SHARE
COPY LINK
For members

POLITICS

What can David Cameron learn from Nordic PMs turned foreign ministers?

The appointment of former UK PM David Cameron as foreign minister has been greeted with astonishment, but Sweden's Carl Bildt and Denmark's Lars Løkke Rasmussen made the same move. What can Cameron learn from them?

What can David Cameron learn from Nordic PMs turned foreign ministers?
Denmark's Lars Løkke Rasmussen (left), and Sweden's Carl Bildt (right) have both made the same move from prime minister to foreign minister that the UK's David Cameron (centre) has taken. Photo: Hannah McKay, Tolga Akmen, Odd Andersen/AFP

Rasmussen, who served two terms as Denmark’s prime minister, from 2009 to 2011 and again from 2015 to 2019, was appointed foreign minister last December by the Social Democrat prime minister who had ousted him nearly four years earlier.     

Bildt had to wait longer. After serving as prime minister between 1991 and 1994, he was appointed foreign minister twelve years later in 2006, staying in the post two full terms until 2014. 

Never one to miss an opportunity to draw attention to himself on X, Bildt on Monday welcomed Cameron to the “rather distinguished club of former PM’s becoming Foreign Minister”.  

Here’s what Cameron can learn from Rasmussen and Bildt’s records. 

1. Your failures as PM need not get in the way

Neither has anything on the record quite as dramatic as Cameron’s decision to call and subsequent get defeated in the Brexit referendum. Their experiences do, however, show that what you did as PM need not matter that much. 

Bildt’s term was rocky, to say the least, with Sweden’s Riksbank – then not wholly independent of government – in 1992 forced to raise interest rates to a hair-raising 500 percent to defend the krona. His government also brought in the liberal system of for-profit, government-funded free schools which some see as to blame for a sharp drop in the performance of Sweden’s schools.

“People remember him for being a really strong political leader when it comes to foreign policy, not for being a strong prime minister,” said Jenny Madestam, Associate Professor in Politics at Stockholm’s Södertörn University, although she said he was nonetheless “an iconic leader” in Sweden’s Moderate Party. 

A key difference from Cameron, of course, is that Bildt’s government oversaw the referendum that brought his country into the EU, and not one that saw it leave.  

Løkke Rasmussen, on the other hand, led a government that shocked many internationally with its hardline response to the 2015 refugee crisis, at one point passing a law allowing asylum seekers to be stripped of jewellery to pay for their accommodation. 

In neither case has their record been a hindrance to their performances as foreign minister, with Rasmussen much softer on immigration and immigrants than he was as prime minister, helping, for instance, to draw up a ban on Quran-burning.  

2. Being patrician and aristocratic works well internationally  

With his Eton education, stockbroker father and baronet grandfather, David Cameron is sometimes criticised for his privilege. But Bildt is, if anything, even more aristocratic, coming from a long line of Danish-Swedish nobles and boasting a general as a grandfather and a 19th century prime minister as a great great grandfather. 

But while this sort of background can be a disadvantage when trying to engage with voters, it’s a good preparation for the flurry of international summits, dinners, and embassy events that come with being foreign minister – as evidenced by the concentration of nobility within Sweden’s foreign ministry.  

Bildt was so in his element as foreign minister that he has carried on jetting around the world meeting international leaders, both as a consultant and on any number of short-term assignments, for most of the ten years since he left the post. 

Rasmussen, however, has a lower middle class background, being the first in his family to go to university.  

3. You can bring some of your prime ministerial status to your role as foreign minister  

Whether it’s a summit of the European Union, the United Nations, or of Nato, prime ministers often take over from their foreign ministers when it comes to crunch decisions. Rasmussen met Benjamin Netanyahu countless times in his role as prime minister, something he has been able to exploit as foreign minister during the Israel-Gaza crisis.  

“It has been a strength for Rasmussen to have been prime minister because he has a lot of contacts,” Peter Nedergaard, a politics professor at Copenhagen University, told The Local. “He can easily pick up the phone and call heads of states around the world, and the same goes for David Cameron.”

Bildt as foreign minister brought with him the heft he had gained, not only from his term as prime minister, but from his positions as the EU’s Special Envoy to Former Yugoslavia, High Representative for Bosnia and Herzegovina, and the UN Secretary General’s Special Envoy for the Balkans. 

This is where Cameron differs. 

“David Cameron has been out of politics for now almost four or five years, whereas Lars Løkke Rasmussen was always in politics,” Nedergaard pointed out. “He was a member of parliament all the time. So there’s no gap for him. David Cameron has been out of sight for a long time.” 

4. It’s quite easy to stay out of the current PM’s way

Foreign Minister is the ministerial role where it’s easiest to stay out of the prime minister’s way. Rasmussen has rarely clashed with Denmark’s prime minister, Mette Frederiksen, even though he was her main opponenent in the 2019 election.

Similarly, Barack Obama appointed Hillary Clinton, his rival in the 2008 Democrat primary, Secretary of State, on taking office. 

Rasmussen has handled this very carefully, Nedergaard explained. 

“His approach is to be very humble vis-à-vis the prime minister, always showing that he’s not the number one any more. Often, he says, ‘this is not my decision’, so attitude is very important.”

Similarly, Bildt managed to carry out his role without much friction with Fredrik Reinfeldt, even though Reinfeldt had taken the Moderate Party to the centre of Swedish politics, abandoning much of the liberal economic programme Bildt had fought for. 

“He had he had a low profile in the in the government as a whole,” Madestam said. “He was really focused on the foreign policy, and everyone knows that that is his first and foremost interest and also what he’s really good at.” 

Member comments

Log in here to leave a comment.
Become a Member to leave a comment.
For members

MILITARY

EXPLAINED: What you need to know about Sweden’s new military spending report

Sweden's parliamentary defence commission on Friday recommended adding 52.8 billion kronor to the national defence budget by 2030, taking defence spending to 2.6 percent of GDP.

EXPLAINED: What you need to know about Sweden's new military spending report

What is the Swedish Defence Commision? 

The Swedish Defence Commission is a cross-party forum which seeks to ensure broad political agreement around Sweden’s defence requirements. It brings together representatives of all eight parties in the Swedish parliament, with two each from the Moderates, Sweden Democrats and Social Democrats and one each for the other parties.

There are also advisers and experts from the Ministry of Justice, the Ministry for Foreign Affairs, the Ministry of Defence, the Ministry of Finance, the Prime Minister’s Office, the Swedish Armed Forces, the Swedish Defence Materiel Administration and the Swedish Civil Contingencies Agency. Members of the committee are supported by a secretariat comprising one principal secretary and five secretaries.

What is the report they have delivered? 

The committee on Friday delivered its final, report, “Strengthened defence capability, Sweden as an Ally“, meeting the deadline given by the country’s defence minister Pål Jonson when he ordered the committee to develop proposals for a new defence bill in December 2022, with a total of four reports, the first three of which were delivered in April 2023, June 2023, December 2023. 

What have they recommended? 

The committee have recommended that Sweden’s budget is increased from 119 billion kronor a year in 2024 to 185 billion kronor in 2030, which would bring total spending to 2.6 percent of Sweden’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP). 

The committee said it agreed with the recommendations given by Micael Byden, Supreme Commander of the Swedish Armed Forces in November 2023, which were that Sweden should increase or improve: 

  • air defence and in particular its cooperation within NATO’s Integrated Air and Missile Defence (IAMD)
  • its ability to combat air, land and sea drones 
  • its integration with NATO’s command system
  • its logistics, so that it can provide Host Nation Support and serve as a base for other units from other Nato countries. 
  • its capacity to operate with military units outside Sweden’s borders 

But the committee also made additional recommendations beyong those given by the armed forces, calling for: 

  • two new army brigades, so that Sweden would have three mechanised brigades and one infantry brigade by 2030
  • a new Norrland Infantry Regiment,
  • an increase in the number of conscripts trained a year from the current level of 8,000 to 10,000 in 2030 and 12,000 in 2032, and possibly to 14,000 in 2035
  • a boost in Sweden’s air defence capability, particularly to counter drone attacks 
  • stocking up on additional ammunition, including air-to-air and cruise missiles, and spare parts 
  • 20 new companies and platoons dedicated to defending Sweden’s territories 
  • increased refresher courses for conscripts, extra funding of voluntary defence organisations, and expansion of the officer education programme

How will the cost of funding this military expansion be met? 

While they were agreed on what needed to be done, party representatives on the committee did not agree on how much needed to be spent or how ti should be financed. 

The Centre Party representative said that spending should be higher, comprising 3 percent of GDP. 

The representatives from the Social Democrats, Left Party, and Green Party, added a statement to the report when they called for a section on how the extra spending should be financed.  

Peter Hultqvist, who served as defence minister under the former Social Democrat government, called for a new beredskapsskatt, or “Readiness Tax” to fund the increase, saying it was disappointing that the committee had not been able to agree on financing. 

“This demand is so big that it risks pushing other pressing requirements out of government spending plans,” he said. “There is a risk that healthcare, education and elderly care will be hit.” 

But Ulf Kristersson, Sweden’s prime minister, rejected the idea of a new tax. 

“It’s no secret that the parties on the left always see reasons to raise taxes, and that’s the case this time as well, I assume. But that is not our way forward,” he said. “We must be able to prioritise Swedish defense, and I understand that there is now complete agreement that it is an important political task.” 

Anna Starbrink, a defence spokesperson for the Liberals, the smallest party in the government, said that the Swedish Defence Commission had not in the past been tasked with developing funding proposals. 

“This is a new idea from the opposition and from the Social Democrats’ side is about nothing more than forcing through a new tax hike through the defence commission, and that’s something the rest of us don’t want to go along with,” she said. 

SHOW COMMENTS