Swedish contribution to NATO's forward presence in Finland

Peter Hultqvist (S)

Madam Speaker! The war in Ukraine has now entered its fifth year. We follow the daily reporting of what is happening and what happens at night in Kyiv and other areas in Ukraine where the Russians attack in the most brutal way.

The outcome of the war will also determine much of the future of Sweden, Finland, Norway, Denmark, the Baltics, Poland, and Germany. It is a matter for all of Europe. We must prepare ourselves for the fact that we will have a long-term problem with Russia in a fifty-year perspective. There may come times when the sun shines a little, but there may also come even darker times.

We have previously in the Riksdag stood behind a formulation that reads: An attack against Sweden cannot be ruled out. We must therefore build a long-term functioning deterrence with a higher national military capability but also deepen cooperation with other countries within the framework of the Nato alliance.

We can observe that Russia has created infrastructure to be able to receive extensive military troop formations, vehicles, and other equipment along both the Baltic and the Finnish border. A ceasefire in Ukraine could mean that they will expand their presence in those areas.

We also cannot rule out that from the Russian side, in the longer perspective, they are trying in some way to provoke or test NATO and NATO's Article 5 in our immediate vicinity. We must remember that areas such as Gotland, Åland, Svalbard, the Suwalki Corridor, Narva and several others can be such areas where a test could take place.

We must, therefore, have scenarios and perspectives ready for us that we link to the fact that we largely have to deal with cyberattacks from the Russian side on a daily basis. The war that is ongoing in Ukraine also affects us; from the Russian side, it is explicitly stated that they are not at war with only Ukraine but also with Nato.

The mission that Sweden undertakes in FLF, Forward Land Forces, in northern Finland is an important mission, and we are the framework nation. It sends a security policy signal both to the Russian side and to the population in our common area around the Baltic Sea.

Sweden is, therefore, prepared to take a major responsibility for the defense of not only northern Finland but also Nordkalotten. We are prepared to allocate military resources for this and to operate in Finnish territory in the event that it is necessary.

It is part of what one could call a policy of solidarity alliance. It actively contributes to security and stability in the Euro-Atlantic area, and it promotes Swedish integration into Nato.

We see that from the Russian side there is a large base in Murmansk for primarily naval power. They also have an Arctic brigade stationed there and extensive air resources.

One opens and closes bases along the Northeast Passage on the various islands there. One practices and makes markings. From the Russian side, they want to control the Northeast Passage and, in conflict with international maritime law and with the international legal system, decide which ships are allowed to travel there.

This clearly shows the state of tension that prevails. As climate change continues and the ice melts, natural resources that can be interesting in different ways are also being exposed.

Sweden's commitment in northern Finland is part of a collective commitment in the Nordic region from Norway, Finland, and Sweden. It is, therefore, a broad mission.

It also means that another issue is raised, which is not handled in this proposal. It would, in fact, be desirable and good if one could arrange the whole thing so that the pre-positioning of materiel, weapons, and ammunition etc., could be placed from the Swedish side in Finland. It would largely facilitate our commitment.

This is an issue that is not resolved. We have put it forward from the Social Democrats' side in various contexts, and therefore I do so today as well. This is something that a future government must address after the election and ensure that we get an arrangement where we can store ammunition on Finnish territory. It will in practice be a defence cooperation agreement, to use a term that we have previously used in connection with us signing agreements. It would naturally also be a clear evidence of a deepened integration that would benefit NATO's operational planning.

The situation is that we are ready to take an increased responsibility from the Swedish side. We also have a battalion in the Baltics, in Latvia. This is something that is also an important signal and an important operation that we participate in together with other countries within the framework of Nato. It is a signal that Latvia and the Baltics are not alone, but Sweden stands on their side and recognizes the clear Russian threats that exist.

This is a way to maintain a higher threshold and in practice work towards deterrence. It is precisely the deterrence perspective that must be very long-term. I mention it again: A fifty-year perspective should characterize Swedish policy in this area.

I vote in favor of the proposal in the present report.

(Applause)

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Per Söderlund (SD)

Madam Speaker! I would like to begin by moving for the approval of the proposal in the report in its entirety.

Madam Speaker! Sweden, our allies, and Europe have found themselves in an entirely new security policy situation since Russia's brutal and full-scale invasion of Ukraine on 24 February 2022.

For the Sweden Democrats, the starting point has always been clear: The state's primary task is to protect Swedish citizens, Swedish sovereignty, and Swedish interests. We do this best through a strong national defense but also through credible alliances with other democratic states.

It is against that background that Sweden is now a member of Nato and takes a greater responsibility for the security of our immediate area. Sweden joined the alliance with important capabilities that have strengthened Nato as a whole, which means that we have contributed from day one. Sweden is not hitching a ride in the alliance.

At the latest NATO summit, Sweden was described by the USA as an example, which in several aspects is positive for us as a country. The Swedish contribution to NATO's forward presence in Finland, in everyday terms called FLF Finland, is therefore both logically and strategically important.

The Sweden Democrats have for many years pursued the issue of a deepened defense cooperation within the Nordic region. It is therefore pleasing that Sweden can now take a larger holistic approach to the issue together with our neighbors. The decision means that Sweden will contribute to NATO's forward presence in Finland with armed forces of at most 1,200 people. This is a historic decision, as it is the first time ever that Sweden will lead a force of this kind.

Sweden will, through FLF Finland, take a very large responsibility for the defense of NATO's northeastern flank. Finland has a long and strategically important border with Russia. This is therefore a significant contribution to the alliance's collective defense, and it clearly shows that Sweden is seen as a reliable and capable ally in the alliance.

So far, Denmark, Iceland, Norway, the United Kingdom, France and Italy have announced that they intend to contribute to FLF Finland. The decision that Sweden shall lead the effort has strong support among the parties in the Riksdag, even though some non-partisan members have chosen to motion for the rejection of the proposition.

Madam Speaker! It is important to understand the purpose of NATO's forward presence. It is not about provoking conflict; on the contrary, it is about preventing conflict. A credible military presence reduces the risk of attacks.

After the collapse of the Soviet Union, the Western world supported Russia with enormous sums of money and trade agreements in the hope of a civilized and democratic development. Despite the support, shortly after the collapse of the Soviet Union, Russia began to act aggressively towards its neighboring countries. This aggressive behavior continued to increase in scope and brutality and led up to the Georgia war in 2008, the Crimea invasion in 2014, and the full-scale attack on Ukraine in 2022.

The transition of Russian society to a war economy, the mobilization, and the deepened cooperation with the world's rogue states such as Iran and North Korea, and also the deepened cooperation with China, is problematic.

For the Sweden Democrats, there has never been any doubt about what type of actor Russia is. We make the assessment that the war in Ukraine is only the first step in the process of change that these countries are trying to drive through. Therefore, Sweden's contribution to the alliance is both necessary and important.

Madam Speaker! A prerequisite for being able to defend our allies is that the defense functions on home soil. That is also what Article 3 of the North Atlantic Treaty stipulates. As Sweden now takes a greater responsibility within Nato, we must simultaneously continue to rebuild our own national defense capability.

For all too long, the Swedish defense was dismantled. Readiness stocks were phased out, regiments were disbanded, and the total defense was weakened. New construction of, for example, shelters ceased completely in the early 2000s, which means that a large part of the population today stands without possibilities for adequate protection in the event of war, something that this government and Sverigedemokraterna have addressed. The previous mistakes, Madam Speaker, must never be repeated.

That Sweden, Norway, Finland and Denmark are now members of Nato creates new opportunities to coordinate defense, logistics and intelligence work in our part of Europe. It strengthens security in the entire Nordic region and the Baltic Sea region. At the same time, we must never become naive regarding the threat that Russia poses. Russia has shown a dangerously low threshold for using military violence, threatening neighboring countries and conducting cyber operations and influence operations against European democracies. Meeting that requires both military strength and political determination of the kind that we see in this report.

Madam Speaker! The Sweden Democrats firmly support Sweden taking responsibility within Nato and contributing to security in our immediate vicinity.

With that, Madam Speaker, I move again for approval of the committee's proposal in the report.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Jörgen Berglund (M)

Madam Speaker! Finland's cause is ours. It is an expression that I believe very many recognize and have heard many times. Even more perhaps have seen the iconic image of two skiers, a Swedish and a Finnish soldier, skiing side by side.

The expression dates back to 1939. It concerned the movement that wanted Sweden to send armed troops to Finland or at least support the volunteers. The government at the time was quite hesitant. The expression "Finland's cause is our cause" is something I believe still applies. I would like to describe the expression as that what Finland considers to be good for the country's independence and sovereignty is also what Sweden should support.

Sweden and Finland have a common history. We were, for a long time, closer to 500 years, a common country. But we share so much more than just history, not least in terms of security policy. It is about both our countries' immediate proximity to Russia. The difference, however, is that Finland has a very long land border with Russia – a Russia that does not hesitate to act militarily and aggressively against its neighboring countries. Therefore, Finland's cause is still ours, which we prove once again in this decision.

Madam Speaker! That Sweden, together with the other allies, maintains confidence in the collective defense guarantees is central to NATO's deterrence and defense and to preserving peace in our immediate vicinity. Sweden's geostrategic position and security policy interests shall constitute the starting points for the design of Sweden's role as an ally. This includes a regional responsibility for the Nordic countries, the Baltic Sea area, and the Nordic Cap, including the specific expertise that these environments require. We who live up here are good at defending our part of the world.

Sweden has taken on the role of framework nation for what is called Forward Land Forces, FLF, in Finland, which is also what this report is about. Being the framework nation for FLF Finland means that Sweden takes responsibility for establishing and resourcing a combat group in Finland, in close cooperation with the host nation Finland, Nato and other allies.

Finland wished that Sweden should be the framework country, which once again demonstrates the strong and deep relationship our two countries have.

The commitment also includes leading the multinational task force which currently also includes the United Kingdom, France, Denmark, Norway, Iceland and Italy. The multinational force constitutes an important part of NATO's reinforced deterrence and defense of the Nordic region.

FLF Finland raises the threshold for a potential Russian aggression and strengthens the allies' ability to quickly defend the Nordkalotten if necessary. The participation is also in line with Sweden's solidarity alliance policy, which aims to strengthen security and stability in our immediate vicinity. Furthermore, the contribution is expected to promote Sweden's continued integration into Nato.

The responsibility as a framework nation as well as the contribution of strength constitute parts of the very close Swedish-Finnish security and defense policy relationship. Sweden will, as we have heard, detach a Swedish battalion to FLF Finland. It will be forward-deployed in Boden, but a multinational staff element shall also be established in Rovaniemi in northern Finland, a place that large parts of the Defense Committee visited this winter.

Madam Speaker! The Swedish contribution will amount to approximately 600 active-duty soldiers and officers during 2026. If necessary, according to the proposal that the Riksdag is considering today, the contribution can amount to a maximum of 1,200 people.

The Swedish commitment as a framework nation for FLF Finland means that Swedish forces shall be able to carry out the task of supporting NATO's collective deterrence and defense and participate in operations or other activities within the framework of FLF Finland. The force is naturally covered by NATO's operational planning and will, if the Riksdag now makes this decision, be subject to NATO's command as of June 6 this year.

Finally, Madam Speaker, I would like to say with some pride that it feels both important, reassuring and secure that a united committee today proposes to the Riksdag to take this step and contribute not only to Sweden's security but also to Finland's and other allies'. Finland's cause is ours – then, now and moving forward!

(Applause)

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Hanna Gunnarsson (V)

Madam Speaker! Honored members! Hello to those listening and watching at home!

The Riksdag is debating today the issue of FLF Finland, that is, Forward Land Forces or what we in Swedish call NATO's forward presence in northern Finland.

The FLFs mean that the NATO countries together deploy soldiers in countries bordering Russia in a joint mission. Sweden participates in NATO's FLF in Latvia every spring, and Sweden will now take responsibility for NATO's FLF in Finland.

The parties are in agreement on the matter, so this perhaps will not become much of a debate.

FLF in Finland will be different from the one in Latvia that we are participating in. To Latvia, Sweden sends 600 soldiers every spring, and when we now move out from Camp Valdemar outside Riga in June, Denmark moves in with an equal number of soldiers.

When it comes to FLF Finland, Sweden's soldiers will instead remain on home soil in Boden. A smaller number of Swedish officers will be on site in Rovaniemi. During exercises or at other times of need, the Swedish soldiers in Boden can quickly transport themselves across the border to Finland. Sweden will have the main responsibility for holding together the planning of FLF Finland, which will then be filled with officers and soldiers from a number of other Natoländer.

Madam Speaker! Vänsterpartiet voted no to Sweden's membership in Nato and is still critical of large parts of Nato's work, especially that which concerns nuclear weapons and the USA's dominance in Nato. Vänsterpartiet would rather see a strong Nordic-Baltic cooperation than a membership in Nato. We see that the USA still has very large dominance in the Nato work, despite Trump's various incomprehensible twists and turns. The USA directs large parts of the work in Nato, which we are critical of.

Now, however, Sweden is a member of Nato and needs to make the best of that situation, and the best thing is to cooperate very closely with our neighboring countries in the Nordic and our Baltic neighbors on the other side of the Baltic Sea. We share both the Baltic Sea and the Arctic; this is our countries' direct vicinity. It is also the geographical area and the terrain that we are best at, and it is here that we shall together secure peace for everyone who lives here. We do this, of course, best through close cooperation in very many areas, by being a strong common Nordic voice in the world for democracy, peace, and development, as well as by building robust societies that can withstand various forms of crises. This is what we want to do instead of being in Nato.

Madam Speaker! Finland is our closest partner in security and defense policy and has been for a very long time. Our countries are very similar, we have a similar structure of our total defenses with conscription and strong civil defense, and we perform the same analyses of the situation in our vicinity. Vänsterpartiet voted for the law on military operational support between Sweden and Finland in 2020, and it is logical that it is precisely Sweden that leads the FLF in Finland.

Madam Speaker! Earlier this spring, the Defence Committee visited the Cold Response exercise in Rovaniemi, where the FLF will have its base. We then received a very good overview of how the FLF will operate and the opportunities and challenges that exist. I would like to once again thank everyone involved from the Swedish and Finnish Defence Forces, who arranged this very successful and rewarding visit.

I also want to take the opportunity to tip off everyone who is going to or working in Rovaniemi that it works perfectly well to travel there by train, both on the Swedish and on the Finnish side.

In conclusion: A week ago, we celebrated the Swedish Veterans Day with ceremonies all over Sweden. I want, just as we always do when we discuss Sweden's international military missions, to extend a big thank you both to the soldiers who are deployed today and to the veterans who have participated in previous missions, as well as to the relatives, families, and friends who bear the heavy burden at home. Thank you for your efforts!

On behalf of the Left Party, I move for the approval of the bill and the committee's proposal for a decision.

(Applause)

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Mikael Larsson (C)

Madam Speaker! Ukraine is not only fighting for its own freedom. They are fighting against an aggressive Russia that has launched its war of aggression in order to overthrow the European security order. Thus, Ukraine is also fighting for the freedom of all of Europe.

The war has already had enormous consequences for the security policy situation in Sweden and in the entire Western world. One of these consequences in recent times was that Sweden's and Finland's journey into Nato was initiated. Now, the practical work of building up a strong Swedish total defense is underway, while we carry out large defense investments together with the entire Nato alliance. Since Sweden joined Nato, work is ongoing to participate fully in exercises and the various operations that exist within the framework of the Nato alliance.

Madam Speaker! Now that we are members of Nato, Sweden needs to participate fully in the alliance's activities, not a little and not sometimes, but fully. The Government Bill Swedish contribution to Nato's forward presence in Finland shows the importance of Sweden participating and having to participate fully in the entire alliance's activities, but also in the region we are in with the Baltic Sea and the Arctic region. The responsibility that Sweden will take in FLF Finland is important for Sweden and for the security of the entire Nato.

Madam Speaker! It is a strength that all parties stand behind both the bill and the committee report in their entirety. In view of this, I move to approve both the bill and the proposal in the committee report in their entirety.

(Applause)

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Magnus Berntsson (KD)

Madam Speaker! Today we are considering the government's bill on a Swedish contribution to NATO's forward presence in Finland, which within NATO is referred to as Forward Land Forces Finland. The Christian Democrats welcome this proposal and move for approval of the committee's proposal for a decision.

Sweden has been a member of Nato for just over two years. It is one of the most important security policy decisions in modern Swedish history. Membership is, however, not just about the security guarantees that we receive, but also about the responsibility that we take.

Madam Speaker! Today we are not only debating our own defense but the security of the entire alliance. Through our contribution to NATO's forward presence in Finland, we show that Sweden is ready to bear its share of the responsibility for peace and stability in Europe. It is a statement of strength for Sweden as an ally and a clear example that we are a security provider in our immediate vicinity.

That is exactly what this decision is about. By contributing to NATO's presence in Finland, we strengthen the defense in the entire Nordic region. We strengthen the collective deterrence against those who wish to threaten our freedom, and we show that Article 5, the principle that an attack against one ally is an attack against all, is not just words on a paper but a common commitment.

It is also natural that Sweden takes a special responsibility precisely in Finland, our closest ally. Our countries share history, geography, and security interests. If security in Finland is threatened, Sweden is directly affected, and if Sweden is threatened, Finland is directly affected. Our security is today in a way more intertwined than ever, even though our nations throughout history have stood side by side on battlefields and faced trials together on countless occasions.

Madam Speaker! Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine changed Europe's security policy map. It became clear that peace cannot be taken for granted and that freedom must be defended. Therefore, NATO's forward presence is important. The purpose is to prevent and preclude conflict. A credible deterrence reduces the risk of war arising at all.

It is also important to remember that Sweden has much to contribute. We have modern and well-trained units, experience of operating in a Nordic climate, and a strong defense industry and high-tech competence.

Since joining, Sweden has quickly become an integrated and valued part of the alliance. NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte recently noted that Sweden has not only become stronger through NATO but has also made NATO stronger. He specifically highlighted that Sweden is the host nation for NATO's Forward Land Forces in Finland and that this strengthens the entire Nordic part of the alliance's defense.

Even from the American side, clear assessments are coming. The US Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, described Sweden as recently as yesterday as an extraordinary partner and emphasized that Sweden's defense capability is an example for other allies. He expressed a wish that more Nato countries would have the same capacity as Sweden. These are words that we can receive with humility but also with pride. In a short time, Sweden has shown that we are not just a new member of Nato but also a member that contributes, takes responsibility, and strengthens the alliance.

Madam Speaker! The Christian Democrats have long argued for a stronger Swedish defense and Swedish membership in Nato. We have done so because we know that freedom, democracy, and national sovereignty must be defended together with other democracies. Ultimately, it is about solidarity – the same solidarity that makes us stand up for Ukraine, strengthens the security of our Baltic neighbors, and contributes to Nato's presence in Finland.

When democracies hold together, they become stronger. When free nations take collective responsibility, the threshold becomes higher for those who want to use military violence. Therefore, today's decision is important. It shows that Sweden is a credible ally, that Sweden takes responsibility for security in the surrounding area, and that Sweden stands side by side with Finland and other allies. It shows that Sweden is ready to contribute to peace and security, not just for our own sake but for the entire transatlantic community. Again: Kristdemokraterna move for approval of the proposal in its entirety.

(Applause)

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Emma Berginger (MP)

Madam Speaker! Today we are debating Sweden's contribution to NATO's forward presence in Finland. It concerns that the government shall, until December 31, 2026, be allowed to deploy Swedish armed forces of at most 1,200 persons to, in accordance with international law, contribute to FLF Finland. I would like to begin by moving for approval of the proposal in the committee report and rejection of the motion.

Miljöpartiet argues that Sweden should be a credible, reliable and solidary ally. Finland is not just any neighboring country. Our history and security are intertwined. Many of us have family and roots in Finland and have grown up with the stories of Finland's experiences of war. Therefore, it is important that we stand in solidarity with Finland to contribute to ensuring that they never have to relive those experiences. At the same time, we also affect our own security. When Sweden takes responsibility in Finland, we take responsibility for our entire immediate area.

Madam Speaker! Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine has shown what is at stake when international law is attacked and borders are attempted to be moved by force, and what consequences it has for people's security, democracy, and the environment when an authoritarian and risk-prone state like Russia chooses to attack its neighboring country. The experiences from there demonstrate the importance of having a functioning defense. We also see the various hybrid activities and attacks that have become increasingly frequent in our immediate vicinity and which underscore the serious security policy situation.

I want to emphasize that this effort is about a readiness to defend the northern parts of Finland, even though we hope that it will never be necessary. As long as Finland's sovereignty is respected, this will primarily be an opportunity for soldiers and officers from Sweden and allies to experience our Nordic climate in all seasons and to practice their skills.

Through an increased presence in the north and by demonstrating our capacity and ability, we want to deter an adversary from antagonistic actions. But if it should be required, we are prepared to defend ourselves and our allies.

Madam Speaker! Since 2016, in view of the progressively deteriorating security situation, Nato has decided on the establishment of nine multinational battle groups along its eastern flank. The nine battle groups are designated Forward Land Forces, and in Swedish they are called Nato's forward presence. They can, if necessary, be expanded to a brigade size, each with approximately 5,000 soldiers.

At the NATO summit in Washington in 2024, the alliance decided to establish a forward presence in Finland, FLF Finland. That Sweden has taken responsibility as the framework nation implies responsibility for the establishment, resource allocation, and command of the multinational combat group in close cooperation with Finland, Nato, and other allies.

Madam Speaker! It is natural that Sweden takes this responsibility. Operating in the subarctic environment of the Arctic requires special knowledge, experience, and capabilities. At the same time, it is welcome that the other Nordic countries, the United Kingdom, and Italy have announced that they intend to contribute to the development of FLF Finland. The Swedish contribution is planned to amount to around 600 active-duty soldiers and officers during 2026, but the mandate covers up to 1,200 people.

The Swedish battalion shall be forward-deployed in Boden and be able to operate in Sweden, Finland, and Norway. It is a significant commitment, and precisely for that reason it is important that the Riksdag is clear regarding both the scope of the mandate and its basis in international law. The Swedish force is fundamentally a contribution to peacetime deterrence and defense. But as said – in the event of an armed attack against Sweden or an ally, the force shall be able to transition to defense within the framework of NATO's operational planning and mandate.

Madam Speaker! I also want to say that the Nordic Cap is not just a strategic point on a map. It is home to people, communities, nature, Sami culture, and sensitive ecosystems. Therefore, of course, military presence must always occur with respect for local communities, the environment, and indigenous rights. That is why it is important to emphasize the importance of coexistence and protecting even that which we defend, namely the population, the land, freedom, and democracy. It is also important to emphasize that the consequences of a war would be much, much worse.

With all this said, Madam Speaker, I am proud that Sweden contributes as a framework nation to FLF Finland.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Fredrik Malm (L)

Madam Speaker! It is a historic decision we have to make in the Swedish Riksdag. Sweden has been a member of Nato for just over two years and will now take responsibility for the multinational battle group that is to be based in Finland. It concerns the Nordic countries, the United Kingdom, France and Italy.

It is, just as the previous speaker said, a significant commitment from the Swedish side to be the framework nation. We will contribute 600 soldiers. One can scale up to 1,200 Swedish soldiers.

Why was this needed, Madam Speaker? Well, for several different reasons. We can start with what happened on November 30, 1939, when Josef Stalin and the Red Army, the Soviet Union, attacked Finland. The Finns then established the Mannerheim Line along the Karelian Isthmus and defended themselves heroically. They used winter camouflage, employed guerrilla tactics, had snipers, and resisted the Russian invasion. But after the complications of World War II, the Continuation War, and other events, it ended with Finland losing approximately one-tenth of its territory to the Soviet Union, which today is part of the Russian Federation.

Could this happen again? Yes, it could. Practically all wars Sweden has fought with Russia historically have occurred on Finnish, Ukrainian – in Poltava – or Baltic territory. So it was also in the Russo-Swedish War, in Gustav III's Russian war, and when Sweden was drawn into the Napoleonic intrigues and lost all of Finland in 1809.

We have a responsibility together with Finland and Nato to maintain Nato's outer border. This does not only concern the Finnish land border against Russia. We saw what happened a little over a week ago. A Geran2 drone, that is, a Russian drone slightly modified according to the instructions for Iranian Shahed drones, struck a residential building in Romania. No one died, but two people were injured. 70 people had to be evacuated. Romania's president Nicușor Dan was very, very clear that it was a Russian missile intended for Ukraine that struck in the neighboring country. This means that Nato today must have deterrence capability and be able to maintain the territorial integrity in all of Ukraine's neighboring countries and along all borders against Russia. It is extremely important.

Madam Speaker! I think one can also point out that historically, Swedish neutrality has relied very much on someone else managing to balance Russia. That was a conclusion already drawn by Jean Baptiste, Karl XIV Johan, when he was installed as king. Sweden no longer had the capacity to take back Finland and balance Russia in our region. That led to the British having to do it. The British were in land on Gotland in the middle of the 1800s, for example. After the British came Imperial Germany, and after the Second World War it became Nato.

Now Sweden is a member of Nato. We contribute to the collective defense. It is extremely important that we do so, partly because we have much to contribute, and partly because we have a moral responsibility towards our neighboring countries, not least the Baltic countries that were occupied by the Soviet Union.

Madam Speaker! I believe it was Peter Hultqvist, Socialdemokraterna, who mentioned the longer perspective regarding how we must relate to Russia and said that it is about 50 years. That is indeed the case. We see a very clear historical pattern, a common thread, in Russia's actions. It doesn't matter much whether we speak of the Russian tsarist empire until Nicholas II abdicated in 1917, the communist Soviet Russia after Vladimir Lenin's coup in the autumn of 1917, or today's far-right, fascist-like Russia under Vladimir Putin in the 2000s.

Russia has taken it upon itself to dominate, torment, and invade its neighboring countries and neighboring peoples. It is a historical fact. Minorities have been deported left and right. Russia is fundamentally a colonial power that has emerged through imperialism. When one had practically colonized all of Siberia, one turned westward and then collided with the Swedish armies during the era of Great Power. And one expanded southward. When the Bolsheviks took power in Russia, they took the country out of the First World War through a separate peace with Germany. It meant that Russia ceded enormously large areas. Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Ukraine, Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania became independent states. It was 1918.

When Germany capitulated, Lenin no longer felt bound by the peace treaty with the Germans. One then immediately began to retake the areas that had been legally ceded at the peace of Brest-Litovsk a year earlier. This led to Russia retaking Georgia, Azerbaijan, Armenia and Ukraine, which then became Soviet republics. But they did not manage to retake Finland, because Mannerheim and the Whites won the civil war there. They did not manage to take over Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania because they succeeded in maintaining their sovereignty. They did not manage to take over Poland, despite the fact that they invaded Warsaw in 1920.

What did the Soviet Union do then? Well, they waited until the next world war and attacked Finland in the Winter War. They occupied Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania and partitioned Poland in a pact with Hitler. Then the entire Soviet empire collapsed in 1991. Then all these countries became independent again. Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, and Ukraine.

What has Russia done since then? Well, they have resorted to the same type of expansionism again, with attacks on Georgia and by using force to try to prevent Armenia from choosing the European path. In Ukraine, it was first the annexation of Crimea, then the involvement in Donbass in the southeastern part of the country, and then the full-scale invasion. Constant hybrid attacks and denial of other countries' sovereignty occur.

It is in light of this, Madam Speaker, that we must see our commitment to Nato. As long as Russia has a doctrine, an ideology, and a mindset that implies taking the right to act in this way towards its neighboring peoples and towards neighboring countries, Nato must maintain its deterrent capability and stand up for those affected by the expansionism and the aggressive behavior. Now it is Ukraine; tomorrow it could be someone else.

With this, I would like to move for the Liberal Party's approval of the proposal in the report.

(Applause)

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Lorena Delgado Varas (-)

Madam Speaker! This will be brief. There are some of us in this assembly who say no to Sweden becoming NATO's leading military power in the north. We say yes to disarmament, diplomacy and an independent Swedish security policy.

History shows that NATO's military interventions do not create peace. They have rather created chaos. Many countries have still not been repaired after that.

Sweden's place is not in the front line of a nuclear weapons alliance. In a changed security situation, military escalation does not mean that one strengthens Swedish security. Therefore, I move for approval of our motion to reject the bill, and we say no to Nato for real.

The deliberation was hereby concluded.

(Decisions were made under § 8.)

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)