SWEDEN: FOREIGN POLICY PRIORITIES IN AN ELECTION

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 03 STOCKHOLM 000224 SIPDIS SIPDIS E.O. 12958: DECL: 02/15/2016 TAGS: PREL PGOV SW SUBJECT: SWEDEN: FOREIGN POLICY PRIORITIES IN AN ELECTION SEASON REF: A. EMAIL CHRISTENSEN/DALLAND 2/15 ¶B. STOCKHOLM 192 Classified By: Polcouns Casey Christensen, reason 1.4 (b) and (d). Summary and Comment -------------- ¶1. (u) Foreign Minister Laila Freivalds outlined 2/15 GoS priorities during the annual plenary foreign policy session of parliament, sparking pointed exchanges with the opposition as each side sought to lay down pre-election markers. Sweden's relationship to NATO and the U.S. were prominently featured by both Freivalds and opposition figures. Freivalds reiterated the GoS approach of not participating in military alliances, while the Moderates and Liberals called for a discussion of NATO membership. The opposition Alliance for Sweden (Moderates, Liberals, Christian Democrats, and Center) made much of differences of views regarding Sweden's relations to the EU among the governing Social Democrats and their Left Party and Green supporters, while Freivalds highlighted differences among the Alliance for Sweden parties in terms of support for NATO membership. The GoS and its supporters were more critical of Israel than were the Alliance members. Freivalds said Sweden hoped to continue to provide development support to the Palestinian areas. Freivalds noted during the debate, in response to a question, that she would be meeting soon with Secretary Rice, and intended to raise human rights issues with her. ¶2. (c) The parliamentary debate provided a good preview of foreign policy issues that will be raised in the run-up to the September parliamentary elections -- although the campaign will primarily focus on domestic welfare state issues -- and an idea of what a change of government could mean for U.S. policy interests. The two leading parties of the opposition, Moderates and Liberals, are pro-NATO, and call for greater bilateral cooperation with the U.S. Their Christian Democrat and Center Party allies take a more nuanced stance, especially on NATO, with the Center Party living up to its name. The governing Social Democrats are pragmatic on working with NATO, while saying no to membership, but rely on the support of the Left Party, which portrays the U.S. as the source of all that is wrong in the world, and the Greens, which also broadly criticizes U.S. policy. For more than a year, the Alliance for Sweden parties have been leading in the polls. But support for the Social Democrats runs deep, and is tied to two traditional political pillars: military non-alignment and support for the welfare state. By underscoring the "risk" of a push to join NATO that would be posed by an opposition victory, Freivalds was playing on fears that the "bourgeois" parties could imperil the Swedish model. To the extent that foreign policy figures in the elections, we are likely to hear this refrain again. End Summary and Comment. GoS Foreign Policy Priorities -------------- ¶3. (u) Foreign Minister Laila Freivalds presented 2/15 the annual statement of Swedish foreign policy to the parliament (ref A). Freivald's full statement is available in English at http://www.sweden.gov.se/sb/d/3103/a/58251. Relevant key points included: -- a restatement of Sweden's policy of "non-participation in military alliances." Freivalds made a virtue of cooperative non-membership: "We value our cooperation with NATO, but see no reason for Sweden to join NATO. Non-participation in military alliances gives us both the independence our international commitments need and the opportunity to participate in international cooperation for peace and security." Freivalds challenged the opposition parties to present their views on NATO membership during the debate, seeking to highlight differences among the opposition members of the Alliance for Sweden. -- a measured call for developing cooperation with the U.S.: "Just as we need a commitment from the USA on global issues, the USA needs the international community to enable it to deal with its own threat scenario." In response to question regarding Sweden's relations with the U.S. and human rights issues, Freivalds said she would be meeting with Secretary Rice soon, and would raise human rights. -- an implied openness to deal with Hamas on Palestinian STOCKHOLM 00000224 002 OF 003 issues: "A completely new political situation has emerged (following the Palestinian elections) that the international community and Israel must deal with in a sensible way. Support for peace efforts on the part of Sweden and the EU must continue. We also want to continue our support to the Palestinian areas. However, the level of cooperation depends upon the actions of the new Palestinian government. It must dissociate itself from violence in words and deeds, and accept Israel's right to exist." -- a tough line on Iran: "It is not in any country's interest that Iran acquires nuclear weapons. The pressure on Iran's leadership must be kept up. In the longer term, the whole of the Middle East should be made a zone free of nuclear weapons." -- an emphasis on the importance of the UN, and the need for UN reform: "One of the Government's top foreign policy priorities is UN reform," including a reformed Security Council. -- a focus on difficult countries in Sweden's neighborhood, including Russia, Ukraine, and Belarus: "During the year, a broad initiative to promote Sweden will be conducted in Russia," where a new Consulate General will be inaugurated in Kaliningrad. On Ukraine, "Sweden is one of the countries in the EU that is most clearly advocating a membership perspective for Ukraine" in the WTO and the EU. Belarus "is governed by a hard-line, authoritarian regime. Sweden's support to the democratisation of Belarus is best expressed through involvement, not isolation." The Opposition Response -------------- ¶4. (u) Each of the four opposition parties responded separately. Moderate Party vice-Chair of the Foreign Affairs Committee Gunilla Carlsson chose to focus initially on the Government's failures in connection with the humanitarian disaster in Darfur, calling for UN boots on the ground with Swedish forces contributing. This was intended to demonstrate the gap between the Government's rhetoric and its actions. The Alliance for Sweden has called for a more muscular foreign policy, including a greater willingness to use force when necessary. Carlsson may also have in intended to send a message to Swedish companies that they would be more secure abroad and better supported by a Moderate-led government. Sweden's exports to Sudan have grown from 13 million dollars in 1999 to 80 million dollars in the first 11 months of 2005. Carlsson also underscored the importance of better cooperation with NATO and the U.S. Carlsson noted differences among the Social Democrats, who support strong EU participation, and its supporting parties Greens and Left Party, which oppose Sweden's EU membership. In a later intervention, Carlsson raised the specter of Left party leader Lars Ohly as a possible Foreign Minister. ¶5. (u) Liberal Cecilia Wigstrom criticized the Government's role in pressuring a web service to shut down a web site publishing the Mohammed cartoons (ref B). She called for closer cooperation with the U.S., and a recognition of the essential security role it has played in saving Europe from "the Nazis and communism." Sweden's fence-sitting role in regard to NATO was not acceptable. Sweden should drop neutrality and join NATO. She also supported the U.S. intervention in Iraq. ¶6. (u) Christian Democrat Holger Gustafson called for "a better knowledge of religious questions" in order to avoid the backlash now experienced by Denmark. He said the Government always criticized the U.S., and Social Democrats had sounded nearer to Russia than the U.S., while the U.S. was the bastion of values of democracy and human rights shared by Sweden. Gustafson also criticized the Government's openness toward China, "a country with slave camps." He also noted that Christian Democrat head Goran Hagglund had nominated Cuban dissident Osvaldo Paya for the Nobel Peace prize. ¶7. (u) Center Party Agne Hansson called for a foreign policy based on a broad consensus. During later debate, in response to Freivald's request for party representatives to state clearly their stance on NATO, Hansson said there was an understanding among the opposition that NATO would not be raised unless there was a broad consensus. Hansson said the STOCKHOLM 00000224 003 OF 003 U.S. should stop its plans for missile defense. The Government's Uncomfortable Allies -------------- ¶8. (u) Left Party Alice Astrom decried the U.S. "double standard" on human rights, citing secret prisons, Guantanamo, and U.S.-led interventions in Afghanistan and Iraq. She said the same requirements should be made of Israel as of Hamas, and called Israel an occupying power. Astrom cited democratic "progress" in Latin America, with Chavez in Venezuela, Morales in Bolivia, and Lula in Brazil representing the poor people. ¶9. (u) Green Party Lotta Hedstrom criticized the U.S. for Abu Ghraib, renditions, and CIA flights. She noted that Israel has nuclear weapons, but the U.S. choses to criticize Iran, Korea, and Pakistan. Israel, she said, is an apartheid state and a sponsor of terrorism. A Final Word from the Social Democrats -------------- ¶10. (u) Social Democrat Chair of the Foreign Affairs Committee Urban Ahlin said Sweden could work with NATO "on everything except on the basis of Article V." Ahlin said the U.S. approach of force had not promoted democracy in the Middle East. The EU's attraction had a much better record at inducing democratic reform. There was a long line still of countries wanting to join the EU; they recognize that they would have to make changes to do so. The answer to the question of how to promote democratic reform was not military power. Comment -------------- ¶11. (c) The parliamentary debate provided a good preview of foreign policy issues that will be raised in the run-up to the September parliamentary elections. We underscore, however, that issues of health care, social security, sick leave, retirement, and other welfare state benefits are the major focus of this electoral campaign. The NATO issue is of interest primarily because of how it will be used by the Social Democrats to underscore division among the opposition, not because the election will be, in any sense, a referendum on NATO membership. At the same time, it is clear that the leading parties of the opposition, the Moderates and Liberals, would like to steer Sweden in that direction, as well as toward a closer relation with the U.S. The Christian Democrats have a more nuanced, but quite positive view of the U.S., while the Center party balances itself on the fence as precisely as possible. We will never make converts to Atlanticism of the Left and the Greens, although the later are more issue-oriented. Support for the Social Democrats runs deep, and is tied to two traditional political pillars: military non-alignment and support for the welfare state. By underscoring the "risk" of a push to join NATO that would be posed by an opposition victory, Freivalds was playing on fears that the "bourgeois" parties could imperil the Swedish model. To the extent that foreign policy figures in the elections, we are likely to hear this refrain again. (Drafted by POL:CChristensen) NOBLE