|
|
||
 Prime Minister Reinfeldt with President Bush II in the White House.* Which interests do Swedish politicians serve in matters relating to NATO? |
||
|
|
furtive accession of Sweden to NATO |
|
| The purpose of these guidelines is to provide an initial orientation, and thereby to facilitate, the citizens' inquiry proposed in the public appeal, ”Stop the Furtive Accession to NATO”. According to that document, the main questions to be investigated are: |
||
What are the small-- and perhaps even large -- steps that have thus far been taken? |
||
| The questions themselves provide some indication as to what sorts of information and research are required. The first priority, of course, is to develop a list of the various steps in question. There may be some differences of opinion about which steps ought to be included, and a special section of the inquiry's website will be set aside for a discussion of that matter. When the various steps have been at least provisionally identified, each of them can be studied within the framework of the three basic questions noted above. The final report will summarize and interpret the findings that result. Interest seldom lies As a point of departure, it can be useful to consider which interests might derive some benefit from Sweden's accession of NATO. By itself, an interest analysis cannot be regarded as solid evidence of anything in particular: It sometimes happens that groups and individuals, intentionally or not, act against what appear to be their own interests. But such an analysis can provide useful clues about where to start looking for facts and relationships. Among the interests that might conceivably be relevant in this context are: |
||
United States of America |
||
| The list can doubtless be expanded and refined; and as with every interest analysis, an important task will be to elucidate possible connections and co-ordinated efforts among various interests. Information sources When the legendary U.S. journalist, I.F. Stone, was asked how he managed to dig up so many secret items of information in connection with his many revealing articles, his standard answer was that remarkably little was actually secret. Most information was accessible in official documents, published reports, news media, etc. ”All” that was required was for someone to devote the necessary time, effort and thought to sifting it out and analysing it. Concerning the furtive accession of Sweden to NATO, there is surely much to gain by the application of I.F.Stone's method, because most and perhaps all of the small steps of the process have been at least partially taken in full public view. (This fact has sometimes been adduced as evidence that nothing furtive has occurred. But the furtive aspect concerns the eventual accession to NATO, not the individual steps of the process. That is what is meant by the phrase, ”the tyranny of small steps”.) Among the Swedish and international sources that may yield useful information are: |
||
Public documents such as laws, bills, government decisions, public inquiries, legislative debates, etc. |
||
| Methodology As I.F. Stone explained (see above), there is often much to gain by making use of the valuable information that lies waiting to be discovered in libraries, public archives and other open sources such as the Internet. It is a matter of carefully sorting through printed and digital sources, and of watching/listening to various types of recording. To get at more concealed facts and relationships, it may be essential to find well-informed individuals who are willing to impart their knowledge. The challenge is to identify promising interview subjects, and to get them to openly or anonymously convey tips and information. Considering the issues that the inquiry is likely to touch upon, there should be at least a potential for various forms of co-operation with investigative journalists, scholars, university students and others who for their own reasons are dealing with the same or related questions. The citizens' inquiry might be able to contribute with useful information and contacts, and participate in joint efforts of mutual interest. Again, the task is to develop answers to the three basic questions. That would include a thorough description of each step toward NATO, including its rationale, the individuals and organizations directly involved, and both the consequences thus far and the future implications of the furtive accession process. Then it is a matter of determining who took each step, with what means and motives, and with what legitimacy. A key question in this context is: Who have the decision-makers represented in each case - the people of Sweden, or other interests? To the extent that the relevant decisions have not been democratically arrived at, which elected representatives have allowed that to happen and why? The final report will summarize and analyse the knowledge accumulated and, to the extent possible, identify remaining gaps in that knowledge. The challenge will be to develop a comprehensive view which, among other things, identifies patterns and inter-relationships. The entire body of knowledge and related discussions will be published on the inquiry's website. Investigators Everyone who wants to help shed light on the furtive accession process is welcome to contribute to the inquiry. But until a reasonable number of interested parties join the effort, it will of course be impossible to devise any research plan or division of labour. To begin with, therefore, most essential tasks will necessarily be carried out by the project co-ordinator. As soon as possible, a research advisory council will be established to review and assess contributions prior to publication, and also to assist volunteers who lack research experience and/or self-confidence. All public inquiries are quite properly subjected to critical review, and it may be assumed that this one will become the focus of especially sharp scrutiny for at least three reasons: |
||
It deals with sensitive issues that concern powerful Swedish and international interests. |
||
| The answer to all potential criticism is maximum openness. Every aspect of the inquiry will be openly presented and thereby subject to debate. As for the ”non-professional” component, there will be no pretence that the inquiry is anything other than what it is-- i.e. a joint effort carried out by every manner of interested citizen, with the help of whichever Swedish and international professionals choose to contribute their expertise. The final result can hardly be worse than what has thus far been achieved in this area of inquiry by prominent institutions. The heavily state-subsidized Swedish Institute of International Affairs, for example, has dealt with the NATO issue in a manner that can only be regarded as propagandistic.** As with all initiatives, the most important precondition for success is a firm belief that it is possible to succeed-- something that can at times be difficult to conjure up, especially at the outset of a large and complex task. It can therefore be useful to meet often in order to pose questions, discuss methodological and other problems, share experiences, etc. It is intended that a special section of the inquiry's website will be established for that purpose and, if there is sufficient interest, it may also be possible to arrange physical meetings of project participants. Finally, it should be emphasized that these guidelines are by no means written in stone, and may very well need to be further developed during the course of the project. Al Burke, Project Co-ordinator 17 June 2009 |
||
|
*Photo of P.M. Reinfeldt and President Bush: Regeringskansliet/Thomas Quiggle
**See PDF document Open letter to Swedish Institute of International Affairs |
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| |
||
|
|
||