“A perfect storm” after the end of the Cold War where all conditions worked together gave the United States and NATO the opportunity to expand into Central and Eastern Europe, says Joshua Shifrinson, one of three American political scientists we hear about NATO’s development, and who in part provides a a different perspective on what Sweden has to gain and lose on a membership than what is now heard most strongly in the Swedish political debate.
Shifrinson and colleague Richard Betts believe that Sweden would not have much to gain from Swedish NATO membership based on how they perceive the threat picture. Sweden could count on support NATO’s support even without a membership, they say, and reminds of what obligations a membership entails.
We also hear the Swedish historian Aryo Makko, at Stockholm University, who has researched the relationship of neutral countries to the Soviet Union. He comments, among other things, on the “broken promises” not to expand NATO, which Russia now often highlights.
Featuring: Richard Betts, Professor of War and Peace Studies at Columbia University and Senior Fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations; Joshua Shifrinson, Associate Professor of International Relations Pardee School of Global Studies, Boston University; James Goldgeier, Visiting Scholar at the Center for International Security and Cooperation, Visiting Fellow at the Brookings Institution, and Professor at the School of International Service at American University, Washington DC; Aryo Makko, professor of history at Stockholm University
Host: Annika Östman
Producer: Björn Gunér
Source: ICELAND NEWS