This study is examining the Swedish military attachés reports from Washington regarding the Vietnam War. The focus is to find out if there are any lessons learned by the US military, and then also if these lessons learned are applicable for the Swedish military according to the rapports of the military attachés. This with the help of Tom Dyson’s theory about the lessons learned process in modern militaries. Where the process is turned into four steps, knowledge acquisition, management, dissemination and finally transformation. These four steps are also influenced by four factors, organizational theory, bureaucratic politics, culture, and neoclassical realism. The method used is qualitative text analysis with a hermeneutic viewpoint, where the focus it to interpret the rapports. The study shows that there are several rapports from the attachés regarding the Vietnam War, where rapports range from political problems in the US to the use of hovercraft on the rivers of Vietnam. The study further shows several instances where the US tactics in Vietnam have changed following the lessons learned theory four steps. The study shows that several of these lessons learned by the US in Vietnam were also interesting for the attachés for their applicability in the Swedish military. Lastly it showed that several of the theories factor might have played a part in how the rapports were presented from the attachés to the Swedish intelligence center.

Using a qualitative text analysis tying into the hermeneutic tradition, this study aims to explain how Swedish military attachés, as part of the process of professionalization, reported information as possible proponents of their own armed service during WW1. Michael I. Handel’s taxonomy, including four definitions of politics in the intelligence process, will here be used to analyze how the interests of the Swedish army as a stakeholder in the competition for state funds came to light in intelligence reporting. Based on the perceived conflict between a “professional intelligence culture” and the political use of intelligence, Handel’s taxonomy will also be used to discuss the attachés attitudes regarding the relationship between professional military officers and political decision making. These conclusions are made to create a Swedish historical perspective in research geared towards the politicization of intelligence, a field dominated by Anglo-Saxon perspectives and generalizations based on empirical findings not necessarily relevant to Swedish conditions. This study is therefore an attempt at relating the Swedish intelligence history to the phenomenon of intelligence politicization in an era where the professionalization of the military trade was highly prevalent. The study concludes that the reports show a tendency, with slight exceptions, where the attachés defend and propagate the interests of the army. This especially in cases where there is a clear rival in the competition for state funding within a political bargaining process, here exemplified by the Swedish navy. Cultural ideals emphasizing professional judgements over political opportunism, where officers who can propagate military demands in spite of political opposition are idealized, come to light in the reports. This suggests that the socioprofessional change within the Swedish officer corps between 1890-1914 coincides with a will to speak truth to power in line with the interests of military professionals.