Overview of the Swedish Navy

The Swedish Navy is one of the biggest navies in the Baltic Sea together with the Russian Baltic Fleet. These two countries alone have more naval power then their neighbors and as such they determine the balance of power in the Baltic Sea.

The Swedish armed forces face themselves in a strange situation. On one side they are not a NATO member but on the other hand they are a part of the European Union (EU) of whom most member states are NATO members. This complicated situation means that in case of war involving NATO, Sweden would be neutral but any war involving the EU would mean Sweden does have to be involved as well. This makes defense politicians wonder in what kind of scenario’s Sweden would be involved in which ones they would remain neutral.

Thus Sweden poses a great unknown in the Baltic Sea. It is therefore important to understand the strength of the Swedish Navy in order to understand what military force Sweden can decide to deploy inside the Baltic Sea and beyond.

Submarines

The Swedish Navy has in its inventory a decent arsenal of diesel-electric submarines.

The oldest submarines in the Swedish navy are the 2 Södermanland class submarines (or the A-17 class) . Originally constructed in 1988, these submarines underwent a major modernization program in 2003-2004 with the installation of air-independent propulsion (AIP), allowing these submarines to stay under water for several weeks. Also during these modernizations there was an update on their filter systems and cooling units. These are now converted to operate optimally with cooler, less saline water. As such, these submarines are well suited to operate in the northern Atlantic Ocean or Baltic Sea, meaning their mean adversary would be the Russian Navy. These 2 submarines are planned to be retired around 2019-2020 and will be replaced by a new class of submarines.

The 3 submarines of the Gotland class (A-19) are the backbone of the Swedish submarines. Commissioned in 1996, these submarines operate with AIP. Their engines can use the surrounding sea water as a heat sink, therefore diminishing the need for cooling pumps, generally believed to be the loudest piece of equipment on board of a submarine. A high degree of automation on these submarines allow them to operate with a minimum crew. In retrospect, a diminished crew allowed to build better living spaces on board which in turn improves the overall endurance of the crew.

The Gotland class operates two type of weapons. The four 533mm torpedo tubes are used to fire anti-ship torpedo’s. These torpedo’s are wire guided and can be steered on their target from the submarine. The two smaller 400mm torpedo tubes are used to fire anti-submarine torpedo’s.

All 3 Gotland class submarines are planned to be overhauled to increase their life span to 2025. The overhaul is currently ongoing and is expected to end in 2017.

Gotland class submarine

Two new A-26 class submarines are currently being constructed in order to replace the two older Södermanland class submarines.

Corvettes

Given the nature of the Swedish coastline, small corvettes are more suited to defend the littoral waters and protect the Swedish sovereignty. Sweden can rely on a small but modern and well equipped force of corvettes to protect its shores.

Commissioned in 1986, the two Stockholm class corvettes are the oldest corvettes in the Swedish Navy. These two corvettes were rebuild and modernized in the 1999-2002 period and are capable of serving in the Swedish Navy until halfway the 2010’s. Armed with anti-ship missiles and a 57mm gun these ships are designed for anti-surface warfare.

Just like the Stockholm class, the last two remaining Götenborg class corvettes are designed for littoral combat and anti-surface warfare. Commissioned in 1990 and 1993 these ships are going through a mid-life modernization to extend their service life to the mid 2020’s.

The by far most renowned corvettes in the Swedish surface fleet are the Visby class corvettes. These five stealth corvettes are Swedish most modern vessels. The main role of these ships are mine countermeasures (MCM) and anti-submarine warfare. This emphasizes Sweden’s view on its Baltic position in which many mines can still be founds and many nations have quite submarines, as lately has been proven by what was thought to be a Russian midget submarine operating in Swedish territorial waters.

For the anti-surface warfare capabilities the Visby class relies on anti-ship missiles and a 57mm gun. The ship can also deploy 400mm torpedo’s, depth charges and rocket-powered grenade launchers to perform an anti-submarine warfare role. The Visby class is also capable of letting helicopters land, refuel and take off from its deck but lacks a hangar to store a helicopter.

Visby class stealth corvettes

  

In the future the Swedish Navy plans to replace their two Götenborg class corvettes with two K-40 class corvettes. The K-40 is envisioned to be an enlarged Visby class corvette up to a frigate size. The commissioning of these two vessels is planned in the mid 2020’s.

Other ships

The Swedish Navy can, aside from the previous mentioned main naval forces, count on several other vessels. 12 Trapper class coastal patrol boats with machineguns as well anti-submarine rockets, depth charges and mines add another force capable of defending and patrolling the Swedish coast. Adding to this capacity are up to 147 CB90 combat patrol boats and although these belong to the Swedish Naval Brigade, they can be used to patrol the coast as well.

Sweden can also count on 5 minehunters from the Koster class to deal with any mine treath. The most important support ships are the Orion that can collect intelligence and the Belos that is being used as submarine rescue ship.

Conclusion

The Swedish Navy operates two distinct navies. It’s green water navy with diesel-electric submarines and modern corvettes are all aimed to operate in the Baltic Sea. It’s brown water navy of patrol boats  are used for coastal defense as well as patrols in the littoral.

Sweden is a neutral country, and it has the tools to enforce its neutrality. However at the same time Sweden is carefully looking towards the Russian Baltic Fleet. As Sweden and Russia have always been at odds with each other it is naturally that Sweden views the Russians as their main opponent. As such, Sweden will always try to match the Russian combat power in the Baltic Sea both in numbers as well as in quality.

EU’s military shipbuilding capacities

The European Union (EU) consists of 28 member states, all of them deciding on their own what military hardware their armed forces require. The direct result of this is that the EU has a large number of defense companies that can deliver a wide arrange of different military hardware. This diversity can clearly be seen in all the branches of armed forces (army, air force and navy). When it comes down to navies, this diversity in military hardware can be both an enrichment and a limitation.

All EU member states that have a navy are forced to equip it as they themselves see fit. In the absence of one unified EU navy there are no guidelines or orders telling what navy a country should develop and contribute to the EU navy. As such the navies of the EU member states are designed to fulfill their own needs. While the United Kingdom and France are still planning to have ocean going fleets that can operate in both the Atlantic and Indian Oceans other states are looking to operate closer at home. Italy and Spain have their main focus on the Mediterranean while Sweden and Poland are looking to operate in the Baltic Sea. The tiny Baltic states invest in protecting the coastal waters as well as in mine-countermeasure ships to clear the large minefields that are a left over from both the second World War and the Cold War. Likewise Belgium has a main priority to keep its waters, and in extension the North Sea clear of unexploded sea mines and bombs from the second World War. The Netherlands on the other side are giving priority to their expeditionary capabilities, being their marines and amphibious assault ships,as well as maintaining a complete amphibious task force to escort and protect their marines in their zone of operations.

 

All these different tasks and missions result in the need for ships that are best suited for these tasks. Ships built for service in the Baltic Sea are not ideally equipped for operating in the hot Mediterranean environment and vice versa. Mine hunters and minesweepers are too small to operate on or transit the oceans and prefer to stay near the coast. European shipyards therefore are specialized in building ships that suit the specific needs of a nation. Even more than this, the direct competition between these shipyards allow the EU member states to select or request the most optimal ships thy need.

 

All these different ship models, each with their own specifications and limitations, are interfering with the creation of an EU navy. Taking a logistics point of view, any EU navy is in need of standardizing its ships not only for providing repair facilities and delivery of spare parts in any EU naval base, but for planning reasons as well. Operating with identical ships or ships with the same specifications simplifies planning compared to taking in account a lot of different specifications like range, endurance, weaponry, electronic capabilities, etc.

 

FREMM frigate: Both the French and Italian navy use the same basic design.
Specific requirements defined by each nation makes that these ships are not completly identical

Hence the EU’s greatest strength, being able to develop and build a wide array of ships tailor made to specific needs, will in the end become its greatest limitation in creating one uniform EU navy. The EU is in need of standardizing its equipment in order to allow the navies of the different member states to integrate more directly and being able to form ad hoc task forces that can be managed easily. Already some member states are cooperating in attempts to create uniform navies. The FREMM project is a type of frigate that is in joint use by the French and Italian navies, allowing them to work more closely. Likewise, Belgium and the Netherlands each operate two M-type frigates to enhance their cooperation.

These projects are already a step in the right direction but what any future EU navy would need is an end to this wild diversity in ships and start streamlining its shipbuilding capabilities in only a handful of different types of ships to increase cooperation, logistics and simplifying planning of naval operations throughout the EU and the waters it has taken an interest in.

 

Overview of Europe’s aircraft carriers

When it comes to bringing considerable firepower to a distant battlefield nothing beats an aircraft carrier as the most dominant tool of power projection. Capable of transporting a certain amount of aircraft freely across the globe, only dependeding replenishment at sea to sustain its operations, the aircraft carrier allows countries to execute airstrikes almost wherever and whenever they want or need it. Unlike aircraft based on land, Carrier-based aircraft operate from a secure base at sea only to be threatened by the naval assets of an opponent it is always protected by a carrier battle group that is tailor made to give a carrier the maximum of protection.

Of all the aircraft carrier forcess in the world the US Navy is the most dominant. It operates 10 nuclear powered Nimitz class carriers, each capable of transporting and operating the amount of aircraft that is equal in size to a medium sized country’s air force.

As aircraft carriers are the most dominant tools of power projection it is no wonder that every serious navy tries to build and operate them. India and Russia are both long term carrier operators and China has made its successful first steps in operating a carrier and plans to build more of them. So in light of established and rising sea powers, each with the tools of projecting power and influence across large areas of the world, what are the carrier forces the European Union (EU) can count on and in extension, the carrier forces that the EU can use in NATO operations.?

United Kingdom

Once the world’s biggest navies, the Royal Navy has been suffering from major budget cutbacks. At the moment, the UK has no operational carriers in its service. It is however currently building two conventional powered carriers of the Queen Elizabeth class. With 65.000 tons, these ships are at the limit of tonnage for conventional powered carrier although the design has taken in account that over her service life the carrier could be remodeled and have a displacement of 70.600 tons. The 70.600 ton displacement puts this carrier at the limit of what can be conventionally powered without reducing its speed too much. Anything bigger would be insufficient powered and move to slow to create enough wind over the decks to launch aircraft, unless a nuclear propulsion plant is installed.

The first ship, the HMS Queen Elizabeth was officially named on the 4^th of July 2014 and will be commissioned in 2017. The second ship, the HMS Prince of Wales, will be commissioned in 2020.

Both ships will have a planned carrier air group of 36 F-35’s and 4 helicopters. However, delivery of the F-35 to the Royal Navy is only scheduled to happen in 2020 so both carriers will only become fully operational in 2020 and off course that is if the F-35 program isn’t cancelled due to its high cost and many drawbacks and failures.

France

Of all the EU’s nations, France is the only nation with a nuclear powered aircraft carrier and indeed the only nation in the world besides the United States to operate a nuclear powered carrier. The Charles De Gaulle has a displacement of 42.000 tons, making her very small for a nuclear powered carrier that could sustain a weight of 3 times more. Launched in 1994 and commissioned in 2001 this carrier has a lifetime that can span into the 2040-2050 time-frame before the carrier is worn down and forced to be decommissioned.

The carrier air group of this carrier is composed of 28 – 40 aircraft, depending on what the composition of the air group is. The main fighter aircraft on board is the Rafale, backed up by  E-2C Hawkeye aircraft.

France normally operated two aircraft carriers in order to make sure that at least one was available when the other underwent repairs or modernization programs. As of 2013 however, the French government decided to scrap the plans for building a second aircraft carrier due to the high costs and budget restraints.

Charles de Gaulle, the EU's only nuclear aircraft carrier: Layout of flight and hangar deck

Italy

Italy operates 2 small carriers, the Giuseppe Garibaldi and the Cavour.

The Giuseppe Garibaldi is STOVL carrier with a displacement of 14.000 tons and commissioned in 1985. Her carrier air group is composed of 18 AV-8B Harrier aircraft.

The Cavour was commissioned in 2009, has a displacement of up to 30.000 tons fully loaded. Her carrier air group is smaller in size then the one of the Giuseppe Garibaldi with only  8 AV-8B Harrier aircraft or 15 F-35B’s in addition to her 10 helicopters. Although termed as a carrier, the Cavour can also double as a landing platform helicopter (LPH) amphibious warship. If given a 40 to 50 year lifespan for a capital ship undergoing proper maintenance then Italy could operate the Giuseppe Garibaldi until the 2025-2035 time-frame and the Cavour until the 2050-2060 time-frame.

Spain

Spain only operates one ship that can function as an aircraft carrier, the Juan Carlos I. Although in design the ship is an amphibious assault ship, her ski-jump ramp on the bow enables it to operate STOVL aircraft.  Conventionally powered and with a displacement of 26.000 tons this ship can serve as a light aircraft carrier with a carrier wing of 10 to 12 AV-8B Harrier aircraft or F-35B’s in addition to 10 helicopters. As the ship has been commissioned in 2010, it will be operational, if probably maintained, for the 2040-2050 time-frame as its projected lifespan is envisioned as maximum 40 years.

The Juan Carlos I design has been opted by Turkey as the basis to build an amphibious warship for the Turkish Navy. Although Turkey plans to use the ship as an amphibious assault ship to assist in humanitarian ops, it would give Turkey also a platform to operate aircraft from should the circumstances require it. In this case, NATO could count on one more carrier in its alliance that operates in European waters

Conclusion

Only 4 nations are capable of giving the EU the tools for projection power with aircraft carriers and unlike their massive US counterparts these aircraft carriers are small in comparison. Of the 6 carriers in total, only 1 is nuclear powered and 2 are not available until 2020, giving the EU at the moment only 4 small carriers. Cuts in defense budgets among the EU member states have deprived the EU of deploying hard power when it is needed. This was seen clearly during the 2011 NATO intervention in Libya where only the Charles de Gaulle and the Cavour operated as EU carriers.

Due to the resurgence of Russia at the EU's borders, resulting in the Ukraine crisis, and other nearby crises in the Mediterranean such as Libya and Syria, as well as Iraq further into the Middle east and a potential showdown in the Arctic, the EU finds itself in a weak position to back up its military power. Like all European defense projects and the creation of a EU army, the creation of a EU navy will be very troublesome and will face many delays. However, should the EU succeed in creating a EU navy it will be one that finds itself deprived of the hard power tools such as carriers to project its power across the oceans.

Country	Ships	Aircraft
UK	HMS Queen Elizabeth HMS Prince of Wales	36 F-35B 36 F-35B
France	Charles de Gaulle	20-40 Rafale
Italy	Giuseppe Garibaldi Cavour	18 AV-8B Harrier aircraft 8 AV-8B Harrier aircraft  or 15 F-35B
Spain	Juan Carlos I	10-12 AV-8B Harrier aircraft
TOTAL	6 carriers	72-87 F-35B 28-38 AV-8B Harrier aircraft 20-40 Rafale

Table I: Overview of the EU aircraft carriers and their carrier air groups

 

Brazil’s maritime influence in Africa and its consequences for the EU

In the past decade, Brazil has been working to improve its maritime relations with West-African countries. Brazil’s aim is to make the South Atlantic Ocean its sphere of influence. As such, it is reaching out to the African countries on the South Atlantic Ocean. By creating what Brazil describes as a “Belt of good will” across the South Atlantic it hopes to create a common defense of the region and a fortification of its international presence.

Brazil has the advantage that it is the largest maritime power in the South Atlantic. This area was of little importance for NATO and the Soviet Union during the Cold War and as such Brazil stepped in to become the leading nation in this region. What is significant is that Brazil has been reaching out across the Ocean towards Africa and not only to Portuguese speaking countries like Angola. In the past decade, Brazil has been signing bilateral military co-operation programs with South-Africa, Guinea-Bissau, Mozambique, Angola, Nigeria and Senegal.



The Lusophone countries: Portuguese speaking nations
are mainly seperated by the Atlantic

The military programs often focus on joint training exercises and exchange programs. Lately however there is also an increase in the export of Brazilian made weaponry to Africa. As a direct result of this military co-operation Brazil’s influence in Africa have been on the rise both politically and economically. The amount of African embassies in Brazil as well as Brazilian embassies in Africa has been rising and economic trade between Brazil and Africa has increased six fold since 2000 to USD 27 billion in 2012.

Brazil’s influence in western Africa is potential bad news for the European Union (EU). Several of its member states are having a new focus on Africa and are starting to develop their own military partnership programs with African countries. Each of these member states might find out that they are being pushed back into a secondary position as Brazil keeps fortifying its leading role in Africa. Brazil’s three Amazonas-class offshore patrol vessels all had their maiden voyages towards west Africa where they participated in anti-piracy exercises with Cape Verde, Benin, Nigeria, Angola, Mauritania, Ghana, Cameroon and São Tome and Principe The focus of each of these exercises is on combating illegal activities such as piracy, illegal fishing, drug trafficking and smuggling. These topics are also the main focus of many military co-operation programs that EU members are offering to African countries.

At the same time Brazil is in a better position to sell weapons systems to African countries. As Brazilian weapons are less expensive and less sophisticated then their European counterparts, they are a prime choice for African armies and navies. This places the EU at a disadvantage in providing African countries with the weapons they want as Brazil can in most cases offer better deals.

As Brazil keeps fortifying its position as a leading nation in the South Atlantic Ocean it reaches out to west African countries. What started as bilateral military programs allowed Brazil to increase both its political and economic influence in Africa. This puts Brazil opposite of the EU as some of its member states are planning to get more involved in Africa and are planning to have their own co-operation programs. As Brazil is capable of offering training programs and weapon systems against a lower cost it can outmaneuver the EU. As such, Brazil’s geopolitical rise and subsequent power projection are, unintentionally, a threat to the EU who will see its influence in Africa diminished.

India, a strategic partner for the EU?

After  the Cold War EU defense budgets declined and with it it’s military hardware. EU maritime forces are at an all-time low but they still have to perform a wide array of tasks like:

·       Maritime interventions near the African continent, either being piracy at Somalia or maritime cooperation between African countries and the EU or intervention in conflicts.

·       A rapidly changing maritime balance of powers in the Mediterranean Sea with Turkey and Algeria as rising maritime powers, as well as unresolved conflicts such as the Syrian civil war and the Palastine conflict.

·        A more assertive Russia that is increasing its naval capabilities in both numbers and technology. Combined with the US pivot towards Asia this would leave EU on its own to counter Russia and protect the North Atlantic trade between the EU and the USA.

EU maritime forces thus have a wide array of tasks to perform. Member states such as the United Kingdom and France are also looking towards the Indian Ocean where they still have several colonies like the island of La Réunion and Mayotte. At the same time the EU is very dependent on trade with Asia and these trade lines run through the Indian Ocean.
 

There are a wide array of potential security threats to our trade lines. Piracy around the Horn of Africa is just one example. An Iranian blockade of the Strait of Hormuz would be devastating to the EU’s energy supply. Piracy in the Strait of Malacca will have the same effects for EU trade as piracy around the Horn of Africa.

There is a need for a EU maritime presence in the Indian Ocean but given the fact that the EU maritime forces are at an all-time low and with other theaters demanding attention as well, the EU has few maritime assets I can deploy in this region. A maritime partnership would therefore be in the EU’s best interests. Of all the surrounding maritime powers, either already established or on the rise, only India would make a good partner.

The Indian navy already has lots of experience and is expanding its navy even further. It has shown on several occasions, either in international training exercises or in the anti-piracy operation in the Gulf of Aden, that it can cooperate and integrate its naval forces with other countries.

Another advantage is India’s strategic location as the subcontinent sits in the middle of the Indian Ocean. This allows India to respond to  a lot of potential security threats such as piracy in the Gulf of Aden, a possible blockade by Iran of the Strait of Hormuz, operating along the east coast of Africa or intervening in the Strait of Malacca. India also dominates the EU’s vital trading routes from and towards Asia. India would be a vital partner that can act to a wide array of crises and conflicts in the Indian ocean region on behalf of the EU. This would allow the EU to focus the majority of its naval forces in other theaters.

Ties between India and the EU are generally perceived as good. Several EU member states have defense contracts with the Indian Army. France for example is delivering Raphale aircraft to India in 2016. As India is an upcoming regional power with a lot of economic potential a collaboration between the EU on both a military and economic level would be in the interests of both nations.
Although India makes for a logical case for a maritime partnership there are some downsides.

First, siding with India would anger China as both countries have bad relations with each other. Since most of our trade comes from China this could have  long lasting and far going economic consequences. At the same time it would cause bad relations with Pakistan as both India and Pakistan have bad relations because of the border region of Kashmir that both countries claim.

 

And at last there is the Russian angle. India tends to buy its military hardware from pretty much everyone who can deliver it. Still, it tends to buy most of its equipment from Russia and both countries are known to collaborate on military research. The BrahMos supersonic cruise missile was a joint Indian-Russian development. India’s aircraft carrier, the Vikramaditya, used to be the former Admiral Gorshkov aircraft carrier of the Soviet/Russian Navy. So there is a risk that military technology  from the EU given to India could end up in Russian hands and from there on out in Chinese hands.

In conclusion we could say the a maritime cooperation with the Indian navy would be in the best interests for the EU on a maritime level. It allows the EU to use the few maritime assets it has in other theaters that are equally important. On the downside it would alienate the EU from China, its biggest economic partner and possibly lead to a spillover of military technology to Russia.