Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsINTERVIEW: Would the EU defend Sweden if it was attacked?
Could the EU's mutual defence clause, which says member states will help each other if one is attacked, provide extra security for Sweden?https://www.thelocal.se/20220309/explained-would-the-eu-defend-sweden-if-it-was-attacked/
Russias invasion of Ukraine has reignited Swedens long-running debate about its own defence, and in particular whether it should join Nato. Prime Minister Magdalena Andersson has rejected joining the transatlantic alliance, but has written to EU leaders along with her Finnish counterpart to remind them of the blocs mutual defence clause, which says member states will come to each others aid with all possible means if one of them is attacked. Sweden and Finland are close partners of Nato, but as non-members they cant count on Nato intervening militarily if attacked, as they arent covered by the alliances Article 5 guarantee.
Andersson this week ruled out joining Nato, saying that an application to join would destabilise this part of Europe even further. But does the EUs mutual defence clause really provide Sweden with a cast-iron guarantee? Björn Fägersten, head of the Europe program at the Swedish Institute of International Affairs, says there are some key differences between the EUs and Natos guarantees.
The Local: Does the EUs mutual defence clause have a similar effect to Natos Article 5?
Björn Fägersten: In a purely legal sense they are equivalent in some ways the EU is a bit sharper. But on the other hand, the EUs clause has a sub-clause that makes clear that it doesnt affect member states individual choices on security policy, for instance for those countries that are neutral.
A key difference between the EU and Nato is that the EU has no real apparatus. Nato has a joint military headquarters, SHAPE, but the EU doesnt have an equivalent. Within the EU there are also expectations that Nato will be at the centre of European planning most EU countries are members. In the EUs Global Strategy from 2016 it is made clear that Nato is the cornerstone of the EUs defence.
snip
Sweden says it built a Russian fighter jet killer and stealth is totally irrelevant
https://archive.ph/Jou88#selection-1659.0-1659.85
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
3 replies, 712 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (5)
ReplyReply to this post
3 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
INTERVIEW: Would the EU defend Sweden if it was attacked? (Original Post)
Celerity
Mar 2022
OP
dsc
(52,130 posts)1. I am little surprised they decided not to join
I know I would be first in line.
ck4829
(34,977 posts)2. All this Russian incompetence on display, I'm thinking it could happen the other way
doc03
(35,148 posts)3. With the Russian's performance in Ukraine I don't
think anyone has to worry much about Russia. Providing they don't use nukes.