Sweden says it will pursue a feminist foreign policy to counter macho Russian aggression… even if no one really knows what that means.

STOCKHOLM — Everywhere one looks on the eastern fringes of Europe, the Russian bear menaces. From Ukraine to Estonia, Russian troops are either engaged in outright warfare or testing the borders of Russia’s neighbors. In Sweden and Finland, Russian planes and vessels are prodding at coastal defenses. Nordic defense officials now speak of a fundamentally altered security environment in the Baltics.

There is a measure of the surreal to these developments and Sweden’s response to them. When in October Swedish forces hunted what was all but certainly a Russian submarine in the Stockholm archipelago, Swedish media dispatched reporters into dinghies, where they breathlessly tried to intuit news in the movement of naval vessels. And when Sverker Göranson, the supreme commander of Sweden’s armed forces, went before the media last month to present concrete evidence that a submarine had violated his country’s territorial waters, a Russian newspaper responded by calling the officer “unmanly.”

It was probably meant as an insult, but the writer behind the snub may have unwittingly paid the Scandinavian nation a compliment. After all, even as Russia steps up its military activity in the Baltics and elsewhere, the new Swedish government is working hard to send a message to the world that Vladimir Putin’s bluster represents machismo’s death knell.

Margot Wallström, the newly minted foreign minister, has said that under her leadership Sweden will become the only country in the world to conduct a “feminist foreign policy.” That’s a perspective that flows from U.N. Security Council Resolution 1325, a landmark measure that recognized both the disproportionate impact war has on women and the role women must play in ensuring peace and security.

But questions about what this means in practice and Wallström’s foreign-policy moves come at a time of unusual instability for Sweden. The country is headed for a snap election in March after the Sweden Democrats, an ascendant right-wing populist group, blocked the government’s budget on Wednesday, Dec. 3. It will be Sweden’s first snap election since 1958. Meanwhile, the Russian military is challenging its Swedish counterpart in ways that haven’t been seen since the Cold War.

The Social Democrats and the Greens — the two parties that make up the minority government — have said they will campaign together on a joint political platform and will put forward the same budget that was just scuttled. So little looks set to change until March, when fresh elections are held.

In the interim, Wallström will remain at the Foreign Ministry, with her feminist vision for Sweden’s ventures abroad intact. By empowering women, the argument goes, there are better chances of snuffing out wars before they start and of ending them in more equitable ways. However, it is less clear what such a feminist foreign policy has to say about the old-school power politics that Putin has helped resuscitate in the past year.

During a recent debate in the Swedish parliament, Wallström said that her feminist approach is based on the American political scientist Joseph Nye’s concept of “smart power.” “The tools of foreign policy can, in varying degrees, be hard as well as soft. The situation at hand determines this,” Wallström said. “The half of the population that so far has been almost systematically excluded and forgotten — namely, women — will now be included.”

Asked how she believes a feminist foreign policy will help end Russian aggression, Wallström suggested it would be useful to review women’s participation in the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe and to look at what it does to address the problems women face — a statement exactly as vague as it sounds.

Meanwhile, Putin delivered another swaggering address on Thursday. “The policy of containment was not invented yesterday. It has been carried out against our country for many years, always, for decades, if not centuries,” he said at his annual state-of-the-nation address. “In short, whenever someone thinks that Russia has become too strong or independent, these tools are quickly put into use.”

The newfound emphasis on feminism abroad has been remarkably absent in the Swedish response to the recent submarine incursion in Stockholm. When Göranson, flanked by Prime Minister Stefan Löfven and Defense Minister Peter Hultqvist, presented evidence at a November press conference of illicit underwater activity in the Stockholm archipelago, there was no talk of gender perspectives or feminist approaches to territorial breaches. (While the Swedish military maintains that it does not have the evidence to conclusively identify the submarine’s nationality, it was all but certainly a Russian boat.)

Löfven did not parse his words. “Those who are considering entering Swedish territory should be aware of the enormous risks this entails for those who are involved in such violations,” he said. “We will defend our territorial integrity with all available means.”

For Löfven, the moment was an opportunity to show leadership after his government’s shaky first few weeks in power. A minority government, the Social Democrats and Greens had from the outset been hounded over their weak mandate and lack of experience. To bolster Sweden’s defense capabilities and improve coordination, Löfven announced the formation of a national security council, and his clear threat to Russia was a more hard-line position than many expected from the former union leader.

But no one quite seems to know how to square that perspective with notions of a feminist foreign policy. “If Sweden would really invest in military defense and at the same time push for a feminist foreign and security policy, then the government faces a big rhetorical problem in explaining how these two things go together,” said Ulf Bjereld, a professor of political science at the University of Gothenburg and a supporter of the Social Democrats.

“One option is to insist that military defense and feminism represent two branches of the same tree: that citizens’ security is guaranteed by having a strong military and that the feminist agenda is guaranteed through diplomacy, aid, and other arsenals beyond defense,” Bjereld said. “Is that credible or not? Well, credibility is like beauty — it’s in the eye of the beholder.”

Wallström herself sees no contradiction between the two. In an interview with Foreign Policy, she said that the Social Democrats’ security policy has always been based on combining the right to territorial defense with an engagement in humanitarianism. “Sweden has been a world power because we have acted constructively to find political solutions and because of our aid policy and contribution to achieving global development,” Wallström insisted.

Whether or not Sweden classifies as a “world power” in the traditional sense of the word is debatable, but the country does pride itself on having a generous aid policy. The total development aid budget for 2014 was around $5.1 billion. That also covers costs for refugee reception and integration in Sweden, EU assistance, and contributions to the regular budget of some U.N. agencies, leaving about $4 billion for international aid. (In this regard, Sweden is indeed a world leader, putting .97 percent of its GDP toward aid. The United States, by contrast, spends .19 percent of GDP toward aid.)

Wallström’s feminist foreign policy is based on three Rs: representation, resources, and respect. In its dealings with other nations, Sweden should push for fair representation of women in everything from ambassador posts to political committees, notes Wallström. Sweden should also encourage other countries to ensure equal access to resources and to respect women’s rights, she said.

Wallström argued that this women-focused perspective is relevant in all aspects of foreign policy, including in how Sweden deals with territorial breaches and Russian aggression in nearby countries like Ukraine. “To say it’s not relevant in such situations is to suggest that women don’t think we should have a defense force and that is just not true.”

The gender-focused agenda has also been welcomed by at least some in the Swedish military. One enthusiast is Robert Egnell of Sweden’s National Defense College, which has hosted several seminars on gender perspectives in military operations. In a recent op-ed for Swedish newspaper Dagens Nyheter, Egnell wrote that Wallström’s stated focus is an “instrument for preventing armed conflict, achieving peace where violence is already a fact, and promoting post-war reconciliation and reconstruction.”

Egnell pointed out that Wallström’s focus on women, peace, and security is not unique, and has also been embraced by figures such as Hillary Clinton and William Hague, the former British foreign secretary. Wallström’s approach, however, is arguably more original in that she has chosen to label efforts to boost women’s power and participation as “feminist.” She herself insisted that her government is “starting something new here” rather than emulating other international leaders’ approaches.

Critics say the Social Democrats’ push for a feminist foreign policy amounts to little more than branding. “This is about sending a signal to the world that the new government wants to bring in some kind of paradigm shift after Carl Bildt’s time as minister for foreign affairs and to show that, in the international arena, this government’s priorities are different,” said Katarina Tracz, a research fellow at the McCain Institute for International Leadership and deputy director of the center-right think tank Stockholm Free World Forum.

“When Wallström was appointed, she told Swedish media that she would not evaluate Bildt’s time as minister for foreign affairs — and that’s because she can’t find much to criticize,” Tracz said. “But by defining her own approach as feminist, she is indirectly indicating that the previous government fell short of prioritizing women.”

Talk of a feminist foreign policy, according to Tracz, is a distraction. “When it comes to the security issues that Sweden and the world face today, it is not at all clear what a feminist foreign policy can achieve,” she said. “There are no concrete suggestions for how a gender approach to security policy will help put an end to intrusions in the Stockholm archipelago, for instance.”

Wallström’s retort is that a feminist foreign policy does have concrete implications. “Are female police officers being allowed to take part in surveillance operations? Are women in a given country being asked about their ambitions?” she said, citing her efforts to include women in the peace-making process in Ukraine. “This perspective should permeate everything we do.”

When it comes to simultaneously pushing a hard and soft agenda, the Social Democrats have also faced a challenge from within their own government, given their weakness in the run-up to elections in March. While campaigning for the September election that resulted in the minority government, the Social Democrats’ coalition partner, the Greens, pushed for smaller defense budgets and the formation of an EU-led Civilian Peace Corps that, party spokeswoman Åsa Romson said, would push for dialogue and disarmament in international conflicts.

So far, the Social Democrats have steamrolled their partners and presented a budget without concessions to the Greens’ demands for cutting defense spending — and the government has now said it will use that budget as a platform to campaign ahead of the March poll. (And as the submarine hunt got underway, Prime Minister Löfven and Defense Minister Hultqvist both made the case for increasing defense spending in the future.)

Wallström, who spoke to Foreign Policy before Wednesday’s budget vote, insisted all was well among the coalition partners. “We have agreed that it is up to the Swedish Defense Commission to determine how much we should spend on defense and exactly what the defense force should be doing,” she said, referring to a government-appointed commission charged with undertaking studies on long-term developments in Swedish security and defense policy. “And we are sticking to that.”

Divided on the issue with their coalition partners and headed toward yet another election, the government in Stockholm isn’t exactly putting up a united front in the face of Russia’s actions in the Baltic. While the feminist foreign-policy perspective has important contributions to make as regards the role of women in international conflicts, the divisions in Stockholm could play into the hands of Putin’s expansionism.

“No one will ever attain military superiority over Russia,” Putin declared Thursday. “We have a modern and combat ready army. As they now put it, a polite, but formidable army. We have the strength, will and courage to protect our freedom.​”

The dark winter months until the March election will provide Moscow with ample opportunity to test what this feminism really means in practice.

STOCKHOLM—Hundreds of dancers have invaded the floor. The more self-conscious among them cradle drinks and stand pushed up against the walls of the crammed, clammy club. Most, though, have submitted to the beats blasting out of the speakers as the DJ spins a techno remix of Gloria Estefan’s “Conga.” Though it’s near freezing outside, inside it feels more like a sauna. Sweat is dripping, fists are pumping.

On the surface, it looks just like any other dance party. Except here you won’t get any drunken propositions. Because—as the event’s name, Sober, hints—there’s a strict no-alcohol policy. The drinks served at the bar are “mocktails.” The signature offering is a blend of lime, fresh mint, and ginger beer that will set you back $13. Before entering the club, you have to take a breath test; if the machine shows alcohol content above 0.0 percent, you will be asked to leave.

By Swedish standards, the club feels like an anomaly—in fact, in the 1990s, Magnus Uggla, one of Sweden’s most famous artists, released a hit single titled “I Never Dance Sober.” The song mocked Swedes’ pickup methods and lack of natural charm. Its title paraphrased Roman philosopher Cicero’s adage “Nemo enim fere saltat sobrius, nisi forte insanit”—no one dances sober, unless he is insane.

But the idea of on-the-wagon partying has been gaining popularity in Sweden. Sober is the second clean-living party phenomenon to come out of the Scandinavian nation in recent years. It follows the wildly popular Lunch Beat, a midday office rave that started as an informal gathering of a handful of colleagues and ended up spurring a global lunch-disco movement. Lunch Beat, which also operates a no-alcohol, no-drugs policy, even gained sponsorship from the Swedish Institute, a government agency tasked with promoting Swedish culture around the world.

Sober founder Mårten Andersson says one of his biggest inspirations is “straight edge,” the 1980s hard-core punk subculture whose adherents refrained from using alcohol, tobacco, and drugs, sticking instead to “natural highs.”

Nine months ago, Andersson, a 40-year-old stand-up comedian and television host, decided to take a break from drinking after 20 years of hard partying, a period during which he found himself waking up next to people he didn’t remember bringing home the night before.

“That’s how bad it got,” Andersson says. “I thought I was alone in bed and turned around and realized I wasn’t and that I didn’t have a clue who the person lying next to me was. That’s not how I want to live my life anymore.”

Sober has been endorsed by the Swedish Temperance Association. Andersson says he appreciates the support but that he is not trying to push a message that drinking is immoral or wrong. Instead, he wants to offer an alternative. “If you want to go out dancing, flirting, and talking to people you don’t know, then there should be at least one place where you can do all that without alcohol,” he says.

Sober premiered in September and has already inspired copycat events around the country. The original monthly club night attracts a mixed crowd. The high proportion of young hipsters is perhaps not surprising, seeing as the venue, Södra Teatern, is in Södermalm, a Stockholm district recently flagged by Vogue as one of 15 coolest neighborhoods in the world.

While Sober is in its infancy—just two club nights have been arranged so far—Andersson says it has already attracted people of all ages. Some are simply curious about the concept. Others are ex-addicts looking for alcohol-free parties. The third category is what Andersson calls “yogis”—people into yoga, meditation, and other spiritual pursuits.

Zoaria, 30, belongs in that last group. She became a raw-foodist four years ago and hasn’t touched alcohol since. “I used to drink a lot,” she says. “I was a real party girl, but I don’t miss it. Now, I’m just really into dancing, and there’s a wonderful vibe and great energy at this club. People are here to have a good time. At other clubs you always have to deal with drunk people who bump into you and smell bad and smoke a lot. I don’t think they’re as happy as this crowd.”

Standing by a high table with a view of the dance floor, first-time Sober attendee Ralph is sipping one of those pricey mocktails. He refers to himself as an addict but has been clean for over 17 years. He doesn’t really go out much these days, he says. “It’s usually just a hassle because people are so wasted,” Ralph explains, adding that, at Sober, “people are clean and honest.” He is grateful that the club offers him a chance to go out on the town again without having to face the temptations of alcohol and drugs.

Khaled and Moa, two friends who are both in their early 30s, are not teetotalers but say they like the idea of going to a club that’s not based around drinking. “The use of alcohol is such a strong norm in our society today that if you don’t drink, people find it provocative somehow. Here, I can have fun and party without being forced to drink and without getting weird looks for turning down alcohol,” Khaled says.

“Partying here doesn’t feel that different,” Moa says. “People are happy, they’re dancing, and they’re drinking—it’s just that there’s no alcohol involved.”

To outsiders, Swedes’ drinking habits can seem curious. In a sense, there is a laxer attitude compared with that of the States; 18-year-olds are allowed into bars here. Scenes of mayhem are also common at popular nightlife spots in cities like Stockholm, where otherwise introverted Swedes tend to turn loud and chatty after a few drinks.

While Swedes seem to have few inhibitions when it comes to drunken behavior, regular alcohol consumption is relatively uncommon. European habits of drinking a glass of wine at dinner on a weekday or enjoying a beer with your lunch are generally frowned upon here. Swedes like to save it for the weekend and go all out.

There are restrictive alcohol laws in Sweden. You can’t order alcoholic beverages before 11 a.m., so forget Champagne breakfasts. Establishments that want to serve alcohol must also offer food. A restaurant or bar where guests spontaneously decide to dance may end up losing its alcohol license unless it also has a so-called dance permit.

To buy alcohol for personal consumption, you need to go to a state-run chain of stores called Systembolaget, which has a strict monopoly on liquor sales in Sweden. The stores have no late-night opening hours and are shut on Saturday afternoons, Sundays, and public holidays. You have to plan your drink shopping carefully: no spontaneous beer runs, no picking up an extra bottle of wine if your dinner party suddenly runs out.

Andersson has his own theory about Swedes’ paradoxical relation to alcohol. “Most tourists who come to Sweden describe it as really stiff,” he says. “They say we Swedes don’t talk to strangers, that we’re reserved. Instead of really doing the work required to change that, we drink ourselves to that state where we dare to break out of our comfort zones. But that’s cheating because when the high fades out, we’re back to scratch again.

“If Swedes would start doing things sober that they usually do under the influence of alcohol, I think we could change the way we drink in this country. I truly do,” says Andersson, adding that getting wasted “just feels un-modern.”

Could Sober be the next Scandinavian export?  Andersson says it’s too early to tell, but he’d love to prove Cicero wrong: “It would be amazing to become the Ikea of clubs and spread around the world.”

 

Each Friday, Roads & Kingdoms and Slate publish a new dispatch from around the globe. For more foreign correspondence mixed with food, war, travel, and photography, visit their online magazine or follow @roadskingdoms on Twitter.

BoI

 

Debattfestivalen Battle of Ideas firade 10-årsjubileum i oktober och för tionde året i rad utlovade arrangörerna, the Institute of Ideas, en helg av ohämmad debatt under mottot Free Speech Allowed.  I år handlade det om allt från feminism till moralism, från robotar till gatumusikanter. Nathalie Rothschild rapporterar från årets upplaga av Battle of Ideas i London.

Orden Free Speech Allowed hängde på en stor banderoll i foajén till Barbican Centre, ett kulturhus i brutalistisk stil som en gång utsågs till Londons fulaste byggnad och som sedan tre år tillbaka är värd för Battle of Ideas. Där navigerar upp emot 2000 deltagare mellan scener där 400 talare debatterar i sammanlagt 80 seminarier.

Vad är då poängen med parollen? Måste man verkligen under en debattfestival år 2014 påminna deltagare om att ordet är fritt? Lever vi inte trots allt i en tid då det offentliga rummet fylls av ohämmat tjattrande, twittrande och tyckande?

På Battle of Ideas uttryckte många en frustration över uttrycks- och handlingsfrihetens tillstånd, något som visade sig redan i seminarierubrikerna. Ett urval:

  • Why are we afraid to judge?
  • From Yid Army to Green Brigade: free speech for football fans?
  • Busking – the clash between liberty and noise pollution
  • Toxic on Twitter: should we clamp down on trolls?
  • Policing the night-time economy: killing the lads’ night out?

På festivalen lanserades även en “Free Speech Helpline” dit lättkränkta besökare uppmanades att ringa in för att få hjälp att borsta av sig kritik, stå upp för sina åsikter och fritt uttrycka sina tankar (telefonnumret, för den som känner sig träffad, är +44 208 525 7912).

En genomgående tanke med Battle of Ideas – som jag själv deltagit i som talare och moderator – är att människor tål att behandlas som robusta individer som kan utsättas för åsikter som de inte nödvändigtvis håller med om. Det gäller även ungdomar. Många av de 450 skolelever som erbjudits gratis inträde till festivalen nöjde sig inte med att sitta tysta i publiken utan utmanade talare när de fick chansen att ställa frågor och komma med synpunkter (det stora publikdeltagandet är utmärkande för Battle of Ideas).

Ofta är det just föreställningen om att uttalanden sårar och kränker som motiverar försök till att begränsa det fria ordet. Formella inskränkningar på yttrandefriheten är relativt milda i länder som England och Sverige men samhällsdebatten kringskärs av att gränserna för vad som är acceptabelt att säga blir allt snävare. Konsekvenserna för de som avviker är inte sällan social utfrysning.

Den informella censuren, liksom tendensen att lägga band på sig själv, är ett minst lika stort hot mot det fria och öppna samtalet som formella begränsningar, menar Battle of Ideas arrangörer.

Paradoxalt nog lever vi i en tid då alla har tillgång till medel för att yttra sina åsikter men då man också blivit mindre mottaglig för öppen debatt och i stället alltmer intolerant till allt som faller utanför ramen av det socialt acceptabla. Till och med så kallad normkritik handlar, i slutändan, om att införa nya normer för tal och tanke. På sociala medier råder häxjaktsstämning – det som i Battle of Ideas broschyr beskrivs som ”twitchhunts”. Debatter pendlar mellan konsensussträvande och förolämpningsslungande.

Namnet till trots blev det sällan några riktiga verbala boxningsmatcher på årets Battle of Ideas. Inte fysiska heller för den delen. Personangrepp och Twitter-tjafs uteblev till stor del också. De flesta stora samhällsfrågor – folkhälsa, konstnärlig frihet och utbildning fanns bland dem som tacklades under festivalen – är inte svartvita och kan varken reduceras till enkla frågeställningar som handlar om att vara för emot eller till en målsättning som handlar om att uppnå konsensus. Bättre då att inte låtsas som att de två alternativen är de enda möjliga utan att istället mana till ärliga debatter. Sådana kan bli både behagliga, snåriga och underhållande.

Nathalie Rothschild
frilansjournalist och reporter och producent på Radio Sweden

twitter.com/n_rothschild

Battle of Ideas har en Youtubekanal där man hittar sessioner från tidigare festivaler och där filmer från årets upplaga kommer att läggas ut inom kort

Några debattsessioner med särskilt medietema i år, som kan vara värda att hålla utkik efter på Youtube, var:
Me, my selfie & I: narcissism or empowerment?
Big Data: Big danger?
Trust me, I’m a music critic
Drip by drip: Have we given up on privacy?
Hashtag feminism: radical or banal?

Stockholmare har möjlighet att uppleva en Battle of Ideas-kväll på Kulturhuset onsdag 5 november. Mer information här.