The project is a continuation of my thesis on the role of international law in Swedish security policy, which dealt with the period up to 1993. This study analyzes how Sweden has used international law arguments in its security policy from 1993 to 2016. The aim is to see what is constant and what has changed as the world has changed. A lot has happened. Sweden has joined the EU and changed the definition of its security policy, new threats to peace have emerged, the UN has been bypassed and the question of when and how the world can intervene with force to prevent gross violations of human rights has been high on the agenda. There are more examples. All this has put traditional Swedish interpretation of international law to the test. Questions that are being asked are whether Sweden still acts as a traditional small state with all that this entails in terms of trusting legal regulations and multilateral organizations, whether Sweden still uses international law as protection to avoid taking controversial decisions, whether the legal value of the norm is given decisive importance, whether Sweden uses the law to try to limit the freedom of action of states, and whether Sweden still interprets international law strictly when it benefits Swedish interests and flexibly when it is considered more appropriate.