Some thoughts on Control of Critical Technologies

But sleepless nights rarely lead anywhere. What gives me hope, instead, is the mobilization I see throughout Sweden and Europe – above all within Swedish industry. And it’s high time. We can’t afford to wait any longer. 

For generations, Swedish industry has built some of the world’s most advanced and secure products. But in recent years, the value of these products has shifted from hardware to software and the AI that controls it. This is a technological transition. But it is also a geopolitical issue. 

Semiconductors, AI, and computing capacity are not only important for productivity, competitiveness, and research – they have become tools of security and trade policy, as well as key factors in the global distribution of power. I believe that much of the geopolitical friction we see today between the United States and China is driven by a race to control and dominate the key technologies of the future. 

This creates a new context to which Sweden must adapt. 

For a long time, we have viewed technology suppliers as just that – suppliers – and bought the best and cheapest options, regardless of their provenance. 

Leading US and Chinese tech companies offer an ever-increasing share of the software used in physical systems as ready-made packages: computing platforms, operating systems, AI models, and tools for training and simulation. Reducing costs in this way – at least in the short term – and shortening time to market may seem like a rational decision for individual companies. 

But the sum of many rational decisions made by multiple companies can become a strategic problem for a country. If the core components of tomorrow’s physical systems are developed and owned outside of Europe, Swedish companies risk being reduced to subcontractors and passive users of other people’s technology. This means margins, expertise, and control over data will shift abroad. And our ability to manage and develop our own products will become dependent on decisions made in Washington or Beijing. In the long run, this puts the competitiveness of Swedish industry – and with it, Swedish prosperity – at risk. 

It also poses a security risk. Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine has shown how quickly software and autonomous systems have become crucial on the battlefield. Drones that are updated and adapted in weeks rather than years have changed the very idea of military capability. 

The challenge we face is not unique to Sweden. During IVA’s recent Royal Technology Mission to Germany and Switzerland, I met with representatives of European industry who described the same situation. They also expressed concern that policymakers and business leaders have not grasped the magnitude of the problem. There is some awareness: the debate on technological sovereignty, the Draghi Report on Europe’s competitiveness, and the investments in European computing capacity are evidence of this. But as I said, awareness is not the same as action. 

Sweden is a small country that for decades has exerted global influence far beyond its size, thanks above all to a strong industry. This is a pivotal moment for our time. The decisions we make – or fail to make – today will shape Swedish competitiveness for decades to come. 

On Monday, IVA released the report Safety-critical software, which is based on the work for our project on software for critical physical systems. 

The conclusion is clear: Sweden holds a strong position thanks to its industry and its research in embedded and safety-critical systems. For that very reason, we can and should own the layers where security, system understanding, and application are determined. This is also how Sweden becomes a valuable partner among our allies, rather than merely being a customer. But to succeed, industry, academia, and government must act together, and the government must take the initiative. We don’t need to start from scratch. We have strong research, world-leading companies, and world-class testing facilities. What’s missing is a shared direction. 

As I mentioned at the outset, the mobilization has already begun. Software executives at several of Sweden’s largest industrial companies have collectively raised their voices. They know where the problems lie, and they are prepared to take action and contribute their own resources. But for this to be more than just experts calling for action, the business community and policymakers need to come together on what is at stake and take responsibility for the next steps. 

This is how Sweden has succeeded in the past. When government, industry, and academia have pulled in the same direction, we have developed world-leading technologies. IVA stands ready to contribute. 

Sweden has built some of the world’s safest machines. Now we must ensure that, going forward, we also own the intelligence within them. 

Thank you for being part of IVA’s network!