The Quest for Relevant Air Power

308 │ Swedish Air Force
air power’s abilities and principles. As a further step, the single mission
types were analysed. To conclude, the international dimension of air
operations and an outlook for the future were presented. 156 Moreover,
the 2004 edition introduced a broad panoply of topics, from interwar
air power thought in Europe and the United States, through Western
air power thought in the aftermath of World War II, to modern air
power theory. The section on modern air power was dominated by
American thinkers and concepts. As such, it referred to concepts by
John Warden and John Boyd and also dealt with the concept of parallel
warfare. 157 With regard to Swedish specifics, a particular reference was
made to the provision of indigenous equipment. 158
Given Sweden’s defence political opening process, it was an explicit
aim to harmonise the national air power doctrine with NATO
doctrine. This thrust towards doctrinal interoperability had already
been underlined by Sweden’s Military-Strategic Doctrine of
2002, which stated that “our participation in multinational operations
within the framework of the UN, NATO and European crisis
management entails certain harmonisation with multinational
doctrine, primarily NATO’s Allied Joint Doctrine (AJP-01).” 159 In
certain areas, such as the categorisation of air operation or the
CJTF concept, the alliance’s air power doctrine, Joint Air and Space
Operations Doctrine, AJP-3.3, served as an example, though Swedish
specifics were taken into account. For instance, so-called strategic
air operations were not introduced as a separate topic. 160
Air power seminars held annually at the SNDC served as a
platform for input from a wider audience during the doctrine
development phase. During the first seminar in 2002, for instance,
the essence and value of doctrine were discussed in general
terms. Representatives from the military strategic, joint, and
single service doctrine working groups discussed the progress of
their work. During the 2003 seminar, an entire day was exclusively
devoted to the outline and progress of the Swedish air
power doctrine. In a number of workshops, its contents were
discussed and suggestions to improve the draft were given. 161
Undoubtedly, these phases of reflection prevented the SwAF
from merely copying the structure and outline of already existing
Anglo-Saxon air power doctrines.
The 2004 Air Power Doctrine was bestowed only draft status, as
the decision was taken that the single service doctrine had to be