Many countries today produce a security 'strategy' document to cover the full range of military and non-military challenges facing them. By their nature such policy papers deserve careful parliamentary scrutiny, but do they receive it?  A case-study from the five Nordic states shows that governance arrangements for strategy-making vary considerably and sometimes leave parliament only a limited role.  This does not necessarily mean the strategies themselves are wrong, but it does underline the problem of updating parliamentary roles to keep pace with new security practices.