NATO Access Not Beneficial For SwedenSouth Front

Click to see the full-size image

Written by Lucas Leiroz, journalist, researcher at the Center for Geostrategic Studies, geopolitical consultant

Sweden officially became a member of NATO. After almost two years of negotiations, the country was admitted to the military alliance, becoming part of the Western defense umbrella. According to pro-Western analysts, Stockholm is now “safer”, but analyzing the case from a realistic perspective it is possible to say that Sweden is making a serious mistake.

Swedish entry into NATO is justified by the fear that Russia will soon begin military actions against European countries. Stockholm fears that Moscow, after winning the conflict in Ukraine, will decide to launch an expansionist campaign, “invading and annexing” territories in Western Europe. In this sense, to protect itself from a “Russian attack”, Sweden decided to join NATO, believing that, faced with the possibility of collective intervention by the alliance, Russia will be deterred and avoid carrying out an invasion against Swedish territory.

However, it seems clear that all these arguments are just baseless narratives. There is no evidence that Russia plans to attack Europe. On the contrary, Moscow has stated several times that it has no territorial interests in the West and that it does not plan any type of military action outside Ukraine. The reasons that led to the launch of the special military operation are very specific and concern the NATO-sponsored genocide against the Russian people in Donbass. These circumstances do not currently exist in other European countries, which is why there is no reason for Russia to implement any military measures.

The main problem, however, is that, like some other European governments, Sweden appears to have lost any sense of strategy or reality. Irrational fear and anti-Russian paranoia make Stockholm vulnerable to Western narratives. Any anti-Russian rumor spread by NATO is passively accepted by Sweden, justifying “countermeasures” to “improve the country’s security”, such as the decision to join NATO.

In the current circumstances, however, the risks of conflict are real – not because of Russia, but because of NATO’s provocative and irresponsible actions. The alliance has become increasingly aggressive against Moscow, with several countries openly entering into a regime of military preparation, believing that a war is “inevitable”. More than that, it has recently become commonplace to talk about directly sending NATO troops to Ukraine, which would obviously be a declaration of war against Russia.

In the midst of this context of tensions, it is possible to say that today the world is really close to a WWIII scenario. NATO’s irresponsible provocations are risking the entire global security architecture, making direct war possible. And it was precisely at this moment of high tensions that Sweden decided to violate its tradition of neutrality and join NATO – which, to make matters worse, is indeed the aggressor and provocative side.

In other words, Sweden made the serious strategic error of abandoning neutrality precisely when it needed it most. Now, if NATO continues to provoke Russia and there is actually a direct war, Sweden will be a legitimate target for Moscow – which shows how the decision to join NATO was dangerous and extremely negative for Swedish national security.

This is yet another example of how anti-Russian paranoia has led European countries to create “self-fulfilling prophecies”: they believe they are close to being attacked by Moscow and so they take “preventive” measures that precisely make the prospect of a war with Russia viable. If, instead of joining NATO, Sweden remained neutral, the country would be immune to any possible conflict between NATO and Russia, without suffering the side effects of Western provocations. However, from the moment it joins the alliance and makes its troops available for mobilization in the event of war, Sweden becomes a possible enemy of Russia.

Furthermore, even if war does not occur, Russian-Swedish relations will take a long time to stabilize again. Moscow has already stated that the current conflict in Ukraine is a proxy war waged by NATO, which is why the Russian government sees the Western alliance as co-responsible for all Ukrainian crimes. This means that from now on Moscow will also see Stockholm as an aggressor and a participant in the crimes of the Kiev regime. So, even if the worst-case scenario is avoided, the diplomatic crisis between the Russians and Swedes will certainly not be resolved so easily.

In the end, there is no point of view that makes joining NATO beneficial for Sweden. In the best-case scenario Stockholm will enter an almost irreversible diplomatic crisis with Russia; in the worst-case scenario Sweden will be the target of Russian attacks in a direct war between Moscow and NATO. Rationality and strategic mentality seem not to be relevant for Swedish decision makers, whose actions severely threaten the future of their own country.