Sweden is “no longer a country that cannot be trusted”

War, cross -border conflict and geopolitical upheaval are rarely considered good business.

However, this is influenced by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine on two neighbors of the aggressor to the West – Finland and Sweden.

Not right, of course. Rather, it was the answer of the two northern countries to the invasion that turned fear into hope.

Both countries have applied for NATO’s Western Membership in May 2022, three months after the invasion of the winter.

In less than three years, they are both full members and are already reaping the benefits, in terms of national security and economics.

“We are no longer a country that cannot be trusted,” said Mikael Johansson, CEO of the Swedish defense company SAAB, citing the country’s previous historical neutrality.

He emphasizes that Saab has already agreed on the framework of the NATO support and procurement agencies (NPA) a year after Sweden. NSPA is an organ that organizes NATO in defense firms.

Mr Johansson adds that it is much easier to get an idea of ​​what is happening inside the alliance. “We couldn’t have access to NPA before,” he says.

Agree Jukka Siukosaari, Finland Ambassador to the UK. “Being part of NATO leads us to equal with all other allies. It expands the opportunities for Finnish companies in the defense sector and beyond.”

Private companies will benefit from NATO’s promises for increasing defense costs.

Currently, only 23 of the 32 member states of the organization meet the target of 2% GDP, but in recent months, ambitions have only grown in recent weeks and days among the many turbulence in the Alliance.

Among the uncertainty is that NATO may look like in the future, there is no doubt that these higher costs will remain and may even be strengthened if Europe decides that the US can no longer rely on.

Obligations on the cost of the note are already ahead, expressed by several existing members. Last year, Finland spent 2.4% and Sweden 2.2% of the relevant defense GDP, and both seek to raise it up to 2.6% to 3% in the next three years.

Examples of new NATO initiatives in the northern flank of Europe include the creation of new NATO bases and efforts to create joint defense forces in Northern Finland.

Plus the formation of a joint Nordic Air Command, which brings together 250 Finland, Sweden, Norway and Denmark combat aircraft against the connected team structure, with flexible founding and backed by common intelligence.

In addition, significant investments will be required to replenish the advanced weapons systems, including missiles and anti-tank systems, Mr. Johansson emphasizes.

Although the White House has paused this week in the US military assistance in Ukraine, European leaders said they were in it for a long time, so we can also expect significant and constant weapons costs here.

Air observation programs and underwater systems are also increasingly in demand as the returns between Russia and the West bring a new chill to the Arctic region.

In these areas, Boss Saab seeks to promote its own solutions, such as the Early Prevention and Management Platform, and its WASP, a remotely controlled underwater vehicle that can neutralize explosive devices.

But given the strong focus of Donand Trump on “America at first”, it is unlikely to be satisfied with NATO European members who choose SAAB, or really any other European defense firm over US rivals.

Europe will need to balance its desire to reduce its dependence on the United States with their obvious need to maintain US support.

European members will also need to consider the complexity and interdependence of NATO defense systems. They often combine technologies and machines, weapons and ammunition, vehicles, crafts and courts, which are made in several different NATO countries.

In a sense, the alliance is conducted together with complex supply chains and contract agreements that could not be unraveling over the night.

“Europe’s translantic relations will always remain important,” says Mr. Johansson, although he also indicates “growing implementation in Europe, which we have to do more on its own.”

“The United States really defends its own defense industry, and we must do the same in Europe,” he says when he welcomes “fierce competition” between commercial defense companies.

However, most of this competition may be between the relative visitors to the defense industry.

Finnish Government Business Business Agency Finland published a guide This offers tip companies on how to run a NATO business.

Its authors predict that the Armed Forces on both sides of the Atlantic will have “new needs for services and equipment, both high -tech and low technology.”

Many of these needs should be satisfied with startups and created by small and medium -sized companies, according to the management, not exclusively large, created defense companies.

Johan Sheberg, an advisor on security and defense policy on the confederation of the Swedish enterprise, says NATO membership opened the door to Swedish companies, not least because “the prospect of other countries and companies (to them) has changed.”

Mr. Syaberg adds that he prefers “a holistic opinion that security is good for business, as increasing safety and stability provides long-term authority.”

In Finland, also NATO membership has created new opportunities, especially for many small and medium-sized companies that the Siukosaari ambassador calls “Nokia-Sspin-Offs”.

They are still expected to provide advanced technologies, such as drones, sensors and digital observation systems such as the “wall of the unmanned wall” of Norway to Polland, which six NATO members are developing to protect their borders with Russia.

Indeed, as the nature of the war is changing, Europe’s safety can more and more rely on cyber defense and protection of civilian attitudes such as critical system pipelines and cables.

But perhaps the most revolutionary idea that arises from the Scandinavian NATO expansion is the concept of “general protection” of the region.

It is also used by Norway and Denmark, it considers national infrastructure such as the Internet and telephony, energy generation and distribution, road networks and safe power materials, medicines as part of the overall defense system.

Most of this cannot be registered as a statistics protection costs, but at the same time none of them is free.

In addition to costs for civil infrastructure, the national military service, for example, sometimes selects people from economically productive parts of the economy, says Ambassador Siukasaari.

But perhaps what they deliver does more for the nation than the simple provision of products and services?

NATO’s latest members believe that they can teach other union countries about protection. They clearly offer new perspectives on how to measure protection costs. And perhaps also about how civil society and private enterprises can play in their parts.