Between Brussels and Stockholm : An Argumentative Analysis of Sweden’s Security Policy Choices

This thesis examines how the Swedish Parliamentary parties have argued and legitimised the two major shifts in Sweden’s security policy concerning NATO and the European Union’s security and defence between 2017 and 2025. The study applies Fritz W. Scharpf’s theory of input and output legitimacy to explore how parliamentary parties construct democratic legitimacy in a changing geopolitical context. The analysis focuses on themes such as national sovereignty, parliamentary responsibility, policy effectiveness and collective security.The materials consist of more than twenty transcribed parliamentary debates along with two televised debates broadcasted by Swedish public service television (SVT). The study uses a structured argumentation analysis grounded in Stephen Toulmin’s model. The study identifies how political parties justify their positions in terms of democratic participation as well as policy delivery.The findings demonstrate clear variation in how legitimacy is articulated depending on the institutional context. NATO is predominantly legitimized through arguments that highlight credible deterrence and collective defence especially following the full-scale Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022. The European Union’s defence policy is more contested. Some parties highlight the importance of military capability and preparedness while others focus on national sovereignty and parliamentary accountability. Certain parties also reframe output legitimacy in terms of civil preparedness and normative values.The study shows that legitimacy in security policy is not a static condition but the result of political negotiation. The arguments used often combine elements of both input and output, depending on party ideology and the institutional framework. The study also challenges the idea that parliament is merely a reactive institution by demonstrating how political parties actively shape public narratives of democratic legitimacy through debate. In conclusion the thesis offers new insights into how national parties interpret and construct legitimacy in an increasingly transnational security landscape.