Sweden joining NATO isn't an enthusiastic decision; ending 213 year neutrality (it's become an identity) is quite painful. But alas, times change.
The only parties who really love NATO are M and L; KD and C only became pro-NATO recently. And now S follows very reluctantly. SD should come along in the vote as well, as the government has expressed a desire that 3/4 of the Riksdag approve the decision (consensus culture, after all).
Remaining neutral during the second World War, right at Sweden's doorstep, should not be considered a point of pride or national identity, in my opinion. This is absolutely the right decision, and clearly backed by the Swedish population too.
Well obviously no one in Sweden is proud of that period of neutrality, even if it was the right call in the end, but more of an attitude of being an independent voice in international affairs, especially during the Cold War.
Certainly in the early years of the war, Sweden thought there was a good chance the Nazis would invade them nonetheless - though if that happened they intended to go down fighting like Norway did (but unlike Denmark)
If Sweden had entered the war Danish and Norwegian forces would have had a place to retreat to and could have continued fighting. Denmark has no terrain suitable for defense against a modern army and Norway lacked the manpower to fight alone after the Allies withdrew. Sweden has excellent terrain for defense and had a relatively large army which together with evacuated Norwegian and Danish troops could have tied down substantial German forces if they'd decided to fight. Instead they sold iron ore to the Nazis. "Intending" to go down fighting doesn't really matter if you don't do it, the fact remains that Sweden's role in WW2 is on balance rather shameful. They offered refuge to the Danish Jews and resistance fighters from the other Scandinavian countries, but compared to actually fighting the Nazis and given they had both the terrain (unlike e.g. the Benelux countries and Denmark) and the manpower to do actual damage to Nazi Germany and aid the Allied war effort their neutrality is more problematic than e.g. Ireland (too weak and with strong anti-British sentiments in parts of the population), Portugal (too isolated and would have been a net drain on Allied resources) or Switzerland (too isolated, landlocked and completely surrounded by the Axis). If all of the Scandinavian peninsula had been available to the Allies it would also have made sense to open a Scandinavian front and e.g. evacuated Polish troops and Canadians (used to similar terrain) could have been deployed there.
Sweden had a right to defend itself against the Nazis by remaining neutral. Swedish neutrality made Sweden a safe haven for Jews as well, saving many lives from being killed in the Holocaust. Sometimes taking the “down low” route is better than being outright antagonistic, even if your opponent is as bad as Nazi Germany. Not to mention going to war would’ve been terrible for Sweden.
