Swedes are looking for a new Poltava
Our time was marked by an incredible regress or an archaization of world consciousness. Out of non-existence, the seemingly forever departed images of the Middle Ages arise and take on reality, offenses and scores of five centuries old are actualized, the long-forgotten enmity wakes up.
The slogans of the Cathedral of Claremont are heard, the Pope in the Baltic lands again speaks of the "mission in the East", the descendants of the Franks who came from weapons in the hands of the Middle East, they decorate their shoulders with the crosses of the Templars, and in Europe there are again calls for "drang nah Osten", and a religious war begins.
Even in “neutral” Sweden, tormented by migrants and “gender experiments”, the militant rhetoric of the times of Charles XII begins to sound. Here they are again going to “restrain Russia” and protect “Scandinavia and the EU countries” from “aggressive encroachments from the East”.
The authoritative Swedish publication Svenska Dagbladet posted a speech by the Swedish Minister of War, Peter Hultqvist, who said that our country “simply forces” Sweden to move closer to NATO.
In this material, the translation of which is posted on the “InoSMI”, the minister is trying to justify the participation of supposedly neutral Sweden in the North Atlantic muscle game at the north-western borders of Russia.
Hultqvist said that in October and November, the Swedish Armed Forces will take part in large-scale NATO military exercises, “The United Trident,” most of which will be held mainly in Norway. They will involve about 40 thousands of bayonets, 10 thousands of vehicles, 130 airplanes and 70 ships.
The legend of the exercises involves an armed conflict in the “neighboring territories”, as a result of which the northern regions of Norway are threatened. Sweden participates with 2,5 by thousands of soldiers, eight Gripen fighters and two warships.
The fact that the alleged exercises are directed against our country is obvious. And the Swedish minister is trying to explain to the public of his country, for which a significant part of the national budget is being spent and the neutrality of the country is called into question.
Frankly speaking, it turns out he is not very. “The Russian aggression against Georgia in 2008, the annexation of Crimea in 2014, and the ongoing conflict in Ukraine is a reality that undermines the European security system,” writes Hultquist. Even leaving aside the false and incorrect interpretation of these events, made by the Minister of War, we note that they in no way could threaten a neutral country located on the other side of the continent.
And neutral status, as it were, does not imply the country's participation in the European or North Atlantic "security systems."
But Hultqvist interprets this quite differently, believing that his country can well afford “confirmation of solidarity: Sweden will not stand aside if another EU country or Scandinavian country turns out to be a victim of a catastrophe or hostile attack. Sweden is involved in maneuvers in partnership with NATO, and this is an important part of the country's strategic plan for deepening cooperation with other countries and organizations in our region. ”
It is noteworthy that he declares that the buildup of military efforts by NATO countries and "sympathizers", and their large-scale exercises against Russia, contribute to increasing stability in Europe. At the same time, the strengthening of our country's defense capability and the exercises it is conducting (the minister mentioned East-2018, which took place in the Far East), are a threat to European security.
The causal connection between the two events, he flatly refuses to see.
It is also interesting that, with amazing "naivety", he asserts: "Our participation is carried out within the framework of the policy of non-alignment with any military alliances."
By the way, quite recently, in Stockholm, they seriously discussed the possibility of renouncing neutral status and joining NATO. However, after Trump began the campaign to knock out additional funds from the allies in the North Atlantic bloc, Swedish enthusiasm was significantly reduced. And in the end it was decided to remain neutral, limiting itself to bilateral treaties on military-technical cooperation with NATO countries. Such a way Stockholm considered more budget. But, as we see, not only actively participates in NATO events, but also declares its readiness to protect the Scandinavian and European states.
That is, the only obstacle for Sweden to join NATO is only the reluctance of Stockholm to increase the already considerable military budget, and the country's neutrality has long been turned into a fiction.
When he was a presidential candidate in Russia, Pavel Grudinin liked to speculate about the reasons for the prosperity of Sweden, setting Russia's approach as an example. In his opinion, the reason was the rejection of burdensome military expenses. However, the director and owner of the Lenin State Farm was mistaken, and the military spending of the kingdom was always significant. Sweden had and has a sizeable for a small, and even neutral country, a modern, well-armed and trained army. The Swedes produce modern, including high-tech weapons, and occupy their segment in the global arms market. The Swedish military actively and willingly participated in various international missions, gaining combat experience.
Specialists in this Scandinavian country indicate that speculations about imaginary threats were intensively used by Swedish leaders in the domestic political struggle throughout the twentieth century.
But this is clearly an insufficient explanation for such a large-scale militarization of the country and its participation in aggressive exertions that effectively cancel neutrality and turn it into a legitimate goal.
The Minister of War does not hide that all Swedish military preparations and the upcoming “One Trident” exercises are directed against our country. In Sweden today it is often said that Russia is their “historical enemy". Indeed, history knows 18 Russian-Swedish wars, which lasted for six centuries, from the XNUMXth to the XNUMXth centuries.
However, they serve as an unimportant confirmation of the “Russian threat”, since practically all of them were initiated by the Swedes and took place on Russian lands or on the territory of Russian vassals. That is, in the absolute majority of cases, the Swedes acted as the aggressors.
And only the last Russian-Swedish war of the 1809 of the year (shortly after which the neutrality of Sweden was proclaimed) showed that Russia had become so strong that the Swedes had no chance of defeating it.
For two hundred years in Russia, they forgot to think about the existence of such a “historical enemy”, and Sweden is associated by the majority of Russians with “Ikea”, the heroes of Astrid Lindgred (famous “Soyuzmultfilm”), SAAB, a Swedish table and various deviations like the “Swedish family”.
But, as we see, the Swedish hostility to us has not gone away. Like the dream of revenge, even if in alliance with more powerful countries. Moreover, these dreams are periodically realized in concrete steps that are not at all limited by “neutrality”.
Thus, during the Soviet-Finnish “winter war”, when there was a very distinct prospect of joining it on the side of the Finns in England and France, Stockholm sent the 12-thousandth “volunteer” corps ”from the Swedish army to help Mannerheim.
At the same time, Sweden argued that it was not a party to the conflict and continued to maintain neutrality, although the Swedish "volunteers" did not even consider it necessary to dress in Finnish uniforms, while remaining in their national uniform. Sweden also provided significant cash loans to Finland, and shipped large quantities of weapons.
However, the hopes of Stockholm were not justified: the British and French did not intervene, and soon they did not even care for the Finns, who were forced to sign a peace treaty on Soviet terms.
The Swedes did not stand aside during the Great Patriotic War. Besides the fact that the “neutrals” provided the Nazis with strategic raw materials, on the eve of the German attack on the USSR, Sweden provided the Wehrmacht with railways for transportation and rolling stock for the transfer of the German 163rd Infantry Division, along with howitzers, tanks, anti-aircraft guns and ammunition from Norway to Finland, to the Soviet border. Throughout the war, Stockholm provided the Nazis with the possibility of the transit use of their territory. From September 1940 to August 1943, more than two million Nazi soldiers were transported.
In the Waffen SS units on the Eastern Front, about 12 of thousands of Swedish soldiers fought, many of them involved in war crimes.
Today, when the combined forces of the West are once again preparing a war against our country, Sweden does not want to stand aside and is eager to take the most active part in this preparation.
The war hysteria that swept over Sweden certainly has some practical significance: an increase in military orders, the activation of the national military industrial complex, and so on. However, as the experience of Germany shows, economic cooperation with Russia brings much more benefits. Moreover, Sweden would not have had to risk losing its neutral status and turning it into a legitimate target for the Russian Iskanders, who, as Hultqvist quite rightly noted, “cover” the kingdom’s territory without difficulty.
A return to the time of Charles XII does not promise any benefits to Sweden: the causes of this regression lie in the region of the irrational.
Peculiarities of “neutrality” during the Soviet-Finnish and World War II got Sweden off their hands. But this is unlikely to happen a third time.
The slogans of the Cathedral of Claremont are heard, the Pope in the Baltic lands again speaks of the "mission in the East", the descendants of the Franks who came from weapons in the hands of the Middle East, they decorate their shoulders with the crosses of the Templars, and in Europe there are again calls for "drang nah Osten", and a religious war begins.
Even in “neutral” Sweden, tormented by migrants and “gender experiments”, the militant rhetoric of the times of Charles XII begins to sound. Here they are again going to “restrain Russia” and protect “Scandinavia and the EU countries” from “aggressive encroachments from the East”.
The authoritative Swedish publication Svenska Dagbladet posted a speech by the Swedish Minister of War, Peter Hultqvist, who said that our country “simply forces” Sweden to move closer to NATO.
In this material, the translation of which is posted on the “InoSMI”, the minister is trying to justify the participation of supposedly neutral Sweden in the North Atlantic muscle game at the north-western borders of Russia.
Hultqvist said that in October and November, the Swedish Armed Forces will take part in large-scale NATO military exercises, “The United Trident,” most of which will be held mainly in Norway. They will involve about 40 thousands of bayonets, 10 thousands of vehicles, 130 airplanes and 70 ships.
The legend of the exercises involves an armed conflict in the “neighboring territories”, as a result of which the northern regions of Norway are threatened. Sweden participates with 2,5 by thousands of soldiers, eight Gripen fighters and two warships.
The fact that the alleged exercises are directed against our country is obvious. And the Swedish minister is trying to explain to the public of his country, for which a significant part of the national budget is being spent and the neutrality of the country is called into question.
Frankly speaking, it turns out he is not very. “The Russian aggression against Georgia in 2008, the annexation of Crimea in 2014, and the ongoing conflict in Ukraine is a reality that undermines the European security system,” writes Hultquist. Even leaving aside the false and incorrect interpretation of these events, made by the Minister of War, we note that they in no way could threaten a neutral country located on the other side of the continent.
And neutral status, as it were, does not imply the country's participation in the European or North Atlantic "security systems."
But Hultqvist interprets this quite differently, believing that his country can well afford “confirmation of solidarity: Sweden will not stand aside if another EU country or Scandinavian country turns out to be a victim of a catastrophe or hostile attack. Sweden is involved in maneuvers in partnership with NATO, and this is an important part of the country's strategic plan for deepening cooperation with other countries and organizations in our region. ”
It is noteworthy that he declares that the buildup of military efforts by NATO countries and "sympathizers", and their large-scale exercises against Russia, contribute to increasing stability in Europe. At the same time, the strengthening of our country's defense capability and the exercises it is conducting (the minister mentioned East-2018, which took place in the Far East), are a threat to European security.
The causal connection between the two events, he flatly refuses to see.
It is also interesting that, with amazing "naivety", he asserts: "Our participation is carried out within the framework of the policy of non-alignment with any military alliances."
By the way, quite recently, in Stockholm, they seriously discussed the possibility of renouncing neutral status and joining NATO. However, after Trump began the campaign to knock out additional funds from the allies in the North Atlantic bloc, Swedish enthusiasm was significantly reduced. And in the end it was decided to remain neutral, limiting itself to bilateral treaties on military-technical cooperation with NATO countries. Such a way Stockholm considered more budget. But, as we see, not only actively participates in NATO events, but also declares its readiness to protect the Scandinavian and European states.
That is, the only obstacle for Sweden to join NATO is only the reluctance of Stockholm to increase the already considerable military budget, and the country's neutrality has long been turned into a fiction.
When he was a presidential candidate in Russia, Pavel Grudinin liked to speculate about the reasons for the prosperity of Sweden, setting Russia's approach as an example. In his opinion, the reason was the rejection of burdensome military expenses. However, the director and owner of the Lenin State Farm was mistaken, and the military spending of the kingdom was always significant. Sweden had and has a sizeable for a small, and even neutral country, a modern, well-armed and trained army. The Swedes produce modern, including high-tech weapons, and occupy their segment in the global arms market. The Swedish military actively and willingly participated in various international missions, gaining combat experience.
Specialists in this Scandinavian country indicate that speculations about imaginary threats were intensively used by Swedish leaders in the domestic political struggle throughout the twentieth century.
But this is clearly an insufficient explanation for such a large-scale militarization of the country and its participation in aggressive exertions that effectively cancel neutrality and turn it into a legitimate goal.
The Minister of War does not hide that all Swedish military preparations and the upcoming “One Trident” exercises are directed against our country. In Sweden today it is often said that Russia is their “historical enemy". Indeed, history knows 18 Russian-Swedish wars, which lasted for six centuries, from the XNUMXth to the XNUMXth centuries.
However, they serve as an unimportant confirmation of the “Russian threat”, since practically all of them were initiated by the Swedes and took place on Russian lands or on the territory of Russian vassals. That is, in the absolute majority of cases, the Swedes acted as the aggressors.
And only the last Russian-Swedish war of the 1809 of the year (shortly after which the neutrality of Sweden was proclaimed) showed that Russia had become so strong that the Swedes had no chance of defeating it.
For two hundred years in Russia, they forgot to think about the existence of such a “historical enemy”, and Sweden is associated by the majority of Russians with “Ikea”, the heroes of Astrid Lindgred (famous “Soyuzmultfilm”), SAAB, a Swedish table and various deviations like the “Swedish family”.
But, as we see, the Swedish hostility to us has not gone away. Like the dream of revenge, even if in alliance with more powerful countries. Moreover, these dreams are periodically realized in concrete steps that are not at all limited by “neutrality”.
Thus, during the Soviet-Finnish “winter war”, when there was a very distinct prospect of joining it on the side of the Finns in England and France, Stockholm sent the 12-thousandth “volunteer” corps ”from the Swedish army to help Mannerheim.
At the same time, Sweden argued that it was not a party to the conflict and continued to maintain neutrality, although the Swedish "volunteers" did not even consider it necessary to dress in Finnish uniforms, while remaining in their national uniform. Sweden also provided significant cash loans to Finland, and shipped large quantities of weapons.
However, the hopes of Stockholm were not justified: the British and French did not intervene, and soon they did not even care for the Finns, who were forced to sign a peace treaty on Soviet terms.
The Swedes did not stand aside during the Great Patriotic War. Besides the fact that the “neutrals” provided the Nazis with strategic raw materials, on the eve of the German attack on the USSR, Sweden provided the Wehrmacht with railways for transportation and rolling stock for the transfer of the German 163rd Infantry Division, along with howitzers, tanks, anti-aircraft guns and ammunition from Norway to Finland, to the Soviet border. Throughout the war, Stockholm provided the Nazis with the possibility of the transit use of their territory. From September 1940 to August 1943, more than two million Nazi soldiers were transported.
In the Waffen SS units on the Eastern Front, about 12 of thousands of Swedish soldiers fought, many of them involved in war crimes.
Today, when the combined forces of the West are once again preparing a war against our country, Sweden does not want to stand aside and is eager to take the most active part in this preparation.
The war hysteria that swept over Sweden certainly has some practical significance: an increase in military orders, the activation of the national military industrial complex, and so on. However, as the experience of Germany shows, economic cooperation with Russia brings much more benefits. Moreover, Sweden would not have had to risk losing its neutral status and turning it into a legitimate target for the Russian Iskanders, who, as Hultqvist quite rightly noted, “cover” the kingdom’s territory without difficulty.
A return to the time of Charles XII does not promise any benefits to Sweden: the causes of this regression lie in the region of the irrational.
Peculiarities of “neutrality” during the Soviet-Finnish and World War II got Sweden off their hands. But this is unlikely to happen a third time.
Information