I falchi svedesi vogliono la propria arma nucleare – man mano che la minaccia russa cresce e gli Stati Uniti sembrano sempre meno affidabili, i politici stanno discutendo se hanno bisogno di una bomba

> #Swedish hawks want their own nuclear weapon
>
> **As the Russian threat grows and the United States seems ever less reliable, politicians are discussing whether they need a Bomb of their own**
>
>
> Lake Foajaure was never supposed to exist. Located in a military testing site hidden in the wilderness of Swedish Lapland south of Jokkmokk, its existence is a relic from an era of defence policy that was kept classified for many years.
>
> Named after the Swedish Defence Research Agency (FOA) and jaure, which means lake in the indigenous Sami language, it was originally a crater from one of the largest explosions ever detonated in the country.
>
> In 1956 and 1957 the authorities covertly detonated powerful bombs not far from the village of Nausta with the aim of simulating a minor atomic blast, part of laying the ground for a national nuclear weapons programme. After the test explosions the crater slowly filled with water and became a lake.
>
>
> As war and geopolitical turbulence return to Europe, those long-submerged secrets are beginning to bubble back up to the surface, and a debate has broken out about whether Sweden should make a new attempt to acquire the Bomb, whether alone or in concert with its new European Nato allies, after a series of recent articles in the country’s newspapers.
>
> While the discussion remains speculative for the time being and there is no evidence that the government has any serious appetite for developing nuclear warheads, the debate has rippled through the political sphere.
>
> In March Jimmie Akesson, leader of the right-wing Sweden Democrats party, on whose support the ruling coalition depends, was the first prominent politician to flirt with the idea. “[Sweden] had a lot of expertise in nuclear technology a long time ago,” Akesson told Goteborgs-Posten. “But the political will wanted something different. I think everything should be on the table in this situation.”
>
> Several weeks later, Robert Dalsjo, a researcher at the FOA, told a seminar: “Now we must discuss independent nuclear weapons with a Swedish component.”
>
> The sentiment is shared by Alice Teodorescu Mawe, an MEP from the centre-right Christian Democrats party, part of the government, who suggests that Sweden should play its part in a common European nuclear weapons strategy.
>
> It is not the only European country where these questions are being contemplated. Poland has appealed for a stake in both the French and American nuclear deterrents. Donald Tusk, its prime minister, also hinted that Poland might consider building its own atomic weapons, although experts believe this possibility is both technically and politically remote.
>
> German politicians, too, have discussed taking part in some form of European deterrent, but public opinion is set against any kind of national military nuclear programme.
> It is not clear whether Sweden has either the technological or industrial capacity to build nuclear weapons without significant help from an existing atomic power. While it has six nuclear power plants that supply almost a third of its electricity, the last such was built 40 years ago.
>
>
> “It would be a very large industrial project,” Martin Goliath, a nuclear weapons expert at the FOA, said. “A lot needs to be developed, not least the entire infrastructure to produce the materials needed for a nuclear weapon, which would require large investments. I think it would be almost impossible to lay down the resources.”
>
> What Sweden does have is a deep institutional history of thinking about the issue, including decades of clandestine Cold War-era nuclear policy planning during a period when it was officially neutral but secretly had an atomic security guarantee from the United States.
>
> For more than two decades after the end of the Second World War, this poster child for pacifism and international nuclear non-proliferation quietly sought the means to assemble an atomic bomb. This began in 1945, when the FOA was commissioned to investigate what kind of new weapon the US had used in the attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
>
> “It was about understanding the new weapon that had come,” Goliath said. “But pretty soon it was that you also wanted to examine the possibilities: how could you do this in Sweden?”
>
> Having remained neutral in the struggle against Nazi Germany, Sweden came out of the war largely unscathed. Its economy was in full swing, it had no need to rebuild its infrastructure and it also had its own uranium deposits, although of low-grade quality.
>
>
> In 1948, the chief of the defence staff tasked the FOA to investigate the possibilities for Sweden to acquire nuclear weapons and produce a plutonium-based atomic bomb. The country’s leaders at the time believed in armed neutrality — and that nuclear weapons might be needed to preserve that neutrality.
>
> Antoine Bousquet, associate professor of political science at the Swedish Defence University, said that at the time the thinking had been: “Sweden won’t be part of Nato, but it has to have a robust and independent capability to defend itself against a potential Soviet attack. And so, nuclear weapons seem like an effective possibility.”
>
> In the following years Sweden geared up towards its goal of producing nuclear weapons and the project spread across the country. Uranium was mined in central Sweden and two nuclear reactors were built, one in Agesta, south of Stockholm, and one in Marviken outside Norrkoping, although the latter never became operational. The plan was straightforward: plutonium would be obtained through the fission of uranium in nuclear reactors.
>
> Then the FOA carried out its secretive non-nuclear test blasts in Swedish Lapland. The most powerful involved 61 tonnes of explosives and created a column of smoke nearly a mile high.
>
> By 1957 the CIA concluded that Sweden had “a sufficiently developed reactor programme to enable it to produce some nuclear weapons within the next five years”. Eight years after that, analysts assessed that the country was only six months away from building a bomb.
>
> Yet the project had already begun to fizzle out. Bousquet said this was partly down to the strength of the anti-nuclear movement in the Swedish public; partly because of the colossal expense involved; and partly because of secret security guarantees from the US.
>
> “Although Sweden was not formally part of Nato, it received informal guarantees which provided some confidence that the United States would stand behind Sweden, and therefore Sweden might not necessarily have to depend on nuclear weapons,” said Bousquet.
>
>
> The facilities were either demolished or used for other purposes, and in 2012 the last remnants of the plutonium were shipped across the Atlantic for storage in the US.
> Goliath believes that it would be unrealistic to resurrect the programme today, and said that Sweden would effectively have to start from scratch again.
>
> “Of course there could be reports that you could dig up from the archives, but the people who actually worked with it, they are not still around, and probably not even alive any more,” he said. “A lot needs to be developed, not least the entire infrastructure to produce the materials needed. You have to start from the beginning, I would think.”

I would totally support a Nordic nuclear weapons initiative. 

Norway, Denmark, Iceland, Sweden and Finland.

Maybe even add Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia and Poland to that list.

I think everyone should have one, personal one, maybe with a radius of 25 meters. The world would be definitely safer place.

I cannot imagine Nordic people to get angry enough at someone to nuke them. They are so chill.

IKEA’s new product SVAMPMOLN, build it yourself

*Jealous crow noises*

First step is actually very easy. Pull out of the NPT. Otherwise it’s just a lot of talk.

Every developed country will have their own nuclear weapons eventually, or they will be in constant danger from those who have it. That’s the reality we live in, thanks to international law that can’t be enforced

Swedens nuclear weapons program was shut down after lowkey threats from the US.

They didn’t want to neutral country with nukes in Europe.

Absolutely – we should develop this in the EU, but the point from Sweden stand, with out the threat of nukes Russia will not back off.

More like Domherre.

It’s the obvious step. But if Sweden has the bomb, Denmark needs it too.

Is this one of those reports that is about a handful of people bringing up an idea for political publicity , that doesn’t have any general support not government backing? Or is there actually a groundswell of growing support in the electorate? I suspect it’ll be the former.

I can’t wait to see those eco-friendly Nordic nuclear weapons.

understandable… the behavior of some big nuclear powers will increase the urge of middle powers to re-think this topic

They co up lad buy one.