Response to interpellation 2024/25:122 on the defense industry agreement between Sweden and Finland
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
1 M argues that Sweden and Finland have an extensive and deeply integrated cooperation in the defense industrial area 1 2 3. M emphasizes that the cooperation is intensive and that several concrete material projects are underway 3. M advocates that the cooperation should be broadened to a Nordic basis, particularly regarding security of supply for ammunition 2 3. M is willing to investigate joint development projects to strengthen the cooperation 3. M believes that development projects based on the defense forces' operational needs should be welcomed 4. M argues that the content of the agreements is completely central 4. S considers that a more comprehensive agreement with a common strategy is required 5. S wants to see joint procurement and development work 5. S argues that the current agreements are not sufficient 5 6. S wants to renew the agreements from 1995 5 7. S believes that a deepened cooperation can have a positive impact on the Nordic perspective 7.
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)
Madam Speaker! Peter Hultqvist has asked me what measures I intend to take to establish a new defense industrial agreement between Sweden and Finland.
Sweden and Finland have extensive cooperation in the field of defense materiel, partly multilaterally, for example within Nato, EU and Nordefco, and partly bilaterally. Examples can be given of cooperation regarding the procurement of armored personnel carriers and small arms and cooperation regarding ensuring the security of supply for ammunition.
Sweden and Finland agree that the continued promotion and strengthening of the defense industry is an important part of the development of the defense capability in our countries. This is also to the benefit of our allies. Cooperation in this area is currently carried out both within the framework of existing bilateral defense cooperation agreements between Sweden and Finland and through agreements between the Nordic countries. The Government monitors and develops the cooperation together with Finland as needed so that it will yield the results jointly desired by the countries.
Peter Hultqvist (S)
Madam Speaker! Thank you for the answer, Minister for Defence! I believe it is possible to do significantly more. The 1995 agreement, which is a memorandum of understanding, can be renewed and developed greatly. The collaborations mentioned regarding certain specific things such as armored vehicles and small arms are based on the procurement of specific systems. But that is not quite what I am looking for. I am looking for perhaps a joint procurement and joint development work and maybe a common strategy.
I took note of what is stated in the declaration of cooperation from September 16, when Sweden and Finland had a major meeting. It was stated then that there should be a bilateral cooperation linked to the defense industry. It was one or two sentences quite far down in the text. My perception is that if this is to become truly serious, one must make a more comprehensive and thorough defense industrial agreement, which is also anchored in both the Swedish and Finnish defense industry. One should therefore move towards us doing more together.
At the same time, there is one thing that we could address jointly very quickly. We need increased production capacity in the defense industry with a focus on Ukraine. Initiatives are being taken for various projects in the EU and between different countries. But Sweden and Finland could undertake a large ammunition project together, where we also look at how we could establish larger production capacity and new production lines together.
If one were to mention some specific areas where we could deepen the cooperation, it is, in addition to ammunition, also sensors and radar. There is technology in Sweden that could ultimately be used on the Finnish side, for example the system Global Eye. We have naval competence and could discuss further cooperation through the Swedish Finnish Naval Task Force, which has been built up into a very good joint naval unit. Within that framework, one could also look at what can be done jointly while the Finnish side is now renewing its navy with various investments in new ships.
Cooperation can also occur regarding components in different weapons systems. Small arms and vehicles have been mentioned as examples, but I think, as I have said, that we should look at this more broadly. Are there prerequisites for joint development projects? That is an important question one could ask. In that case, it is about us deciding on a certain area where we jointly choose to invest. Are there long-term priorities that can be made when it comes to the development of joint weapons systems? I think such questions can be laid the foundation for. Within the framework of an agreement, one could then continuously gather the defense industry in each respective country and move in that direction.
I am convinced that this could yield good results if the will and clarity are there. I don't think there is anything to say about what has been done, but much more needs to be done. The stride must be taken.
Försvarsministern Pål Jonson (M)
Madam Speaker! Thank you, Peter Hultqvist, for the interpellation! I will answer the questions linked to the cooperation in just a moment. I just want to say for the sake of context that we have a stronger cooperation with Finland now in the defense policy area than before because we are covered by NATO's common defense planning and also Article 5. This naturally creates entirely new conditions for integration at the defense policy level but also when it comes to defense planning between our defense authorities.
We also have extensive cooperation in the defense industrial area, but let me first mention the things that Peter Hultqvist touched upon. It concerned, among other things, the procurement of new surface combat ships, where Finland is in a slightly earlier stage than Sweden. But there is an industrial cooperation there. Saab is already participating in the development of command systems on the Finnish platforms. I think that is good.
When it comes to a broader defense industrial cooperation, it is a relevant issue. If we can strengthen the cooperation, we shall do so, but it is a matter of finding the right form for it. When we posed control questions to the Swedish industry organization, they said that the cooperation is already flowing well and that there is a very extensive cooperation with contact on a weekly basis. One will also have exactly what Peter Hultqvist requested, namely a large, bilateral defense conference between Swedish and Finnish companies here in Stockholm on February 5 and 6. Much of the work Peter Hultqvist requests, I want to say anyway, is ongoing without such an agreement. The cooperation is deep and integrated.
Let me also, Madam Speaker, say a few words linked to how we work with security of supply, not only between Sweden and Finland but also on a Nordic basis. As Peter Hultqvist knows, there has been a cooperation agreement since 2015 with extensive Nordic cooperation when it comes to Nordefco and security of supply, joint procurement and export control.
An expression of this is what is called Nordefco plus plus, where the Nordefco countries work much more deeply and more strategically when it comes to the conditions for the production of different types of ammunition, not just artillery ammunition. Security of supply agreements and strategic partnership agreements are now being established between the Nordic countries. It is about strengthening the ability to produce, above all, artillery ammunition.
We have identified the production of ammunition as a strategic material area, so it will not be subject to competitive procurement. The purpose is for the Nordic countries to join forces and place long-term orders primarily with the Norwegian-Finnish company Nammo, and thereby create an opportunity for them to invest in their production capacity. In that way, we can build up greater security of supply in the ammunition area, on a Nordic basis, while we can better support Ukraine with different types of ammunition.
A good deal of the work that Peter Hultqvist requests takes place not only on a bilateral basis, through the defense industrial cooperation between Sweden and Finland, but also on a Nordic basis. There, we gain access to a somewhat larger industrial base than just the Swedish and the Finnish.
Peter Hultqvist (S)
Madam Speaker! The question of cooperation between Finland and Sweden has been relevant for a long time. It was a main priority during the eight years that we sat in government. It concerns information exchange, operational planning, exercises, and coordination of the military units.
We could, therefore, already before the entry into Nato, manage situations beyond peace jointly, and much of the foundation for this was laid then. I mean that we at that time, and also not now, have not come as far when it comes to the defense industrial cooperation.
The type of conferences that the Minister for Defence refers to are good, but they have occurred previously and are not actually a measure of the depth of the projects themselves. But it is good that one has that meeting point.
When it comes to the agreements on security of supply for, for example, ammunition, I mean that it must be checked what the security of supply actually looks like, in practice. Writing an agreement is one thing, but the practical outcome is another. That an agreement has been written does not mean that one has reached what can be called security of supply.
Both Finland and Sweden have sent a lot of ammunition to, for example, Ukraine, and this has led to the fact that we have some catching up to do in comparison to how it looked previously. Therefore, I do not see the securing of security of supply as something that is self-evidently fulfilled just because an agreement has been signed.
What I am actually looking for is what type of long-term development projects that Sweden and Finland as nations could develop jointly and involve the defense industry in. I mean that perspective has not been sufficiently discussed. We are not there yet. I agree that there are many connections between Swedish and Finnish companies, but that cloak that provides a main direction and that ties everything together properly does not exist.
When one asks a question about how the situation actually is, one can receive many different types of answers depending on how one wants it. Therefore, a considerably deeper discussion with the industry is probably required before one can say with absolute certainty that everything that has now been done is sufficient. I therefore do not share the view that everything I say here is largely addressed.
I mean that if one is serious about the agreement from September 16, 2024, where bilateral cooperation linked to the defense industry is mentioned, the ambition should be significantly higher than it is today. I cannot see what would be the problem with a Swedish and a Finnish government working out a proper understanding and strategy for how we want to see the defense industry cooperation between our countries develop and how the defense industry can be linked to it.
Is there really any problem with making that type of agreement and platform for future development work? It would, of course, provide significantly greater weight from the government level in relation to the industry if there were a clear and distinct direction of intent.
I think this is logical also from the perspective that Finland, regardless of NATO membership and other things, has for a long time and even today is our closest defense policy partner. We work a lot together with Finland. We even have people represented in both countries' staffs.
Försvarsministern Pål Jonson (M)
Madam Speaker! The central point is the scope. The question that I want to send back to Peter Hultqvist is whether the scope should be a Swedish-Finnish defense industrial cooperation and agreement or if we should work on a Nordic basis when it comes to security of supply and defense industry cooperation.
Several of the defense collaborations we have rest on a Nordic foundation, not least when it comes to security of supply on the ammunition side. This includes a Swedish but, above all, a Finnish and Norwegian company in the form of Nammo.
I mean that instead of having a Swedish-Finnish defense cooperation agreement linked to defense industry issues, perhaps one should broaden it and work on a Nordic basis. The trade associations that exist also work contractually mainly on a Nordic basis when it comes to writing cooperation agreements.
The Swedish-Finnish defense industry cooperation is good, but I believe one can also consider taking a broader approach and thinking that the Nordic region is larger than Sweden and Finland in this regard.
Just to clarify: The cooperation that is to be generated by this is concrete projects. I share Peter Hultqvist's view and think that there is development potential when it comes to joint development projects, because we actually do not have so many in the Swedish-Finnish defense cooperation. I am willing to look into whether we can find that.
This is also something that the state can more easily control through allocation. In Sweden, we have a privately owned industry that we can influence but not control, but one or two joint development projects in the area of defense materiel, I believe, would be beneficial to strengthen the cooperation between the industries.
We now have five or six major equipment cases which are an expression of the fact that we have a good defense industry cooperation between Sweden and Finland. Peter Hultqvist knows that. Right now, we are in the procurement of armored terrain vehicles, torpedoes, anti-tank weapons, anti-tank missiles, and combat uniforms.
As late as last week, FMV and the Finnish industry signed an agreement on the delivery of a large number of automatic rifles. This is an expression of the fact that there is good and effective cooperation between Sweden and Finland in the defense industrial area. It is also completely obvious when it comes to the CV 90 platform, where both Sweden and Finland operate together with several other Nordic countries.
I think, therefore, that we have a good cooperation. It generates operational capability, and it generates a number of materiel projects. The intensity of the materiel exchange is greater than it has been in a long time. It also leads, as I said earlier, to an intensive dialogue between the defense industries in Sweden and Finland. I perceive, therefore, that the cooperation is intensive, close, and stronger than it has been in a long time.
Peter Hultqvist (S)
Madam Speaker! I think Pål Jonson at the end here touched upon what I am actually looking for, namely to try to define some development projects that the state stands behind. This leads to a shared responsibility which, in the long run, broadens the entire perspective.
I choose to focus on what is positive in the answer that Pål Jonson gave me here. I hope that it could constitute some kind of platform for that type of MOU – that is, a renewal of the MOU from 1995, which is a bit too old to fit with today's conditions. I want to encourage a start on that work. I would be surprised if there was no interest in this in Finland.
When it comes to a Swedish-Finnish versus a Nordic cooperation, I mean that there is no contradiction there. One does not exclude the other, and it can also be that a deepened Swedish-Finnish cooperation with certain development projects can actually have a positive impact also in the Nordic perspective. I therefore do not believe that one should lock oneself into it being one or the other, but here it is about being able to play across the entire palette. One can, however, create core components that make it possible for, for example, Sweden and Finland to contribute in a positive way to the Nordics together.
I think there are many good things in the discussion that we have had here, but when it comes to the exchange of information and the operational planning - the exercises and the coordination of the military units - we have come significantly further than when it comes to the defense industrial. Now it is about moving forward in development projects, which I believe could be very positive.
Försvarsministern Pål Jonson (M)
Madam Speaker! I believe we agree that we welcome development projects that we identify based on the operational needs of our respective defense forces. After that, one can also look at defense industrial cooperation agreements. I believe one should start in that direction.
An agreement in itself does not solve very much, but it is the content of the agreements and what activities they generate that is completely central. I just want to say that in connection with the Nordefco cooperation in the ammunition area, where there is a very serious depth of intention. They are looking at what the security of supply actually looks like on a Nordic basis regarding everything from primers and gunpowder, trotyl - that is TNT - and so on. It is, therefore, an extensive work that needs to be done to ensure that we have security of supply not only in peace but also in crisis or war.
What I want to conclude with, Madam Speaker, is that there is extensive cooperation between Sweden and Finland also on a Nordic basis. There are a number of Pesco projects that Sweden and Finland collaborate on, and within the framework of the EU instrument Edirpa, Sweden and Finland, under Finnish leadership, have applied for support for the implementation of a joint procurement of armored terrain vehicles. This means that there may be EU funds available when Sweden and Finland enter into a joint procurement of terrain vehicles in order to reduce administrative costs.
I think that even this is an expression of the very strong Swedish-Finnish defense cooperation that we have in these days - and which, I want to say, Peter Hultqvist also laid an important foundation for during his time as Minister for Defence.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.