The Nordic Times has previously highlighted how the Swedish government is borrowing SEK 300 billion (€27.5 billion) for “the biggest rearmament since the Cold War”.

However, former Swedish Commander-in-Chief Johan Hederstedt believes that this is far from enough and points out that NATO will require Sweden to contribute significantly more money than that.

The current initiative means that the Moderate-led government is borrowing about €4,600 per Swede of working age for military rearmament until 2035.

Analysts point out that future generations of Swedes will be forced to pay for the investment through higher taxes – and others suggest raising the retirement age to pay for the project.

Johan Hederstedt was commander-in-chief between 2000 and 2023, and although he praises the rearmament announcement, he believes that the real cost will be much more expensive than what has been presented so far.

– Adding SEK 300 billion to the defense budget is good, but it will not be enough. NATO will demand even more, he says.

“No time to waste”

Hederstedt believes that the war in Ukraine and the new US foreign policy under Donald Trump have led to increased uncertainty in Europe – but also strengthened cooperation between the continent’s countries.

– Europe needs to be united and I see several signs of this, not least the British Prime Minister taking the initiative. The EU is strong in that it is investing a huge amount of money in equipping the countries of Europe, which is positive, he continues.

He believes it is highly unlikely that Russia would pose a direct military threat to Sweden – but he nevertheless argues that it is important to “strengthen military, civilian and psychological defense” very quickly.

– We can’t wait; there’s no time to waste. Decisions and financial support need to come early, he asserts.

Instead, it is alleged Russian disinformation, influence campaigns and cyberattacks that threaten Sweden, according to the former commander-in-chief – who claims to be particularly worried about Swedish voters being influenced by pro-Russian messages.

– And that can be incredibly serious when they can influence not only the electoral system but also the people in terms of what to vote for, he says.

Double standards

Exactly how Russia is alleged to influence the Swedish election result is not clear, but according to the Swedish Psychological Defense Agency, it includes “manipulating the flow of information” and spreading misleading information “with the aim of influencing public opinion” or “disrupting and weakening society”.

For example, when Russian media and opinion leaders report critically or negatively on European establishment politicians and instead highlight nationalist or conservative alternatives such as Alternative for Germany, this is usually cited as an example of alleged Russian election interference.

Critics have long pointed out that the debate on foreign election interference is often conducted in a deliberately dishonest and alarmist manner – and that those who are appalled by the effects of Russian propaganda on the electorate simultaneously turn a blind eye to the influence of American media, lobby groups and think tanks or left-liberal international NGOs such as George Soros’ Open Society Foundations have had over Swedish politics for decades.