Research Question:

To what extent were the concessions made to Swedish neutrality during WWII voluntary
decisions, independent of Axis and Allied coercion?
Sweden participated in a low-commitment, low-risk way in WWII, allowing it to escape the
destruction of war but also to be opportunistic and benefit socioeconomically alongside
victor nations.
Swedish concessions were sought to sought to be profitable wherever possible, without
provoking violence, but not necessarily moral.

Aims of Research:

Understand the political concessions, coercion, and domestic consequences

associated with maintaining an independent policy during war
Investigate the sphere of influence exerted by Nazi Germany and the Allies through
vehicles of diplomacy, militarisation, and economy
Discover whether concessions made to Swedish neutrality were forced by other
external regimes, justified by humanitarian incentives, or pursued in self-interest
How did Sweden avoid Nazi invasion, and better yet, why she chose to remain neutral
Determine if a policy of absolute neutrality can truly exist

Methods

Compare Swedens pre-war agenda to those of the Allies and Axis Powers
Contextualise Swedens refugees against total number of people in need, the crude
quality of security and freedom received, and the resources available for
humanitarian efforts
Frequency and nature of Swedens interactions with warring regimes
Track the trend in Swedens concessions as the war progressed
Reveal the implications of Swedish neutrality on its government and people
Was it a one-way street of compromise or did Sweden also benefit from its
concessions?

Sources:
WIKEPEDIA: Sweden during World War II
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sweden_during_World_War_II#Concessions
WIKEPEDIA: History of the Jews in Sweden
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Jews_in_Sweden
PRIMARY: Hilfskreuzer German merchant ship [Bismarck & Tirpitz]
http://www.bismarck-class.dk/hilfskreuzer/thor.html
BOOK: Arne Beurling and Swedish Crypto Program during WWII
http://books.google.co.uk/books?
id=n5RFilaXbC4C&pg=PA105#v=onepage&q&f=false
ORAL: Winstown Churchill accuses Swedish of playing sides in 2002
REPORT: The Economics of Neutrality [London School of Econ & Politics]
http://etheses.lse.ac.uk/178/1/Golson_The_Economics_of_Neutrality.pdf

REPORT: Neutrality and Morality The Swedish Experience [American University

International Review, Krister Wahlbck]
http://digitalcommons.wcl.american.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?
article=1299&context=auilr
REPORT: Political Neutrality in Europe during WWII [Cali University, by William
Preston] http://digitalcommons.calpoly.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?
article=1127&context=socssp
REPORT: Swedens Security Policy: Engagement The Middle Way [Gustav Lindstrm ]
http://www.peacepalacelibrary.nl/ebooks/files/occ02.pdf
YAHOO: Primary sources help https://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?
qid=20081111074846AAl8eIJ
USA: http://1997-2001.state.gov/www/regions/eur/rpt_9806_ng_sweden.pdf
Sweden Propaganda Posters: http://digitalpostercollection.com/propaganda/19391945-world-war-ii/sweden/
http://www.torontopubliclibrary.ca/detail.jsp?Entt=RDM724925&R=724925

Source 1:

Outlines conflict of interest between the state and its people to appreciate the
Nazi design for pushing Liberalism out of Europe and exterminating Bolshevism.
To many Swedes, on the other hand, concessions signified a rather humiliating
deviation from the rules of international law enforced by German pressure. Thus,
concessions werent moral, wasnt supported
Gold was looted by the Nazis and received by the Bank of Sweden goldlaundering seems to be ignored by government since it was profitable
Does not discuss concessions to Allies
Ultimately blaming Swedish government for lack of action and not being
proactive, highlights uncaring attitude of Sweden for things not profitable and
excessive commitment to those things it could benefit from
Wahlback criticizes statement by: Mr. Eizenstat states that before Stalingrad
there was a legitimate fear of imminent German invasion. After that German
defeat, however, the Swedes in this view cooperated with Nazi Germany for their
own economic benefit.
Explores alternative option of cutting off all trade to Nazis and military
consequences, thus defending Sweden