Sweden PM Touts Nordic Ties, Saab Jets to Buffer US Volatility

Sweden’s PM on whether NATO can depend on Trump | The Economist — The Economist

The Economist

NATO membership shields Sweden from American political volatility by replacing covert bilateral dependence with regional Nordic defense integration while opening opportunities for domestic arms makers like Saab.

AI-assisted summary of Sweden’s PM on whether NATO can depend on Trump | The Economist — original source. Check the original for full context.

Source published:

Key ideas

  • Swedish Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson pushed back on the premise that NATO accession introduced new reliance on Washington, revealing that Sweden maintained unacknowledged, secret defense ties to the US since the 1940s and 1950s. (0:00)
  • Stockholm approaches US relations through pragmatism rather than public confrontation, reserving blunt pushback only for direct sovereignty challenges like American rhetoric targeting Greenland. (1:40)
  • Allied anxieties regarding US political reliability and export dependencies are inadvertently boosting European interest in Swedish arms like the Saab JAS 39 Gripen over American platforms like the F-35. (3:34)
  • European capitals are prioritizing sovereign supply chains and regional production capabilities to eliminate single points of failure in defense procurement. (4:26)

Detailed notes

## Background Published by The Economist on YouTube on September 2, 2026, this interview features Swedish Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson speaking with geopolitics editor David Rennie. The program examines Sweden's historic turnaround from decades of neutrality to joining NATO following Russia's invasion of Ukraine, addressing transatlantic strain, European security uncertainties, middle-power diplomacy, and how to handle Donald Trump.

## TL;DR Swedish Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson defends Sweden's accession to NATO against concerns of American political volatility by revealing that Sweden secretly relied on the United States throughout the Cold War, arguing that NATO now actually diversifies its defense through deep Nordic and Baltic integration. Addressing how middle powers should navigate Donald Trump, Kristersson advocates for quiet pragmatism over vocal confrontation, drawing strict red lines around core sovereign issues while protecting crucial commercial and tech partnerships. He also highlights Europe's structural push toward defense self-reliance, noting with dry humor that anxieties over American arms reliability have inadvertently bolstered international interest in domestic Swedish platforms like the Saab Gripen.

## Atmosphere & style The exchange carries a measured, cerebral, and distinctly diplomatic tone, pairing sharp, probing inquiries from Rennie with calm, unvarnished pragmatism from Kristersson. Rather than slipping into defensive posturing, the dialogue feels like a candid masterclass in small-state realpolitik, enlivened by flashes of dry Nordic wit—particularly when Kristersson smiles at the suggestion that Donald Trump is functioning as an accidental arms salesman for Swedish fighter jets. The overall mood is cool-headed, analytical, and grounded in long-term strategic realities rather than rhetorical panic.

## Bulletin - [00:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NhzWFLSOCGc&t=0s) Swedish Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson pushed back on the premise that NATO accession introduced new reliance on Washington, revealing that Sweden maintained unacknowledged, secret defense ties to the US since the 1940s and 1950s. - [01:40](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NhzWFLSOCGc&t=100s) Stockholm approaches US relations through pragmatism rather than public confrontation, reserving blunt pushback only for direct sovereignty challenges like American rhetoric targeting Greenland. - [03:34](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NhzWFLSOCGc&t=214s) Allied anxieties regarding US political reliability and export dependencies are inadvertently boosting European interest in Swedish arms like the Saab JAS 39 Gripen over American platforms like the F-35. - [04:26](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NhzWFLSOCGc&t=266s) European capitals are prioritizing sovereign supply chains and regional production capabilities to eliminate single points of failure in defense procurement.

## Key takeaways - [00:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NhzWFLSOCGc&t=0s) Sweden's historic Cold War neutrality was paired with covert, bilateral US defense dependencies hidden from the Swedish public. - [00:48](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NhzWFLSOCGc&t=48s) NATO membership diversifies Sweden's defense architecture across Nordic and Baltic neighbors rather than resting on isolated bilateral ties with Washington. - [01:22](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NhzWFLSOCGc&t=82s) Kristersson endorses an increased European defense burden provided the transatlantic transition follows an orderly process. - [01:40](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NhzWFLSOCGc&t=100s) Middle powers like Sweden and Canada maintain close consultations, but Sweden opts for practical engagement over vocal confrontation with unpredictable superpowers. - [02:22](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NhzWFLSOCGc&t=142s) Sweden establishes clear red lines on core democratic principles and territorial sovereignty, as demonstrated during US discussions on purchasing Greenland. - [03:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NhzWFLSOCGc&t=180s) Economic diplomacy and safeguarding access to the US market for Swedish tech and industrial firms remain a cornerstone of Stockholm's strategy. - [03:34](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NhzWFLSOCGc&t=214s) Sweden is marketing defense platforms, including Saab Gripen fighters and surveillance aircraft, to allies reassessing reliance on American manufacturers. - [04:02](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NhzWFLSOCGc&t=242s) Allied concerns over potential technical dependencies and operational control have made former President Trump an inadvertent salesman for non-US military hardware. - [04:26](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NhzWFLSOCGc&t=266s) Sweden has maintained an independent domestic defense industry since the 1930s, positioning it as a strategic asset amid Europe's push for industrial autonomy. - [05:12](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NhzWFLSOCGc&t=312s) European nations are actively building out regional defense capabilities to ensure guaranteed readiness and avoid single-source reliance on US defense exports.

## Detailed walkthrough ### [00:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NhzWFLSOCGc&t=0s) From Secret Cold War Reliance to Open NATO Alliances

David Rennie challenges Swedish Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson on Sweden's historic pivot away from neutrality, pointing out that joining NATO is fundamentally a bet on the transatlantic link and the reliability of the United States. Given growing political volatility in Washington, Rennie asks whether anchoring Sweden’s national security to America now feels like a much riskier wager than when the country first applied.

Kristersson counters this premise by re-evaluating Sweden's modern history. Ever since the 1940s and 1950s, he explains, Sweden was already heavily reliant on the United States behind closed doors. The country maintained a public posture of formal non-alignment while secretly cultivating deep Western defense ties that were deliberately hidden from the Swedish public—a covert legacy Kristersson admits he is "not that proud of." From his vantage point, accession to NATO does not heighten Swedish vulnerability to American whims; instead, it broadens Sweden's collective security net by tying its defense directly to its immediate Nordic and Baltic neighbors. Sweden has never collaborated as intimately with its regional partners as it does today, creating a diversified regional structure rather than a purely bilateral American dependence.

While acknowledging that a continued American presence remains vital and calling for an "orderly process" in transatlantic defense burden-sharing, Kristersson stresses that Sweden is now far less exposed to singular American bilateral decisions because its closest operational integration is rooted right across Northern Europe.

```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: Evolution of Swedish Security Posture accDescr: Diagram tracing Sweden's shift from covert bilateral Cold War reliance to multilateral NATO and regional Nordic integration.

subgraph ColdWar["Cold War to Pre-NATO Era"] A["Formal Neutrality"] --> B["Secret Bilateral Ties with US"] B --> C["Heavy, Unacknowledged US Dependency"] end

subgraph ModernNATO["NATO Membership Era"] D["Open Transatlantic Alliance"] --> E["Deep Integration with Nordic & Baltic Allies"] E --> F["Diversified Defense & Shared Regional Burden"] end

C -.->|"2022-2024 Strategic Shift"| D ```

- **Cold War secrecy**: Sweden maintained formal diplomatic neutrality while establishing secret, high-level defense dependencies with the US dating back to the 1940s and 1950s. - **Neighborhood reliance**: NATO membership has catalyzed unprecedented defense coordination between Sweden, the Nordic nations, and the Baltic states, reducing isolated reliance on Washington. - **Burden-sharing**: Kristersson agrees that Europe taking on more defense responsibility is fair, but insists the transition must be handled through an orderly process.

---

[01:40](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NhzWFLSOCGc&t=100s) Pragmatism, Middle Powers, and Standing up to Trump

Rennie shifts the discussion to how "middle powers" ought to navigate a world dominated by unpredictable superpowers and political strongmen. He contrasts the aggressive rhetoric of Canadian leadership—citing warnings delivered at Davos urging middle powers to push back against "big bullies," including the US—with the markedly more reserved posture adopted by the Nordic and Baltic states toward Donald Trump. Rennie asks whether Kristersson believes confrontational approaches are a tactical mistake.

Declining to pass judgment on Canadian domestic choices, Kristersson warmly characterizes Canada as "the most Nordic country outside the Nordics" and highlights close working relationships. However, he distinguishes Sweden’s diplomatic playbook: rather than picking public fights, Sweden practices firm, case-by-case pragmatism. When core democratic principles or territorial sovereignty are threatened—such as previous rhetoric surrounding the purchase or annexation of Greenland from Denmark—Sweden is completely unambiguous: "no American doubts our opinion on that."

Outside of those red lines, Kristersson maintains that Swedish foreign policy must remain intensely practical. It makes little sense to alienate Washington when Swedish tech enterprises, defense manufacturers, and commercial industries depend on unrestricted access to the American market. The governing principle for Stockholm is to speak out firmly when core values are challenged while quietly protecting vital economic and defense interests.

- **Middle power coordination**: Sweden maintains routine high-level consultations with Canada and fellow Nordic-Baltic partners to coordinate foreign policy. - **Red lines on sovereignty**: Sweden was outspoken and uncompromising in defending Danish sovereignty when American rhetoric targeted Greenland. - **Commercial pragmatism**: Stockholm pairs firm principled boundaries with active economic diplomacy to assist Swedish technology firms expanding into the United States.

---

[03:34](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NhzWFLSOCGc&t=214s) Gripen, the F-35, and Selling Arms in a Risk-Averse Europe

Rennie probes whether Sweden’s diplomatic restraint masks a sharper commercial calculation: positioning itself as a reliable defense contractor for nations spooked by Washington. When Sweden pitches Saab surveillance aircraft or JAS 39 Gripen multirole fighters to countries like Canada, Rennie argues, it is quietly selling itself as an insurance policy against an unreliable United States that might one day exploit technical dependencies or export "kill switches."

Kristersson responds with dry candor, acknowledging that while Sweden has pitched the Gripen to Canada, no agreement has been concluded. When Rennie points out that international anxiety over Trump has turned the former president into a formidable inadvertent salesman for Swedish hardware—prompting allies to consider the Gripen over Lockheed Martin's F-35—Kristersson smiles: "I don't mind the reasons for them to buy Gripen. I will help Saab to sell Gripen anyway."

Moving past the humor, Kristersson emphasizes a profound structural transformation across European defense thinking. Since the 1930s, Sweden deliberately maintained an independent domestic arms manufacturing industry to ensure baseline self-sufficiency. In a volatile geopolitical environment, European nations have realized that military readiness requires absolute certainty of access and diversified supply chains. While the United States remains the world's preeminent weapons supplier, European capitals are aggressively building out domestic and regional production capabilities to eliminate single points of failure, turning Sweden's legacy of defense autonomy into a major strategic asset.

- **Saab Gripen marketing**: Sweden is actively pursuing major foreign defense contracts, including pitches to Canada for Gripen fighters and Saab airborne early warning platforms. - **Sovereign supply chains**: European partners are re-evaluating military purchases like the F-35 due to anxieties over availability, operational autonomy, and potential software "kill switches." - **Indigenous industrial base**: Sweden's defense manufacturing ecosystem has been purposefully built and maintained since the 1930s to secure self-reliance and diversify international suppliers.

## Notable quotes > [00:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NhzWFLSOCGc&t=0s) not that proud of — Ulf Kristersson

> [00:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NhzWFLSOCGc&t=0s) orderly process — Ulf Kristersson

> [01:40](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NhzWFLSOCGc&t=100s) middle powers — David Rennie

> [01:40](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NhzWFLSOCGc&t=100s) big bullies — David Rennie

> [01:40](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NhzWFLSOCGc&t=100s) the most Nordic country outside the Nordics — Ulf Kristersson

> [01:40](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NhzWFLSOCGc&t=100s) no American doubts our opinion on that. — Ulf Kristersson

> [03:34](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NhzWFLSOCGc&t=214s) kill switches — David Rennie

> [03:34](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NhzWFLSOCGc&t=214s) I don't mind the reasons for them to buy Gripen. I will help Saab to sell Gripen anyway. — Ulf Kristersson

## Mentioned Canada, David Rennie, Denmark, Donald Trump, F-35, Greenland, JAS 39 Gripen, Lockheed Martin, NATO, Russia, Saab, Sweden, The Economist, Ukraine, Ulf Kristersson, United States

## Video description Sweden's decision to join NATO was a remarkable turnaround after decades of neutrality. The country was left with little choice after Russia invaded Ukraine; it became a staunch supporter of Kyiv and raised defence spending. But with the transatlantic alliance under strain is the security of Sweden—and Europe—more uncertain than ever?

Ulf Kristersson, Sweden’s prime minister, spoke to David Rennie, The Economist’s geopolitics editor, about American dependence, the plight of the middle powers and how countries should deal with Donald Trump.

#sweden #europe #trump #usa #politics

00:00 - Why Sweden has traded neutrality for NATO 01:40 - How should the “middle powers” deal with Donald Trump? 03:34 - Could Swedish jets tempt buyers away from America? 04:26 - Has Trump shattered Europe's trust in American arms?

Watch the full show: http://bit.ly/4x6S16T Sign up to the Insider newsletter: https://econ.st/4nOyzIb

Subscribe to The Economist: https://www.economist.com/subscribe Download our app: https://www.economist.com/get-the-app

Follow The Economist on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/theeconomist/ Follow The Economist on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/TheEconomist Follow The Economist on X: https://x.com/TheEconomist

[Source](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NhzWFLSOCGc)

中文简报

瑞典首相称北欧防务纽带与萨博战机可缓冲美国局势波动 加入北约使瑞典以北欧区域防务一体化取代了隐秘的双边依赖，从而防范美国政治波动的风险，同时也为萨博等本土军火商创造了机遇。 面对外界对美国政治波动的担忧，瑞典首相乌尔夫·克里斯特松（Ulf Kristersson）为瑞典加入北约进行了辩护。他透露瑞典在整个冷战时期都秘密依赖美国，并指出加入北约实际上通过深度融入北欧和波罗的海防务体系实现了防务多元化。在谈及中等强国应如何应对唐纳德·特朗普时，克里斯特松主张采取低调务实的态度而非公开对抗，在核心主权问题上划定严格红线的同时，保护关键的商业与技术合作关系。他还强调了欧洲在防务自主方面的结构性推进，并带着冷幽默指出，对美国武器可靠性的担忧反而在无意中提升了国际市场对瑞典本土平台（如萨博“鹰狮”战机）的兴趣。 瑞典首相乌尔夫·克里斯特松驳斥了加入北约会导致瑞典对华盛顿产生新依赖的观点，并透露瑞典自20世纪四五十年代以来就与美国保持着未公开的秘密防务联系。 (0:00) 斯德哥尔摩以务实态度而非公开对抗处理对美关系，仅在面临直接的主权挑战（例如美国针对格陵兰岛的言论）时才会予以直接反击。 (1:40) 盟友对美国政治可靠性及出口依赖的担忧，反而在无形中推动了欧洲对萨博JAS 39“鹰狮”等瑞典武器的兴趣，胜过F-35等美国平台。 (3:34) 欧洲各国正优先发展自主供应链和区域生产能力，以消除国防采购中的单点故障风险。 (4:26)

Reading summary

Swedish Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson argues that joining NATO reduces Sweden’s strategic vulnerability to United States political shifts by replacing decades of covert bilateral reliance with a diversified Nordic and Baltic defense architecture. Replacing Covert Dependency with Regional Defense Networks (0:00) Kristersson challenges the assertion that NATO accession exposes Sweden to greater American political volatility. He notes that dating back to the 1940s and 1950s, Sweden maintained a public stance of neutrality while secretly developing deep defense dependencies with the United States that were hidden from its own public. According to Kristersson, formal NATO membership ends this covert bilateral dependence by integrating Swedish defense into an unprecedented multilateral network alongside its Nordic and Baltic neighbors. While acknowledging that a continued American presence remains critical, Kristersson argues that deeper regional integration cushions Sweden against unilateral policy shifts in Washington. He supports greater European burden-sharing, emphasizing that Europe must manage this shift through an orderly transatlantic process rather than abrupt disengagement. Pragmatic Middle-Power Diplomacy and Sovereignty Red Lines (1:40) In contrast to more vocal approaches adopted by some middle powers, such as Canada's public challenges against great-power bullying, Sweden employs a strategy of targeted pragmatism. Kristersson emphasizes that Stockholm establishes clear red lines when territorial sovereignty or core democratic norms are challenged, pointing to Sweden’s decisive opposition to American rhetoric regarding the purchase or annexation of Greenland from Denmark. Outside of fundamental sovereignty issues, Kristersson advocates diplomatic restraint. He argues that unnecessarily antagonizing Washington risks harming Swedish commercial and technological interests, which rely heavily on open access to the American market. The Swedish approach balances firm defense of core principles with practical economic diplomacy. Strategic Arms Production and European Industrial Autonomy (3:34) European defense strategy is shifting as allies reassess their exposure to American procurement dependencies, operational availability risks, and potential software kill switches on platforms such as Lockheed Martin's F-35. Kristersson highlights that Sweden has deliberately sustained an independent arms manufacturing sector since the 1930s to preserve national self-sufficiency, positioning companies like Saab to offer alternatives like the JAS 39 Gripen and airborne surveillance platforms to partners such as Canada. Kristersson notes that European capitals are increasingly focused on eliminating single points of failure by diversifying suppliers and strengthening regional production capacity. Although the United States remains the dominant global weapons supplier, Kristersson views Sweden's indigenous manufacturing base as a vital strategic asset in supporting broader European defense resilience. Kristersson frames Sweden's security policy as an exercise in regional diversification and industrial self-reliance, leaving open the broader question of how quickly European allies can manage transatlantic burden-sharing without fracturing their security links to Washington.

Source quotes

[0:00] Ulf Kristersson: not that proud of [0:00] Ulf Kristersson: orderly process [1:40] David Rennie: middle powers [1:40] David Rennie: big bullies [1:40] Ulf Kristersson: the most Nordic country outside the Nordics [1:40] Ulf Kristersson: no American doubts our opinion on that. [3:34] David Rennie: kill switches [3:34] Ulf Kristersson: I don't mind the reasons for them to buy Gripen. I will help Saab to sell Gripen anyway.

Original transcript

[0:00] Joining NATO is [0:01] a bet on America, among other things. [0:03] It's a bet on the strong transatlantic [0:05] link. Your own security national [0:06] security documents talk about, you know, [0:08] that strong transatlantic link. [0:10] Does relying on America feel like a much [0:14] riskier bet now than when you joined [0:16] NATO? [0:17] >> The story of Swedish security policy [0:20] since the [0:22] 40s or at least the 50s, [0:25] we have been relying heavily on the US. [0:28] >> You didn't talk about it always. [0:29] >> We didn't talk about it. It was [0:31] originally secret, you know, just [0:33] secret. In a way that today really can [0:35] discuss the legitimacy about being so [0:38] secret. Formally neutral, but secretly [0:41] extremely Western, but nobody should [0:44] know, not even our own population. [0:47] I'm not that proud of that legacy. So, [0:49] the dependency on the US was extremely [0:52] big in very many as to very many [0:55] aspects. [0:56] So, my reading is the the opposite. [0:59] Joining NATO we join also all the other [1:02] NATO members, not least the NATO allies [1:04] in our own neighborhood. We have never [1:06] been cooperating as closely [1:08] with our neighbors as we do now because [1:11] of the NATO membership. So, so, I'm [1:14] very, you know, transparent. US presence [1:17] in NATO is obviously very important. And [1:20] orderly process in the burden shifting [1:22] is extremely important as well. It is Is [1:25] this fair? But, it should be orderly. [1:28] Uh but, we are now depending less [1:31] on bilateral American. We don't mind the [1:33] cooperation. We have quite contrary, but [1:36] we are depending and relying more on [1:38] partners in our own neighborhood. [1:40] >> So, I'm so struck by, you know, [1:42] we spend our time talking about middle [1:44] powers trying to work out how do we, [1:46] >> You know, what about the Canadians? [1:48] >> Yeah, navigating this world of big [1:49] bullies. But, there's a I there's a [1:51] really interesting gap between, you [1:52] know, [1:54] at the beginning of this year you had [1:55] the Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney. [1:56] He said at Davos, you know, that the [1:58] middle powers need to, you know, [2:00] basically stand up, push back against [2:02] the big bullies. And he meant, among [2:04] others, America. [2:05] Your middle powers, you know, the [2:07] Nordics, the Baltics, you're all working [2:09] together. You seem to be much keener to [2:12] avoid a direct confrontation [2:15] with Donald Trump. [2:16] Do you think that Mark Carney [2:18] is going about this the right way? [2:21] >> I would not try to kind of, you know, to [2:24] assess or even less judge on on domestic [2:28] Canadian choices. We have extremely good [2:30] cooperation with Mark Carney and the [2:32] Canadian government, and I really [2:34] appreciate his efforts also to be very [2:37] close to Nordic countries. The most [2:40] Nordic country outside the Nordics, [2:42] as they and we normally call each other. [2:44] We have regular meetings, and I really [2:46] appreciate that. We are not seeking [2:49] conflicts. We can accept that we have [2:51] different views on many things. [2:53] When things happen that we think are [2:56] kind of challenging core values for us, [2:59] then we are extremely frank. Greenland, [3:01] Denmark, such a case. [3:03] And no American doubt [3:07] doubts our opinion on that, our stance [3:10] on that. On the same time, we do a lot [3:12] to increase the possibilities for [3:14] Swedish tech companies to to cooperate [3:17] with American ones, to be successful on [3:18] the American market. And we we do [3:21] appreciate a lot of these these [3:22] cooperations. We are very pragmatic in [3:24] that sense. Speak out when necessary, [3:27] but also protect Swedish national [3:29] interests in relation to the US. [3:32] >> But sometimes there's a kind of [3:34] I say there's an edge to it, right? I [3:36] mean, when you're in Canada celebrating [3:38] selling, you know, Saab surveillance [3:40] planes, or you're selling Gripens to to [3:42] Canada. I mean, that that's Sweden [3:45] offering itself as a safe alternative to [3:47] an unreliable America. No, that's that's [3:50] what's going on. [3:51] >> That's not for us to decide. It's not We [3:53] We love [3:54] >> going on. [3:54] >> We love to sell the Gripen fighters to [3:57] To be frank, we haven't yet finalized [3:59] the [4:00] a deal with Canada even though we are [4:03] proud um [4:05] making proud offers to them. [4:07] Uh [4:07] But, of course, we are doing everything [4:09] we can to to make [4:12] make have these business opportunities, [4:14] not least in this very dangerous world. [4:16] Then every country has to make their own [4:18] decisions on whether to to how they kind [4:20] of spread different risks and and [4:22] dependencies across the world. [4:24] >> But, you know, the things that have [4:26] happened, including, as you say, the [4:27] threats to take Greenland, have been [4:29] such a shock that people are now saying, [4:32] "We We can't depend on America to this [4:33] extent. We're worried about American [4:35] kill switches." And then people often [4:36] say, "So, maybe instead of buying an [4:38] F-35 from America, we need to buy a [4:41] Gripen fighter from Sweden." So, [4:44] I guess [4:44] >> I don't mind the reasons. I don't mind [4:46] the reasons for them to buy Gripen. I [4:48] was I will help Saab to sell Gripen [4:50] anyway. [4:51] >> So, you know, you you don't want this [4:52] fight with Donald Trump, but he's a [4:53] pretty good salesman for your weapons, [4:55] no? [4:57] >> Absolutely. And um [4:59] And different countries will always have [5:01] to make up their mind on providers, on [5:04] dependencies. And I think this actually [5:06] goes slightly beyond the current [5:08] situation. Uh I mean, US is a one of the [5:12] is the world's biggest provider of of of [5:14] military equipment, but Europe is also [5:16] stepping up for good reasons because of [5:19] availability. [5:20] >> Of course. [5:20] >> But, also on dependencies. [5:22] >> And trust, no? Around the table? [5:24] I mean, I hear from other European [5:25] governments. There's a There's trust has [5:27] been badly damaged, no? [5:28] >> A few things you really need to be very [5:30] sure that you actually can access when [5:33] you need them. There is a reason why [5:35] Sweden built up a [5:37] national competence on military [5:40] equipment since the '30s. [5:41] >> Mhm. [5:42] >> And the partly because of neutrality, we [5:44] wanted to be able be self-sufficient, [5:46] but also because we we we wanted to have [5:49] different sources. So, I think this is a [5:51] mutual, you know, mutual dependency and [5:54] and kind of spreading these dependencies [5:57] are basically a good idea for Sweden and [6:00] for other countries.