We Social Democrats must say no to NATO
S-profiles: Nuclear weapons a bigger threat than Putin invading Gotland
PUBLISHED: TODAY 06.00
This is a debate article. It is the writer who is responsible for the opinions expressed in the text, not Aftonbladet.
The destructive role of nuclear weapons is not mentioned at all in the documentation sent out by the S party board for the so-called security policy dialogue in the party. The very fast NATO process raises the question of how democracy works in S, write Henrik Fritzon and Pierre Schori.
The destructive role of nuclear weapons is not mentioned at all in the documentation sent out by the S party board for the so-called security policy dialogue in the party. The very fast NATO process raises the question of how democracy works in S, write Henrik Fritzon and Pierre Schori.
Photo: TT, ANNA SCHORI
DEBATE
DEBATE. The first thing that needs to be said about the NATO issue is something that is rarely even mentioned in today's discussion: NATO is an alliance of nuclear weapons, almost all of which are American under the exclusive control of the Pentagon.
If these doomsday weapons come into use, we will all perish.
NATO membership increases tensions in the Baltic Sea and immediately makes Sweden a target for Russian nuclear weapons in the event of a major power conflict.
Here, too, the greatest danger of war, between the United States and Russia, does not lie in Putin invading Gotland. His imperial dream has already crashed in Ukraine.
Many of today's younger generations have not experienced what it means to live in a world where the threat of destruction and total annihilation is ever-present.
Following the US bombings in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, journalist Wilfred Burchett sent "a warning to the world about the unknown nuclear plague". Seemingly healthy people "lost their hair, bruises appeared on their bodies. And the bleeding started from ears, nose and mouth ”. A few years later, five countries had nuclear weapons.
Today, we have nine people holding the rest of the world hostage in the atomic bomb's terror balance.
At the initiative of Olof Palme, a group of politicians from East and West, North and South, was able to convince the leaders of the United States and the Soviet Union that "in a nuclear war, there are no winners but losers." This led in 1987 to the first and only dismantling of an entire category of nuclear weapons in Europe, also at the suggestion of Palme and his group.
Earlier, Finnish President Kekkonen had raised the issue of a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Baltic Sea, which is supported by Olof Palme.
If we join NATO, we will be prevented from signing the UN Convention on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons or pursuing the issue of a nuclear-weapon-free zone, which the Party Congress has supported. Austria and Ireland, on the other hand, have signed the UN Convention and remain non-aligned.
In general, Sweden's opportunities to work for peace and disarmament will be cut short.
The destructive role of nuclear weapons in world politics is not mentioned at all in the documentation sent out by the party board for the so-called security policy dialogue in the party.
NATO membership is briefly described as "Sweden receives security guarantees from other member countries and at the same time undertakes to contribute to the defense of other NATO countries if they are attacked".
Does anyone think that a re-elected Donald Trump, which is the highest possible scenario, would give such guarantees if something NATO was attacked by his friend Putin? The US midterm elections in November provide the answer to the question of Trump's chances.
For these reasons, the Social Democrats should stick to their congressional decision on Swedish freedom of alliance.
Even the parties that advocate NATO membership should see the benefits of not rushing a decision and instead awaiting development.
This very rapid NATO process also raises questions about how democracy works in social democracy and, in general, about popular support.
We have had a number of referendums and important debates several times before in Sweden. But never before has such an important decision been rushed forward as now. It is a high stakes game with many risks, yes an issue that is ultimately about war and peace.
Putin's war must be met with strong, concrete solidarity with the people of Ukraine and harsh sanctions against Russia.
But sustainable peace and security in Europe is not founded by military escalation and, above all, not by sharp throws in our security policy. Peace is built through long-term peace work, popular commitment and cooperation within the EU. Non-aligned countries have a role to play here, as Sweden has done so successfully.
That's what this talks about NATO should be about.
Henrik Fritzon, former chairman of the regional board in Skåne, today second vice chairman of the regional board (S)
Pierre Schori, former Deputy Foreign Minister (S). Today chairman of the Olof Palme Memorial Fund
