Response to interpellation 2022/23:216 on combat-ready brigades
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
The debate concerns the Armed Forces' upscaling and combat-ready brigades. M argues that the Armed Forces are undergoing a historic upscaling where the war organization grows to over 100,000 positions by 2030 1. M emphasizes that the reactivation of conscription is crucial for personnel supply 1 2 and that the basic organization is being re-established for war unit production 1 3. M believes that FMV is growing to avoid bottlenecks and streamline deliveries 4. S argues that limited equipment and infrastructure for officers hinders growth 5 and that conscripts do not have complete equipment 6. M argues that the industry's delivery capacity has been affected by shortages in supply chains 4 and that the support to Ukraine affects the conditions for growth 4.
Written by AI in advance and may contain errors. The numbers lead to the speech a statement builds on; check against the text below.
Försvarsministern Pål Jonson (M)
Mr. Speaker! Marcus Andersson has asked me how I intend to work to ensure the personnel supply and the availability of equipment to the brigades.
War units and war unit production are based on personnel, materiel, infrastructure, and training. Self-sufficient war units that are personnel and materially fulfilled are a prerequisite for the Armed Forces' collective capability. As a result of the latest defense decision in 2020, the Armed Forces' war organization is undergoing reorganization and growth in the period up to 2030. The war organization is growing from approximately 60,000 to over 100,000 positions plus reserves. It is nearly a doubling, and it requires that the personnel and materiel supply functions. It also places demands on the basic organization to have the prerequisites to be able to produce war units.
The army is also growing and being reorganized. The army shall primarily consist of three mechanized brigades, a reduced motorized brigade, and a reinforced mechanized battalion. In addition to this, there will be a number of independent and supporting units. The army is also developing the capability to fight in divisions where several brigades are included.
The reactivation of the obligation to complete basic training with conscription was a response to the need to be able to provide personnel for the war organization. With the reactivation follows also an increased recruitment base for the supply of officers and non-commissioned officers, soldiers and sailors.
Armenia is also continuously supplied with materiel, including equipment such as air defense, grenade launchers, trucks, and soldier equipment. In addition, tanks and combat vehicles are being renovated and modified.
All re-establishments of the basic organization within the army are initiated, and operations at these are under construction. All are assessed to be completed during the period 2026-2030. In addition to re-establishment, other infrastructure projects within the army at existing regiments continue to enable war unit production.
The Armed Forces have received political direction and financial resources to be able to establish a decided war organization. It is now the Armed Forces' responsibility to produce war units. I and the government are following this issue closely.
Marcus Andersson (S)
Mr. Speaker! I would like to begin by thanking everyone who serves in the Armed Forces. The political decisions we have made, both in the previous government and in the current one, truly mean that we are rebuilding our capability. This does not only concern the Armed Forces, but it also concerns things we have debated previously, for example, support functions and industries. It is an important work, and just as it was described in the response, we must continue to build towards a horizon.
It feels good that this is being done now and that the Defence Preparation Board is working on the issues. The document for the 2020 defense decision is also relevant. However, I would like to continue to highlight what is happening here and now, and that is the intention of my interpellation.
Let me take as an example the Swedish National Audit Office's report on GSS-K's personnel. In the summary, it appears that the goals are not being achieved, that is to say, it is a matter of a limited amount of materiel, infrastructure for officers hindering growth because there has not been enough for both employees and conscripts.
There are several dimensions to this. I would like to hear the Minister for Defence reason about the picture that the National Audit Office provides, especially how it affects the brigade's current ability to be capable according to the war organization's requirements.
What is the status of the current brigade fulfillment for the active brigades?
Försvarsministern Pål Jonson (M)
Mr. Speaker! I gladly agree with Marcus Andersson's thanks to all soldiers. I know that Marcus Andersson has been a former soldier, and it is good that there are Members of Parliament who bring in experiences from the Armed Forces. I appreciate that, and it is valuable.
Two reports from the Swedish National Audit Office have been submitted. One concerns the brigades, which pointed out a number of deficiencies. Another report submitted last year pointed out the problems that existed with employed soldiers and K-soldiers and how they were organized. I cannot take too much responsibility for them, but I have been involved in making decisions linked to the 2020 defense decision - the period 2016-2020. Some criticism is directed partly at the Armed Forces' own organization, and partly at the previous government's management of the Armed Forces.
What we have done in broad political consensus, which I think is good, and here I gladly give credit to the previous government for, is to establish the defense branches and to strengthen the defense branch chiefs' authority over their own operations. It is well-documented that there have sometimes been problems in the units – Marcus Andersson surely knows this – linked to the availability of personal equipment out in the units. It is good that the Army Chief gets greater authority over that operation.
Also linked to this is that we have followed up on the issue in the regulatory letter. It states explicitly there that the Armed Forces shall report back on how the development of the allocation of personal equipment to the soldiers is progressing. It is important that that issue is clarified by the Armed Forces. It is good that we receive the report.
Both defense decisions in 2016 and 2020 aimed to address what is called the base plate. There, the availability of materiel, exercise, and training is important. We have put effort into that, but there are certainly reasons to further develop it. Then come more resources in the form of Nordic Combat Uniform and other types of garments and equipment for the soldiers. It is important and urgent.
Then there is the question of personnel supply. The basis for our personnel supply is conscription. It is naturally intended to man the war organization, and it is also of completely central importance for personnel supply in general. People should be able to continue and proceed to study to become an officer or, just as Marcus Andersson has done, to work as a soldier. It is important.
At the same time, we have the arrangement in Sweden that there is a delegation of employer tasks. It does not lie on the table of politics; since 1994, it has been delegated down to the agency level. The agency decides wages, employee benefits, skills supply, etc.
The questions are very important. We have also received the Defense Forces' budget basis. Ahead of the 2024 budget year, attention is drawn to the important personnel issues and the conditions that the employed soldiers, officers, sailors, and non-commissioned officers have, and the conscripts should, of course, also have good conditions.
Marcus Andersson (S)
Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Minister for Defence!
Just as you pointed out, the employment form GSS is primarily a decision that was made even before your government, so I completely understand that. I also completely understand Arbetsgivarverket and the delegation, but I wanted to highlight it precisely from the perspective of the brigade concept. Then, I am well aware of the collective bargaining relationship on the labor market.
As said, this was an important issue for us when we sat in government, and we naturally notice that it is an important issue also for the current government.
You mentioned the budget document, and just as you describe, it states clearly: "The personnel endurance needs to be secured so that, without a decision on increased readiness, different forms of threats and pressures can be handled over a longer period. It follows from this that the amount of immediately available resources, within all personnel categories, at both central and regional levels, needs to increase."
As we have just discussed, there are several dimensions here, and I mentioned two in my interpellation. One is the personnel and competence situation and the form of conscription with KFÖ. It is a very important aspect and an issue that absolutely needs to be highlighted.
The second thing I would like to go into a little bit, connected to the material supply, is what the National Audit Office also describes as one of the reasons why, for example, GSS does not choose a further employment, namely that indications have been received that conscripts do not have full equipment and so on.
I would like to ask a question to the Minister of Defence regarding the logistics chain. The logistics chain is, fundamentally for our part, as we have discussed, from the industry and all the way out to the combat unit. We also have a step in between, the service depots at the regiments, which are essentially the basic organization. They have a very important function to fulfill, and we see that there could be bottlenecks at these service depots.
Does the Minister of Defence have any perception of how the material supply and logistics function within the brigade concept, both during planned exercises and during readiness checks? Does the Minister of Defence see that any measures need to be implemented?
Försvarsministern Pål Jonson (M)
Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Marcus Andersson, for the question!
Regarding the brigades, I think there are reasons to take note of what the Armed Forces have previously pointed out, and it is the imbalance between combat units and support units, that is to say that there is a balance between, for example, the maneuver brigades but also when it comes to logistics and maintenance. It is absolutely crucial for the Armed Forces to have endurance. We are working today with target management of the Armed Forces, where we set a number of targets that the Armed Forces can act from. In that case, endurance is crucial, and I think that one should take a firm stand on that.
The second thing we are working a lot on now is, naturally, to complete the three brigades, which I mentioned, but it is also about divisional command capability, something that I believe is just as important to consider in connection with that aspect.
When it comes to other equipment, a considerable amount of equipment is also coming now, and that is due to the fact that we have a large growth. Among other things, a new uniform system, Nordic Combat Uniform, will arrive, and new body armor, helmets, and firearms will also arrive, to name a few of them.
On a more overarching level, it was probably the case that the previous defense decision, 2020, had a focus on the army. It was right that it was so. The army was the branch of the defense that was the most neglected, and it was very difficult to conduct operations with two brigades. Now Marcus Andersson knows that we are going to increase to three brigades plus a reduced mechanized wheeled brigade. We are also going to have a battalion.
The army is growing, then. We will also re-establish many organizational units, which Marcus Andersson knows well. Within the army, this concerns I 13 in Falun, I 21 in Sollefteå, and A 9 in Kristinehamn. We are also re-establishing K 4 in Arvidsjaur as a separate organizational unit. In Östersund, we have a detachment linked to I 21. Alongside that, things are happening on the naval side through the re-establishment of Älvsborg's amphibious regiment Amf 4, and we also have a flotilla in Uppsala.
The basic organization is growing, and it naturally follows that the material allocations should follow and further develop this.
Another dimension that is important and that I want to bring up is the imminent NATO accession. It will affect our basic organization and war organization. Fundamentally, this is about our ability to both receive and give defense guarantees. Other allies within Nato will, for reasons to be discussed, have views on how we design our defense force. We are not going to defend Sweden alone but together with others, and within the framework of Nato's joint defense planning, there are also a number of capability requirements that are being looked at.
Therefore, I believe that ahead of the upcoming defense decision, there may be reasons to consider what the Armed Forces state in its November 1st submission, namely that there may be reasons to move from three battalions to four battalions in each army brigade. There may also be reasons to review command structures, all with the aim that we should also be able to adapt our defense to the expectations that exist among the other allies within Nato.
Marcus Andersson (S)
Mr. Speaker! Thank you again, Pål!
I think it is good that you highlight exactly leadership structures and how our defense force needs to be integrated into the upcoming Natointrädet. Of course, there will surely be time to return to those issues in the future; I am convinced of that.
As I said, I would like to go back to the current situation. Again, you are completely right on important matters, and I share much of what you say. But I would also like to dive a bit deeper into FMV's annual report. What is mentioned there and that I think is important in connection with the interpellation is the division into external and internal risks. There, they talk, among other things, about the suppliers' ability to deliver what is agreed upon but also what we actually get out of the material orders. We have touched upon this earlier regarding the bnp.
I would also like to hear a comment regarding risks and FMV's role in all of this. FMV has a super important role in the entire system. They have done a fantastic job, and they continue to do so. But they need to expand in order to be able to meet the Armed Forces' increased needs.
In order to demonstrate exactly the complexity regarding supply and material availability to our upcoming and currently active brigades, but also regarding the division concept, I would like to ask the Minister of Defence to state his assessment and what indications he looks at when he follows the issue, as he says in the answer. He is welcome to specify this.
Försvarsministern Pål Jonson (M)
Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Marcus Andersson, for this debate!
Let me take it from a growth perspective, because I think that is important. We are in the middle of a historical upgrade, and in that case, it naturally applies that we must achieve efficiency and operational effect in light of the serious security policy situation. That is, so to speak, the foundation for it.
FMV is growing significantly today. They have recruited nearly 200 people and will grow by an additional 100 people. It is naturally important that we do not create bottlenecks in our ecosystem for growth. I am very much aware of that. We have also included a mandate in the regulatory letter to FMV that they should also report back on how they are working with the streamlining of deliveries.
Since it is not always the FMV where the shoe pinches, if the expression is excused, but it also concerns the industry's delivery capacity. It has been partly affected by a number of deficiencies that exist today when it comes to everything from semiconductors to various sub-components. We are emerging from a pandemic that also affected the conditions for delivery.
In conclusion, I really want to express my deep appreciation to the Armed Forces but also to FMV regarding the support for Ukraine, something that also affects the conditions for growth. I think we should be honest and say that it does. It is a risk that we, from the political side, ultimately have to take.
FMV has a central mission in supporting Ukraine with the procurement of defense materiel in Sweden through various framework agreements but also various trainings for Ukraine. The Armed Forces also perform a highly appreciated and forward-looking work linked to supporting Ukraine with both training and weapon deliveries. They have done very well there, and there is every reason to feel pride in that.
(TALMANNEN: I remind you politely that we do not usually say "you" to each other across the floor here, but we speak via the Speaker in the third person.)
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.