How worried should we be about China’s fresh military arsenal? Plus: Japan’s abandoned suitcase problem

Summary

---

The Monocle Daily: How Worried Should We Be About China’s Fresh Military Arsenal? Plus: Japan’s Abandoned Suitcase Problem

Date: September 3, 2025
Host: Andrew Muller
Guests: Marion Messmer (Chatham House, International Security), Robyn Brant (former BBC China & US correspondent)

---

Episode Overview

This episode of The Monocle Daily tackles two major news stories: China’s grand military parade and its implications, and Japan’s quirky problem of abandoned suitcases in airports. The panel—Andrew Muller, Marion Messmer, and Robyn Brant—also discusses European defense cooperation, Sweden’s debate over cultural heritage (and the ABBA controversy), and closes with a lighthearted historical note on San Marino. The conversation blends sharp geopolitical analysis with cultural insight and a dose of Monocle’s signature wit.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. China’s Military Parade: Pageantry, Power, and Deterrence

[03:03 - 12:00]

• Event context: China’s Victory Day parade in Tiananmen Square featured massive displays of military hardware, including tanks, missiles, drones, and even "robot wolves." President Xi Jinping’s speech emphasized China’s “unstoppable” rise and presented the world with a stark “choice between peace and war.”
• Show of Deterrence: Robyn unpacks the spectacle as “a big fat deterrent” aimed at the U.S., Japan, and anyone considering defending Taiwan.
• Technological Leap: Marion observes the shift from “copycat” American designs to domestically innovated weaponry, especially drones, showing how “the platitude that authoritarian states can’t innovate simply doesn’t hold anymore” ([07:13]).
• Untested Threat: Despite modernization, China’s military remains largely untested in combat since 1979, unlike Western militaries. As Robyn puts it: “China continues to have an untested military... the chances of its operational success remain more on the negative side than the positive” ([05:50]).
• International Arms Sales: Marion warns China’s ambitions include not just domestic improvements but also exporting modern arms to “less aligned or non-aligned states” ([07:50]).
• Domestic Significance: The parade is also for internal propaganda, fueling national pride and President Xi’s power consolidation.
• Axis or Ad Hoc Partnership?: The trio of Xi, Putin, and Kim Jong Un is more a temporary axis of convenience than a formal alliance. As Marion jokes: “Is this more likely to be three rats in a sack?” ([10:00]). She cautions that the West “doesn’t do enough to exploit fault lines between these regimes” ([12:00]).

---

2. European Naval Deals and Defense Procurement Headaches

[12:00 - 20:25]

• UK’s Win in Naval Contracts: The UK secures a £10B contract for Norway’s new warships (Type 26 frigates), with potential sales to Denmark and Sweden, offering economic and strategic benefits.
• NATO Interoperability: Marion lauds the “investment in European defense industry we’ve been looking at... and it’s all interoperable” ([13:01]), simplifying supply and joint operations.
• Production Concerns: However, she warns of overlapping timelines and longstanding issues with UK military procurement: “Not a single one of them, I think, has been delivered on time or on budget” ([13:34]).
• Domestic Politics: Robyn highlights the crucial local and electoral impact—especially jobs in Glasgow—and the political win for the Labour government: “This is a huge win... beating the US, France, and Germany. It’s the creation of thousands of, as politicians love to say, ‘proper jobs’” ([15:16]).
• Future-Proofing Dilemmas: With warfare evolving quickly—especially with drones and uncrewed systems—Andrew asks if these expensive ships might be obsolete by launch. Marion responds that as submarine hunters, their role will persist as “nuclear armed submarines remain the most survivable deterrent” ([18:23]). The model for drone procurement must change, she says, but “it’s an and rather than an or” when it comes to crewed vs. uncrewed platforms ([19:53]).
• Baltic Security: Robyn affirms that Russia is frustrated by NATO’s near-total control of the Baltic Sea, a direct consequence of recent invasions: “This is seen as the big strategic failure for Vladimir Putin’s action... NATO now does basically own the Baltic Sea” ([20:48]).

---

3. Sweden’s List of Heritage: How Could Abba Be Missing?

[21:14 - 28:52]

• ABBA’s Exclusion from Swedish Heritage List: The government’s list of 100 defining items snubs ABBA due to a “50-year” rule, despite their breakout in 1974 (“Waterloo”).
• Panel Outrage: Marion wryly notes, “It is very strange not to include them in a Swedish cultural canon... they are probably, with the exception of Ikea, the most famous Swedish export” ([22:28]). Robyn jokes, “For me it stinks of a bit of the old days of Sweden... it’s a matter of months, come on” ([23:07]).
• Political Underpinnings: The panel suspects nationalist motives: the 50-year rule may quietly exclude more recent immigrant contributions. Marion claims, “It does sound a bit dodgy, as if they’re trying to create a sort of purist Swedish narrative that actually doesn’t really hold up to scrutiny” ([24:52]).
• Broader Value of Such Lists: Robyn and Marion agree that debating national identity can be healthy—if inclusive and not weaponized: “As long as you don’t then impose the list on everyone, it has generated a lot of discussion... it’s a really healthy thing” ([27:29]).

---

4. Japan’s Abandoned Suitcases: Travelers, Luggage, and Airline Woes

[28:52 - 33:23]

• The Quirky Crisis: Japan, famously efficient with lost bags, now faces a surge of suitcases abandoned at airports by passengers unwilling to pay extra after exceeding carry-on limits.
• Panel Stories: Robyn shares tales of lost luggage trauma in Paris, while Marion admits to being a “very efficient traveler” who avoids checked bags ([32:33]). Andrew is more old-school: “People should just check their bags in and everybody should be allowed to bring a book on board. That’s it” ([31:45]).
• Shopper Theory: Robyn theorizes that “shoppers who’ve gone to Japan... realize it costs more to get the bag home than what’s in it, so they abandon it” ([33:06]).
• Andrew’s Amused Frustration: “Everybody annoys me on a flight, though” ([32:36]).

---

5. On This Day: The Curious Case of San Marino’s Independence

[33:23 - End]

• Foundation Day: Andrew recounts the origins and quirks of San Marino, the world’s oldest republic, with tongue-in-cheek affection, referencing its minuscule size, sovereign trappings, and hapless football team.
• Cultural Note: A highlight—San Marino’s footballing infamy: “San Marino did, in fairness, back in 1993, do the funniest thing in the history of World Cup qualifiers” ([36:13]), scoring against England in under 10 seconds.
• Takeaway: The story celebrates the enduring charm—and occasional absurdity—of Europe’s microstates.

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On China’s parade:

  • "If you’re into goose stepping, if you’re into formations that are vast in scale with a phenomenal accuracy, then this is for you. But… it’s a big fat deterrent." (Robyn, [04:27])
  • "China has shown time and time again, especially over the last year, that that [lack of innovation] is just really not the case anymore…" (Marion, [07:29])

• On Western complacency:

  • "If there are still any Western nations or European nations that are complacent, they really ought not to be." (Marion, [07:50])

• On ABBA and Swedishness:

  • "It is very strange not to include them in a Swedish cultural canon... they are probably, with the exception of Ikea, the most famous Swedish export." (Marion, [22:28])
  • "For me, it stinks of a bit of the old days of Sweden... come on." (Robyn, [23:07])

• On checking bags:

  • "People should just check their bags in and everybody should be allowed to bring a book on board. That’s it." (Andrew, [31:45])
  • "I’m a very efficient traveler... so hopefully I’m not one of the people that would annoy you on a flight." (Marion, [32:33])
  • "Everybody annoys me on a flight, though." (Andrew, [32:36])

---

Timestamps for Key Segments

• 03:03–12:00 — China’s Military Parade: Implications and Analysis
• 12:00–20:25 — UK-Norway-Denmark-Sweden Warship Deals & Defense Procurement
• 21:14–28:52 — Sweden’s Heritage List & the ABBA Controversy
• 28:52–33:23 — Japan’s Abandoned Suitcases: Airline and Travel Gripes
• 33:23–End — Historical Segment: San Marino’s Foundation Day

---

Conclusion

This episode deftly interweaves hard-hitting analysis on international security with lighter touches of cultural affairs and travel oddities. Listeners are treated to expert insights, memorable panel banter, and the occasional tongue-in-cheek history lesson—hallmarks of The Monocle Daily.

---

Transcript

[A]

You're listening to the Monocle Daily, first broadcast on the 3rd of September, 2025 on Monocle Radio.

[B]

As the scarlet and gold bunting comes down in Tiananmen Square. What did China's big military parade teach us? What is a pillar of Swedish heritage if Abba apparently isn't? And the plague of Japanese air passengers deciding that their possessions are worth less than the hassle of checking luggage. I'm Andrew Muller. The Monocle Daily starts now. Hello and welcome to the Monocle Daily, coming to you from our studios here at Midori House in London. I'm Andrew Muller. My guests Marion Messmer and Robin Brant will discuss the day's big stories. And our on this day historical series acknowledges the origins of one of the world's smallest and strangest countries. Stay tuned. All that and more coming up right here on the Monocle Daily. Foreign this is the Monocle Daily. I'm Andrew Muller and I am joined today by Marion Messmer, senior research Fellow in International Security at Chatham House, and Robyn Brandt, former BBC presenter and correspondent in China and the United States. Hello to you both.

[C]

Hi.

[B]

Hi. You are both coincidentally back from holidays which you have chosen to take this year in the extraordinarily imaginative destinations of Paris and Greece. Let's do Paris first. Marion, did you see the Eiffel Tower?

[A]

I actually didn't see the Eiffel Tower on this occasion. I've been to Paris many times and it's always a good time. I went for museums and good food this time, so I ate a lot of excellent food and saw some really.

[B]

Interesting exhibitions, both of which they have in abundance. And a reminder to any of our listeners in Paris or listeners visiting Paris, there is a Monocle cafe and shop in Paris now which you can go to. But you didn't, Marion.

[A]

No, I didn't know it was that, unfortunately. Next time I'll have to go next time.

[B]

Robyn, you have been to Greece despite the fact that we do not as yet have a Monocle cafe and shop and studio in Greece. But which bit of it did you go to?

[C]

I went to a place called Stupa, just south of Kalamata in the Peloponnese, which it turns out some of my Greek friends, with my wife back here, have heard nothing about at all. So it seems like it's a mysterious little jewel of a place.

[B]

Were you the only people there?

[C]

No, Mostly kind of native, so to speak. It was beautiful. It was lovely and we had a lovely holiday. It was good value. Last time I was here, we talked about the benefits of the Essex coast today. I sound like I'm working for the Greek Tourist Board. But it's lovely. Kids are happy, it's a nice week away, it's sunny. Thanks very much.

[B]

It is just hard to say anything contrary or controversial about Greece, though, really. It's just every time you go there, you think this is nice, the people are friendly, the food's great, the views are terrific.

[C]

Yeah, I mean, I had a conversation, though, with a barber friend of mine who was about to put a razor to my throat from a country nearby that has a troubled history with Greece. And he wasn't as happy, genuinely, about where I was going on my holiday.

[B]

Well, yes, yes, I can imagine that. And I think our listeners can probably all take a while guess as to which of Greece's neighbours your barber comes from. We will start in Beijing, where the after party for the Victory Day parade will be well underway. At this point, the march past of goose stepping troops, lumbering tanks, massive missiles, air and sea drones and robot wolves was beamingly regarded by Chinese President Xi Jinping. His guests of honor, President Vladimir Putin of Russia and Supreme Leader Kim Jong Un of North Korea, among others. President Xi delivered a mercifully brief oration in which he said that China was, quote, unstoppable and that the world has to choose between peace and war, which we have to hope he intended to have less of the tone of a protection racketeer. Robyn, this is your former beat. Did you ever attend any such parade?

[C]

Yes, I went to the 70th anniversary parade for the PLA, the People's Liberation army, in Beijing in 2019. And I've also been to a similar ceremony, which was Seabourne, that Xi Jinping attended up in Qingdao, which is the home on the east coast of China's plan, the People's Liberation Army Navy that was beset by fog and we didn't really see much, but they are phenomenal events, if nothing else.

[B]

Well, yeah, judging by the footage, leaving aside the obviously sinister subtext, this was quite a production.

[C]

Yeah. I mean, if you're into goose stepping, if you're into formations that are vast in scale with a phenomenal accuracy, then this is for you. But of course, what it achieves more than anything else is it shows us the huge scale of China's military, military capabilities. It continues to demonstrate the vast amounts it invests, most of it not made public, in its military and crucially, in modernizing its military, modernizing the kit it has, modernizing its structures and the way the orders are sent and the way that this Military can operate as well. And look, you know, it's a big fat deterrent, isn't it, to Donald Trump and to any others in Tokyo, in Seoul and beyond who may be thinking about coming to the defense of Taiwan if and when that moment comes. It's fascinating in terms of the technology that was on display, you know, the unmanned maritime vehicles, in particular, the further modernization of China's nuclear weapons, which is something of huge concern, particularly for those in Washington, dc. And this is something that China is very proud of. But China continues to have an untested military. This is, you know, we can have a separate discussion about whether this is good or bad. But the British army, the American army forces in Western Europe have been tried and tested and continue to be. That, of course, makes you a better army.

[B]

Hasn't really fought a war since 1970. Exactly.

[C]

And China hasn't had that. And in terms of its operational capabilities, the chances of its operational success, that remains something that is more in the negative side as opposed to the positive side.

[B]

Marion, with your defence boffins hat on reviewing the kit that was on display aside, obviously, or in fact, if your eye was especially caught by the robot wolves, feel free to digress on the robot wolves. But other than that, anything really leap out at you?

[A]

Well, I think it was really interesting that we've seen so many different type of drones and also China produced drones that kind of goes hand in hand with what we've also been able to observe in Ukraine, where Russia used some Chinese drones at one point. So it's interesting that China seems to really be going in that direction, investing much more in that. And the other thing that I thought was quite noteworthy was that not too long ago, the kit that would be on display at these parades would essentially be sort of copies of US kit, whereas it seems like the majority of this is now essentially genuinely domestic production, domestic design and so on, and China essentially iterating and improving on previous versions of missiles. And that's noteworthy in the sense that I think Western nations have for a long time taken solace in the fact that China seemed to be bad at innovation. And there used to be the sort of platitude that if you have an authoritarian state, they're not going to be that innovative. And I think China has shown time and time again, especially over the last year, that that's just really the case anymore, whether that's in the case of AI development and large language models, or whether that's in the case now of this military equipment. And I think if there are still, any Western nations or any European nations that are complacent, they really ought not to be looking at the display of the range of military capabilities, not just because China might be a potential future adversary, but also because Chinese industry is undoubtedly looking to sell some of that equipment to not just the sort of usual suspects of North Korea and Russia, but presumably also to other less aligned or non aligned states that might want to invest in their military capabilities too.

[B]

This is a country you spend a lot of time in, Robyn, so as well as your own assessment of seeing these parades up close, how do they usually play with actual Chinese people? Does everyone get their friends round on a few cans in to watch it on television, or do people just sort of roll their eyes and go about their day?

[C]

Well, I think it's a really important point to actually, because much of this is also for the domestic audience and not just in terms of China's military largesse, but also it's a moment for Xi Jinping to further demonstrate his consolidation of power and make it clear that whilst he continues to hold the little brother of North Korea close and the increasingly economically dependent Russia close, he is a man who has ambitions in terms of power for another eight years up to 2032. And look, if you put that together with a demonstration of the military capabilities they have, this is not an army, an air force, a navy that's modernizing because it thinks it's going to be attacked on the mainland. It's doing it for different reasons. Now, you can put those two things together and draw your own conclusions. But yeah, there's a huge amount of national pride when these moments are displayed on the evening news that comes at 7 o' clock every night with that vast audience on state media. And yeah, it's something that many Chinese people on the mainland and abroad and diasporas will take huge pride in. China is catching up. As with articulated a little earlier, you know, it used to replicate, now it innovates.

[B]

And just finally on this one, Marion, the picture which has led most reporting on this is that shot of Xi Jinping, Vladimir Putin and Kim Jong Un together. I believe it's the first time the three of them have all got together, which is heartwarming. But what do we suspect that relationship's actually like? Is it more like, is it less likely to be. Not so much. Everyone thinks of the great alliances. Is this more likely to be three rats in a sack?

[A]

I think I definitely wouldn't want to equate it with a structured alliance in the way that we tend to think about it. It's not a NATO version, but the three clearly have a lot of common interests at the moment and they are also really benefiting from their mutual support. I mean, Russia has relied a lot on both China and North Korea to help them evade Western sanctions, to help them get additional military equipment, apparently in the case of North Korea, even to get troops, which is quite significant, I suppose, for North Korea. It actually really helps to do what Robin said China had not been able to do in terms of testing their own military and actually getting combat experience, that sort of thing, which, if we're thinking about North Korea no longer really believing in a pathway to peace with South Korea, is also unfortunately quite significant in terms of combat preparations. So as long as these three states, or perhaps together with Iran, these four states are sort of seen as the common enemy, to use the old George W Bush phrase, the axis of evil, then they're going to get a lot out of mutually supporting each other, even if it really is just on this defense and security points, even if they don't agree on lots of other things, even if China has concerns about North Korean comportment on the Korean peninsula and whatever else there might be, or if Russia and China can't agree about borders and border territory. But they clearly get a lot out of this mutual support and showing up together in this way, and I think we can at least expect that to continue. At the same time, there are a lot of fault lines in those relationships and I often think that Western states actually don't do enough in terms of diplomatically exploiting those fault lines and trying to play the them off against each other. So there's a lot more that we all could do in that regard.

[B]

Well, let's move along to a display of military might less ostentatious on the basis that it has not as yet been built. This week, the UK clinched the contract to supply the Royal Norwegian Navy with at least five new Type 26 frigates, benefiting to the tune of 10 billion quid and several thousand jobs. These ships will be built in Glasgow. It further emerges that the UK is in advance talks to supply type 31 frigates to the Royal Danish Navy and Royal Swedish Navy Navy, further knotting the UK into an informal alliance of countries sharing interests in the North Sea and terrible weather. Another project may see the UK concern Babcock working with Swedish outfit Saab to build corvettes. Marion, again with your defence boffen. Hat on. Is this basically good?

[A]

It's really good for the UK in terms of economic investment and in terms of the jobs that are secured. It is really good for NATO overall, because it means that this is essentially the investment in European defence industry we've been looking at.

[B]

And it's all interoperable.

[A]

And it is all interoperable. Absolutely. So you also have sailors that are trained on one of these vessels, essentially being able to seamlessly switch to another if necessary. It also simplifies supply chains, which is something that I think we don't talk about often enough when we're talking about the interoperability point, because if any of these vessels were ever in a wartime scenario, you wouldn't need to supply different parts for the Norwegian and the British one. You'd essentially have one integrated supply, which is really excellent from a simplification perspective. Really. My only point of concern is that the UK has only just begun to invest in its additional production capabilities and we have seen some significant improvements there. But at the same time, as long as I've been following British shipbuilding and especially sort of military procurement contracts, not, not a single one of them, I think, has been delivered on time or on budget. And especially because the UK is also building ships for the Royal Navy in the very same production facilities as these ships for the Norwegian Navy will be built. And the timelines overlap as well. I think Norway is expecting the first ship for 2029. The Royal Navy is expecting some of these ships over the next decade. I think the sequencing of that construction activity is going to be really tricky and I hope it really works out because that's. That's essentially one of the big headaches that we're facing with the European defence procurement plans. But at the same time, this is the one bit where I'm a bit worried that things could come up and that this could be much more difficult to pull off than they're currently expecting.

[B]

Couple of things there I do want to come back to, but, Robyn, I do want to look at the domestic political ramifications of this, because the Labour Party has had a fairly rough first year in government, a lot of it self inflicted, and Sir Keir Starmer is not as popular as he may have been on election day. Are they going to get the credit they deserve for this one? Because this is a huge win. It's not just the investment, it's not just the sale, it's the beating out of the United States, France and Germany, which all could have supplied these ships. And it is the creation of thousands of the kind of inverted commas, proper jobs that people fetishize.

[C]

Yeah. And that is absolutely crucial. I remember speaking to now A former Defence Secretary. He was a Defence Secretary at the time in the previous government who talked about how defence, defence procurement, investment in defence within the UK is a crucial election issue because it creates a huge amount of jobs. And investment in regions, localities, villages, towns, areas has a huge political upside if it's communicated properly and if it is something that genuinely delivers on what the politicians promise. So make no mistake, there is a domestic political aspect to this. I mean, look how much fast Donald Trump has made of bringing jobs back home to the United on shoring parts of be the supply chain or the US defence industry. And this is not dissimilar. The SNP government, the Scottish National Government, has been in control in Scotland for a long time, traditionally way back when that used to be Labour territory. And if this does deliver on the hundreds or thousands of jobs, or secures a larger number of jobs around Glasgow's much depleted shipbuilding industries, then that could be a very good thing, certainly for Scotland and maybe even for the Labour Party. One other thing it reminded me of as well was David Cameron, a former Conservative Prime Minister in this country. He led a coalition government at the time, 2010 to 2015, who saw much benefit to striking up political and broader military coalitions with the Scandinavian and more broadly, Nordic countries. I went with him on a couple of trips. This was about trying to build up alternative power bases in the European Union as well. Didn't really work out that well for him. But nonetheless, this reminded me of this and the potential he saw and his government saw in those countries. Look, the geopolitics has changed. Ukraine was invaded again and Russia is on the march. But this, of this and the closer cultural and historical ties that the UK has with those governments.

[B]

I wanted to come back to that thing you were talking about, Marion, about the lead times on these ships and the likely delivery times. And as I asked the question, it's probable that there is nothing you can do about this, because you can't conjure an entire frigate out of thin air in a matter of weeks. They're quite complicated things. But now more than ever, and with reference to what you were saying about how defence procurement projects famously never come in on time and they never come in on budget, how great is the danger that billions of quid get spent on something which is more or less no use by the time it's actually operational? Because in this respect, I am haunted by a conversation I had with another defense boffin in Odessa a couple of months ago, who was just talking about how advances in drones, basically, whether air, land and sea, he said generations are now occurring in weeks. I have no idea what warfare will look like six months from now, nevermind ten years from now. I mean, I've also spoken, as I'm sure you have, to serious people who already think the aircraft carrier is redundant, that crewed fighter aircraft are redundant. Might these ships have the champagne bottle broken over their bow just in time for them to be actually not much use?

[A]

I think it's a really legitimate question. But when we're talking about these specific ships, I think they will continue to have a use, if only because these frigates are submarine hunters. And as long as a major NATO adversary is nuclear armed Russia, nuclear armed submarines are going to be a huge part of Russia's arsenal because they are essentially the most survivable way of having a nuclear deterrent. And so same reason why the UK invests in submarines. And so for that reason alone, I think these frigates are going to be relevant whether they're ready for 2029 or 2035. I completely hear what people are saying on the question of drone technology and how quickly those generations evolve. And I think that's one of real learning points of how Ukraine has been fighting in this war and the Ukrainian procurement model. And I think this is something where most West European countries really need to change their procurement models, because the traditional procurement model of having these incredibly long tendering processes, long lead times and so on is not going to work for something that you essentially need to treat like a consumable. I think most defence ministries are learning from that, whether they're implementing it correctly. I think we can't really tell at this moment because luckily none of us have been in a position where we've had to procure drones on such a quick turnaround. But at least when I talk to people, I'm reassured that they are also noticing this and they're thinking about how to implement it. I'm not someone who thinks about it in such absolute terms. I think we've also seen in Ukraine that tanks, for example, are still really relevant. So I think crude aircraft, crude warships, all of this crude tanks are going to remain relevant. But what's going to change is the support infrastructure around it and the role that these uncrewed systems are going to pick up in order to maybe keep soldiers, sailors, pilots, safer for longer to improve reconnaissance, those kind of missions. So it's going to be an and rather than an or, I think.

[B]

And just finally on this one, Robyn, do we anticipate, and I suspect this may be one of those questions to which the answer is just yes. Russia getting increasingly grumpy about the Baltic being locked down by NATO, which it now is. And you could argue, well, Russia, that's on you for behaving in such a way that Sweden, Finland joined. But NATO now does basically own the Baltic Sea.

[C]

Yes, and of course, this is seen as the big strategic failure for Vladimir Putin's action in 2014 and 2022, and also not something that his current supporter Xi Jinping wanted to see, which is an emboldened, more unified, energized NATO. There is no doubt that is what we now have, and we're seeing manifestations of that as well, in these vast commitments to increase defense spending across the European Union. Union here in the UK and beyond.

[B]

Well, staying in Sweden, there is apparently uproar and why, yes, I am overselling this over whether this, that being aberhit, Mamma Mia. Is entitled to be thought of as Swedish cultural heritage. As such. A considerable brouhaha has been occasioned by the government's unveiling of A list of 100 works, ideas, brands and so on, which define what it is to be Swedish. However, ABBA are not on it due to a rule that all listed Items must be 50 years old. But Mamma Mia appears on Abba's eponymous debut album, which was released in April 1975, and they won Eurovision with Waterloo a full year before that. So who even knows what is going on here? Marian, as the person at this table from closest to where ABBA are from, you tell us, have ABBA been robbed here?

[A]

I mean, I think it is very strange not to include them in a Swedish cultural canon. Right.

[B]

Especially since they're literally the first thing anybody would think of.

[A]

Exactly. I think they are probably, perhaps, with the exception of ikea, the most famous Swedish export, and they are really iconic. And also, I think this 50 year rule is a little strange because there are definitely modern classics that I think everyone would recognize as.

[B]

And also so Mamma Mia. Is, God help us, literally 50 years old.

[A]

Right? Yeah. So, I don't know. I mean, it seems really arbitrary.

[B]

Maybe they could have put early ABBA on the list.

[A]

Indeed. I mean, maybe the authors of the list for some reason are ABBA haters or. I don't know, there's more famous Swedish music, not that I can name it.

[B]

But there is not. I mean, there's plenty of good Swedish music and I do not even count myself, Robyn, a massive fan of abba, but come on.

[C]

Yeah, I mean, for me, it stinks of a bit of kind of the old days of Sweden and how the people behind this list and behind this kind of concept want to highlight what they regard as the best of the country as it is at the moment. And I think there are many people who would disagree. But it's a fine line, isn't it? I mean, it's a matter of months. Come on.

[B]

Yeah.

[C]

And in terms of Sweden's soft power, I mean, it's undeniable that that band Collective continues to be a huge influence.

[B]

It is absolutely bizarre. Things that did make the list include ikea, Pippi Longstocking, the Nobel Prize and the Seventh Seal, all of which. Okay, fine, but here is where I think, Marion, we have to grapple with possibly the slightly sinister aspect of this. This is an initiative of the Swedish Democrats, who are a fairly cranky right wing nationalist party who don't much care for foreigners. And there is some suggestion that the 50 year rule has been imposed to exclude the considerable contribution of immigrants to modern Sweden, because most of those people, of course, have a arrived since 1975.

[A]

I mean, that's an interesting narrative in its own right, right? I mean, I'm not an expert on modern Swedish history, but I wouldn't be surprised if there has been migration to Sweden, if only from Finland and Norway, for much longer than that period. And also, I mean, Sweden for a really long time was quite an imperial power that spent a lot of time in other bits of Europe. And normally if you have imperial powers, that also means that, you know, people from the bits that you've conquered move back to the heartland for economic prosperity. And so. So I think not much about this narrative holds up and it does sound a bit dodgy, as if they're essentially just trying to create a sort of purist Swedish narrative that actually doesn't really hold up to scrutiny.

[B]

Is there something useful about enterprises like this, Robyn? Even if we, I mean, if we extend to them the assumption that this was all done with the best of intentions to try and both recognise and celebrate, you know, what a particular nation has contributed and build something around that, because I can. Years ago the BBC did that thing to determine the hundred greatest Britons, which I did actually think ended up being quite an interesting exercise. They did make the mistake of asking the general public, which is never ever a good idea, with the absurd result that I'm pretty sure I recall Princess Diana being in the top 10.

[C]

Is this a kind of Churchill comes top or the Queens the same time?

[B]

Pretty sure Churchill came top. I can't remember all the top 10. Churchill was in There Newton, Shakespeare, Isambard Kingdom, Brunel, Elizabeth I, and I think, actually Oliver Cromwell.

[C]

Can you imagine the paperwork that would go into that now? Can you imagine the bureaucracy? Can you imagine the meetings?

[B]

There would be uproar. I mean, Marion, I do recall at the same time as well, Germany undertook a similar exercise, but had to lay down some pretty hard and fast rules about certain people you just weren't allowed to vote for.

[C]

But competing narratives, let's not call this an alternative narrative. Competing narratives of a country's past are not uncommon, are they? You know, Xi Jinping, China. The Communist Party in China since 1949, has placed a lot of stock in rewriting history and the concept of revisionism and how important that is to owning the future. And partly that is what this exercise is about, a celebration of what these people think Sweden's biggest cultural achievements are and how maybe that can be a guide to the future as well. But there's no. Is there a Saab or a Swedish fish in there?

[B]

I mean, I'm not sure, to be honest. If Volvo or Saab got up to the gate, they should have, obviously. I mean, I do recall, Marion, a similar undertaking in my own homeland of Australia many years ago to try and find, like, a poll for, like, the greatest Australians. The top three places, I'm not kidding. And I was actually kind of pleased by this. And I forget the exact order, but they were filled by Sir Donald Bradman, who was a cricket player, Ned Kelly, who was a bush ranger or what we call a highwayman, and Far Lap, who was a racehorse. And I'd actually think. I actually thought, yeah, that's. That, that's kind of us. But you were going back to that. Going back to that point you were making about imperial countries or countries with big immigrant populations. Is there necessarily anything bad about a thing like this? Again, if it's done in good faith in a way that's actually kind of welcoming to new arrivals, saying, this is who we are, this is what we have done.

[A]

I mean, I think as long as you don't then impose the list on everyone in some sort of a, you know, this is our culture and you must consume it kind of a way. Clearly, it has generated a lot of discussion in Sweden. And I think looking at yourself, looking at your national identity, how you conceive of it, who's included, who's excluded on occasion, is a really healthy thing. And if you have that debate in a healthy way, then I think that can actually be a really good way of allowing the country to move forward. I mean, I know in Germany it keeps coming up, you know, the extent to which Germans who are not white can consider themselves German and so on. That's something that a lot of Germans still really struggle with. And I think, you know, that's like for the country in order to move forward. That's a really healthy conversation to have, especially if you think about one of the most famous German foods being done, kebab. And so I think, you know, especially for countries where perhaps their imperial legacy is a little farther in the past, such as Sweden. So you might not have as much of a recent experience of migration as the UK does, for example. I think it's a really good thing to think about what it means to, to be your national identity and how you can make that fit for the 21st century, how you can make that fit for essentially being a really vibrant democracy.

[B]

Well, to Japan now, whose airports and airlines are justly famous for ranking among those least likely to lose your luggage. The same, it seems, cannot be said for their customers. Japan's airports are somewhat beleaguered by a bewildering surge in abandoned suitcases, specifically suitcases dumped by passengers who have discovered that they they exceed the limits for carry on bags. Between Narita, Chubu and Kansai airports, There were nearly 2,000 such derelictions in the last fiscal year, each one necessitating investigation by police to check it contains nothing hazardous and then storage and or disposal. Robyn, I will ask you first, have you ever at check in got into a row about a baggage allowance?

[C]

No. This is crazy. They got a small row with someone from an airline I won't name last year who decided that our bag was too big at the gate. But now it turns out these people are being given a commission to, to pick certain people out. But we'll set that aside. I'm also someone whose bags, when we came back from China en famille, were all lost at Paris Charles de Gaulle. It was a very traumatic kind of three month wait for us. But finally they turn up late at night in a van and give you your baggage back. I do wonder if there's something a bit more to this, actually. You know, there are plenty of people that go to Seoul, they go to Japan, some from mainland China, other places for a day of shopping, usually skincare products. I've seen these people, they pile them into the cases at the airport and often there's a little bit of a last minute reshuffle of goods and some stuff goes into one bag, goes into another bag and stuff gets set Aside, I just can't believe that people are willing, particularly with the cost of some of this kit, some of it which appears in monoclonal on a regular basis. I'm willing to leave this stuff at the side of the check in desk and just kind of abandon it and walk away.

[B]

See Marion, I've never had one of these roused because I am a checker in of bags. I don't think my time is so valuable that I cannot afford to spend 20 minutes waiting for my bag to get off the plane. And I get incredibly irritated by those people who seem to find it necessary to take literally everything they own on board for like an hour long flight to Munich. That said, the last time I did fly anywhere within Europe, my bags got lost in both directions by airlines which I will not name, but do both come from countries which are actually proverbial for their efficiency. So who knows what's going on there? My favorite, I did. I wasn't there. I was told that this had happened by a friend of mine because it was somebody traveling within his film crew who got told that he, he would have to pay extra to check in his flak jacket because they were going somewhere where, you know, such things were necessary. He didn't want to do that. Instead what he did was just put it on and wore it on the plane because they can't charge you for what you're wearing. But this is by way of bringing in my own prejudice to this, Marion, which is I think seriously, people should just check their bags in and everybody should be allowed to bring a book on board. That's it.

[A]

Oh, I mean, I'm unfortunately on the completely other end of the spectrum to you on this. I mean, like, look, my work travel is probably horrendous for the environment. I travel a lot for work. A lot of my trips are in Europe and a lot of them are sort of like, you know, you arrive on a Monday, you fly back on a Wednesday. So I neither really have the time to wait for lost luggage to get to my hotel, nor do I usually have the patience if I'm going to a Ministry of Foreign affairs or Ministry of Defense meeting to, I don't know, run to H and M at 7am to like buy a suit jacket because all I have is like the jeans and top I wore on the flight. So I'm a very efficient traveler. I always have like my cabin suitcase or cabin bag perfectly packed. You know, like I'm very quick getting through security. So hopefully I'm not one of the people that would annoy you on a flight.

[B]

But I do like, oh, everybody annoys me on a flight, though.

[A]

Fair enough. I can only imagine 95% of the time I like, I'm in and out, like very quickly, but I do always have my cabin suitcase on.

[B]

I just want to come back finally on this to your hypothesis, Robin, because I think you may have cracked the mystery here. Is it your assumption that people are going shopping, not calculating how big the bag is or how much it weighs, being told what it would cost to take it on the plane and have realized that's more than I spent on the stuff in the case?

[A]

Yeah.

[C]

I think this is shoppers. I mean, just to go back quickly to your point, though, I think the issue here is not so much your own choices about your baggage, it's the airlines don't want Andrews, do they really? They want more of you because they don't want to have to pay for the stuff to come out, out of under the hole. But yeah, I think it could possibly, particularly in that part of the world, be about people who have gone shopping.

[B]

Well, I think we've cleared that up. The nation of Japan thanks you, Robyn. Robyn Brandt and Marion Mesmer, thank you both for joining us. Finally on today's show, our on this Day historical series reflects upon the founding of one of the world's least likely countries. Obviously, borders are important. We would not fight over them if they weren't. Borders can also be, however, arbitrary, whimsical, even nonsensical, accretions of history and happenstance. There are few better demonstrations of this than the borders of the country founded, so legend insists, on this day, 17, 24 years ago. The most serene Republic of San Marino, to rejoice in its official title, is not quite the smallest country on earth, either by size or population, though the holder of both those titles, Vatican City, is only an afternoon's drive away. San Marino is basically a hilltop in Italy, specifically Mount Titano, about an hour by bus from Rimini. San Marino occupies roughly the same amount of territory as the London Borough of Richmond upon Thames, and is home to fewer people than Oak Creek, Wisconsin, which, to be clear, is not a lot. Large town, big hello to all our listeners in Oak Creek, Wisconsin, childhood home of Gordon Gano of Violent Femmes. Absolutely none of any of which, nor any of what may ensue is intended as any slight upon the most serene Republic of San Marino, which this broadcaster had caused to visit for Monocle magazine in 2017 and found delightful. The Secretary of State for Foreign affairs, who is probably also the milkman gave me a very nice tote bag emblazoned with the San Marines coat of arms. And San Marino was otherwise basically all the good stuff about Italy. Plus, for five euros, someone in the tourist office will put a visa stamp in your passport, which will guarantee many future conversations with customs officials all over the world. Not altogether persuaded that San Marino is a real place. But it is, with its own national anthem and everything. Well, okay, not quite everything. San Marino does also have its own flag, its own government, its own passports, its own post office, its own police, its own national broadcaster, its own military, which includes, quaintly, a crossbow corps and its own legendarily useless football team, who did, in Fairness, back in 1990, 1993, do the funniest thing in the history of World cup qualifiers.

[C]

Oh, there's a mistake by Pierce and humiliation here, Gualtieri. I was going to say that San Marino conceded a goal in the opening seconds against Holland. Well, it's England that have conceded a goal here.

[B]

England, the big spoilsports went on to score seven on that same visit in 2000, 2017, incidentally, I saw San Marino get belted eight nil by Norway. San Marino also sends an ambassador to the United nations, athletes to the Olympics and musicians to Eurovision. The best they've ever done is 19th with a song by Turkish ringing Serhat in 2019. But let's hear it for San Marino's own three time Eurovision songbird, Valentina Morgan Monetta, who finished 24th in 2014 with this. But San Marino's 34,000 or so locals speak Italian, eat Italian food, why would anybody not and spend euros? San Marino is not actual. A member of the EU, it narrowly voted yes in a referendum in 2013, but on a turnout insufficient to validate the result. But there are nevertheless a few euro coins in circulation with San Marinet's imagery engraved upon them. September 3rd is a holiday called Foundation Day in San Marino. So happy Foundation Day to all Those who celebrate, etc. Today in San Marino there will have been parades, fireworks, marching, military bands, a crossbow display and a Mass at the Basilica del Santo, which beneath its altar in a reliquary bust, contains what is said to be a chunk of the skull of St Marinus, the founder of the nation. Marinus was a Christian stonemason from Rab, an island in the Adriatic Sea, now part of Croatia, whose shores you can glimpse from San Marino's battlements. On a clear day, wearied of being pestered by the Romans about his faith, Marinus fled to Rimini, where he became wearied of being pestered by a local lunatic who insisted she was his wife. In 301 AD, Marinus scarpered up the mountain and built a monastery, arguably not unreasonably in the circumstances. San Marino's present borders were established in the 1460s, that is, more than four centuries before the unification of Italy. When Pope Pius II awarded the tiny republic a handful of towns around Mount Titano and one other Feitano joined of its own accord. There was an attempt in 1543 by some local noble to conquer it, but his cavalry got lost in fog and San Marino was occupied in 1739 by the Papal governor of Ravenna. But after a few months, Pope Clement XII instructed him to go back down the hill, give or take some crossfire and refugee inflows. During World War II, San Marino has been pretty much left alone and has left everyone else alone. And ever since, both the luxury and necessity of a small nation, perhaps, but not a bad example to which others might aspire. Happy birthday, San Marino. And that is all for this edition of the Monocle Daily. Thanks to our panelists today, Marion Messmer and Robin Brad. Today's show was produced by Monica Lillis and researched by Henry King. Our sound engineer was Elliot Greenfield. I'm Andrew Muller here in London, the Daily Island. Back at the same time tomorrow. Thanks for listening.