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