After two years of both open and behind closed doors debate, Sweden will not – repeat, not – be signing the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons. Somewhere around 20 countries have signed it, and Sweden was considered by many to be a sure thing, in particular because Sweden’s Minister for Foreign Affairs Margot Wallström leaned heavily in that direction.
However, there were plenty of people who thought the whole idea was not only quixotic, but even damaging: the Treaty would have thrown into question and very possibly undermined the landmark and arguably effective NPT, Treaty on the Non Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, from 1970. (The NPT is not only a binding arms limitation treaty but it has a whopping 191 signatories: It’s not something you want to undermine.)
Since there were two divergent opinions on the usefulness of the new prohibition treaty (one cynical and one hopeful? One idiotic and one helpful? One hopeless and one realistic? opinions vary), Sweden (per usual) assigned an special investigator to do a deep dive on the issue for Sweden. He came out against signing. Also the USA and other Nato countries pressed hard for Sweden not to sign, arguing it would seriously hurt Sweden’s standing in international contexts.
Although Wallström has now said no, Sweden won’t sign, in typical Swedish fashion she isn’t committing to not signing in the future, if the treaty becomes more feasable/popular. At the same time as she said “not now (though I really really, really wanted to)” Wallström signed Sweden up for being a treaty “observer” who would help develop the treaty and monitor it being followed. The catch here is that at least 50 countries need to have signed it for Sweden to take this watchdog role, and that doesn’t seem to be happening for the moment.