In this case I don't see absolutely any logic in joining NATO. This scenario supposes the war between NATO and Russia over Baltic states, and joining NATO for Sweden will not decrease the chance for them to be dragged into war against Russia, but instead guarantee it. With possible escalation to exchange of tactical nuke strikes against military bases in the area.
What Russia should be looking for then is a militarily very strong Sweden, and a fortified Gotland.
It's the only terms on which Sweden continuing to be alliance free makes real sense. A militarily weak Sweden is then a liability not just to Sweden. No one wants a power-vaccuum in the middle of the Baltic not unless they are hoping and planning to at some point fill it themselves that is.
The objective is to
not have to fight a war. The key to that is not
fighting wars, but
deterrence. Si vis pacem, para bellum...
NATO is the best immediate deterrence available against Russia. (There are no scenarios regarded as even possible that does not proceed from Russian aggression in the region you can like it or not.)
For small nations, as deterrence goes, NATO membership does the job while also being relatively cheap. And it provides capacity that are simply beyond the scope of the abilities of single members.
And the kicker for small nations, and Sweden is one, is that whatever it does, in a worst-case scenario, it will never be enough to actually defeat a concerted effort by a military great power, such as Russia.
And that's leaving the nuclear issue aside. In fact, the only serious deterrence Sweden might count on against hypothetical nuclear black-mail, is to become a nuclear armed state itself. (It was been broached in past history, but the problem is the same now as then too expensive to build a credible delivery system.) That is to say, NATO is
again the obvious available credible deterrence against that as well.
And if you yourself don't quite realize how threatening your scenario involving nukes is, then that in itself speaks volumes about why Russia is trouble for everyone else at this point.
No one wants to fight Russia. Everyone wants to, if need be, be able to
deter Russia, so they don't end up with these "polite men in green" or some other permutation of that.
NATO ups the ante for Russia, whatever might or might not consider doing. (Which is one of the uncertanities of the last couple of years of interaction with Russia.) The Swedish discussion right now circles around the problem that in the event of any kind of conflict in the Baltic region too little indicates Sweden can somehow "sit it out". If it's not going to join Russia, and it won't (since if there's actual aggression it will come from Russia), then it can join NATO in advance and get the deterrence effect or it can try to join later, without getting the benefit of early membership. That's the case for NATO so far.
Whichever it is, having a proper national defense is a bloody good idea. If anything being reasonably able to fend for yourself increases the likelyhood of an alliance accpeting your application. And no one wants a power vaccuum in the middle of the Baltic...
Right now the Swedish mood seems rather for the continued alliance freedom, and some rearmament. But no one is concerned enough so far to seriously increase military spending. There's been an additional 1,4 billion SEK slated for defense in 2015, but defense spending sits still at around 1,2% of GDP. It may just have stopped dropping. Estimates are that the Swedish armed forces may need som 3 billion SEK/years extra for the next decade, but that's right now politically not acceptable. That's a pretty good gauge of how acute the situation is regarded as.
You can take the basic question to be: "What is the most-cost effective, efficient form of deterrence against Russia we can get?" Any pointers from Russia on that one? Something that does not involve NATO?
It might surprise Russians, but the overarching point of NATO membership if not to be able to fight Russia, but simply to as much as possible remove the risk of at some point have to fight Russia.
Sweden alone offers little in the form of deterrence against Russia. NATO does. At the moment odds are still rather better that Sweden will continue to come down on the side of trying to build credible deterrence on its own.
