Government backs down on new national intelligence chief – but moves forward with “James Bond” agency

The government has decided not to proceed with the proposal to establish a superior national intelligence chief. This was announced by Minister for Foreign Affairs Maria Malmer Stenergard. The proposal, attributed to former Moderate Party leader and Prime Minister Carl Bildt, has faced strong criticism, including from the Swedish Armed Forces and the Swedish National Defence Radio Establishment (FRA). Nevertheless, the government intends to move forward with the establishment of a new civilian “James Bond” agency, albeit with a director at the same level as other agency heads.

Carl Bildt’s investigation proposed that Sweden should establish a new civilian intelligence service and a separate military counterpart. During the press conference, the proposal was likened to a “Swedish CIA,” and the investigator himself likened it to agency organizations in the UK and Australia that have been compared to James Bond.

The proposal for a chief with overall responsibility for all intelligence operations in Sweden drew criticism from several quarters. FRA, for example, stated in its response that “it is unclear what the role of the national intelligence chief is intended to entail in terms of substance and operational content” and argued that it could damage trust between agencies if an agency head is hierarchically placed above other agency heads in the same system.

The Swedish Armed Forces also pointed out the risks of dividing civilian and military intelligence operations: “The combined expertise within the Swedish Armed Forces Intelligence and Security Service (MUST) is unique and must be utilized,” the agency wrote in its response. Furthermore, the agency considered the timetable – for the new agency to be in place by January 1, 2027 – to be “rushed.”

The criticism has also revolved around the proposal ultimately concentrating intelligence power toward the Government Offices – something that has prompted critics to draw parallels to the world of James Bond, where the intelligence chief is named “M.”

“Listened to the criticism” – but only partially

Minister for Foreign Affairs Maria Malmer Stenergard stated in a comment to Altinget that the government “has listened to the views of the referral bodies” and therefore chooses not to proceed with all parts proposed by the investigation, including the establishment of a national intelligence chief superior to other agency heads.

At the same time, the decision to establish a new civilian intelligence agency remains. The planned start date, as in the proposal, will be January 1, 2027. The objection that this is progressing too quickly is not heeded by the government.

Malmer Stenergard emphasized that despite the criticism, “this needs to be implemented expeditiously given the very serious security situation we find ourselves in.” This is in reference to the increased threat from Russia following the invasion of Ukraine.

Criticism of the abundance of agencies

While the government now declines a partial proposal, it continues with a new agency. This occurs at a time when Sweden has long been criticized for its growing abundance of agencies. A research report from Malmö University critically notes that “the formation of agencies has increased.”

Several government parties have previously stated that they want to clean up the abundant agency landscape – but now, instead of reducing it, they are adding another state organization.

Supranational intelligence service under EU auspices

The plans to strengthen intelligence and security capabilities are not unique to Sweden. At the EU level, the European Commission, under the leadership of President Ursula von der Leyen, is working to establish a new intelligence service to be placed within the General Secretariat, collecting, analyzing, and coordinating information from member states.

The new initiative officially aims to strengthen the EU’s ability to address supranational threats and information pressure. At the same time, several member states have expressed skepticism about granting Brussels more supranational power over member states’ intelligence matters.