By: Dr Abida Rafique & Nazia Sheikh
Sweden’s 200-year-old neutrality policy ended on March 7, 2024 when it formally joined the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. The decision was heavily impacted by geographic factors as well as the shifting security landscape in the wake of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022. Sweden formally joined NATO in Washington, after the Russian invasion of Ukraine prompted a reevaluation of the country’s national security strategy and the realization that membership in the alliance offered the greatest assurance of protection for the Scandinavian nation. Sweden’s recognition of the shifting dynamics of security threats and the need to form a collective defense alliance in order to safeguard its interests nationally and maintain regional stability, demonstrated through this significant move.
On March 7, 2024, Sweden’s Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson delivered the final set of documents to the United States government, concluding an extended procedure that witnessed all members’ support for joining the military alliance come through.
The North Atlantic Treaty, signed on April 4, 1949, and established the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), a military alliance aimed at providing a counterbalance to Soviet armies stationed in post-World War II Central and Eastern Europe. Following the Russia-Ukraine war, Finland (2023) and Sweden (2024) joined NATO. This expansion signified an abrupt shift in the geopolitical environment Sweden abrogated their long-standing military non-alignment pledge.
Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty, which states that the signatory states agree that, defines the core principles of NATO that: “An armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all; and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defense recognized by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties. The basis of the alliance’s cohesion is its dedication to collective defense, which strengthens the member nations’ security structures and the alliance’s deterrence powers.
The Russian Federation was described as “the most significant and direct threat to Allies’ security and to peace and stability in the Euro-Atlantic area” in a June 2022 statement from the 30 NATO members, which also reaffirmed their “unwavering support” for Ukraine. The statement also included an official invitation for the two nations to join NATO.
Sweden put up a bid to join NATO in 2022. Sweden has a reputation for being a neutral player in European issues. For the previous 24 months, Hungary and Turkey—both of whom have opposed Sweden’s NATO membership for various reasons—have acted as the country’s main obstacles to membership. Though he eventually came around to Turkey’s admission in June 2023 after discussions with Swedish Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan had previously criticized Sweden for allegedly being too flexible on Kurdish groups that Turkey deems terrorist organization. Turkey accepted Sweden’s NATO application in January 2024.
Following French President Emmanuel Macron’s statement that the alliance had not ruled out the idea of NATO forces landing in Ukraine, Russia has issued a warning against the prospect of such an implausible scenario. This coincides with Sweden’s entry into the alliance. Macron stated “nothing is ruled out” to ensure that Ukraine wins its conflict with Russia, despite the fact that Ukraine is not a member of NATO, at a conference held in February 2024.
Sweden’s decision to join NATO has really focused more on its implications for the non NATO Allies. Relations between Sweden and the Major Non-NATO Allies (MNNA) would alter. For instance, countries that have strategic alliances with the United States but are not NATO members are normally accorded MNNA status. The possibility for changes in defense cooperation and diplomatic ties now arises from Sweden’s membership in NATO. The United States does in fact view India as a strategic partner. Over the past 20 years, the United States and India’s relationship has grown dramatically, involving defense, security, trade, and strategic alignment on regional and global concerns, among other areas of cooperation. Whereas India is even not a MNNA of NATO while Pakistan is.
Following the September 11 attacks 2001, Pakistan joined the US in the War on Terror, leading to Pakistan’s designation as a Major Non-NATO ally (MNNA) in 2004. Nevertheless, since gaining its independence, India has upheld a policy of non-alignment and strategic autonomy. It hasn’t pursued formal alliances with military blocs like NATO, despite working with other nations on defense and security matters.
In fact, the possibility of Sweden pursuing a strategic alliance with India, made possible by India’s standing as an American strategic ally, has the potential to upset South Asia’s equilibrium and cause strategic instability that would directly affect Pakistan. Increased defence collaboration between Sweden and India under such a partnership might take advantage of Sweden’s cutting-edge defense technology and India’s expanding military prowess.
Given the long-standing competition between India and Pakistan, this cooperation may increase the prospects of power in South Asia. With Sweden’s backing, India is potential for enhancing its defense capabilities and technical innovations would probably cause Pakistan to get alarmed and take action to protect its own security interests. The risk of conflict and instability in South Asia could be increased by this, as it could heighten current tensions and feed a cycle of military escalation and arms race.
Historically, Pakistan and Sweden have a diplomatic relationship that is characterized by collaboration in a number of areas, including trade, development, and education. Pakistan-Sweden relations may be strained if Sweden continued to back India as a strategic partner of the US after its NATO membership. This could cause Pakistan to view Sweden’s alliance with the US and India as a change in its foreign policy approach. This can erode the mutual respect and confidence that Pakistan and Sweden have developed over many years of bilateral collaboration. Pakistan might perceive Sweden’s backing for India as a security risk if it results in heightened military cooperation or arms sales to the country. This might cause diplomatic strain and prompt a reassessment of bilateral relations.
The authors are research officers at CISS AJK. They can be reached at [email protected]
