Consensus is not something that just happens in the foreign policy domain WIKMANLARS when political actors seemingly agree on a policy. Rather, in this disserta- tion I demonstrate that actors construct consensus through the framing of policy as they highlight and downplay certain elements. Interestingly, for consensus to emerge, the attraction of political support is not always nec- essary; sometimes it is enough to not mobilize opposition. In the Swedish context a “foreign policy line” [utrikespolitisk linje] captures the prevailing consensus view and embraces a particular understanding of foreign policy War the Mention Don’t in the national interest, historically conditioned and elevated above party politics. Based on archival records and 55 interviews, this dissertation ex- plores and analyzes the political process in which a domestic foreign policy LARS WIKMAN consensus was constructed for the entry, expansion and exit of the Swedish military contributions to Afghanistan in the early 2000s. Advocates and opponents frame their preferred policy with the intention Don’t Mention the War of aligning it with a dominating perception of the continuity of Swedish foreign policy to gain wider acceptance. In the case of military contributions The forging of a domestic foreign policy consensus on the entry, to Afghanistan, distancing themselves from sensitive issues such as the US expansionexpansion and and exit exit of Swedish of Swedish military contributions to Afghanistan warfare and framing policy so it resembled traditional Swedish foreign policy was a way for advocates to suppress political conflict within the political left and rally support behind the respective government’s proposition. Afghani- stan was a defining military operation at a pivotal time for Swedish foreign policy. The results therefore have wider implications for our understanding of the domestic politics of Swedish foreign policy, providing an important view of how a general reorientation following the Cold War was managed. In addition to conceptualizing the “foreign policy line” this study contrib- utes theoretically with two frame alignment strategies, which actors employ when faced with an unfavorable context to avoid negative connotations. Lars Wikman was born in Falun, Sweden, in 1981. He graduated as an officer from the Swed- ish Military Academy at Karlberg in 2004 and later earned his master’s degree in politi- cal science from Uppsala in 2010. He pursued his doctoral degree through the Armed Forces PhD program with an affiliation to the Swed- ish Defence University. Currently he serves as a military analyst in the Swedish Armed Forces headquarters. Don’t mention the war is his Ph.D. Foto: Mikael Wallerstedt dissertation. Distributor: Uppsala University Library, Box 510, SE-751 20 Uppsala, Sweden www.uu.se, [email protected] ISSN 0346-7538 ISBN 978-91-513-1166-1 205 Kph TrycksaksbolagetKph AB, Uppsala 20212021. Omslagsfoto: Lars Wikman. ACTA UNIVERSITATIS UPSALIENSIS Skrifter utgivna av Statsvetenskapliga föreningen i Uppsala 205 Don’t Mention the War The forging of a domestic foreign policy consensus on the entry, expansion and exit of Swedish military contributions to Afghanistan Lars Wikman Dissertation presented at Uppsala University to be publicly examined in Brusewitzsalen, Gamla torget 6, Uppsala, Wednesday, 12 May 2021 at 10:15 for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. The examination will be conducted in Swedish. Faculty examiner: Professor Johan Eriksson (Södertörn University). Abstract Wikman, L. 2021. Don’t Mention the War. The forging of a domestic foreign policy consensus on the entry, expansion and exit of Swedish military contributions to Afghanistan. Skrifter utgivna av Statsvetenskapliga föreningen i Uppsala 205. 324 pp. Uppsala: Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis. ISBN 978-91-513-1166-1. Consensus is not something that just happens in the foreign policy domain when political actors seemingly agree on a policy. Rather, in this dissertation I demonstrate that actors construct consensus through the framing of policy as they highlight and downplay certain elements. Interestingly, for consensus to emerge, the attraction of political support is not always necessary; sometimes it is enough to not mobilize opposition. In the Swedish context a “foreign policy line” [utrikespolitisk linje] captures the prevailing consensus view and embraces a particular understanding of foreign policy in the national interest, historically conditioned and elevated above party politics. Based on archival records and 55 interviews, this dissertation explores and analyzes the political process in which a domestic foreign policy consensus was constructed for the entry, expansion and exit of the Swedish military contributions to Afghanistan in the early 2000s. Advocates and opponents frame their preferred policy with the intention of aligning it with a dominating perception of the continuity of Swedish foreign policy to gain wider acceptance. In the case of military contributions to Afghanistan, distancing themselves from sensitive issues such as the US warfare and framing policy so it resembled traditional Swedish foreign policy was a way for advocates to suppress political conflict within the political left and rally support behind the respective government's proposition. Afghanistan was a defining military operation at a pivotal time for Swedish foreign policy. The results therefore have wider implications for our understanding of the domestic politics of Swedish foreign policy, providing an important view of how a general reorientation following the Cold War was managed. In addition to conceptualizing the “foreign policy line” this study contributes theoretically with two frame alignment strategies, which actors employ when faced with an unfavorable context to avoid negative connotations. Keywords: Sweden, foreign policy, consensus, framing, foreign policy line, domestic politics, ISAF, Afghanistan, peace support operations, NATO. Lars Wikman, Department of Government, Box 514, Uppsala University, SE-75120 Uppsala, Sweden. © Lars Wikman 2021 ISSN 0346-7538 ISBN 978-91-513-1166-1 urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-437999 (http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-437999) To Mom and Dad Preface When I was working in the Swedish Parliament a member of the Committee on Foreign Affairs told me a story about the table in the meeting room. Ap- parently, it had been under discussion some years back to remove it and in- stead put in an oval table. Most committee meeting rooms in the Parliament have oval tables placing the parties supporting the government on one side and the opposition on the other. But, she told me that the members of the Committee on Foreign Affairs strongly objected to this idea. Because in foreign policy, she explained to me, they need to reach broad agreements and that is easier to do with a round table. A round table reduces the sense of conflict and breeds consensus. And in foreign policy the stakes are too im- portant to be left to political bickering. So, I have not done any research to find out whether this story is true or not but that really does not matter – and that is the point of my dissertation. The story, true or not, reveals a particular understanding of foreign policy and their very role as politicians. Foreign policy is above conflicts and the need for consensus is principal. Acknowledgements I am in debt to numerous individuals and institutions that made this decade- long journey so much more rewarding and without these people I would never have been able to finish. First of all, I would like to thank my three supervisors: associate professor Fredrik Bynander (Swedish Defence Uni- versity), associate professor Josefina Erikson (Uppsala University) and pro- fessor Condoleezza Rice (Stanford University). For the way you all three believed in me, encouraged me, and patiently allowed me to figure things out on my own, by not necessarily providing me with the right answers, I am forever grateful. The many constructive comments I received from you made my dissertation better and had a significant impact on me as an individual. I am glad I am done but I will miss working with all of you. Fredrik, you were never more than a phone call or email away. Your comments always had a way of reflecting on the wider discourse and history of Swedish foreign pol- icy. I cherish all the advice you have given me along the way and how you steered me in the right direction when I, occasionally, wandered off. Jose- fina, while Fredrik often had the bigger brush you painted the details and always engaged in the texts with sharp precision. Thank you for always say- ing what I needed to hear, not always what I wanted to hear, pushing me to clarify my arguments. You have been a great inspiration throughout this project. Condi, you have taught me the necessity to understand policymaking from the view of the policymakers and not to shy away from complexity, for policymaking is complex. Thank you for allowing me to sit in on your semi- nar class on foreign policy, being part of the control team, and finally for taking me on as your student. I have the greatest admiration for you and the experience you bring into the classroom. Thank you for constantly pushing me to see the bigger picture. My supervisors also represent three stimulating research environments that I have been fortunate to be part of. The Department of Government at Uppsala University is full of many wonderful people that I have had the privilege of getting to know over the years, especially the 4th floor of Diös. A big thank you to Bo Bengtsson and Daniel Nohrstedt for your guidance in the introductory group. My cohort companions “class of 2011”: Ariel, Cecil- ia, Frederike, Helena, Jorge, Lina, Linda, Malin, Marcus, Pernilla, Sami and Sara. I have so many fond memories from the time we have spent together. I want to extend my gratitude to the Swedish Defence University and the Armed Forces PhD program for providing me with funding.