Freddy Jönsson has contributed more than most to putting the Total Defence issue on the agenda. He is now a newly elected member of the Royal Swedish Academy of War Sciences, and Försvarssektorn Nyheter meets him to reflect on developments over the past 10 to 15 years and to congratulate the Total Defence Foundation (Totalförsvarsstiftelsen), which is approaching its tenth anniversary. 

Were you alone in talking about Total Defence ten or fifteen years ago? 

– There were certainly a few people I had interesting exchanges with around 2012: Kristina Syk, Ann Ödlund, Fredrik Lindgren (now Vamne), Björn Körlof, and Bo Richard Lundgren. But otherwise, almost nobody was talking about Total Defence at that time, he says. 

In 2012, Freddy Jönsson was part of the exercise leadership for KOMPASS 12, the first joint Swedish Armed Forces exercise that the Swedish Armed Forces Headquarters conducted from a national perspective since the Cold War. 

What did the defence debate look like at that time? 

– Around 2012 to 2013, the defence bloggers moved to Twitter. The major event that drove this was the Euromaidan protests at the end of 2013 and the Russian annexation of Crimea in early 2014. At the same time, several former diplomats began promoting Russian narratives in Swedish media, which caused considerable frustration, says Freddy, and continues:  

– The government came under heavy criticism. The Prime Minister made ill-considered remarks about Crimea, the Foreign Minister downplayed the fact that a Russian Ilyushin IL-20 reconnaissance aircraft had flown between the Swedish islands of Öland and Gotland during an international staff exercise in Sweden, and the chair of the Defence Commission felt that Russia was retreating eastward and that Europe was safer than it had been for a long time. 

How did you react to that? 

– It created a strong sense of unity on defence Twitter. Everyone writing on the subject agreed that Russia had a threatening agenda and that the government did not understand this. 

You wrote an article on Medium entitled The Vulnerable Society: What Happened to "Total Defence"? around that time. How was it received? 

– It had a major impact. Many people got in touch, particularly from the intelligence and security community. A group of reserve officers, former officers, and former security police officers had been having the same reflections for a long time. That group actually became the foundation for the Total Defence Foundation (Totalförsvarsstiftelsen). 

In what way? 

– During 2014, the group wrote a scenario called Omfall Edmund (Contingency Edmund). It concerned Sweden being subjected to attack by non-uniformed personnel, advanced influence operations, a dirty bomb, explosive charges, and sporadic firefights. It became clear just how difficult it was to determine whether the Police or the Swedish Armed Forces should handle that type of attack. 

What happened when Sweden got a new government and a new Defence Commission was appointed? 

– We then wrote a study, the Total Defence Study, based on a war game using the Omfall Edmund scenario. It was submitted to the government in 2016. We met with the government and the Defence Commission on several occasions, but for much of that period almost nothing happened, he says, and continues: 

– The Crisis Management Secretariat was moved from the Prime Minister's Office to the Ministry of Justice, and a security policy council was established that did not even keep minutes of its meetings. The Foreign Minister referred to the Defence Commission as "that group". Criticism from defence Twitter was intense, directed at this government's paralysis as well. 

Did you contribute anything concrete, or were you mainly critics? 

– We contributed a great deal during "the lost years" between 2014 and 2022. We established a Business Council that became the only forum where business sector actors met with government agencies until 2023, Freddy explains. The Business Council held around 20 meetings attended by all preparedness agencies, the Defence Committee, the Defence Commission, and the ministry.  

– We also launched a Council for Psychological Defence, whose members later appeared in the leadership of the new government agency. In addition, we took the initiative for the NATO exercise Nordic Pine, which today is one of the largest civilian NATO exercises. 

Are NGOs like yours still needed today, now that the government agencies have stepped up? 

– Yes, the agencies are delivering considerably more now. Policy sets clear requirements and allocates resources that can actually make a difference. However, we see three areas where we are still needed: NATO integration of society as a whole, not just the Swedish Armed Forces; security of supply, which concerns global supply chains rather than national preparedness alone; and European security cooperation. Progress there is slow. 

How will you address that? 

– From 2025, we are investing our capital in European defence companies. The returns are used for projects that strengthen NATO integration, security of supply, and cooperation in Europe. 

The Total Defence Foundation is an example of how civil society can contribute and make a difference. How has the public sector handled that kind of initiative? 

– Many people listen to us, but it is not always straightforward to translate that into action. Sometimes it is perceived more as competition than as a complement. For us it has worked very well, but I often hear about similar initiatives that have not received the same positive reception. Agencies frequently want to build everything themselves rather than creating networks with academia, business, and civil society. I think that is a shame, he says. 

Is the Security of Supply Centre of Excellence in Karlskoga (central Sweden) an example of this? 

– Things have gone very well there, but there have certainly been detractors in senior positions. I think it comes down to territorial thinking and envy. Some people become stressed when they see how much can be achieved without large resources. At the same time, this is exactly what policy, the Supreme Commander, and the Director General of the Civil Defence and Resilience Agency (MSB) have called for. SOSCOE has taken and maintained the initiative and become an important international actor on issues such as battery supply, autonomous transport, and dependence on China for rare earth metals. 

You have written two books on Total Defence: "Total Defence for Leaders" and one entitled "Sweden's Total Defence in NATO". Will there be more? 

– The next book is about Security of Supply and will be published in the spring. I often say that it is cheaper to buy fighter aircraft than to build up security of supply. This is the greatest economic challenge facing Western nations right now. I am writing the book together with members of SOSCOE's community of interest, which encompasses nearly 2,000 organisations. It is remarkable! 

Thank you for your time, Freddy, and best of luck! 

– Thank you. It was a pleasure to take part.