To a significant degree the complete failure of the allied defense of Norway (not help by Norway complete incompetence of defending itself) plays a significant role here. It is one of those under-appropriated parts of WW2. Had Norway been defended Sweden would have been in a massively different position. They could have exported Iron Ore to Britain instead and Britain would have been in a position to help Sweden in its defense from potential German attack.
The Sweds had the Germans very close on one side and practically no other trading partner to sell to. Iron ore was vital to the Germans and there is no question they would have gone to war to get it, Germany controlled all export routes.
At the same time you have the Soviets, who are now often seen as the second biggest evil, but this was not at all clear back then. Lets remember that the Soviets had just conducted the Katyn massacre for example. The Soviets had invaded Finland and all the Baltic states. And their treatment of those places was far harsher then the Nazis were in Norway. 10000s of people from the Baltic states were transported to the Gulags at that time and most were never seen again.
So Sweden was stuck between a aggressive Germany and an aggressive Soviet Union with no way for the allies the help them in any meaningful way.
Germany very much had the capability of invading Sweden, specially once they controlled Norway. Just as the Swiss had no question that if Germany wanted to they could invade and take most of Switzerland.
Not being in that positions its easy for us now to be morally outraged. However, at the time a wrong choice could lead things mass starvation, air attacks against civilian population, mass rape and many other things.
> second, in a conflict of literal nazis vs everyone else
You should go back and actually look at WW2. It was not Nazis vs everybody else. In fact, because of Soviet actions in Finland, Baltic, Romania and so on, it was actually the case that many countries looked to Germany to protect them from the Soviets.
Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, Croatia were allies of Germany.
And Italy of course but for other reasons.
> they can hardly be called neutral,
Diplomatic neutrality does not mean you treat everybody equally.
I don't know about Sweden as much. But Switzerland changed is policies quite a bit once the allies had freed France and a Nazi invasion was no longer as acute a possibility.
The Sweds had the Germans very close on one side and practically no other trading partner to sell to. Iron ore was vital to the Germans and there is no question they would have gone to war to get it, Germany controlled all export routes.
At the same time you have the Soviets, who are now often seen as the second biggest evil, but this was not at all clear back then. Lets remember that the Soviets had just conducted the Katyn massacre for example. The Soviets had invaded Finland and all the Baltic states. And their treatment of those places was far harsher then the Nazis were in Norway. 10000s of people from the Baltic states were transported to the Gulags at that time and most were never seen again.
So Sweden was stuck between a aggressive Germany and an aggressive Soviet Union with no way for the allies the help them in any meaningful way.
Germany very much had the capability of invading Sweden, specially once they controlled Norway. Just as the Swiss had no question that if Germany wanted to they could invade and take most of Switzerland.
Not being in that positions its easy for us now to be morally outraged. However, at the time a wrong choice could lead things mass starvation, air attacks against civilian population, mass rape and many other things.
> second, in a conflict of literal nazis vs everyone else
You should go back and actually look at WW2. It was not Nazis vs everybody else. In fact, because of Soviet actions in Finland, Baltic, Romania and so on, it was actually the case that many countries looked to Germany to protect them from the Soviets.
Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, Croatia were allies of Germany.
And Italy of course but for other reasons.
> they can hardly be called neutral,
Diplomatic neutrality does not mean you treat everybody equally.
I don't know about Sweden as much. But Switzerland changed is policies quite a bit once the allies had freed France and a Nazi invasion was no longer as acute a possibility.