hh.sePublications
Change search
Refine search result
1 - 1 of 1
CiteExportLink to result list
Permanent link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Rows per page
  • 5
  • 10
  • 20
  • 50
  • 100
  • 250
Sort
  • Standard (Relevance)
  • Author A-Ö
  • Author Ö-A
  • Title A-Ö
  • Title Ö-A
  • Publication type A-Ö
  • Publication type Ö-A
  • Issued (Oldest first)
  • Issued (Newest first)
  • Created (Oldest first)
  • Created (Newest first)
  • Last updated (Oldest first)
  • Last updated (Newest first)
  • Disputation date (earliest first)
  • Disputation date (latest first)
  • Standard (Relevance)
  • Author A-Ö
  • Author Ö-A
  • Title A-Ö
  • Title Ö-A
  • Publication type A-Ö
  • Publication type Ö-A
  • Issued (Oldest first)
  • Issued (Newest first)
  • Created (Oldest first)
  • Created (Newest first)
  • Last updated (Oldest first)
  • Last updated (Newest first)
  • Disputation date (earliest first)
  • Disputation date (latest first)
Select
The maximal number of hits you can export is 250. When you want to export more records please use the Create feeds function.
  • 1.
    Lennings, Christofer
    et al.
    Halmstad University.
    Kadric, Emir
    Halmstad University.
    Strategisk chock: Påverkan i svensk säkerhetsstrategi under tio år2018Independent thesis Basic level (degree of Bachelor), 10 credits / 15 HE creditsStudent thesis
    Abstract [en]

    Over the course of the past ten years, Russia has used its military means against former Soviet states in an effort to achieve its political objectives. The explanations behind this behavior are probably several, but NATO’s and EU’s expansion to Russia’s proximity and area of interest could very well have played a significant role. The Russian intervention in Georgia in 2008 and the annexation of Crimea in 2014 were from a Swedish strategy perspective, both unexpected, surprising and led to severe changes in Swedish security strategy, thus by definition being strategic shocks. This study aims to analyze if and, in that case how two Russian strategic shocks have affected Sweden’s national security strategy over the course of the past decade. Thus, in doing so it contributes to an increase in understanding the development of Swedish security strategy, its underlying causes, background and relation to Russian geopolitical behavior. This knowledge will also help to better understand the current strategy, political security actions in general as well as a contribution to future analysis of strategies.

    This case study utilizes a frame of reference based on Jacob Westberg’s model of a strategies components, environment, ends, means andways, to define, analyze and evaluate the security strategy in its right context. Through qualitative text analysis, this case study analyzes four analysis units consisting of official security strategy and Defense bills by the Swedish government. Spanning from 2006 to the last unit, the National security strategy from 2017. To enrich the empirical analysis, earlier research on the subject at hand, as well as, reports from the Swedish Defense Commission and the Swedish armed forces have been added to the study.  

    The study concludes that the two strategic shocks have in fact had a major impact on Swedish security strategies over the past decade. Causing a shift from focusing on international operations, a solidarity doctrine and a strictly professional armed force mainly used abroad, to focusing on Sweden’s immediate vicinity, with a Baltic Sea alliance and a re-establishment of a total defense concept. Russia’s intervention in Georgia had a modest impact compared to the annexation of Crimea which created a paradigm in Swedish security strategy. It seems like the first shock was partly absorbed due to a misbelief of European safety as well as Sweden’s two-hundred-year long history of peace, mainly due to a neutral- and alliance free policy. As a result, the first shock functioned as a catalyst, amplifying the impact of the second strategic shock, causing a total turnaround of the Swedish security strategy. Its effects initiated the re-establishment of a total defense concept, new military means, strengthening of the national defense and establishing an increased permanent military presence on Gotland. It also included deepening the bi-lateral co-operation with Finland, USA, the other Nordic-Baltic countries as well as with NATO. The Swedish security strategy is now being focused to two main courses of action. The first, being able to handle a military attack on Swedish soil, the other an alliance strategy with mainly Finland and the USA in the Baltic area. 

1 - 1 of 1
CiteExportLink to result list
Permanent link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf