The topics of focus in this chapter are three issues of profound importance in the context of Swedish security policy; thus, they constitute vital issues in the estimates, discussed in Chapters 8–11. Although the goal of the intelligence service is to be value neutral and strive for objectivity, the three issues were constructed on assumptions that were not defined or reflected upon, creating a normative interpretive framework suggesting an intelligence discourse as a consequence of a specific textual discursive practice founded in a ‘style of thought’.

This intelligence discourse may be uncovered by searching for traces of assumptions appearing before the analytical conclusions and based on arguments and facts, in the form of value statements and rationalisations. The traces of assumptions can also found in the character of the language practice used in the concepts, terms and adjectives that frame the issues. Informed by the understanding that a discourse is ‘a structure of a meaning in use’, the empirical study of the language practice in the estimates will be investigated through the analytical method called predicate analysis (see Chapter 2 above). To recapitulate, predicate analysis is suitable for analysing the construction of subjects found in representations in texts. Predicate analysis usually focuses on verbs, adjectives and adverbs (hereafter, these are referred to as qualifiers).

LANGUAGE PRACTICE

The overall language practice in the estimates has relatively few qualifiers in relation to the topics in focus (in this case NATO, Russia and terrorism). However, the ones used are value statements, indicating that there is a distinct ‘style of thought’ in regard to the issues. The frequent use of valuations as qualifiers rather than the use of descriptive or factual qualifiers creates a general character for the text that is based on implicit assumptions and value statements instead of on factual arguments.

The qualifiers used are distinctly different in the assessments of the different issues. There is a distinct coherence of the positive connotation in the descriptive language used for NATO. Throughout the estimates, the qualifiers used in the representation of NATO are positive and/or affirmative. On the other hand, there is a distinct coherence of negatively connoted qualifiers in relation to Russia.