When a broad majority in the Riksdag decided last year that Sweden should seek membership in NATO, an important argument was that it should be done together with Finland. If Finland joins and not Sweden, it would risk having negative security policy consequences for Sweden, the politicians reasoned.
Today, no one knows when Swedish NATO membership will become a reality. Hungary's announcement is delayed, and the news so far has been contradictory. However, most people perceive Turkey as the biggest obstacle to Swedish NATO membership.
The government's hope is that Turkey will ratify Sweden sometime in June, ahead of NATO's summit in Vilnius in early July. Whether that will be the case, however, is unclear. Should Turkey choose not to ratify Sweden in June, a final decision may be delayed until late this autumn or next year.
Verbal promises
It would be a nightmare scenario for the Swedish government, which has singled out NATO membership as the most important issue right now for Swedish national security.
At the same time, several observers believe that Sweden is nevertheless in a safer position today than before the membership application was submitted. Several major NATO countries have given Sweden "security assurances", that is, verbal promises to help in the event of an attack.
After Turkey's decision to approve Finland, Sweden may also be encircled by NATO countries, which is likely to increase Swedish security. The risk of a military confrontation in the Baltic Sea region is also likely to be less today than a year ago. The war in Ukraine has not developed successfully for Russia, which means that there are hardly any resources to extend the conflict to the Baltic region.
Strategic location
There are several disadvantages if Sweden is left out of NATO when Finland steps in.
The first is that the risk is assumed to increase that Russia in various ways will try to disrupt or stop the Swedish NATO process through various forms of influence operations. Another is that Sweden, as the only country without security guarantees in the Baltic Sea region, lacks NATO's security guarantees. The insurances that different countries have given Sweden are not binding. On the other hand, Article 5 of the NATO Charter on mutual defence guarantees is binding; One country under attack should be protected by the others.
Given Sweden's geographical location, however, NATO may still have an interest in standing up. Gotland's strategic location in the middle of the Baltic Sea is important for NATO. In general, Swedish territory is of great importance for NATO to be able to reach out with help to Finland and the Baltic countries in a war situation.
Criticism from S
Nevertheless, Swedish exclusion means increased uncertainty about both how quickly and in what form Sweden could receive help in the event of an attack. However, how serious the consequences will be for Sweden is determined by how long Swedish exclusion persists.
The question is also how the political unity in Sweden on the NATO issue is affected by a delayed membership. The Social Democrats are of course in agreement with the nonsocialist parties and the Sweden Democrats that Sweden should join NATO.
Within the Social Democrats, however, there is growing criticism of how the government has handled the negotiations with Turkey. Should that criticism lead to an open political domestic political row, it could also affect the continued NATO process.