The discussion of the nuclear weapon development topic completely tabooed for decades has suddenly started in Sweden. Indeed, this country has the capacities to make a nuclear bomb. Paradoxically, it was not Russia but U.S. that has provoked these talks, but it can also nip them in the bud.
Strictly put, Sweden began to implement its nuclear weapon programme back in 1945, right after the end of the Second World War. At the time, it pursued the non-alignment policy, however, some Swedish politicians believed nothing could be better to secure Sweden’s neutrality than the possession of solid striking power.
At first, the government in Stockholm declared the priority of self-reliance in the nuclear energy field. Sweden decided to develop its own peaceful nuclear uses, having opted for the technologies, which could enable reactors to run on natural uranium without the need of enrichment. By the way, American and British analysts estimated uranium reserves in Sweden to be among the largest in the Western world.
By 1960s, Sweden completed a series of studies to explore the opportunities to make nukes while U.S. decreased the price of enriched uranium for overseas customers. That was why Swedes decided that their reactors for the production of weapon-grade plutonium would run on American fuel to reduce costs.
But soon it became clear that developing nuclear weapon along with peaceful uses of nuclear energy was impossible. The reason for that was the ban on the use of the uranium imported from U.S. for military uses, which Washington imposed on Stockholm: the parties signed a special treaty to ban it. As to the making of nuclear weapon based only on local capacities, the Swedish government found this to be too complex technically.
Besides, the plans to make nukes started to come under increased criticism. Opponents of the nuclear programme stepped up their efforts to consolidate public opinion and have it abandoned. They argued that Sweden’s possession of nuclear weapon, in case of a war between the North Atlantic Alliance and the Warsaw Pact countries, might cause the Soviet Union to make a preventive strike on their country.
The technological reliance of Sweden on U.S. grew stronger each year. As a result, official Stockholm decided to refuse from making weapon-grade plutonium in favour of peaceful nuclear uses, and not without relief. The Swedish military nuclear programme was completely ended in 1972.
Sweden has ten nuclear power units in operation. However, their research and military potential provided Swedes with hypothetical military nuclear capacities. In 1990, Swedish experts estimated that, if necessary, the country can restore its previous development progress and make its own nuclear weapon within just 5 to 10 years. In other words, Sweden is a so-called a nuclear-threshold state, which just needs a couple of steps to make a nuclear bomb.
This has become even more relevant after Sweden became part of NATO. In 2024, the prime-minister Ulf Kristersson did not rule out the possibility of deploying American nuclear weapons in the Swedish territory in case of an outbreak of hostilities between Russia and the Western bloc.
But now the Swedish press is spreading crying reports that the U.S. president Donald Trump and his supporters ‘hate Europeans’. Against the backdrop of spoilt relations between U.S. and the European Union, the EU started to consider ensuring its own nuclear umbrella: in particular, the French president Emmanuel Macron offered his EU allies protection with the French nuclear weapon. The Swedish government has welcomed this proposal.
Moreover, the leader of Swedish Democrats, a nationalist party, Jimmie Åkesson called to consider the possibility of developing their own nuclear weapon. ‘We had a lot of expertise in nuclear technology a long time ago. But the political will wanted something else. I think everything should be on the table in this situation’, said Åkesson. Johan Wennström, a political scientist and a staff member of the Swedish Defence University, made a similar statement.
Here, we need to comment on the position of the Swedish Democrats and Åkesson in the local governance framework. They are officially considered to be the opposition. But as per the results for the 2022 election, the incumbent ruling coalition was created only thanks to the Swedish Democrats who supported it with their votes. Therefore, Åkesson’s proposition to make Swedish nukes is something more than just political spitballing. Expressen, a newspaper, notes that if a year ago the suggestion to make nukes in Sweden seemed completely unthinkable, today it does not cause strong rejection any longer.
And the discussion of this topic has already started. First of all, experts are pointing at financial complexities. ‘If we will really want to build our own nuclear weapon, this will be a very large-scale project… This can be compared to designing a new fighter plane’, said Martin Goliath, a nuclear weapon researcher of the Swedish Defence Research Agency (FOI). Earlier, the Swedish press commented that the developing of a new fighter plane could potentially cost the country around 300 billion kronor (27.3 billion euro).
There are also technology gaps out there. ‘The uranium used at Swedish nuclear power plants is enriched to around 3 per cent. To make nukes, we will have to enrich it to 95 per cent. Developing nuclear weapon in Sweden is possible if there is political will, but this will require a lot sacrifices from the society side’, warns Goliath.
Also, according to him, Swedes will have to think of other issues, which are even more unpleasant. If Swedes have their own nukes, how big is the risk that Russia will use its nuclear weapon against Sweden in case of a major war in Europe? And will France be ready to fully support Swedes in such a case?
Today, ‘the nuclear club’ includes Russia, U.S., Great Britain, China, India, France, Pakistan and North Korea. Israel might have its own nukes too, but Tel-Aviv does not confirm it officially. The powers in ‘the nuclear club’ are caring for their status and do not wish to let other members in. And this is much greater than a simple wish to have a more important status than neighbours do.
Nukes have a special war and political status for a reason. Even a single use of nuclear munitions can eliminate the world’s unspoken ban on their use and trigger the third world war to start. The humanity is not at all interested in having new nuclear weapon possessing nations. It is usual to clip wings of those wishing to have it, sometimes in quite a harsh manner.
As is known, one of the reasons to begin the special military operation was the wish voiced by the Ukrainian leadership to have their own nuclear weapon. Earlier, South Africa, Argentina and Egypt wanted to join ‘the nuclear club’. In all these three cases, the nuclear powers had to apply variably harsh measures.
In 1983, a military junta pursuing the plans to make nukes was overthrown in Argentina not without the help of other countries, and the government replacing it declared the refusal to use this type of weapons. South Africa, which secretly conducted nuclear tests in 1979, faced strong international pressure and in 1989 was made to scrap its nuclear weapon programme ‘voluntarily’. In 2004-2005, IAEA launched an investigation of Egypt’s secret experiments to enrich uranium, which led Cairo to make ‘you’ve got it all wrong’ excuses. U.S. and Israel are threating to wage war against Iran demanding that it must drop the plans to make nuclear weapon.
If Swedes finally decide to start operations to make nukes, a harsh response should be expected not from Russia, but, first of all, from U.S. Because it was Washington promising to sell uranium to Stockholm earlier exclusively on condition that it would not be used for military purposes.
How harsh can this response be? From today’s perspective, it is hard to imagine Sweden bombed by U.S. air forces and the deployment of American paratroopers to take control of Swedish nuclear facilities. However, the momentum of political developments in the recent months, as deep as the threats of military seizure of Greenland by U.S. from Denmark, makes us assume that U.S. will, literally, do whatever it takes. And talks of Swedish nuclear weapon will remain mere talks forever.