Evaluating Swedish Defense Minister Carl Oskar Bohlin's statements that 'Russia might be preparing for war with Sweden', Political Psychology Specialist Dr. Güler Kalay stated that America is increasing its military and diplomatic presence by making bilateral defense agreements with Northern European countries. Dr. Güler Kalay, stating that she cannot make very optimistic predictions for 2024, foreseeing that regional conflicts will escalate further, frozen conflicts will resurface, and new areas of conflict and threat will emerge, said, “In the current conjuncture, the Arctic is important as a geopolitical competition area and deserves attention in academia as much as in foreign policy.”
Dr. Güler Kalay, Assistant Director of Üsküdar Üniversitesi Political Psychology Application and Research Center/Political Psychology Center, evaluated the Sweden – Russia tension.
Directly linked to Sweden's NATO membership issue
Dr. Güler Kalay noted that Swedish Defense Minister Carl Oskar Bohlin's statements about 'Russia possibly preparing for war with Sweden' have brought Russia back to the world's political agenda. She said, “Sweden's rhetoric is not new; similar statements were made in April 2023. In analyzing these statements, it's important not to overlook that they are directly linked to Sweden's NATO membership issue.”
What do the US defense agreements with Denmark, Finland, and Sweden bring?
On the other hand, Dr. Güler Kalay stated that in the last days of 2023, America increased its military and diplomatic initiatives by making bilateral defense agreements with Northern European countries, and continued as follows:
“Blinken and Rasmussen justified a series of agreements that would provide the US with access to military facilities, air defense bases, and ports in Denmark, Finland, and Sweden as 'strengthening Euro-Atlantic security' and linked it to current international relations issues.
Last December, the US accelerated its military and diplomatic activities in Northern Europe and sequentially signed defense agreements with Denmark, Finland, and Sweden. This will allow Washington access to approximately 35 military facilities, air bases, and ports in the territories of the three countries.”
Why did the US decide to bypass NATO and sign bilateral agreements?
Pointing to the questions “What are the characteristics of these agreements, why did the US decide to bypass NATO to sign them, and what risks do these agreements pose for Russia?” Dr. Güler Kalay said, “While the US-Sweden Defense and Cooperation Agreement was being signed, Swedish Defense Minister Pal Jonson pointed out the need for continued support for Ukraine, and US Secretary Austin promised to expedite Sweden's NATO membership process. It is useful to recall that a similar agreement was made between the US and Norway in 2021; because we can say that the scenario in the Black Sea is being repeated in the Baltic. We are seeing Moscow increase its military units in the Leningrad Military District in response to increasing Washington's control in Northern Europe. Recently, Putin's statement that this process would continue until March 2024 was reported in the press.”
The economic dimension of these agreements should also be considered
Dr. Güler Kalay noted that American economic policies can also be observed in the agreements and negotiations, stating, “Washington's military modernization within the NATO alliance in Northern Europe also involves the expansion of the US military-industrial complex's foreign trade share. The sale of military munitions and price determination are also discussed in these negotiations. US securities are often used as a means of payment for weapon procurement costs. This actually shows us that despite the Northern European countries – if Sweden is to become a member in the near future – being NATO allies, there are different concerns or expectations that push Washington towards bilateral agreements.”
Reasons underlying this situation…
Dr. Güler Kalay, Assistant Director of Üsküdar Üniversitesi Political Psychology Application and Research Center/Political Psychology Center, listed the reasons underlying this situation as follows:
“Firstly; Washington may be aiming for American influence to dominate in NATO countries rather than the institutional effect of NATO as a common element. This way, the relative military superiority it would guarantee against Scandinavian NATO countries would block a possible Pan-European common defense bloc. Furthermore, in a possible military tension between the Nordic countries and Russia, NATO would be entirely avoided from being drawn into the conflict.
Geopolitical competition moved to Kaliningrad and the Russian Arctic coast
Secondly; while the US gains flexibility of action through bilateral agreements, it also bypasses the bureaucratic burden of NATO's institutional functioning and potential dissenting opinions. This flexibility of action will provide an advantage to American military power against Russia both in the Baltic Sea and in the Arctic Region. The defense and military cooperation agreement signed between the US and Sweden has enabled Sweden's Gotland Island in the Baltic Sea to gain strategic importance. Considering Gotland Island's short distance – approximately 300 km – to Kaliningrad, Russia's Baltic coastal region, we observe that geopolitical competition has shifted to Kaliningrad in the Baltic Sea and the Russian Arctic coast.
Geopolitical competition, the expectation of weakening Russia's hand in the Arctic…
Thirdly; in international maritime trade, the known strategic importance of the Suez Canal is gradually decreasing compared to the Makoko Strait in Asia-Pacific and the Arctic route in the North. For these reasons, Washington's increasing interest in Scandinavian countries and the military aspect of bilateral agreements in recent times are attracting Moscow's attention. The expectation of weakening Russia's superiority in the Arctic, not only in military bases but also in the number of icebreakers, may be an important factor in the shift of competition to the Scandinavian region. At the same time, it can be expected that Moscow's military power and motivation in Eastern Europe, particularly in Ukraine, may decrease as a result of all these factors. I believe that the possible Europe-Russia conflict scenarios expressed by Swedish authorities should be interpreted within this framework.”
Frozen conflicts will resurface in 2024…
Dr. Güler Kalay expressed that her predictions for 2024 are not very optimistic, stating, “My predictions are that regional conflicts will escalate further, frozen conflicts will resurface, and new areas of conflict and threat will emerge. In the current conjuncture, the Arctic is important as a geopolitical competition area and deserves attention in academia as much as in foreign policy.”