| T.R | Title | User | Personal
Name | Date | Lines |
|---|
| 381.1 | Glasnost/Perestroika & Neutrality | NEILS::SAVAGE | | Thu Mar 22 1990 09:35 | 86 |
| From: [email protected] (Magnus Rimvall)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.nordic
Subject: Re: Glasnost/Perestroika & Neutrality
Date: 21 Mar 90 15:27:36 GMT
Organization: Schenectady, NY
In article <[email protected]> billwolf%[email protected] writes:
>
> OK, I forgot what the particular case was in Sweden (Statens
> Invandrarverk regulations are SO much fun to read ;-)), but in
> general US citizens are actively discouraged (by the US Government)
> from seeking dual (or single) citizenship with respect to countries
> which impose required military service on their citizens.
Yes, this is too bad. I wish the Swedish and US governments would take
a more open view on these matters.
> It is my understanding that male Swedish citizens are subject to
> periodic military service (a few weeks) until around age 55 or so,
> in order to ensure military readiness at all times, independently
> of whether or not people are being drafted for full-time service.
This is, correctly, the theory of the case. Two notes, though:
1) If you have not performed your initial "year" (i.e. 8-15
months depending on position and rank), you will NEVER be
called up for the "repmoeten", i.e. the periodic "updates"
2) The decreasing funding (after inflation) of the services has
forced them to save, "repmoeten" was the first target of
this savings, so the period between these sessions has
incresed dramatically (does anybody out there know what
the present interval is???)
> My comment regarding taxes was directed toward the possibility
> of eliminating the military entirely, as has already been done
> in Costa Rica. This would indeed save considerable tax money,
> and might be worth considering given recent developments in the
> Warsaw Pact. I'm still waiting for an answer to the question
> -- is such a move being considered?
This is, I am sure, only a partial answer:
1) There has been a de-facto decrease of military spending over
the last 20 years or so. This decrease has been quite
dramatic for all services. I do not remember the actual
numbers, but the number of "JAS" aircraft (the newest SAAB)
is considerably lower than the number of "Draken" or "Viggen"
(the two previous generations of Swedish military aircraft).
The number of regular and armour divisions has decreased,
and so forth.
2) Recent articles in Svenska Dagbladet have argued that the
nordic countries experience an INCREASED risk of being
involved in military action, due to the lack a russian
"buffer zone" in Eastern Europe, and so forth.
3) I have NOT heard of any discussion on outright elimination of
the military. Switzerland recently had a national referendum
on the outright elimination of the Army ("Schweiz ohne Arme").
The proposal was voted down, but it got more votes than
anybody had expected (30-40% range).
4) The overall tax-rate (public spending divided by GNP) is 56%
and highest in the world. Remove the military, and you bring
it down to 50% or so (my rough estimate). BIG DEAL!!!
(IMHO, this is NOT where Swedens tax problems are.)
My long-distance judgement is that Sweden will retain their military
strength for many years to come. Until a new stability is reached in
Europe, nothing will change (despite the enormously positive
developments in Europe right now; we do NOT yet know that the end
configuration will be 100% good. People are, IMHO rightly so, cautious
of the Germans and "remember" the years 1870, 1914 and 1939 all too
well).
> Bill Wolfe, [email protected]
I enjoy our discussion, Bill, as the "temperature" is more moderate
compared to the wars in comp.lang.* etc. How about some better informed
Swedes (living in Sweden) joining in??? What is the situation in
Norway?
Magnus Rimvall
Standard Disclaimer: these are my own opinions only.
|
| 381.2 | "The Sampo weilders" | ESSB::PJCUNNINGHAM | Armenian Renegade | Fri Mar 23 1990 01:16 | 7 |
| Can anybody tell me Finlands position, or are they just sitting on
the ditch like most others to see the out come. I also hear that
Finland has increased its military budget for the coming fiscal year.
Is this true???????
Paul
|
| 381.3 | Status report from Oslo | OSL09::MAURITZ | DTN(at last!)872-0238; @NWO | Fri Mar 23 1990 05:56 | 33 |
| Finland has indeed increased their military budget. This has a number
of reasons; some of them structural (i.e., need for more hardware
(airplanes, etc.) to adjust for their relative previous misbalance
of probably having spent more on the army branch of the military
than the air force & navy (Note: I am no expert; this is just randomly
gleaned from superficial articles, etc.). The aquisitions that
they are planning will also be balanced in another way; they will
be getting both MIG's (I seem to recall about 1/3) as well as Saab
types (I don't quite recall whether this was JAS or Viggen types).
With regard to Norway, the usual anti-NATO people are making the
usual noises. We had them in the 30's with their "broken rifle"
policy; then they were in the government. Their theory was that
if Norway went totally pacifist, no one would bother us and we'd
be contributing to world peace. I guess the problem was that Hitler
couldn't read Norwegian. In a couple of weeks we'll be "celebrating"
the 50th aniversary of 9th April 1940; it'l be interesting to see
what kind of speech making comes out of the woodwork.
Aside from the above mentions I think most people are doing a "wait
and see". Kohl's toying with emotions regarding the Polish border
is percived as disquieting across the range of the political spectrum,
despite sanctimonious public utterances of the variety "...of course,
everything is different today...". There is a lot being said and
spoken that does not reach print. I shall leave it there as well.
(For the record, I genuinely do believe that things are indeed very
differnt today...I really hope that developments in the next few
years will bear me out).
Mauritz
|
| 381.4 | Events may have opposite effect | NEILS::SAVAGE | | Fri Mar 23 1990 10:04 | 100 |
| From: [email protected] (Kjell Kristiansson)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.nordic
Subject: Re: Glasnost/Perestroika & Neutrality
Date: 22 Mar 90 09:31:00 GMT
Organization: Diab Data
In a previous articles Bill Wolfe writes about the effects of
Glasnost/Perestroika & Neutrality and suggests that they should
influence the present military setup in Sweden.
In an other article Magnus Rimvall corrects some missunderstandings
Bill Wolfe has.
My comment is that for the present Glasnost and Perestroika have the
opposite effect. It can in the short term lead to increased unstability
in eastern Europe. Some factors to consider:
- Influenced by the newly won freedom a lot of the Soviet states wants
to break loose from the Soviet Union.
- Changing form a closed economy to a market economy will lead to
*very* much higher prices on a lot o now subsidiced items like housing
and food.
- We will see and have already seen a lot of ethnic violence in the
Soviet Union, Romainia and Yougoslavia.
I really hope it all can be solved but fear that the next few years
will be rather unstable and shaky. Whats happend is a must but maybee
it's gone too fast. If Russia starts to break up - can Gorby stay at
power and control it. First case is Lithuainia.
Kjell
Standard disclaimer
==============================================================================
From: Kjell Kristiansson ! Tel: +46 31 805300
Adress: Diab Data AB ! Fax: +46 31 150430
Gullbergs strandgata 7 ! Email: [email protected]
S-411 04 Gothenburg ! mcsun!sunic!chalmer!diabgb!kjell
Sweden
==============================================================================
From: [email protected] (Dag Stenberg, Univ of Helsinki, Finland)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.nordic
Subject: Re: Glasnost/Perestroika & Neutrality
Date: 22 Mar 90 22:50:47 GMT
Organization: University of Helsinki
In article <[email protected]>, billwolf%[email protected] (William Thomas Wolfe, 2847 ) writes:
> My comment regarding taxes was directed toward the possibility
> of eliminating the military entirely, as has already been done
> in Costa Rica. This would indeed save considerable tax money,
> and might be worth considering given recent developments in the
> Warsaw Pact. I'm still waiting for an answer to the question
> -- is such a move being considered?
> Bill Wolfe, [email protected]
--
Actually, there is a spreading feeling in Finland and Norway at least,
that the recent developments in Eastern Europe may have increased the
risk for military conflicts in the area. With the eradication of the
forced communist consensus, nationalist disagreements and economic
problems bring forward new risks, and the risk of war in Europe is
again considered a reality. While Norway plans strengthening of the
NATO bases and increasing military transport capacity, Finland is just
getting mentally ready for anything that may happen. From the
standpoint of potential military risks, there is definitely not any
reason to eliminate the military now.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Dag Stenberg [email protected]
Department of Physiology [email protected]
University of Helsinki tlx: 100125 finuh sf
Helsinki, Finland fax: int.+358-0-1918366
tel: int+358-0-1918532
-----------------------------------------------------------------
From: [email protected] (J{rvinen Hannu-Matti)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.nordic
Subject: Re: Glasnost/Perestroika & Neutrality
Date: 23 Mar 90 08:00:34 GMT
Organization: Tampere University of Technology, Finland
In article <[email protected]> [email protected] (Kjell Kristiansson) writes:
>I really hope it all can be solved but fear that the next few years
>will be rather unstable and shaky. Whats happend is a must but maybee
>it's gone too fast. If Russia starts to break up - can Gorby stay
>at power and control it. First case is Lithuainia.
Just a comment: Today's newspaper/yesterday's TV-news in Finland:
"Sweden raised her military readiness because of increased military
activity in Lithuania, and expects refugeers from Lithuania."
Finland has not reacted, but how about if military activity will raise
in Estonia?
-----
Hannu-Matti Jarvinen, [email protected]
These are my own opinions only. N�m� ovat vain omia mielipiteit�ni.
|
| 381.5 | Norwegian perspective | NEILS::SAVAGE | | Mon Apr 02 1990 09:42 | 150 |
| From: [email protected] (Anne Cathrine Elster)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.nordic
Subject: Some Norwegian viewpoints
Date: 30 Mar 90 21:12:01 GMT
Organization: Cornell Univ. CS Dept, Ithaca NY
After reading reems of messages relating to Sweden, here are some of
the issues discussed recently as seen from a Norwegian's perspective:
Like Sweden, Norway is in no hurry to disarm. Granted, we have a
dwindling number of F-16s, but that is sadly not so much because of
military cut-backs, as it is because of the unusually many faulty
planes we received (I believe 10+ of the 3-500 we purchased has
crashed -- a high enough percentile for us to receive a free one from
the manufactorers last year!) Also, being one of the few NATO
countries to have a land border with the USSR (can you name the other?
:-) ) the situation in Lithuania isn't exactly inspiring us to cut back
...
As for dual citizenships, Norway has pretty much the same rules as
Sweden in that the only legal way to obtain dual citizenship is by
being born to Norwegian parents in the U.S. Women can keep their dual
status as long as they do not volunteer to serve in one of the
country's military units. (Norwegian women can do miltary service on
the same terms as their male counterparts, if they so desire.) Another
aspect relating to this is that if you as a Norwegian keep your
citizenship, but obtain a green card, the card will "expire" after
living outside the U.S. for 2 or more years (even if you are married to
a U.S. citizen).
[No, I was not born in the U.S., am not a U.S. citzens, nor married to
an American, but after having spent nearly 9 years in this wonderful
country, I have gotten to know several fellow Norwegians with US
connections over the years.]
High costs of burgers? You bet! No problem charging the same rate as
any other burger joint in the area! Reasons for the high cost of
living in Scandinavia has been mention. A comment on why farm products
in Norway are higher than Sweden and Denmark (try $20/lbs for
tenderloin): High production costs. Only 3% of Norwegain land is
farmable, and farmer work hard politically to have the same vacational
benefits as well as income as the average industrial worker. This has
been, and still is a big problem when it comes to trade negotiations
with the EEC.
In a perfect world, it would hardly make sense to farm in Norway since
it is cheaper to grow things elsewhere (and Europe does have a
food-surplus). I am here assuming a free-market model in an ideal
world. However, since food embargoes are one of the most popular ways
for foreign countries to "teach" other nations, this would pose a high
security risk. (Several Norwegians still remember our situation under
WWII when most of our food supply had to go to the occupying German
soldiers.) We are already in bad shape -- Norway only produces about
half the food it consumes (and that's including our fish export into
the production figures). So, based on food production, Norway with its
near 5million (I believe I saw that figure in a recent cencus poll)
population is overpopulated by about 2+ million despite being 1/28th of
the area of the US (which produces 20+% of the world's food supply and
has a population of about 230 million!).
Anne
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Anne C. Elster Please don't flame me -- I'm just
School of Electrical Engineering trying to share my knowledge with
Cornell University, Phillips Hall you in the name of enlightment.
Ithaca, NY 14853 Polite corrections are, however,
appreciated.
Standard disclaimers.
From: [email protected] (Anne Cathrine Elster)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.nordic
Subject: Re: Some Norwegian viewpoints
Date: 2 Apr 90 08:31:12 GMT
Organization: Cornell Univ. CS Dept, Ithaca NY
The following was just brought to my attention:
>I believe 10+ of the 3-500 we purchased
^^^^^ Norway has bought less than 100 F-16 (which makes the percent
that has crashed even worse!).
Greetings from Tromsoe. Asbj.
--------------------------------------------------------------
And was verified by:
From: Stein J�rgen Rypern <[email protected]>
Date: Mon, 2 Apr 1990 9:38:30 MET DST
Alas, the norwegian Air Force has never had 300 fighters, let alone
500. As I recall we originally ordered 75 F-16 planes from General
Dynamics, the bulk of which have been delivered. We currently (as of
jan 1990) have 62 F-16s. (Source : 'Fakta om forsvaret 1990' translated
'facts about the defense 1990').
I am not sure how many we have lost, but your figure of 10+/- seems
reasonable.
Other facts about the norwegian air force (RNoAF) and our defense
forces:
Air Force :
Peacetime strength : approx. 10 500 men & women
Wartime - ' ' - : 37 000
Planes :
7 P-3N/P-3C Orion Maritime Surveilance Planes
62 F-16 'Fighting Falcon' Fighter-Bombers
20 F-5 'Freedomfighter' Fighters
6 C-130 'Hercules' Transport planes
4 DHC-6 'Twin Otter' small transport planes
3 DA-20 'Jet Falcon' even smaller transport planes
18 SAAB Safir Propel Trainers
13 Bell 412 SP Transport Helicopters
15 UH-1B 'Iroquis' Transport Helicopters
9 Sea King Mk 43 Search and Rescue Helicopters
5 Lynx Mk 86 Coast Guard Helicopters
Our total defense forces is about 41000 soldiers and 12000 civilian
employees in peacetime, whereof approx. 27000 are recruits doing their
12-18 months of military service. After complete mobilization our
defense forces total approx. 320 000.
Hardly a defense force to cut further back is it ? We're not even
strong enough to stop the swedes if they decided to attack us :-) Ah,
well - they'll probably make a mess of it all by themselves, as they
have done the last 4-5 times we've fought :-)
> Anne
S(t)ein
==============================================================================
Stein J. Rypern, undergrad I "Cattle die, kinsman die
Institute of Informatics I You Yourself must likewise die.
Oslo U, Norway I But one thing that never dies,
[email protected] I is the verdict on each man dead" .. H�vam�l
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks to both of you!
Anne
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Anne C. Elster
School of Electrical Engineering
Cornell University, Phillips Hall
Ithaca, NY 14853, U.S.A.
|
| 381.6 | Border cooperation agreement (UPI wire) | NEILS::SAVAGE | | Mon Apr 02 1990 13:45 | 46 |
| From: [email protected] (JULIAN M. ISHERWOOD)
Subject: Soviets, Nordics open communications
Keywords: international, non-usa government, government
Date: 28 Mar 90 20:56:59 GMT
Location: soviet union, norway, finland
MOSCOW (UPI) -- Soviet authorities and Nordic nations agreed for the
first time to develop civilian transport and communications in their
northern reaches, marking a devolution of central Soviet control over
the militarily sensitive area, Tass reported Wednesday.
Tass said Norway, Sweden, Finland and the Soviet Union entered into
an agreement allowing for the development of closer relations between
local businesses and authorities in the sparsely populated region where
East and West lie side by side.
``The agreement is a step forward in the development of border
cooperation between our countries,'' Murmansk communications department
chief Eduard Meshcheryakov told the Soviet news agency.
Murmansk, a city of 430,000, is situated on the Kola peninsula and
is the headquarters of the Soviet northern fleet.
``We discussed not separate contacts but a range of joint measures
to develop communications systems and transportation. We have agreed to
develop international communication lines between Murmansk and Kirkenes
(Norway), Rovaniemi (Finland) and Lulea (Sweden),'' he said.
The agreement will allow direct telephone communications among the
various regions as well as a new international air route from Kirkenes
in northern Norway to Murmansk.
Authorities in northern Norway have long demanded closer ties with
Soviet areas across the 124-mile border to develop commercial links and
prevent a population exodus from the region.
Finland, the only Western country to have a Treaty of Friendship,
Cooperation and Mutual Assistance with the Soviet Union, has
traditionally had close contacts with the country.
Neutral Sweden has continually tried to develop its commercial
interests in the Baltic states of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania and in
the Leningrad region of the Soviet Union.
But such close relations between the northwest Soviet Union and
Norway and Sweden in particular, have previously been made difficult due
to long lines of official communication through Moscow, and East-West
security considerations.
Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev has repeatedly called for the
development of closer relations in the region but Scandinavian nations
have previously been reluctant to make hasty decisions.
During an October 1989 official visit to Finland, Gorbachev
repeated an earlier call to develop local and national relations in the
region, calling for agreements on transport, shipping lanes in the
Barents Sea and the reduction of armed forces in the area.
|
| 381.7 | Cutting Swedish defense won't reduce taxes much | NEILS::SAVAGE | | Mon Apr 09 1990 10:54 | 42 |
| From: [email protected] (Thomas Sj�land)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.nordic
Subject: Re: Glasnost/Perestroika & Neutrality
Date: 6 Apr 90 11:35:36 GMT
Organization: Swedish Institute of Computer Science, Kista
The Swedish military costs about 3% of the tax money so it would not
mean anything significant to take away the defense, when it comes to
reducing taxes. Our taxes go mainly to interests on foreign dept, a
very large public sector paying for various social and medical services
to the inhabitants of all nationalities, and large sums going back to
the households in order to subsidize the living expenses (we have a
very generous system for subsidizing interest costs of newly built
houses for instance).
In fact the comparative strength of our military forces have decreased
drastically since the 50s. The official policy is currently to keep the
current military level and spending until the political changes in
Europe effects the military strength of the Warsaw pact and NATO.
But yes, there is a rather vigourous pacifist movement, although not so
much discussing the mandatory drafting, but rather the fact that the
Swedish industries producing arms have exported to forbidden countries.
This movement is the one that brought the Bofors affair (bribes to
officials to get big contracts in the third world) to the surface,
causing some very obscure legislation forbidding employees to hand over
proof of illegal activities on behalf of their employer to the police
(!), to be suggested in parliament.
The politicians are currently busy trying to prove the weak point that
they were not informed. There are court cases against some company
leaders going on.
--
Thomas Sjoeland
SICS, PO Box 1263, S-164 28 KISTA, SWEDEN
Tel: +46 8 752 15 42 Ttx: 812 61 54 SICS S Fax: +46 8 751 72 30
Internet: [email protected]
.......
Ta't lugnt Goesta, jag har hans personnummer...
|
| 381.8 | Russia, Ukraine and Byelorussia regonized | TLE::SAVAGE | | Fri Dec 20 1991 11:38 | 36 |
| From: [email protected]
Newsgroups: clari.news.gov.international,clari.news.issues.conflict,
clari.news.europe
Subject: Sweden recognizes Russia, Byelorussia, Ukraine
Date: 19 Dec 91 17:42:43 GMT
STOCKHOLM, Sweden (UPI) -- Sweden said Thursday it has decided to
recognize Russia, Ukraine and Byelorussia as independent states in a
move it said signified the imminent demise of the Soviet Union.
"Now is the correct time," said Swedish Prime Minister Carl Bildt
following a meeting of the powerful Foreign Relations Privy Council.
"The decision to recognize the three states comes against a backdrop
of the developments of the past few weeks, leading to the demise of the
Soviet Union," a government statement said.
It added that in deciding to recognize the three former Soviet
republics Sweden had placed "great weight" on announcements by the
three states that they planned to honor international agreements entered
into by the Soviet Union.
"It is equally important that they have expressed their support for
the United Nations Charter and the human rights dimension of the
Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe," the statement said.
The statement said the Swedish government would "closely follow
developments in the other former republics of the Soviet Union and
decide on recognition of them at a later stage."
Norway became the first western country to recognize the three states
on Monday.
In a separate statement Sweden said it would also recognize the
Yugoslav republics of Croatia and Slovenia as independent states on
January 15, 1992 provided certain conditions were fulfilled.
"The government expects that before that date both states will have
expressed their willingness to respect ... democracy, human rights and
the principles that normally exist in an independent state," the
statement said.
The Swedish move followed a similar decision adopted by the European
Community.
|