Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
09STOCKHOLM484
2009-08-03 07:06:00
UNCLASSIFIED
Embassy Stockholm
Cable title:  

Media Reaction - Swedish Role in Afghanistan

Tags:  OPRC KMDR KPAO PINS PINR EUN AF SW 
pdf how-to read a cable
VZCZCXYZ0001
OO RUEHWEB

DE RUEHSM #0484/01 2150706
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
O 030706Z AUG 09
FM AMEMBASSY STOCKHOLM
TO SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE 4593
UNCLAS STOCKHOLM 000484

SIPDIS

SECSTATE FOR INR/R/MR, EUR/PPD, EUR/NB, SA/PPD, S/SRAP

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: OPRC KMDR KPAO PINS PINR EUN AF SW
SUBJECT: Media Reaction - Swedish Role in Afghanistan

Swedish media have recently featured a spate of articles and
commentary pieces examining the Swedish presence and role in
Afghanistan. Much of the introspection stems from a July 23 attack
on Swedish troops in northwest Afghanistan in which no Swedes were
injured, but three attackers were killed. Swedish and Finnish
troops operating out of their main base, Camp Northern Lights, near
Mazar-e-Sharif came under fire again on July 30 with no casualties.
Excerpts of recent reporting follow.

FM Bildt: EU Should take Bigger Role in Afghanistan
-------------- --------------
On July 27, TT - Sweden's wire service - carried an article with the
headline "Bildt: Bigger Role for EU in Afghanistan" reporting
statements from Swedish Foreign Minister Carl Bildt in his widely
read blog that he had "great difficulty understanding" reported
calls to withdraw Swedish and EU troops from Afghanistan. His blog
entry entitled "Abandon? No, quite the opposite", argued for
enhanced engagement, saying "I believe that the European Union can
do more to help Afghanistan." In the entry, Bildt did not elaborate
on the role he envisaged for the EU in Afghanistan. He said Sweden,
which holds the rotating presidency of the 27-member bloc, would
table a proposal after the summer. Bildt also praised recent
changes to U.S. Afghanistan policy: "They have recognized the need
to protect civilians, and to focus more on civil and economic
measures for building peace."


Editorial: Swedish Government Must Defend Involvement
-------------- --------------
In a July 27 lead editorial entitled, "A new Vietnam?" Swedish
broadsheet Dagens Nyheter argued that the war in Afghanistan can
only be won with help from the civilian population, and that the
Swedish government must be prepared to defend Sweden's participation
when the losses mount. Excerpts follow:

"In the past week Swedish soldiers have been involved in firefights
in Afghanistan. No Swedes have been injured as of yet since the
violence has increased, but it is only a matter of time..."

"The government needs to be prepared for criticism. Dead Swedish
soldiers will raise the question of what Swedish soldiers are doing

in Afghanistan. There are a number of reasons. Sweden is a part of
the international community and must take its responsibility for all
nations' collective security. It is indisputable that the Taliban,
during their time in control, allowed Osama bin Laden's terror
network to conduct its business unhindered, and the risk is
considerable that if they returned to power they would do so again."


"Afghanistan accounts for 90% of the world's opium production -
opiates that are used for heroin production and smuggled to Europe.
The Taliban have also systematically violated human rights, operated
against their own people with brutality and are well-known for their
oppression of women, which has manifested itself by their attacks
against schools for girls...The threat from the Taliban remains..."

"The criticism (of the Swedish government) will increase. But the
war in Afghanistan is not a colonial war, but is aimed at self-rule
and a democratic Afghanistan. It is also about international
security, but it can only be won with the Afghans support.
Otherwise the risk is great that it develops into a repeat of the
Vietnam War - this time with Swedish soldiers on the front lines."

Op-Ed: Politicians Must Show Stronger Support for Troops
-------------- --------------
In a July 28 op-ed in Dagens Nyheter entitled "Support our Troops"
Former DN Political Editor Niklas Ekdal criticizes Swedish
politicians' weak support for the military after they have deployed
it. Excerpts follow:

"...In modern times there has been a price to pay for being
non-aligned. When those in charge do not take a position the troops
risk receiving criticism no matter how they act. When governments
say one thing to the people, but do something else on the
international scene, the troops get left in the balance without a
safety net."

"This phenomenon has expressed itself differently over the years.
Traumatized (Swedish) UN soldiers were forgotten for a long time
without honors or enough support. When the (Swedish) troops were to
be sent to the Balkans a Swedish Minister of Defense demanded that
they not have "combat tasks". In Afghanistan our governments have
pretended that the Swedish effort can be separated from the U.S.
effort, and as soon as something goes wrong the responsibility is
kicked downward, to the Armed Forces' leadership, instead of at the
political level where it belongs."

"After the escalation of violence in Afghanistan and the attacks in
the past few days where Swedes were involved in the killing of three
Taliban, these questions have come to the forefront. The lack of
political responsibility and popular support has dangerous
consequences. It is nonchalant to the personnel who are risking
their lives, and it makes recruitment to the Armed Forces more
difficult. It breeds bad morale and increased risk; if one
well-aimed attack or a different constellation in the parliament
would be enough for Sweden to pull out."

"Foreign Minister Carl Bildt has argued well on his blog, but he is
far too alone in his comments. "Support our troops" is a mantra
that one hears in the U.S. that shows that the nation stands behind
the soldiers that the U.S. as a democratic country sends out into
the world. Why are Swedish politicians ashamed to say something
similar? Why do they not take their full responsibility for their
decisions and explain the purpose behind having troops in military
missions in foreign countries?"

"A quick look at the map and history books shows that the US cannot
solely solve the problems in Afghanistan, no matter how many troops
they send, or how many Taliban they bomb....
If the international coalition gets the same image as their imperial
forerunners the mission is over. It was right to stop al-Qaeda and
its Taliban hosts after the terror attacks of 9/11, right to try and
assist the re-building of the country, but it is not possible to
bomb freedom into existence..."

"...there exists a UN mandate, international responsibilities and
good humanitarian intentions of which Sweden is a part. In this
case it is imperative that the troops have the nation's support...
Explain to the citizens what the military effort entails and that it
is decided by the developments in Afghanistan, not the elections in
Sweden 2010. Give the Swedish soldier and officers the recognition
they deserve."

Op-Ed: Defence Minister Lays Out Case for Involvement
-------------- --------------
In a July 29 op-ed in Dagens Nyheter, shortly after returning from
meeting Defense Secretary Gates and other officials in Washington,
Swedish Minister of Defence Sten Tolgfors laid out for the public
"This is why Swedish soldiers are fighting in Afghanistan." His
bottom line was that "we are in Afghanistan for the sake of the
Afghanis and ourselves." Excerpts follow:

"Their (Afghanis) freedom is being threatened by forces who want to
destroy the coming election with violence. Swedish soldiers,
together with troops from 40 countries, are making an important
effort under a UN mandate so that the elections on August 20th can
be conducted in a safe way. Sweden is also in Afghanistan for
Sweden's own security. It is not possible to let the country fall
apart and let it be taken over by terrorists."

"Many countries have been targeted by terrorism that has its roots
in Afghanistan, but it has not been said enough that those who have
suffered the most are Afghanistan's civilians."

"Today Afghanistan is a country where 2 million girls go to school,
but schools are still torched, schoolgirls threatened and subjected
to attacks by the opposition. Recently, acid was sprayed on a group
of schoolgirls. Today, 80% of the country's population has access to
basic health services. Before the international effort it was 8
percent. Today Afghanistan has a democratically elected President
and government. On August 20, a new election will be held in
Afghanistan. That is one reason for the escalation of violence. The
forces that are opposed to freedom, the equal treatment of men and
women and democracy have as their goal to destroy the elections
through threats and violence."

"Another purpose with the violence is to get the West to question
its presence in the country. Without the efforts of ISAF, which has
a UN mandate, Afghanistan would fall back into civil war, oppression
and dictatorship."

"Sweden is in Afghanistan for the Afghan people's security. For the
conviction that respect human rights and freedoms is a universal
human right. Sweden is in Afghanistan because the conflict must be
seen in a regional context. The conflict is not limited to
Afghanistan, but is closely tied to the troubles in Pakistan."

"Sweden is in Afghanistan because it affects Sweden's own security.
The acts of September 11, 2001 showed that in today's globalized
world it is not possible to allow a country fall apart so that it is
taken over by groups that allow terrorist organizations. On the
contrary, regional problems can become so large that they have a
global impact."

"...Sweden welcomes the new US strategy for Afghanistan..."

"The efforts in Afghanistan are not without risk to the personnel
there. If that risk was not present there would be no need to send
troops... It is central that the elections on August 20 can be
conducted safely. It is important that a broader civilian-military
cooperation effort is achieved. If this is successful, the
country's population can see that the development is going in the
right direction and that the efforts are bearing fruit. That creates
the foundation for a stable Afghanistan in the future."

Poll: Majority of Swedes Support Involvement in Afghanistan
-------------- --------------
A poll released on July 28, by independent broadcaster TV4 showed
that more than half of Swedes agree with the government's decision
to send soldiers to Afghanistan. The new poll by Novus Opinion
reveals:
Support for the Swedish presence in Afghanistan is greatest among
men and conservative voters.
63 percent of men think sending Swedish troops to the country is a
good idea, compared to 35 percent of women. Likewise, 67 percent of
conservative voters support the troops' presence, while only 41
percent of socialist bloc voters do.

Op-Ed: Central Asia Problems will come to Europe if no Action
-------------- --------------
A July 31 op-ed in Swedish broadsheet Svenska Dagbladet by Mark
Rhinard and Erik Brattberg of the Swedish Foreign Affairs Institute,
entitled "The EU must do more for Central Asia" called for greater
EU contributions to stability in Afghanistan and Pakistan to avoid
drug-trafficking, migration and radicalism problems reaching Europe.
Excerpts follow:
"...The EU has good possibilities to aid Central Asia, and has good
reasons for doing so when its own security is at stake..."
"If nothing is done, the problems in Afghanistan and Pakistan, along
with the neighboring Central Asian countries, will sooner or later
reach Europe. The EU should therefore adopt a more comprehensive
strategy for the region..."
"While the US puts great emphasis on military solutions, the EU can
instead use the many tools it has access to in order to improve
democracy, the rule of law and education in the entire region..."
"Finally, the EU should use its credibility and its economic
influence to engage other powers who have interests in the region,
such as China and Russia, to engage in a dialogue and cooperation
around common goals and solutions for the region at large..."
"Sweden should forcefully push the issue of a common long-term
strategy for Central Asia during its chairmanship. It is not only
Central Asia's future that is at stake; for every day that passes it
is becoming clearer that Europe's future is as well."
SILVERMAN