Why should Sweden participate in a war against Russia?

By: Ulf Gabrielsson, spokesperson for defence and security policy for Ambition Sverige (A).

The Prime Minister says in SVT's Agenda:

”How the war in Ukraine ends will determine security in Sweden for a generation to come.”

Mr Kristersson compares the ongoing peace negotiations to the way dictators were negotiated with before the outbreak of the Second World War - and how Germany then invaded country after country.

This comparison is unhistorical, as Russia's invasion of the eastern parts of Ukraine had a completely different background than Germany's war of invasion.

Russia entered Ukraine after an eight-year civil war in which the predominantly Russian-speaking population of the breakaway republics of Donetsk and Luhansk had been shelled with artillery into towns and villages - killing around 14,000 people.

What is the Prime Minister trying to achieve with these misleading and unrealistic statements?

Is the aim to frighten the Swedish people to the point where they will accept becoming NATO's springboard in a war against Russia?

Defence Minister believes he is making Sweden safer

Pål Jonson has repeatedly argued that NATO membership and the Defence Cooperation Agreement (DCA) with the US make Sweden safer. Making Sweden a staging area with NATO troops for an imaginary war of aggression against Russia - does that also make Sweden safer?

If not before, it is NOW high time for the Swedish people to wake up to what is happening.
The question that must now be asked is: What has Russia done to Sweden that justifies our participation in a campaign against this nuclear superpower? Is it because Russia attacked Ukraine? How many countries has the US attacked without any action from our governments? Is that reason enough to put the whole of Sweden and its people on a war footing for a war that cannot be won?
With these decisions, the government has grossly failed in its primary task - to protect the country and its people from conflict and war. This is not only irresponsible, it is national suicide.

Nuclear weapons - the biggest threat

Many people still believe that the US has the most and most advanced nuclear weapons. This is not true. Russia currently has the most modern nuclear arsenal in the world. Despite this, the government seems to believe that Sweden is now safe under the so-called nuclear umbrella of the US and NATO. But that security is illusory - a nuclear war cannot be won, only lost.
NATO leaders claim that Mr Putin and Mr Medvedev are bluffing when they have talked about the possibility of using nuclear weapons in certain situations. Now it seems that our leaders are ready to call that ”bluff”.
It only takes one missile to make the escalation unstoppable. The result? Mutual Assured Destruction (MAD).

Sweden - a proxy in the great powers' game

The government has given the US and NATO a free hand to use Swedish territory for a military build-up. Sweden is becoming a proxy in a conflict we cannot win. We only have everything to lose.

Since the end of the Cold War, Russia has not dismantled its defence industry - it was mothballed. Today it is rebuilt and modernised. New weapon systems have been tested in action during the war in Ukraine.

Russia can now produce three times more artillery shells per year than Europe and the US combined, a fact that should not be underestimated when artillery has proved crucial in a stand-off.
Russia has also refined its methods to neutralise NATO weapons such as drones and missiles, including through advanced electronic warfare.

Western military superiority is a myth

Sure, the US and NATO have superior air and sea power - but that is not enough. In ground combat, we will find it difficult to hold our own against a tank and modernised Russian military.

In recent wars, the US Air Force has had the privilege of operating in a state of total air superiority where the enemy's air defences have been knocked out first. This is something that will not be possible against Russia, which has the world's most effective and modern air defence systems in the form of the S-300, S-400 and the ultra-modern S-500.

Hypersonic weapons have changed the game

A frightening game changer is Russia's hypersonic missile systems. These weapons, such as Kinzjal, Tsirkon, Avangard and Oreshnik, are virtually unstoppable with today's Western air defence systems. They travel at up to 8-12 times the speed of sound, can manoeuvre in the atmosphere and take out targets with surgical precision - including aircraft carriers.

Oreshnik, a new hypersonic system developed for a medium-range missile and capable of reaching targets across Europe. The missile can have up to 36 sub-warheads, each capable of hitting individual targets. This is not science fiction. It's reality - and it's already in use and being mass-produced.
These systems can be equipped with either conventional or nuclear warheads.

Sweden has become a catchment area

Now the Swedish government has gone so far as to declare our territory a deployment area - a military term for a place where combat forces gather for a military offensive. In other words, Sweden is becoming the launch pad for a war against Russia.

The United States has never fought a war on its own territory. Sweden is now next in line to become a potential battlefield, if the government's unrealistic analysis takes hold. Neither NATO membership, nor the DCA, let alone the decision to make Sweden a deployment zone, has been debated or even mentioned in any election campaign. A shame for a country that wants to see itself as democratic. To be prepared to throw a country's population into a war by pushing through a number of decisions behind closed doors is nothing short of dictatorial.

Let go of illusions - choose relaxation

We must stop closing our eyes to reality. Russia's nuclear doctrine is clear: if its territory is threatened, nuclear weapons will be used. Yet the Swedish government continues to act as if we are invulnerable - as if a war against Russia can be won.

The playing field has changed. The West's military advantage is no longer self-evident. To think that we can militarily penetrate Russia without consequences is not only irresponsible - it is downright dangerous.

If we want Sweden to have a future, we must change course now. The only reasonable response in this situation is détente, diplomacy and Sweden returning to being a force for peace - not a tool for the wars and strategic interests of great powers.

Unlike the United States, Europe has a huge border with Russia - a country that will be there for the foreseeable future, regardless of what our and other European leaders think.