’t pour the resources into its combat craft that America or NATO could. They had to be easy to operate and reliable — less flashy than stuff like the F-16, but also requiring less maintenance.

Finally, they had to be capable of short take-offs and landings, since Swedish defense plans called for following dispersed operations doctrine in event of war. In practical terms, that meant pilots had to be able to fly sorties from remote roads in the Swedish wilderness, where an invading force would be hard pressed to find and destroy them. The result was a machine Aviacionline describes as a “small but competent fighter” — a robust, cost-effective weapons platform capable of doing serious damage.

Those capabilities have only improved since the Cold War ended. Today, one-seat Gripen C varieties are equipped with MBDA Meteor long-range air-to-air missiles and a cutting-edge active electronically scanned array system. The most-modern E variety Gripens are even capable of supercruise flight — placing them in a rare group alongside craft like the F-22 Raptor, the Eurofighter Typhoon, or France’s Dassault Rafale.

Heavy-hitter nations like Brazil rely on them to project air power. Currently, Sweden has nearly 100 of them: 75 ‘C’ variants, 20 two-seater ‘D’ variants, and just two of the ultra-modern ‘E’ variants — although some 58 more E craft are scheduled to be delivered in the near future. All C and D craft are also planned to undergo upgrades that will keep them working and relevant through to 2035, when the whole fleet will be replaced by newer models.

Beyond combat craft, Defense News recently reported Stockholm is set to buy two of Saab’s new GlobalEye AEW&C craft, which according to the manufacturer “combine air, maritime and ground surveillance on a single platform” — all in real time. To that, add two Gulfstream IV aircraft modified for intelligence gathering. The air force does have a clear and noticeable weakness where large transport craft are concerned, fielding only five C-130H Hercules.

But the overall picture is one of a nation that consistently punches several classes above its weight in the air domain.

The Baltic Sea Transformed: Prisoners of Geography

Sweden the nation represents something NATO can’t afford to ignore — something that has nothing to do with technology or defense industrial bases. One of Vladimir Putin’s stated reasons for unleashing his illegal war on Ukraine was to halt the further expansion of NATO. As many have noted, his actions ironically had the exact opposite effect.

When Finland joined the alliance on April 4, 2023, it more than doubled the land border Russia shares with NATO. But even that strategic blunder may pale compared to Sweden joining. If or when Stockholm is finally admitted to the alliance, it will transform the Baltic Sea from a region bordered by members and non-members alike into little more than a NATO lake.

A map of the alliance before the Ukraine War reveals an obvious weak point: the mere 65 km strip of land connecting the Baltic States with the rest of the alliance. Finland’s accession eliminated that problem — creating a straightforward way to resupply Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania via sea. Sweden’s accession will go one step further.

Rather than eliminate the problem, it will flip it around — creating a world in which the Baltic Sea suddenly becomes Moscow’s obvious weak point. With Sweden and Finland both in NATO, Russia only has a couple of tiny strips from where it can access the Baltic Sea — two strategic choke points that the alliance could potentially blockade. The first is in the Gulf of Finland — the strip of water separating Finland and Estonia.

A blockade here would not only cut off St. Petersburg from the sea, it would also trap the Russian Baltic Fleet in port at Kronstadt. The second is the water around Kaliningrad — a Russian exclave bordering Poland and Lithuania.

Just 200 km from Sweden, it houses one of Russia’s only ice-free ports, as well as a serious military base. But given any ships trying to exit will have to pass both Denmark and Sweden, its use would evaporate in wartime. Especially when accounting for Sweden’s nearby island of Gotland.

A strip of land a hair under 3,000 km², Gotland has been called an “unsinkable aircraft carrier” — a place from where a military could dominate maritime and air traffic over the Baltic Sea. It has long been a premier Russian target. During the Cold War, Swedish spies uncovered Soviet plans to occupy the island in the event of war — Sweden’s neutrality be damned.

Closer to the present, Gotland was the subject of a jingoistic Russian documentary broadcast on the eve of the Ukraine War, which described how Moscow could capture it alongside Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia. During the Cold War, 25,000 troops guarded the place, with another 25,000 in reserve. Harbors were filled with mines. 25 fixed artillery pieces and 36 tanks were ready and waiting for a potential battle.

But the peacetime cuts destroyed all that. Today, Gotland is protected by only 300 to 400 soldiers. The coastal defenses have been dismantled.

The submarine base was almost sold to a Russian businessman. Although Sweden is rapidly trying to remilitarize the island, it is currently a weak link. If Sweden joins NATO, though, Gotland could go from being a potential problem to a potential lifesaver — a place the alliance’s forces could fortify and use to dominate the entire Baltic Sea.

Arctic Strategy and the Northern Sea Route

With fellow NATO member Turkey also capable of closing the Bosphorus and Dardanelles straits, Russia could quickly find most of its European ports cut off from the wider world. Most, but not all of them. Up in the far north, ports like Murmansk would still have access to the Atlantic via the Arctic Ocean — which brings up another reason NATO wants Sweden onside.

Admit the Swedes to the club, and every Arctic nation not called Russia will be an alliance member. There are 8 Arctic nations in the world: Canada, the USA, Denmark (via Greenland), Iceland, Norway, Sweden, Finland, and Russia. Of these, Russia controls the majority of Arctic coastline: slightly over 50 percent.

It has also invested heavily in military infrastructure in the region. As the planet warms and Arctic ice begins to recede, the region is only going to become more important to shipping. At the same time, energy and mineral resources are going to become available to exploit.

That means the chance of confrontation in these waters will increase. As the Council on Foreign Relations has put it, having 7 of 8 border nations in NATO “allows the alliance to pursue a more coherent strategy in the region.” This is potentially vital for both European and American interests.

Not just because of Russia, but because of another nation expanding operations there. China has plans to create a so-called Polar Silk Road using the Northern Sea Route, massively increasing Beijing’s influence and power in what is becoming a highly-contested region. For US lawmakers looking to contain China, a NATO-dominated Arctic is one of the few ways of countering the CCP’s northern plans.

Decades of Quiet Partnership and the Road to Membership

Although they cooperated closely as non-aligned countries, the ambivalence felt towards NATO in Stockholm and Helsinki was not identical. The Finns had living memories of Russian aggression, in the form of the Winter War fought between their nation and the Soviet Union in WWII. So when Putin’s Russia finally showed its true colors, Finland was almost immediately ready to throw its lot in with NATO.

By March 2022, polling showed over 60 percent of Finns wanted to be part of the alliance — a number that eventually rose to over 80 percent. In Sweden, things were not quite so clear-cut. With no Russian land border — and no personal memories of Russian aggression — Stockholm was ambivalent about ending its neutrality.

As late as mid-March, Prime Minister Magdalena Andersson was saying she saw no need to apply to NATO. Even in April 2022, polls were showing fewer than half of all Swedes supported entering the alliance. This was after the discovery of Russian war crimes at Bucha — when the world already knew of the arbitrary torture, sexual assault, and murder Moscow’s forces visited upon civilians.

But this assessment skipped over one key point in the Sweden-NATO debate. The Swedish military had already been cooperating with the alliance for decades. The partnership began almost immediately after the end of the Cold War, with the first steps being taken in 1992.

By 1994, Sweden was an official member of the NATO Partnership for Peace program. Not long after, the two began conducting joint military exercises. In 1995, both Sweden and Finland joined the EU — a move that included signing a mutual defense clause.

With many EU members already in NATO, working with the alliance would clearly be necessary in any continent-wide war. Yet Sweden’s cooperation with NATO went deeper than was strictly necessary. Stockholm received equipment from the alliance — becoming the first non-member to host a Patriot system.

It also joined NATO on active missions. The NATO force in Kosovo (KFOR) has included Swedish troops, as have NATO forces in Afghanistan and Iraq. During the 2011 intervention in Libya, Sweden’s air force was involved in enforcing the no-fly zone.

According to Dutch magazine Militaire Spectator, during the mission “Swedish aircraft seamlessly integrated with NATO air forces.” In other words, Sweden is not some outside force coming into NATO without experience. It is rather a nation that has spent decades hovering on the threshold of membership, without ever quite stepping through the door.

That does not mean there will be no issues. NATO countries commit to spending a minimum of 2 percent of GDP on defense. While only 7 of the 31 members actually hit that target, most are at least spending over 1.5 percent.

Sweden, on the other hand, spent a mere 1.2 percent in 2022. Within the alliance, that would make it one of the lowest-spending members — ahead of only Luxembourg, Spain, and Belgium. While there are plans to boost spending by billions of dollars, it will take at minimum until 2028 for Sweden to come close to the 2 percent target.

Despite all this, in May 2022 polling reported a majority of Swedes wanted to join the alliance for the first time in history. Since then, that number has only grown — not to the sky-high levels seen in Finland, but to over 60 percent. The new government under Ulf Kristersson followed this shift.

On March 23, 2023, the Riksdagen voted to join NATO. 296 lawmakers were in favor, with only 37 against. Sweden’s membership is not a magic bullet for the alliance. Nor is it equivalent to inviting in a major power on the scale of the US, or even France.

What it is, though, is a win for NATO on multiple fronts — a much-needed boost from a military that may be small, but plays to its strengths with deadly precision.

Frequently Asked Questions

Why did Sweden abandon its two centuries of neutrality to join NATO?

After the Cold War, Sweden drastically cut its military — the army shrank by 90 percent and the reserve force fell from 850,000 to just 10,000 — undermining the “deterrence through strength” doctrine that had kept it non-aligned. Vladimir Putin’s 2022 full-scale invasion of Ukraine made clear that peace in Europe was not guaranteed, and that a military hollowed out by peacetime cuts could no longer credibly deter a resurgent Russia without the backing of a collective defense alliance.

What makes the Swedish Gotland-class submarine so significant?

The Gotland is a diesel-electric submarine considered one of the most advanced in the world, and one of the few non-nuclear subs capable of staying submerged for weeks rather than days. In 2005 wargames, a single Gotland scored direct hits on the $6 billion aircraft carrier USS Ronald Reagan without ever being detected — despite the Americans fielding antisubmarine escorts and a full carrier taskforce. That level of stealth capability would be a substantial asset in any Baltic Sea conflict.

How does Sweden’s Gripen fighter jet compare to other NATO aircraft?

The Gripen JAS-39 was designed to be cheap, reliable, and capable of short take-offs and landings from remote roads, making it hard for an invader to destroy on the ground. The modern E variant can achieve supercruise flight, placing it alongside the F-22 Raptor and Eurofighter Typhoon. Sweden operates nearly 100 Gripens, and the fleet is equipped with MBDA Meteor long-range air-to-air missiles and an advanced active electronically scanned array radar system.

How would Sweden’s membership transform the Baltic Sea strategically?

With both Sweden and Finland in NATO, the Baltic Sea effectively becomes a NATO lake. Russia would be left with only two narrow access points: the Gulf of Finland, where a blockade could trap the Russian Baltic Fleet at Kronstadt, and the waters around Kaliningrad, which are flanked by Denmark and Sweden. Sweden’s island of Gotland — just 200 km from Kaliningrad — could become a fortified base dominating maritime and air traffic across the entire Baltic, reversing its current status as a vulnerable gap in NATO’s northern defenses.

What does Sweden’s accession mean for NATO’s Arctic strategy?

Adding Sweden brings seven of the world’s eight Arctic nations into NATO, with Russia as the lone holdout. As Arctic ice recedes and shipping routes open, the region is becoming more strategically and economically valuable. A NATO-dominant Arctic allows the alliance to pursue a coherent strategy against both Russian military buildup in the region and China’s planned Polar Silk Road, which would use the Northern Sea Route to dramatically expand Beijing’s influence and logistics reach.

Sources

1. https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/a40642872/sweden-and-finland-joining-nato/
2. https://www.aviacionline.com/2022/06/what-will-sweden-and-finland-contribute-to-nato-air-power/
3. https://warontherocks.com/2022/07/how-sweden-and-finland-can-bolster-nato/
4. https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/new-atlanticist/sweden-would-strengthen-nato-with-fresh-thinking-and-an-able-force/
5. https://militairespectator.nl/artikelen/safer-europe-finland-and-sweden-join-nato-contributors
6. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/13/world/europe/sweden-finland-nato-putin.html
7. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2022/01/30/ukraine-tensions-grow-sweden-shows-military-strength-strategic/
8. https://www.defensenews.com/opinion/commentary/2022/07/20/finland-and-sweden-in-nato-are-strategic-assets-not-liabilities/
9. https://www.wearethemighty.com/mighty-tactical/sweden-low-key-greatest-superpower/
10. https://medium.com/the-diplomatic-pouch/analysis-seven-to-one-the-impact-of-finnish-and-swedish-nato-membership-on-arctic-security-9f6543e1f1ba