Total Defense – a brief introduction on the concepts in Finland, Norway and Sweden and possible adaptation for Germany

Total Defense is a concept that integrates civil and military defense efforts. While the commonly used wording suggests similarity, the approaches of Total Defense are quite different in various countries. And, on the other hand, there is very much integrated security that are pivotal for Total Defense in those countries that do not claim themselves as such.
What is it about this “Total Defense”-issue which is very trendy in the last years?
Total Defense has a counterpart – that is “Total war”. The term is often associated with the speech of Joseph Goebbels, who rallied the German population for total war during a phase of World War II. This wording implies the use of all civilian and military means, subordinating everything to military objectives.
Both concepts, that of Total Defense and Total War, share the characteristic that war transcends boundaries. Military actions are not limited to the battlefield and do not only involve soldiers; they always affect civilian structures as well, with civilians being integral to both success in war and resistance against an aggressor.
It is a well-known fact that war impacts civilians and that essential resources and human potential for success in war are also civilian in nature. Armies do not bear children, grow food, not even typically manufacturing their own weapons. Moreover, it is never the goal of an aggressor to merely destroy the enemy army; rather, it is to conquer the (civilian) land, seize civilian means and resources, and take control of the enemy state.
Thus, every war has this nature. For centuries and millennia, civilians have been the targets or victims of war. They are it who usually pay the highest price. It may be surprising that civilian considerations play a minimal role in countries’ war planning. Even today, we think about professionalizing the duty of war and to delegate all responsibilities on soldiers, jets and weapons.
Our past decades have been characterized by a professionalization of defense systems. Many large countries and their armies have even abandoned conscription. However, the concept of “Total Defense” has gained renewed support in recent years for two reasons.
First, there is a growing recognition that wars have a massive impact on the well-being of populations. As already said that is not new and a natural element of wars. What is really new is the phenomenon of “hybrid warfare.” Before a “real” war begins, hostile attacks are launched against a country, primarily targeting the civilian population—while an attack on military forces usually constitutes a casus belli. By this, we are lurching from a dispute to a crisis and maybe further into a war. Therefore, civilians are not merely victims of wars or unavoidable targets; they are actually the primary targets from the outset.
Secondly, the concept of Total Defense recently achieved an impressive victory. In 2022, it was mainly civilian and paramilitary forces that thwarted Russia’s advance on Kyiv. From the French “Resistance” to the young democrats around Kyiv – civic resistance bears an army that many aggressors failed to overcome.
So, it is very important having a closer look onto this kind of comprehensive approach which includes the civil society from the beginning. And there are nations that have firmly embedded the concept of Total Defense within their security structures. Therefore, let us present and evaluate the concepts from Nordic countries in Europe.
Finland – Grassroot engagement
The Finnish concept of “kokonaismaanpuolustus”, or total defense, is a holistic strategy that integrates military capabilities with civilian preparedness. The country’s unique geopolitical position at the frontline during the so-called “Cold War” and the direct neighborhood to the still aggressively acting Russian state has significantly shaped its defense policies and is still shaping its preparations for possible future wars. Sharing a 1,340 km long border with Russia, the country has historically faced security challenges that necessitated a robust defense posture even during the centuries before the Cold War. The Winter War (1939-1940) against the Soviet Union highlighted the importance of national unity and civilian participation in defense efforts. This experience laid the groundwork for Finland’s current total defense strategy, which emphasizes that every single citizen has a role to play in safeguarding the nation.
Military Structure
At the core of Finland’s total defense is the “Finnish Defence Forces” (FDF). It operates under a unified command structure led by the Chief of Defence, who reports directly to the President of Finland. One of the most distinctive features of Finland’s military system is its conscription model. All able-bodied men are required to serve in the military for approximately six to twelve months, depending on their assigned role. Women can volunteer for service, and their participation has been steadily increasing. This conscription ensures that a significant portion of the population is trained and ready to respond in times of crisis.
Directly linked to this system is the Territorialization of Finnish Defense: The Finnish Army is organized into brigade-level units that are strategically positioned across the country. This territorial defense model allows rapid mobilization and local engagement in case of an attack. Each unit is trained not only for traditional combat but also for operations in urban environments and against hybrid threats.
Civilian Involvement
Finland’s total defense strategy extends beyond military forces to include crucial sectors of society:
Crisis Planning: Every government ministry is tasked with crisis management planning. This ensures that civilian authorities are prepared to support military efforts during emergencies, whether they stem from military aggression or natural disasters.
Public Engagement and Education: The Finnish government places significant emphasis on educating its citizens about national defense. Programs like National Defence Courses aim to inform people about their roles in maintaining national security. These initiatives foster a culture of preparedness and resilience among the population.
Community Preparedness: Local communities are encouraged to develop their own emergency plans and participate in drills that simulate crisis scenarios. This grassroots involvement enhances overall societal resilience and ensures that citizens know how to respond effectively during emergencies.
Finish People are resilient and prepared
The government promotes mental preparedness among citizens, emphasizing that psychological resilience is as crucial as physical readiness. This includes public campaigns aimed at reducing fear and anxiety related to potential threats. In the same way, economic stability is a vital part for national security; thus, Finland invests in safeguarding critical infrastructure and ensuring that essential services can continue during crises. Also, the country boasts an extensive network of civil defense shelters capable of accommodating a significant portion of the population during emergencies. These shelters are equipped with supplies and resources to sustain individuals for extended periods.
Sweden – revisioning of Total Defense from former Cold War era
As global security challenges become increasingly complex, Sweden has revived its comprehensive approach to national defense known as “totalförsvaret”
During the Cold War era, Sweden maintained one of the most extensive total defense systems in the world. However, following the collapse of the Warsaw Pact, Sweden dismantled much of its total defense infrastructure, only to later realize the importance of reviving this comprehensive approach to security. In the following years, it became clear that Sweden had to revive civil defense, with focus on protection the civil society in an armed conflict. They had to prioritize and also introducing deterrence. Deterrence was not so much in the peoples mind so far. “Reviving Civil Defense – the focus is to protect the civil society in an armed conflict. We have had to prioritize and also introducing deterrence – deterrence was not so much in the peoples mind so far”, Abigail Choate comments. She is heading the Centre for Social Security at the Swedish Defense University.
Swedish Components of Total Defense
Along to Sweden’s Armed Force the country operates its “Home Guard”. This is a part-time military organization which supplements the military by providing additional personnel and capabilities during times of crisis or war. Government agencies, local municipalities, and regions play a crucial role in civil defense. They are tasked with protecting the civilian population, ensuring the continuity of essential services, and supporting the military during emergencies.
A focus in Swedish Total Defense is the private economic sector. Companies are also integrated into Sweden’s total defense strategy. They are required to maintain a certain level of preparedness and resilience to ensure the functioning of critical infrastructure and the supply of essential goods and services.
Voluntary defense organizations, such as the Swedish Civil Defence League (Svenska Civilförsvarsförbundet), contribute to civil defense efforts by providing training, resources, and support during crises.
Sweden – Challenges and Developments
Rebuilding Sweden’s total defense system in the aftermath of the peace-time in Europe is not been without its challenges. The country has faced issues such as:
Lack of Clear Objectives: Specified levels of resilience, such as stockpile levels and redundancy requirements in critical infrastructure, have not yet been fully defined. That’s making it difficult to measure effectiveness.
Secondly, much of the legislation governing total defense remains from the Cold War era, failing to account for the significant changes in the economy and society since then.
Resource Allocation: Allocating sufficient resources to both military and civilian aspects of total defense has been a challenge, as it requires significant investments in infrastructure, training, and preparedness measures.
Despite these challenges, Sweden has made progress in reviving its Total Defense strategy. In 2018, the country conducted its first national exercise focused on civil defense in decades, and a major total defense exercise, Aurora has been conducted in 2023. Here, the military training has been concluded by a civilian mobilization training. Additionally, the Swedish Civil Contingencies Agency (MSB) has been working to assess societal vulnerabilities and guide investments in building resilience.
It has concretely implemented some crucial programs. The “IPA CARE” Program is leading a large-scale international capacity development initiative called “Capacity for Risk Management of Earthquakes and Health Emergencies”. This program, with a budget of SEK 128 million and a duration of six years, aims to strengthen risk prevention and management capabilities in Western Balkan countries and Türkiye. The MSB also provides education, support, and training exercises to municipalities, county councils, other authorities, organizations, and the private sector to increase safety and security at all levels of society. On the international level, the agency participates in various efforts, including providing firefighting training to other countries’ armed forces, as it can be seen in their collaboration with Montenegro. Nevertheless, MSB has been involved in information campaigns. It is constantly running broad campaigns to raise public awareness about crisis preparedness.
Norway – against military and non-military threads
The Norwegian People call it “Totalforsvar”. It directs a little bit in what is meant with “Total for war”. While the country does by no means is in favor for war, it indicates a conviction that a war can only be fought when all efforts are concentrated on ending/winning a war and defeating all threats actively. This approach integrates military readiness with civilian preparedness, emphasizing the collective responsibility of society in safeguarding national security.
Like the others, Norway’s total defense strategy has its roots in the Cold War era when the country recognized the need for a comprehensive approach to security due to its geographical position and historical vulnerabilities. The 1990s saw a shift in focus as Norway reduced its military expenditures and restructured its defense policies following the end of the Cold War.
Well, things changed and so did Norway with its approach.
At the heart of Norway’s total defense strategy is a well-equipped and capable military. With roughly 30,000+ active personnel and a full mobilization around 70,000, Norway has one of the smaller armies in NATO. But in regard to equipment and training it is well renowned. It has state-of-the-art Naval frigates and submarines, a proper air defense system and is in procurement process of the second generation of F-35 fighter jets.
The Home Guard serves as a rapid mobilization force that complements regular military units. It plays a crucial role in local defense and community engagement during crises. The “Heimevernet” has a total strength of 45,000 personnel and is divided into 11 districts across the country.
Norway recognizes that effective national defense requires active participation from all sectors of society. As government states: “A whole-of government approach is required to improve society’s resilience against military and non-military threats. International cooperation and collaboration between governmental agencies, businesses and the population, within the framework of the Norwegian total defense concept is a priority. Civil-military cooperation is an integral part of the Norwegian defense effort.”
Strategic Investments
Norway’s recent long-term defense plan outlines ambitious goals for enhancing national security:
The government has committed to a historic increase in defense spending, projecting $60 billion over twelve years until 2036. This investment aims to bolster military capabilities across all branches while addressing critical deficiencies in current structures.
The plan includes acquiring new frigates, submarines, long-range air defense systems, and expanding the Army from one to three brigades. These enhancements are designed to improve situational awareness and operational readiness in response to evolving threats.
Given Norway’s strategic location in the Arctic region, the total defense strategy emphasizes strengthening naval capabilities and surveillance operations to protect territorial waters against potential incursions.
Comparing Total Defense Approaches in Finland, Sweden, and Norway
In recent years, the Nordic countries of Finland, Sweden, and Norway have re-emphasized their Total Defense strategies in response to evolving global security challenges. While these nations share a commitment to integrating military and civilian resources for national security, each has developed a unique approach tailored to its specific geopolitical context and historical experiences.
Military Structure
All Northern countries have enrolled conscription models. But the philosophy differs. While Finland has a very strong conscription model which leads to a large number of of primarily trained people, Norway emphasized a very strong universal conscription model that includes both men and women as mandatory military service. Sweden reintroduced its conscription model in 2017 but is not enrolling it by large. The system is very selective which leads to fever conscripts but on a higher physical and psychological level.
This elitarian approach seems interesting. While usual professional military armies are often seen as a collection basin of losers, conscription armies are to the vast majority incompetent and using a lot of capacity in basic training. The Swedish model is something what Germany obviously likes. “I’m looking at models, such as the Swedish model, where all young men and women are conscripted and only a select few end up doing their basic military service. Whether something like this would also be conceivable here is part of these considerations,” said German Minister of Defense Boris Pistorius.
Civilian Involvement
The differences are there also in regard to civilian involvement into Total Defense in the Northern countries.
In Finland, the involvement is enrolled to its largest extent. The government actively engages citizens through education programs that highlight their roles in national security. The Finnish model also emphasizes collaboration between various government ministries and local authorities to enhance societal resilience.
But Sweden’s approach is similarly inclusive, involving not just government agencies but also private sector entities and civil society organizations. But Norway gives them all another different notion as the citizens are encouraged to participate in NATO-military training exercises and emergency planning initiatives.
All in all, the “Whole-of-Society Approach”with integrating military and civilian efforts into a comprehensive Total Defense strategy is crucial. There is a commonly shared commitment to building societal resilience against various threats, including hybrid warfare.
Last, but not least, the international cooperation of the three countries is something that is highly dependent on Total Defense. Seemingly, the approach originated from the conviction of being highly responsible for the own survivability in each of these countries. While in fact not really being – countries like Finland (Sweden and Norway also) relied on a policy of neutrality and independence. Due to the illegal occupation of Ukraine by Russia – attention arouses to the fact that even the “most total” defense approach of a single country wouldn’t be enough to defend a super power. The backslash is, that – over the time – the feeling of relying on each other opens room for a decreasing willingness to invest into a real resilient society in favor to other public spendings in social welfare, climate change or other common goods. Germany, for example, is “great” in shifting its responsibilities in defense on the shoulders of other partners.
Lessons for Germany
In Germany, the concept of integrated or synergistic security has been discussed for quite a while. However, there has not been a consensus to adopt a “Total Defense” strategy. While there are initiatives aimed at strengthening civil protection and crisis preparedness, these often exist in niche capacities. There are civilian organizations, such as the “Technisches Hilfswerk” (THW), which are explicitly civilian and peaceful entities capable of ensuring water supply for hospitals, but they do not operate within the situation of warfare and are therefore not trained or equipped for such scenarios.
Consequently, there is a strong need for implementing key elements of the “Total Defense” approach in Germany, as it could enhance societal resilience, especially during significant crises or wars.
These key elements should include:
Civic Engagement Initiatives: Germany could benefit from programs that encourage citizen participation in national security discussions and war preparedness training, fostering a culture of resilience similar to that in Nordic countries.
Restructuring Military Readiness: Reintroducing aspects of conscription or developing a robust reserve system could improve Germany’s military readiness and ensure a larger pool of trained personnel available during crises.
Whole-of-Society Approach: Adopting a comprehensive security strategy that integrates civilians into military planning and defense postures. Currently, the German populace is primarily trained as consumers benefiting from security organizations. They do not see themselves as a producer or guarantee of security.
What Is Lacking in the Total Defense Concept?
While the approach is sound, it is somewhat limited. The essence of war involves the destruction of infrastructure, loss of lives, and the seizure of foreign territories. An enemy will not only try to reduce own losses but also seek to minimize destruction of the territory it aims to conquer, including its people and resources. This reality underpins the existence of hybrid warfare and Grey Zone conflicts, which pose a far greater threat today than might be assumed. It is a kind of a double benefit for aggressors – no losses but all win. Or – inspired by an old English saying – “Having a cake and eating it, too.”
The war in Ukraine distracts us actually from the ongoing polycrisis and hybrid warfare that have long been undermining our societies. It is still more productive for an aggressor staying below the threshold of war and nevertheless winning it all without a death toll.
Referring to the doctrines explained above as so-called “Total Defense” is misleading because this concept is designed solely to ensure resilience in traditional war scenarios. The way of thinking is: Once there is a war the whole society then plays its role in defending the nation. Same in Germany. But when there will not be a war we know from history books? These total defense concepts do not start initially when the enemy is coming silently through the backdoor.
Those Programs aimed at exposing and countering methods of hybrid warfare are merely adjuncts to existing doctrines. Thus, the Total Defense approach should broaden its focus toward a genuine total civil defense strategy below the threshold of hot war. The military will still have its role; however, engagements against armed gangs, organized crime, and terrorist groups within one’s own country are at least as likely as an attack by Russian forces on Stockholm.
Abigail Choate from the Swedish Defense University concludes: “That is the difference to crisis preparedness. Many, many things can risk the society. To this belong public health and safety, but also such sectors like failed democracy, weak rule of law and fainting the damage of property and environment. Instead of these very crucial things for the security of a society, the Total Defense is regulated in the constitution. But there is a different kind of individual responsibility. It spans from individual health over supply and preparedness to the individuals role to support the society in crisis and war. That starts with the individual and goes over to municipalities, regions, including trade and industry, voluntary organizations up to county administrative boards and government agencies.”
Total defense is not fully implemented when it doesn’t take the “whole-of-society”-approach by its words. Pivotal is the individual citizen and its self-understanding as a security factor – be it on an individual or societal level. And we should take the “total” in it seriously. Total means total – also in regard of time and geography. Once we accept that there are still no more defined front lines or clear distinctive times of “peace” and “war” – then we are really entering a debate what “Total Defense” means and what should follow from it.