Left myths about NATO do not convince | GP

popular support Sweden’s membership in the defense alliance is increasing. A number of polls have shown in a short time that almost every second of Swedes now support NATO membership. The highest support was noted in a survey from Demoskop where 51 percent said they wanted to join NATO (Aftonbladet 4/3). A similar development occurred in public opinion in Finland.

Sweden will, of course, follow the rest of Europe in reassessing its defense and security policy. For us, it’s not just about sharply increasing defense funding. The issue of NATO membership, together with Finland, should be a real alternative in our efforts not only to strengthen Swedish defense, but also to contribute to collective security in our immediate region.

The Putin regime’s brutal invasion of Ukraine, and the attack on the European security system that it implies, reinforces the need for Sweden’s membership in NATO. After all, official defense guarantees from Russia did not prevent close cooperation with NATO as partners of Russian aggression against Ukraine.

But NATO’s vociferous opponents in Sweden don’t want to know. Instead, they chose to focus on a number of myths to discourage the public from supporting Swedish membership.

Read more: NATO membership should be a normal thing for Sweden

common event Controversy is that Sweden will automatically be forced into political loyalties and military commitments with an increasingly authoritarian Turkey. Even the Left Party claims that Sweden can no longer pursue independence Foreign Policy If we join NATO.

This is completely wrong. Over the years, NATO countries, Germany and France, among others, have condemned and criticized developments in Turkey and its military operations in the vicinity. Nor did membership prevent the countries concerned from Stop Exporting defense equipment to Turkey when Ankara launched an offensive against Kurdish forces in northern Syria in 2019.

Thus, membership in NATO does not mean that Sweden should blindly respect what Turkey is doing. Sweden can also continue to pursue an independent foreign policy. The duty that Member States are expected to fulfill is to rescue when another Member State is under attack.

Another common argument from NATO opponents is that NATO is a “nuclear alliance” and therefore there is a risk that we will have to host it nuclear weapons on Swedish territory. It is true that nuclear weapons as a deterrent are an essential part of NATO’s defense strategy.

Read more: It’s time to renew Sweden

But this is unfortunate A strategy necessary to contribute to a balance of power in a world in which the Putin regime threatens other countries with nuclear attacks, where rogue regimes in Iran and North Korea attempt to develop their own nuclear bombs, and nuclear nation China is on the rise. . US nuclear weapons are deployed in Belgium, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and Turkey. But the two neighboring countries, Norway and Denmark, did not allow nuclear weapons in their territories, which is also a possible alternative to Sweden.

According to Prime Minister Magdalena Andersson (South), Sweden’s membership in NATO will destabilize the security situation in our immediate region. This is a very unfortunate statement. The Kremlin has taken such a position for a long time, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov himself has repeatedly stated that countries in the vicinity of Russia who want to join NATO would “destabilize” the regime in Europe. Adapting the Swedish line accordingly means that we are allowing the Kremlin to dictate our defense and security policy. But Swedish security policy must of course be based on what serves our country well, and not on what the imperialists in Moscow think of our defense cooperation.

One could discuss the exact time to join the Defense Alliance. But if Sweden is to continue to remain outside the world’s number one defense alliance, opponents of NATO must come up with much better arguments.

Read more: The Kremlin has never abandoned the idea of ​​empire

Read more: What would the world look like without NATO?