The purpose of this thesis is to demonstrate the significance of identity as a driving force behind Swedish security policy change. By studying social identity constructions of Russia in Swedish defence propositions from 1992, 2004 and 2015, the thesis concludes that these constructions might have resulted in shifts in Swedish security policy. The thesis uses discourse analysis to examine how Russia was socially constructed as 'difference' in the propositions. Drawing on self/other theories in IR, the study concludes that Russia was constructed in more or less antagonistic forms of ‘otherness’/’difference’ in the different propositions. In 1992, Russia was constructed as a neutral other and a temporally radical other. In 2004, Russia was constructed as a connected other. In 2015, Russia was constructed as a radical other, mostly due to the Russian aggression against and annexation of Crimea. Moreover the article concludes, through a qualitative content analysis, that these perceptions of Russia may have generated ontological (in)security for Swedish political identity. Drawing on Mitzen (2006) and others, the thesis demonstrates that ontological (in)security may have been a driving force behind security policy change. This thesis argues that the search for ontological security may have resulted in European integration for Sweden in 1992, expanded cooperation with Russia in 2004 and a proposition on a strengthened defence capability in 2015. In relation to existing research on Swedish security policy change, this thesis highlights the importance of identity and perceptions of 'others' as a driving force behind security policy change.

Is the credibility of today's Swedish security policy under question? Through two world wars and the years that followed Sweden has invoked a policy of neutrality and military nonalignment. This policy has come to be perceived as an integral part of the Swedish national identity. Is it possible then that Sweden’s past and present strategic narratives could be contested? This thesis investigates whether or not there is consistency in the narratives expressed by both right wing Swedish governments and socialist Swedish governments. The narratives of both parties are examined during two separate eras of history; the Cold War era of the 1980s is compared with the current more globalized era of the 2010s. A constructivist perspective is utilized in the analysis and a narrative analysis is applied. The results show that there has been significant consistency in the narratives of Swedish security policy from both right wing and socialist governments. There is much greater variation shown between the two eras than there is between the two parties themselves. / Är dagens svenska säkerhetspolitik trovärdig eller omstridd? Allt sedan världskrigen har svenska regeringar förhållit sig till en grundläggande idé om svensk neutralitet och alliansfrihet. Denna politik har kommit att betraktas som en väsentlig del av svensk nationell identitet. Samtidigt har inriktningen för den svenska säkerhetspolitiken förändrats vid ett antal tillfällen under de senaste decennierna och gått från neutralitet till solidaritet. Är det då möjligt att gångna som nutida svenska strategiska narrativ är omstridda? Denna uppsats undersöker hur konsekventa svenska säkerhetspolitiska narrativ har varit. Detta genom att granska de narrativ som konstruerats av respektive socialdemokratiska och borgerliga regeringskoalitioner. Dessa narrativ jämförs både inom och mellan två historiska epoker; det kalla krigets 1980-tal och det nutida globaliserade 2010-talet, med specifika nedslag för åren 1982, 1987, 2009 och 2015. Uppsatsen tar utgångspunkt i ett konstruktivistiskt perspektiv och en narrativanalys tillämpas i analysen. Resultatet indikerar en betydande samstämmighet inom svensk säkerhetspolitik mellan borgerliga och socialdemokratiska regeringar. En betydligt större variation framträder i en jämförelse emellan de olika tidsepokerna än emellan samtida regeringar av olika politiska färger.

The thesis "Sweden and European Integration in the Field of Security" deals with the Swedish role in the military dimension of the EU"s Common Security Policy. The thesis applies the concept of "Integration Dilemma" that forms the basis of the theory of national integration policy formulated by Nikolaj Petersen. The thesis draws on Petersen"s premise that all states involved in integration sooner or later experience an integration dilemma constituted by difficult choices between preserving autonomy and exercising influence on other participants. According to Petersen the salience of the integration dilemma differs among states depending on their influence capability, stress sensitivity and degree of identification with ideological sources of integration. Petersen argues that to handle the dilemma, national governments will most likely use adaptive strategies typical for the "balancing policy" mode. Petersen also predicts that countries characterised by high stress sensitivity, limited influence capability and aloofness from the ethos of European integration will perceive the dilemma as highly salient. Petersen assumes that integration policies of those countries will also include strategies characteristic for the "acquiescent" or "quiescent" mode. Petersen"s hypotheses are tested in the analysis of...