2024-12-112024/25:UFöU1 · p.1UFöUDefence
Security policy direction
What's at stake: The overall direction guides Sweden's actions within NATO and total defense for years to come, and a historical inquiry could yield lessons for future decisions but would also require resources and time.
Case texts and AI reasoning are AI-translated from the Swedish originals; the Swedish text is authoritative.
What the vote decides
The question concerns Sweden's overall security policy direction, including whether a new inquiry should be commissioned to study security policy developments during an earlier historical period, beyond the direction the government already proposes.
Yes Yes — the committee proposal
The committee agrees with the government's assessments of the security situation, including regarding Russia's invasion of Ukraine, the link between climate and security, and the importance of Sweden's loyal membership in NATO and the EU, and against that background sees no need for a new security policy inquiry into an earlier historical period.
No No — the reservations
Reservation 1 (SD)
The reservation holds that a new security policy inquiry should be commissioned for the period 1989-2009, in line with earlier inquiries from 1994 and 2002, in order to learn from history and preserve testimony from decision-makers while still possible.
Summarised from the committee report. Party labels in the summary come from the report, not from the vote.
What do the votes mean here?
Yes The committee proposal: rejecting the motions (keeping things as they are).
No Backing the counter-proposal: reservation 1 by SD.
Abstain The party marks a position of its own that is not one of the two final alternatives.
What each plan points to — and how the party voted
For each party: the vote its own election manifesto and party programme point to in this case, next to how the party actually voted. A plan can only point to Yes or No; a party can also abstain.
| Plan | Vote | Confidence | Evidence | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| V | No | Yes 21/0/0/3 | departs from the plan | confidence: low | not addressed |
| S | No | Yes 91/0/0/15 | departs from the plan | confidence: low | not addressed |
| MP | No | Abstain 0/0/16/2 | departs from the plan | confidence: low | not addressed |
| C | No | Abstain 0/0/21/3 | departs from the plan | confidence: low | derived |
| L | No | Yes 14/0/0/2 | departs from the plan | confidence: low | derived |
| KD | No | Yes 17/0/0/2 | departs from the plan | confidence: low | not addressed |
| M | No | Yes 59/0/0/9 | departs from the plan | confidence: low | derived |
| SD | No | No 0/63/0/9 | follows the plan | confidence: low | derived |
Committee proposal
The Riksdag rejects the motions 2024/25:1433 by Aron Emilsson et al. (SD) provision 1, 2024/25:3038 by Daniel Helldén et al. (MP) provision 1, 2024/25:3162 by Kerstin Lundgren et al. (C) provisions 5 and 11, 2024/25:3252 by Mikael Larsson and Kerstin Lundgren (both C) provision 1 and 2024/25:3257 by Emma Berginger et al. (MP) provision 1.
Original (Swedish)
Riksdagen avslår motionerna 2024/25:1433 av Aron Emilsson m.fl. (SD) yrkande 1, 2024/25:3038 av Daniel Helldén m.fl. (MP) yrkande 1, 2024/25:3162 av Kerstin Lundgren m.fl. (C) yrkandena 5 och 11, 2024/25:3252 av Mikael Larsson och Kerstin Lundgren (båda C) yrkande 1 och 2024/25:3257 av Emma Berginger m.fl. (MP) yrkande 1.
Riksdag decision: The Riksdag has addressed the preconditions and direction of security policy for the coming six years. The direction is part of the Government's proposition Total Defence 2025–2030. The Riksdag endorses the Government's stated direction for the current period. Among other things, both the Government and the Riksdag emphasize that Sweden's support to Ukraine shall be sustainable and long-term Sweden shall be a credible and reliable NATO member and pursue a solidarity alliance policy to strengthen security and stability in our region and throughout the Euro-Atlantic area political dialogue and diplomacy are important tools to strengthen Sweden's security and promote Swedish interests climate change constitutes a threat in itself and increases international tensions and instability and deepens existing conflicts. At the same time, the Riksdag decided to reject the security policy proposals submitted in motions, of which approximately forty are from the regular motion session of 2024. The Riksdag refers to the Government's assessments and positions in the proposition.
Counter-proposals
- The counter-proposal wants a new security policy study to be conducted analyzing Sweden's security policy during the period 1989 to 2009. (SD) — Reservation 1
Plan vs actual vote
Every party, in chamber order: what its own plan pointed to, how it voted, and the reasoning behind both. Highlighted rows are where the two differ — but a vote that follows the plan is a result too, so the reasoning is there for every party.
The plan says nothing about security policy historical investigations.
Plan documents: party programme
Reasoning and quotes
The plan says nothing about security policy historical investigations. Closest are the principles that research is needed to understand the world we live in and that policy should be based on knowledge and independent oversight. Given that, there is no obstacle to a new investigation into an earlier period, and the demand rather aligns with the plan's direction.
Original (Swedish)
Planen säger inget om säkerhetspolitiska historiska utredningar. Närmast ligger principerna att forskning behövs för att förstå den värld vi lever i och att politiken ska bygga på kunskap och oberoende granskning. Utifrån det finns inget hinder mot en ny utredning om en tidigare period, och kravet ligger snarast i planens riktning.
- knowledge as foundationdecisive»Forskning behövs för att förstå den värld vi lever i.« (party programme ↗)“Research is needed to understand the world we live in.”
- listen to research»att lyssna på forskningen och förena de insikterna med politisk« (party programme ↗)“to listen to the research and combine those insights with political”
- independent oversight»insyn och oberoende granskning.« (party programme ↗)“transparency and independent oversight.”
The plan takes no explicit position on what the committee actually decided — often because the committee's reason was procedural. The stance is derived and fully cited, but it does not show the party broke a commitment.
The documents say nothing about security policy historical investigations.
Plan documents: party programme
Reasoning and quotes
The documents say nothing about security policy historical investigations. The closest principle is the party programme's requirement that democratic processes shall be based on openness and transparency and that knowledge provides tools to independently interpret and evaluate events, which speaks for the counter-proposal's demand for a new investigation that preserves witness testimony. However, the basis is weak.
Original (Swedish)
Dokumenten säger inget om säkerhetspolitiska historiska utredningar. Närmast liggande princip är partiprogrammets krav på att demokratins processer ska bygga på offentlighet och insyn och att kunskap ger redskap att självständigt tolka och värdera skeenden, vilket talar för motförslagets krav på en ny utredning som bevarar vittnesmål. Underlaget är dock svagt.
- openness and transparencydecisive»Den demokratiska processen och samhällsförvaltningen måste bygga på offentlighet och« (party programme ↗)“The democratic process and public administration must be based on openness and”
- knowledge as a democratic tool»All kunskapsförmedling måste« (party programme ↗)“All knowledge communication must”
The plan takes no explicit position on what the committee actually decided — often because the committee's reason was procedural. The stance is derived and fully cited, but it does not show the party broke a commitment.
The plan says nothing about security policy history investigations.
Plan documents: party programme
Reasoning and quotes
The plan says nothing about security policy history investigations. The closest related principle is the party's demand for openness and the opportunity to scrutinize power, together with the programme's own emphasis on learning from history. Based on this, the demand for a new investigation is supported, but the foundation is weak and therefore the position is uncertain.
Original (Swedish)
Planen säger ingenting om säkerhetspolitiska historieutredningar. Närmast liggande princip är partiets krav på öppenhet och möjlighet att granska makten, tillsammans med programmets egen betoning på att lära av historien. Utifrån detta stöds kravet på en ny utredning, men underlaget är svagt och ställningstagandet därför osäkert.
- scrutiny of powerdecisive»Medborgarna ska alltid kunna granska makten.« (party programme ↗)“Citizens should always be able to scrutinize power.”
- lessons from history»Historien visar att människan och mänskliga samhällen har varit kapabla till både goda och grymma handlingar.« (party programme ↗)“History shows that humans and human societies have been capable of both good and cruel actions.”
- public access and transparency»Offentlighetsprincipen och meddelarfriheten måste värnas och stärkas.« (party programme ↗)“The principle of public access and freedom to report must be protected and strengthened.”
The plan takes no explicit position on what the committee actually decided — often because the committee's reason was procedural. The stance is derived and fully cited, but it does not show the party broke a commitment.
The plan does not address security policy historical investigations.
Plan documents: 2022 manifesto · party programme
Reasoning and quotes
The plan does not address security policy historical investigations. The nearest applicable principle is the commitment to increased transparency and that openness is a basic prerequisite for democracy, together with the view of education as a bearing part of the democratic project. From this follows weak support for the counter-proposal's demand for a new investigation preserving testimony and drawing lessons.
Original (Swedish)
Planen behandlar inte säkerhetspolitiska historiska utredningar. Närmast liggande princip är åtagandet om ökad transparens och att öppenhet är en grundförutsättning för demokratin, tillsammans med synen på bildning som en bärande del av det demokratiska projektet. Ur det följer ett svagt stöd för motförslagets krav på en ny utredning som bevarar vittnesmål och drar lärdomar.
- increased opennessdecisive»Sverige ska bli ännu mer transparent.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“Sweden shall become even more transparent.”
- openness as democracy's foundation»Öppenhet och transparens är grundförutsättningar för frihet, demokrati och för att förhindra korruption och övergrepp.« (party programme ↗)“Openness and transparency are basic prerequisites for freedom, democracy and for preventing corruption and abuse.”
- education strengthens democracy»Även bildning i bred mening, från förskolan till universiteten till den livslånga folkbildningen, är en bärande del av det demokratiska projektet.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“Education in the broad sense, from preschool to universities to lifelong public education, is also a bearing part of the democratic project.”
The plan takes no explicit position on what the committee actually decided — often because the committee's reason was procedural. The stance is derived and fully cited, but it does not show the party broke a commitment.
The plan does not address security policy historical investigations.
Plan documents: 2022 manifesto · party programme
Reasoning and quotes
The plan does not address security policy historical investigations. The closest position is that the party wants a policy that is wise rather than just wise after the fact, that is, lessons are drawn from earlier choices, and that public transparency and openness are fundamentally important to democracy. From this follows weak support for establishing the investigation; the plan gives no reason to oppose it.
Original (Swedish)
Planen tar inte upp säkerhetspolitiska historiska utredningar. Närmast liggande hållning är att partiet vill en politik som är klok i stället för bara efterklok, alltså att lärdomar dras av tidigare vägval, och att offentlighet och insyn har grundläggande betydelse för folkstyret. Härifrån följer ett svagt stöd för att tillsätta utredningen; planen ger inget skäl att motsätta sig den.
- lessons from historydecisive»För en politik som är klok i stället för bara efterklok.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“For a policy that is wise rather than just wise after the fact.”
- transparency in state action»Offentlighetsprincipen har en grundläggande betydelse för att förankra och fördjupa folkstyret« (party programme ↗)“The principle of public access has fundamental importance for anchoring and deepening democracy”
The plan takes no explicit position on what the committee actually decided — often because the committee's reason was procedural. The stance is derived and fully cited, but it does not show the party broke a commitment.
The plan says nothing about security policy historical investigations.
Plan documents: party programme
Reasoning and quotes
The plan says nothing about security policy historical investigations. The closest principle is stewardship of the cultural heritage and awareness of one's own historical identity, as well as that security policy shall be foresighted and preventive. Based on these principles, the plan weakly supports that a new investigation for an earlier period can be established.
Original (Swedish)
Planen säger ingenting om säkerhetspolitiska historieutredningar. Närmast liggande princip är förvaltarskapet av det kulturella arvet och medvetenheten om den egna historiska identiteten, samt att säkerhetspolitiken ska vara förutseende och preventiv. Utifrån dessa principer talar planen svagt för att en ny utredning för en tidigare period kan tillsättas.
- steward cultural heritagedecisive»En god kulturpolitik måste sträva efter att ta tillvara det värdefulla kulturella arv« (party programme ↗)“A good cultural policy must strive to preserve the valuable cultural heritage”
- preventive security policy»Kriser måste mötas med politikens alla preventiva« (party programme ↗)“Crises must be met with policy's all preventive”
- evaluation as a political task»Utvärdering, kostnadsuppföljning och kvalitetskontroll är därför viktiga politiska« (party programme ↗)“Evaluation, cost monitoring and quality control are therefore important political”
The plan takes no explicit position on what the committee actually decided — often because the committee's reason was procedural. The stance is derived and fully cited, but it does not show the party broke a commitment.
The documents say nothing about security policy historical investigations.
Plan documents: 2022 manifesto · party programme
Reasoning and quotes
The documents say nothing about security policy historical investigations. The nearest commitment is that in a changing world there are reasons to review Sweden's collective foreign policy toolkit, together with the principle that political reforms should rely on research and proven experience. This speaks weakly in favour of the counter-proposal's demand for a new investigation to draw lessons from history; however, the basis is thin.
Original (Swedish)
Dokumenten säger ingenting om säkerhetspolitiska historiska utredningar. Närmast liggande åtagande är att det i en föränderlig omvärld finns skäl att se över Sveriges samlade utrikespolitiska verktygslåda, tillsammans med principen att politiska reformer ska luta sig mot forskning och beprövad erfarenhet. Det talar svagt för motförslagets krav på en ny utredning för att dra lärdomar av historien; underlaget är dock tunt.
- review foreign policy toolsdecisive»I en föränderlig omvärld finns skäl att se över Sveriges samlade utrikespolitiska verktygslåda.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“In a changing world there are reasons to review Sweden's collective foreign policy toolkit.”
- realism from historical experience»Med optimismen följer också en realism grundad i erfarenheten« (party programme ↗)“With optimism also comes a realism grounded in experience”
flags: citat_blockerat
The plan takes no explicit position on what the committee actually decided — often because the committee's reason was procedural. The stance is derived and fully cited, but it does not show the party broke a commitment.
The plan states that Sweden's historic security policy choices have resulted in a unique period of peace and that this heritage should be preserved in the future, which speaks for investigating lessons from an earlier period while witnesses are still available.
Plan documents: 2022 manifesto
Reasoning and quotes
The plan states that Sweden's historic security policy choices have resulted in a unique period of peace and that this heritage should be preserved in the future, which speaks for investigating lessons from an earlier period while witnesses are still available. The plan also seeks analysis as the basis for preparedness. At the same time, the plan wants to hold back unnecessary public spending, which makes the support weak and derived.
Original (Swedish)
Planen slår fast att Sveriges historiska säkerhetspolitiska vägval gett en unik fredsperiod och att detta arv bör tas tillvara även i framtiden, vilket talar för att lärdomar av en tidigare period utreds medan vittnesmålen finns kvar. Planen efterfrågar också analys som grund för beredskap. Samtidigt vill planen hålla tillbaka onödiga offentliga utgifter, vilket gör stödet svagt och härlett.
- preserve security policy heritagedecisive»Svenska säkerhetspolitiska vägval har historiskt lett till en unik fredsperiod för landet, detta arv bör även i framtiden tas tillvara.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“Swedish security policy choices have historically led to a unique period of peace for the country, this heritage should be preserved in the future.”
- analysis as preparedness basis»Analysera och planera för olika typer av stora kriser« (2022 manifesto ↗)“Analyse and plan for different types of major crises”
- restraint with spending»Skala bort onödiga utgifter i det offentliga« (2022 manifesto ↗)“Scale back unnecessary spending in the public sector”
Share and embed
Sources and documents
- The committee report on riksdagen.se (2024/25:UFöU1)
- Committee report full text (HC01UFöU1)
- Per-MP voting data (API)
- Case status (API)
Documents under consideration
- Motion 2024/25:1406 — Militärt försvar av Lars Wistedt m.fl. (SD)
- Motion 2024/25:1433 — Säkerhetspolitik av Aron Emilsson m.fl. (SD)
- Motion 2024/25:1434 — Sveriges Natopolitik av Aron Emilsson m.fl. (SD)
- Motion 2024/25:1436 — Rymdstrategi av Aron Emilsson m.fl. (SD)
- Motion 2024/25:2435 — Förbud mot införsel av kärnvapen av Laila Naraghi m.fl. (S)
- Motion 2024/25:3023 — Försvar och samhällets krisberedskap av Peter Hultqvist m.fl. (S)
- Motion 2024/25:3038 — Stärkt beredskap och ett robustare samhälle av Daniel Helldén m.fl. (MP)
- Motion 2024/25:3088 — Militära relationer med Taiwan av Markus Wiechel (SD)
- Motion 2024/25:3107 — Internationell samverkan av Morgan Johansson m.fl. (S)
- Motion 2024/25:3160 — Krisberedskap och utveckling av militärt och civilt försvar av Mikael Larsson m.fl. (C)
- Motion 2024/25:3162 — Internationellt samarbete i en utmanande tid av Kerstin Lundgren m.fl. (C)
- Motion 2024/25:3247 — med anledning av prop. 2024/25:34 Totalförsvaret 2025-2030 av Hanna Gunnarsson m.fl. (V)
- Motion 2024/25:3252 — med anledning av prop. 2024/25:34 Totalförsvaret 2025-2030 av Mikael Larsson och Kerstin Lundgren (båda C)
- Motion 2024/25:3257 — med anledning av prop. 2024/25:34 Totalförsvaret 2025-2030 av Emma Berginger m.fl. (MP)
- Motion 2024/25:55 — Ett kärnvapenfritt Sverige av Hanna Gunnarsson m.fl. (V)
Source: The Swedish Parliament