This text was originally part of Stockholm News weekly e-newsletter Sunday the 26th of February 2012.
The biggest piece of news from Sweden last week was undoubtedly the birth of a Crown Princess, i.e. a future head of state under the current Swedish constitution.
The newborn, who has already been named Estelle Silvia Eva Mary, is number two in line to inherit the crown from King Carl XVI Gustaf. Number one is her mother Victoria. Many members of the Bernadotte dynasty reach fairly impressive ages so there are reasons to believe that it will take quite long time before little Estelle will become Queen Estelle I. But will Sweden still be a monarchy by then? Is it probable that the baby-girl who was born at Karolinska University Hospital 04.26 in the morning last Thursday really is a future Head of State?
Well, it is of course difficult to predict what will happen during the next 50 years or so (Estelle’s Mother, who will become Queen Victoria I, is 34 now). But I will give it a try.
Popular monarchy
The support for the constitutional monarchy is deep and far reaching. Around 70 percent (sometimes more, sometimes less) usually reply they are in favor of keeping the monarchy. When there is a crisis or scandal of some sort the support drops temporarily and when there is a royal wedding or when a royal baby is born the support goes up.
The issue of monarchy vs. republic is very seldom seriously discussed in Sweden. One reason might be the firm support for the monarchic system. But it also goes the other way; when the issue is never discussed, the opinion does not get a chance to change.
During long periods after the dawn of democracy there has officially been a majority for republic in the Riksdag (but not at the moment). This is if we read the official party programs. But in practice no serious attempts have been made to introduce a Swedish republic, at least not after the 1971 Torekov compromise.
The Torekov compromise was signed in the small town Torekov in south Sweden by the Social Democrats and three center-right parties. The current system (constitutional monarchy) is a product of that compromise, the King then lost almost all political functions. Only four official duties remains.
1) The King shall officially open the Riksdag in September every year
2) Each time there is a shift of government the King shall meet the new government and be officially informed about the happenings.
3) The King shall lead the meetings in the Advisory Council on Foreign Affairs” (Sw: Utrikesnämnden).
4) The King shall be continually informed about “for the country urgent matters” (my translation)
In addition to this he is also expected to represent Sweden during a number of events and journeys, the most well-known being the Nobel banquette.
An official committee which were to propose changes to the Swedish constitution a couple of years ago was expressively forbidden by the government to suggest changes to the Torekov compromise. (Stockholm News wrote about these constitutional changes here.)
Arguments in the debate
Advocates of the current system claim that it works fine as it is (‘if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it’). They usually point out that monarchy has deep traditions in our country and represents a link to the past in a time era when everything else changes quickly and that the Royal family represents Sweden in an excellent way and actually indirectly contribute with more money than they cost. Sometimes the need for some (royal) glamour in the everyday life is also mentioned.
Republicans usually claim that it is fundamentally wrong that in the 21th century appoint the Head of State by heritage; that the royal institution is an anachronism. They also claim that there are no ways to exercise democratic control over the whereabouts of Sweden’s highest representatives and over how they spend the money they receive from the tax payers. Some also argue that it is not right against Estelle to let her be born into a very special kind of life, which she has not chosen, with security officials and journalists around her from her very first day of life.
What about the future?
It is almost certain that Sweden will remain a monarchy for the coming 2-3 decades. But what about the next half century when Estelle could take over?
There are, in fact, powerful republican forces in some of the biggest parties. They have just stepped back and await their right time. If the opinion would shift during a longer time then, perhaps, the next time a committee will overlook the Swedish constitution they will not be prohibited to discuss the issue of monarchy Vs. republic. But it would probably also require some kind of scandal involving the royal house / royal family. The royal family, and especially Crown Princess Victoria, is very popular, which of course do not help the republicans.
One shall also remember that almost all European royal houses either still holds the throne or have been brought down through war or revolution (with the possible exception of Italy in 1946 but that was a very special situation). A democratic, calm transfer in peace time has not occurred in Europe. This says something about the sturdiness of the constitutional monarchic system in mature democracies.
My prediction would thus be that Queen Estelle I will take over the throne sometime during the 2050s or 2060s. None of us who live today will see a Swedish republic. Whether that is good or bad is of course a matter of personal opinion. The possible positive or negative consequence that the constitutional monarchy might have could be a topic for a whole other article – or several.
