In-depth reporting of international aid results

Rasmus Giertz (SD)

Madam Speaker! Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine is not only an attack on a single, independent state. It is an attack on Europe's security, on international law, and on every nation's right to determine its own future. Therefore, Sweden's support for Ukraine is not only a matter of solidarity but also a matter of Swedish and European security.

Russia has restructured its entire society for a protracted conflict with the West, and according to various assessors, Ukraine is only the beginning. A Ukraine that resists Russian aggression, that strengthens its resilience, and that step by step approaches the European community also contributes to a safer Sweden.

The government's communication demonstrates the breadth of the Swedish support for Ukraine. It concerns humanitarian support for people affected by the war and support for essential societal functions, but also long-term reforms, reconstruction, and strengthened resilience. It is precisely that combination that is important. Ukraine needs to be able to manage the acute consequences of the war here and now, while at the same time the country step by step builds a stronger, freer, and more European society for the future.

Mr. Speaker! When it comes to reforms, the committee shares the government's assessment regarding the importance of continued strong, long-term, and coordinated support for Ukraine. Despite very difficult circumstances, Ukraine has continued to carry out extensive reform work. This concerns the principles of the rule of law, anti-corruption work, economic development, decentralization, environment and climate, digitalization, and other reform areas that are central to the country's long-term development.

It is important to be clear that a future EU membership requires reforms. It requires that Ukraine fulfills the requirements that follow from the membership process. But it is equally important to be clear that Ukraine belongs in Europe and that Sweden shall be an active partner in that process.

Since 2022, Sweden has provided reform support within 28 of the 35 negotiation chapters that form the basis of the EU's membership negotiations. This shows that Sweden does not only express support in words but also contributes concretely to strengthening Ukraine's institutions and reform capacity.

It is a responsible line. We shall support Ukraine, but we shall also stand firm that an EU rapprochement must be built on real reforms and the principles of the rule of law, as well as on the fulfillment of the membership requirements.

Mr. Speaker! The committee also addresses the extensive environmental damage that Russia's war has caused. Destroyed infrastructure, contaminated land, debris, and damaged ecosystems are part of the war's long-term consequences. Here, Sweden has an important role to play, not least through expertise in waste management, environmental legislation, and sustainable management.

It is good that Sweden contributes to strengthening Ukraine's capacity even in this area. At the same time, suspected war crimes must be documented and investigated. Russia must be held accountable for its aggression and for the consequences that the war has had, both for people and for the environment.

Another part concerns mine clearance. Ukraine is one of the world's most mined countries. It creates suffering for the civilian population and hinders agriculture, transport, reconstruction, and everyday life.

Sweden has for several years provided support for mine clearance in Ukraine. During the years 2022 to 2024, Swedish support has, among other things, contributed to the clearance of land, mapping of mined areas, equipment for Ukraine's Mine Action Centre, and training of over 22,000 people on the risks of mines. Sweden has also provided 209 million kronor to UNDP's program for civil mine management. This is a concrete example of aid that makes a difference. It saves lives, enables reconstruction, and strengthens Ukraine's ability to regain control over its own territory.

Mr. Speaker! When it comes to the design of the support, the committee's line is clear. The support to Ukraine shall be long-term, flexible, and effective. The government's reform agenda emphasizes exactly this: that the aid shall be characterized by long-term perspective, transparency, and clearer results. It is a direction that we Sverigedemokrater welcome.

Swedish aid must be able to be followed up, and it must be possible to see results. It should not be about symbolic politics or about measuring success in how much money is paid out. The decisive factor is what the support actually achieves.

In Ukraine, the results are clear. Through support to the state budget, Sweden has contributed to maintaining basic societal functions and macroeconomic stability. Through humanitarian aid, people have received food, emergency housing, healthcare, and support for livelihoods. Through reform support, Sweden has contributed to Ukraine's long-term democratic and institutional development.

It is also important that the aid is seen as an integrated part of the foreign policy. Ukraine is the government's primary foreign policy priority. That is reasonable, because what is at stake in Ukraine is not isolated to Ukraine. It is about whether borders in Europe can be moved by force. It is about whether authoritarian states can dictate the future of their neighboring countries. It is about security in our own part of the world. Therefore, the support for Ukraine is also an investment in Sweden's security.

Mr. Speaker! The report also addresses equality as well as women and security. The committee welcomes the gender equality perspective and that it is integrated into the Swedish aid to Ukraine. This is important, not least because a country at war needs to utilize the strength of the entire population in the defense, reconstruction, and social development.

Swedish support has, among other things, been channeled through UN Women, which has worked with state actors, the security sector, and women's organizations. Initiatives have contributed to strengthened female leadership within the defense and security sector and to the implementation of Ukraine's national action plans for women, peace, and security in accordance with UN resolution 1325.

Sweden has also supported civil society's capacity in Ukraine's reform process, including in issues of gender mainstreaming and rights perspectives. Through UNFPA, support has been provided to gender equality work within the education sector, and through the National Democratic Institute, interventions have contributed to increased inclusion of women in political processes. That is good. But even here, we should stick to the principle that aid should be results-oriented.

Gender equality work should not be reduced to percentage targets or administrative markers. It is important that the efforts strengthen Ukraine's resilience, protect vulnerable people, contribute to reconstruction, and strengthen the country's democratic development. It is also therefore correct for the committee not to propose new announcements in the area. There is already work in place. The government reports results, and Sweden contributes. The focus should now be on continuing to deliver support that works in practice.

Mr. Speaker! Sweden shall stand on Ukraine's side. We shall support Ukraine's right to defend its sovereignty and territorial integrity. We shall contribute to the country's reconstruction and reform work. We shall work to ensure that Russia is held accountable. We shall simultaneously ensure that Swedish tax funds are used effectively, transparently, and with clear results. That is precisely why the government's deepened reporting of results is important. The Riksdag needs to be able to follow up on what the aid leads to. The citizens have the right to know how the resources are used. Ukraine has the right to support that is sustained, effective, and adapted to the country's actual needs.

Mr. Speaker! Ukraine's fight is Europe's fight. A strong Ukraine is a prerequisite for a safer Europe and thus also for a safer Sweden. With that said, I move for approval of the committee's proposal in the report.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Anna Lasses (C)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you very much to Rasmus Giertz for a largely very good speech! I agree with much of what was raised, but I still have a short question.

Twice during the past week, the Sweden Democrats have, in different ways, opened up to zeroing out aid. I wonder how one thinks regarding specifically Ukraine. I know that we share the view that Ukraine really needs support. Predictable and clear support for Ukraine was needed. How do the Sweden Democrats think regarding this?

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Rasmus Giertz (SD)

Mr. Speaker! As I said in my speech, Ukraine is the government's, as well as the Sweden Democrats', primary foreign policy priority.

The Sweden Democrats were the party that first and most clearly went out and announced that we are for strong and effective support for Ukraine. That is also our continued position.

Now I do not know exactly which statements Anna Lasses is referring to, but there is probably no party that has been clearer than the Sverigedemokraterna regarding what we believe about the support for Ukraine.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Anna Lasses (C)

Mr. Speaker! It was precisely because the Sweden Democrats have been very clear on this issue that I became a bit confused. Statements have been made by your own party leader in Ekots Saturday interview, and today, since a few hours ago, it states in several places that one is opening up for a zeroing of the aid.

May I interpret the member's statement as that even though the Sweden Democrats intend to significantly reduce aid, they will remain committed to the support for Ukraine?

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Rasmus Giertz (SD)

Mr. Speaker! The Sweden Democrats will stand firm in their support for Ukraine.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Azra Muranovic (S)

Mr. Speaker! Yesterday, together with Nordic Ukraine Forum, I met three Ukrainian human rights activists, Dmitro, who lives in Ireland, Olena, and Aishe. One of them has her children in Russian prisons. Another has managed to escape from Russian forced labor. The first thing they said when I met them was that it was nice to come to Sweden and meet Swedes, because here they do not need to explain why aid to Ukraine is needed and why Ukraine needs Sweden's support.

There are moments in history when international solidarity is not only a moral obligation but also a matter of our own security. The Russian full-scale invasion of Ukraine is just such a moment. It is about a brutal attack on a free and democratic country. It is about an attack on the rules-based world order, on Europe's security, and on the total international law. Therefore, Sweden's support for Ukraine has been right from the very beginning and from the first day, when the Social Democrats were still in government.

It is important that we also talk about the results of the aid, because sometimes it is discussed as something vague, as if it is only about money disappearing without any effect whatsoever. This report shows something completely different. It shows that the support makes a concrete difference.

Sweden's support has contributed to maintaining societal functions in Ukraine. It has contributed to humanitarian aid for people on the move. It has contributed to demining, energy supply, healthcare and reconstruction. It has contributed to psychosocial support for children. It has contributed to reforms that bring Ukraine closer to a future EU membership. This is important not only for Ukraine. It is very important for Sweden, for the Nordic countries and for Europe.

Ukraine's campaign is ultimately about which security order shall prevail on our continent. If Russia's aggression is allowed to win ground, it will have consequences far beyond Ukraine's borders. Therefore, it is absolutely in Sweden's long-term security policy interest that Ukraine can defend its sovereignty and continue its path towards democracy, the rule of law, and European integration.

Mr. Speaker! The Social Democrats have been clear that the support for Ukraine must be long-term and sustained and continue as long as the Ukrainians need it. In our reservation in the report, we highlight that Ukraine belongs in the European community and that the EU must give clear and long-term commitments regarding continued support. This is not a conflict that will be decided within a few months. It has been ongoing for several years and will continue to be ongoing for a longer period. Furthermore, this, as said, is about Europe's future over a long period to come.

I think it is important when we talk about aid that we have the ability to hold two thoughts in our heads at the same time. While the war in Ukraine continues, we also see how developments in the world in general have gone in the wrong direction. The number of conflicts is increasing. Democracies are becoming fewer. Hunger is increasing in several parts of the world. Climate change is driving instability and humanitarian disasters.

We see a trend where international aid is decreasing globally, and unfortunately, Sweden is no exception to that development. We need to be able to discuss international aid seriously. Support for Ukraine must never be weighed against the world's poorest people and occur at the expense of the poorest and most vulnerable countries in the world.

One does not have to exclude the other – on the contrary. International aid is not only about humanitarian solidarity but also about long-term security policy. When people gain access to education, healthcare, and livelihoods, societies are strengthened. When democratic movements receive support, the resilience against authoritarian forces is strengthened. When institutions function, the risk of corruption, conflicts, and the collapse of states decreases.

It is how peaceful and stable societies are built, and it is also important for Sweden. We know that instability in our global environment also affects us here at home, which we have clearly seen over the past year. Conflicts lead to large flows of refugees. Climate disasters create economic and humanitarian crises. Weak states become breeding grounds for organized crime, extremism, and security threats that also reach Sweden.

Therefore, we need to see aid policy as part of a broader foreign and security policy. Aid should not be seen as alms or charity, but as an investment in peace, stability, and human security.

It is here that I think the report shows something very important, namely that aid can be both acute and long-term at the same time. In Ukraine, Sweden has supported people in the midst of a war but also contributed to reforms, institutions, reconstruction, and democratic development. It is precisely that combination that makes the aid effective.

Mr. Speaker! In a time when the world is becoming more uncertain, Sweden does not need less international engagement, but more strategic international responsibility. We need to continue to stand strong behind Ukraine, but we also need to continue to stand up for people in the world's poorest and most vulnerable countries.

That is how we build security in the long run. It is not only something that is morally right to do, but it is actually also very wise security policy.

(Applause)

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Katarina Tolgfors (M)

Mr. Speaker! Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine on 24 February 2022 changed the European security order in a single stroke. In August 2023, I, together with two other members of the Swedish Riksdag, was invited by the Speaker of Ukraine to visit the country. It is a visit and a journey that I will carry with me when I leave the Riksdag.

The people of Ukraine have since fought not only for their own freedom and independence but also for Europe's security, for democracy and for the international rule of law. Sweden has stood by Ukraine from day one, and Sweden will continue to stand by Ukraine.

It is therefore very important that we today debate the Committee on Foreign Affairs' report 2025/26:97 on the Swedish support to Ukraine, which totaled approximately 100 billion kronor from 2022–2025, of which the civil and humanitarian aid constituted 25 billion kronor.

Mr. Speaker! In the government's communication, an account is given of Sweden's support to Ukraine. It is an important part of transparency and important information for the Riksdag and the Swedish taxpayers.

The report shows that the Swedish support has primarily been well-executed, relevant, and effective. Sweden has been able to act quickly, flexibly, and long-term in a situation where the needs are enormous and have changed over time. It is about humanitarian aid to people who have lost their homes. It is about support to Ukraine's state budget so that teachers, healthcare personnel, and essential societal functions have been able to continue functioning in the midst of a burning war. It is about the reconstruction of energy systems, water supply, and infrastructure after Russian attacks. It is about reform support that brings Ukraine closer to the EU and strengthens the fight against corruption and for the principles of the rule of law.

Measures targeted at women and children are particularly distinctive in the aid budget with support to organizations such as UN Women, International Rescue Committee and UNFPA and to children through Rädda Barnen, Röda Korset and other civil society organizations.

Mr. Speaker! The government has been clear: Ukraine is the primary foreign policy priority. This is also evident in the policy. Ukraine has become Sweden's largest recipient of aid while we have strengthened the cooperation between our countries. Ukraine is also a good partner that Sweden has come to know better during these difficult times for the country.

When a European country is attacked by an aggressive dictatorship, Europe must respond. Passivity would have been significantly more costly – both humanly, in terms of security policy, and economically.

The Swedish support has also not only been about meeting acute needs here and now. It has also been about Ukraine's future and, in the long run, Europe's future security order. It has been about reconstruction, about democratic reforms and about the path to EU membership. It is crucial. A strong and democratic Ukraine is the best answer to Putin's imperialism.

Mr. Speaker! The report presents the results within five central areas: the reconstruction of Ukrainian society, social reforms, security and stabilization, budget support, and humanitarian assistance.

It is clear that Sweden has contributed concretely and palpably, and it is good that there is broad support for this in Sweden's Riksdag. Swedish support has, for example, contributed to keeping schools open, strengthening energy supplies after Russian attacks, and giving people access to healthcare, food, and shelter. At the same time, Sweden has supported reforms for increased transparency, reduced corruption, and stronger institutions.

It is important to understand that this is interconnected. A country that defends itself against a war of aggression must simultaneously be able to function as a state. There must be electricity and water and functioning authorities. There must be hope for the future.

Mr. Speaker! In the communication, the government points out the importance of continued development of monitoring and reporting of results for aid in general, but also specifically to Ukraine. Taxpayers' money must be used responsibly. This applies always and perhaps especially in times of crises and war and large international commitments.

Therefore, it is positive that the government has developed the in-depth reporting to the Riksdag. It strengthens transparency, improves the possibility for follow-up, and provides better opportunities to draw lessons for the future.

Mr. Speaker! There is also a larger security policy dimension here. Ukraine is not only fighting for its own territory. Ukraine is also defending our and Europe's security. Every success for Ukraine is a setback for Russian aggression and authoritarian expansion.

That is why the support for Ukraine should not be seen as charity. It is an investment in our own security and in a freer Europe. We know that if Russia were to win this war, the consequences would be very serious. It would signal that wars of aggression pay off. It would make Europe more dangerous and have far-reaching consequences for international law and global stability. Therefore, the support must continue.

Mr. Speaker! Sweden has also shown something about Sweden during these years – about the solidarity and the strength we as a country can muster when we see that crisis and war affect not only our own but also our immediate surroundings.

The Swedish commitment has made a difference. We receive direct feedback from Ukraine on this in various ways, during the different meetings and dialogues we have at different levels. Most recently, the other day, we in the Swedish-Ukrainian network in the Riksdag met Ukraine's ambassador Svitlana Zalisjtjuk. She, as well as her representatives and also parliamentarians, soldiers, civil society workers, women, men, and other Ukrainian representatives whom I and my colleagues have had the opportunity to meet, also show Ukraine's gratitude and that Sweden's commitment is seen as part of a long-term cooperation.

In the midst of all the darkness, there is also something hopeful, Mr. Speaker: Ukraine's resilience. Despite war, terror bombings, and enormous sacrifices, people continue to work, study, run businesses, and fight for their country and for their and Europe's future. It deserves our respect and our continued support.

Mr. Speaker! I notify you already now that in my final debate contribution in the Swedish Riksdag, I may run over time slightly.

The report shows that Sweden's support for Ukraine has largely functioned well and that we also have important lessons to learn. But above all, this is about something greater than figures and reports. The support for Ukraine is about which side of history Sweden should stand on. The Moderates and the government are clear. Sweden stands on the side of freedom, democracy, and Ukraine. As long as Ukraine fights for its freedom, Sweden shall continue to stand by their side. Slava Ukraini!

Mr. Speaker! In conclusion, I would like to thank the Speaker's Presidium and also my parliamentary colleagues from all parties in the Committee on Foreign Affairs, for many and long debates on aid, foreign policy, and much more. I believe we can claim to be quite well-known in the Swedish Parliament as a committee that enjoys debating and discussing.

It has been a privilege to serve in this committee during this term, during a time that has been unnecessarily exciting in every way. We live in a restless world, where Sweden plays a role. So thanks also to the voters and the Swedish people who stand behind the strong support for Ukraine!

(Applause)

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Lotta Johnsson Fornarve (V)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Katarina Tolgfors, for the speech! If I interpret Katarina Tolgfors correctly, this was this member's last speech. I also want to take the opportunity to thank you for the good cooperation and all the debates we have had in exchanges of remarks, but also for many exciting and interesting joint journeys. Thank you for that!

I also want to take the opportunity to ask a slightly more tricky question, while we are standing here anyway. It concerns the aid to Ukraine. We are in complete agreement regarding the support for Ukraine. I am extremely pleased that all political parties in Sweden's Riksdag stand completely united when it comes to the importance of continuing to support Ukraine in all conceivable ways – militarily, humanitarily, economically, and in every way – for as long as it is needed. There is no doubt whatsoever about where we stand.

But at the same time, we see how the world's most vulnerable and poor people are finding it increasingly difficult, not least due to the withdrawn support from the USA. It is estimated that 34 million people are left without support just because the American support has been withdrawn, and 14 million risk dying. In that case, I think it is strange that Sweden's government leaves the one percent goal and reduces its international aid as drastically as it actually does. It is about nearly 20 billion in aid that disappears, which would need to go to the poorest and most vulnerable people in the world to at least contribute a little bit to meeting the enormously difficult situation they face.

That is why I mean that the aid to Ukraine should be additional. It should not be taken from the regular international aid, but here one should find other funds to support Ukraine. How does the member view that?

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Katarina Tolgfors (M)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Member Johnsson Fornarve, for the question! And thank you for all the good debates and for the company on the various study trips we have been on!

When it comes to aid in general, which this report is not actually about, I can be honest and say, as I have done many times in this speaker's chair, that Sweden is carrying out a reform of Swedish aid, where we place more weight on humanitarian aid and review development aid. It is responsible to do so in these times. We must make priorities.

That the USA and other countries are not increasing their aid and, in the case of the USA, are instead drastically reducing it is regrettable, but it is not something that Sweden can compensate for. When it comes to aid, it is exactly like when it comes to security in Europe: Europe must step forward. More countries in Europe must give more.

I also note, which I have also pointed out many times in this chamber, that the shadow budget that the Social Democrats are presenting, which I assume the Left Party would support in the event of a change of government, does not reach the one percent goal either.

This government ensures that we have a budget framework. It is predictable for everyone. We ensure that quality is increased, that different levels are removed, and that more money goes to those in need, to humanitarian and acute interventions but also to development efforts where we see that it actually does good and generates economic development and sustainable support in the form of development aid.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Lotta Johnsson Fornarve (V)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you for the answer, Katarina Tolgfors!

The Speaker says that we must make priorities, and I agree with that; we must always prioritize. It is naturally very important that tax money is used in a good way. But then I think it is strange that the government prioritizes lowering the tax for those who earn the most, when we see what the needs in the world look like, how child poverty is increasing, how children risk starving to death, and how equality is receding. Why does one choose to lower the tax for the very richest instead of maintaining a generous and good international aid?

This is not just about some kind of moral questions, even though they are naturally very important, but it is also about global security. When we turn our backs on Africa, it means that China and Russia increase their engagement in those countries and that undemocratic forces gain more influence on the African continent. It is also a global security risk for us. In the long term, it is therefore very foolish not to continue to have an engagement in the poorest and most vulnerable countries in the world.

Europe must step forward, says Tolgfors, and I naturally agree with that. But then Sweden should be able to lead by example, show the way and go in the lead. Instead of reducing, Sweden should increase its aid.

I still think it would be appropriate that we try to find additional funds to support Ukraine regarding humanitarian aid and development aid and do not let the world's poorest and most vulnerable people contribute to this.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Katarina Tolgfors (M)

Mr. Speaker! This is almost becoming a general political debate. But if I am to answer the question about lowering the tax, I can tell you that the Social Democrat-led Region Örebro län yesterday – or was it perhaps today – went out and announced that they will lower the tax in the region. It is my home region. This is done for a reason, and it is believed that this lowering of the tax also generates growth, opportunities for investments, and other things that will subsequently benefit the welfare.

But now the debate today is about Sweden's support for Ukraine. From the opposition, I have heard that you want to see alternative financing models. However, throughout the entire parliamentary term, as long as the issue has been relevant, I have not seen any concrete proposal at all from your side on what such a financing should look like.

That Sweden has a financing of the aid to Ukraine builds credibility and an opportunity for control. It is democratically anchored, and it shows that Sweden as a nation also supports Ukraine and also wants to develop cooperation in a long-term way.

This is something that I consider to be quite obvious. You yourselves have voted through all the support packages in Sweden's Riksdag. If one wants to see a different financing model, I would very much like to take part in a concrete plan for this. I have not seen that during these years so far.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Azra Muranovic (S)

Mr. Speaker! Thanks to Member Tolgfors for these four years! As she herself says, it has truly been an honor to work in the Committee on Foreign Affairs under the special circumstances prevailing in the world. It has been a historical period, I would like to say.

But let me return to the question of aid. What Katarina Tolgfors said in her speech sounded very good. Several times she also pointed out that aid is not just about charity but also has to do with security. In Ukraine's case, this is quite clear.

But it becomes very strange when the Moderates, on the one hand, during this weekend have run a campaign where aid, which among other things goes to Ukraine, is pitted against Swedish elderly, and on the other hand, a few days later speak of the aid to Ukraine as decisive for Swedish security.

My question is actually very short and concise: Does this perspective only apply to Europe and Ukraine, or does it also apply to people in Sudan, Gaza, Yemen and so on?

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Katarina Tolgfors (M)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Member, for the question! I also thank you for good cooperation during these years and for sharp but good debates.

The Leader of the House speaks about security and stability. That is, of course, why we provide aid. Aid is a tool to contribute to stability. For it to be sustainable, one must also set counter-requirements on the countries. One must also ensure that aid is provided in a way that is also sustainable.

We can see many examples over the years where Sweden has contributed with aid but where one cannot see the results that one would wish for when we contribute with Swedish tax money to try to help, support, and combat poverty.

In the shadow budget, we cannot see that the Social Democrats have particularly much larger appropriations for aid. You do not reach the one percent goal.

When it comes to priorities, the Moderaterna have clearly communicated that it is precisely priorities that politics is about. These are difficult priorities, where one obviously many times wishes that one had had the opportunity to, like you, promise everything to everyone. But we do not do that, because we take responsibility for the state budget. We take responsibility for the aid funds, and we ensure that they are directed where they have the best possibility to grow and have a sustainable effect.

We also set requirements that countries that receive Swedish aid, often in the billions, also act so that we see that this actually leads to democratization and that human rights are supported and that women and children are supported and so on. It is reasonable.

We take responsibility, and we prioritize in tough times.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Azra Muranovic (S)

Mr. Speaker! Now I received many answers to questions that I did not ask.

When it comes to responsibility for the state budget, which the Moderates speak about, we differ when it comes to what we consider to be responsible. The Social Democrats do not think that enormous tax cuts, moreover with borrowed money, for those who have a high income is particularly responsible. We also do not think that the high unemployment or the cut growth in Sweden is a responsible financing policy, and deficits in the state budget are absolutely not counted as responsible fiscal policy.

But that is not what this is about. It is also not about the one percent goal. That was not what I asked about.

What I asked about concerns the fact that Tolgfors, in his speech, acknowledged what many of us have already said, namely that international aid is not a side issue or charity policy but a part of building peace, stability, and security, including security for Sweden.

At the same time, we saw Ulf Kristersson last week out there contrasting the aid with the elderly in the Swedish population. My question then is: When one views aid as a security policy action and as peacebuilding and stability building – does one have that perspective only when it concerns Ukraine, or does it also apply to aid in other countries? I repeat again that I mean countries such as Gaza, Sudan, or Yemen. Or is it seen as pure charity? Will the elderly in these countries be set against Swedish elderly?

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Katarina Tolgfors (M)

Mr. Speaker! Now it was the member himself who raised questions concerning the state budget in general and how we prioritize. That was what I answered.

Tax cuts can we now see also in S-led regions. They are doing the same and lowering the tax now. We could have a different debate about that.

When it comes to priorities in aid, it is quite crystal clear. Sweden is one of the largest donors in the EU when it comes to Gaza and Sudan. We are there and see what must be prioritized. It is also done based on the needs in the country. It is not just about numbers and about dividing up which priorities we want to make, but we listen to what the need is.

In Ukraine, we maintain a very close dialogue. What we direct our aid to in Ukraine – that is what this report is about – is based on the needs that we see Ukraine has. The same applies to Gaza and Sudan. There, Sweden is at the forefront among all countries in the EU when it comes to support for those in need and so that the acute situation in these areas can be improved somewhat.

I think this government clearly shows that one can prioritize and do so where it is most acute and where it is also sustainable and, in the long term, can provide a return on the tax money that Sweden contributes to fight poverty, to save lives, and so that other countries can move from poverty to a better society with democracy and human rights, where the principles of the rule of law apply. This is stated very clearly both in the foreign policy declaration and in the aid agenda.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Anna Lasses (C)

Mr. Speaker! I did not intend to take a reply to Katarina Tolgfors, and it will probably not be a real reply either. I just wanted to say a big thank you, quite honestly, to Katarina Tolgfors for a very good cooperation. I think it is important to show here in the Riksdag that we are also colleagues, even if we are from different parties and perhaps do not always agree with each other. I have also never doubted Member Tolgfors' commitment to aid, even though we have prioritized differently in the matter.

Many thanks for four very interesting years!

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Katarina Tolgfors (M)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you very much, Member Lasses!

We sit in a committee that I believe is a bit different from other committees. We actually often strive to find some kind of common line and position. It is quite unreasonable for Sweden to have five different positions when it comes to foreign policy in the large and important issues.

I appreciate that Member Lasses is always well-prepared and her genuine commitment to these issues. I also appreciate the atmosphere we can have in the Committee on Foreign Affairs, even though we have had some tough debates on certain issues during this parliamentary term. We can actually also discuss our way toward a consensus and a line where it is important that we in Sweden stand strong together.

Thank you very much!

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Lotta Johnsson Fornarve (V)

Mr. Speaker! Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine is a violation of international law and a humanitarian catastrophe. The Russian invasion and occupation is a flagrant breach of the principles of peace, détente, and international cooperation. Russia's attack is unprovoked, illegal, and unjustifiable. Russia violates Ukraine's territorial integrity, sovereignty, and culture and subjects the Ukrainian people to great suffering that will affect generations of Ukrainians.

People's right to live in peace and security is unconditional, and every country's ability to govern its own future must be defended. The people of Ukraine cannot be left alone with the Russian military superiority. With support in international law and the UN Charter, Vänsterpartiet stands behind Sweden's military, economic, and humanitarian support to Ukraine. We are extremely pleased that there is a consensus in the Swedish Riksdag regarding the important support to Ukraine.

Sweden will, of course, contribute actively to a just peace in Ukraine. It is only the population of Ukraine that has the right to decide on Ukraine's future. All talks and plans for peace must include Ukraine and take place on Ukraine's terms.

Violations of international law must have consequences. Vänsterpartiet therefore supports the sanctions against Russia and has done so ever since the annexation of Crimea in 2014. We want to tighten the sanctions further and put a stop to the Russian shadow fleet in the Baltic Sea.

Mr. Speaker! As a result of the war, many Ukrainian refugees have come to Sweden, but here many live under tough economic conditions due to the government's increasingly strict policy. Vänsterpartiet is deeply critical of this and has several times proposed measures and improvements.

Mr. Speaker! The support from the EU to Ukraine needs to be comprehensive and long-term. The EU currently has special representatives for a number of countries and regions. As part of this, we therefore believe that the EU should also appoint a special representative for Ukraine.

It is pleasing that the Ukrainian parliament has now approved the Rome Statute and that as of 1 January 2025, it is joined to the International Criminal Court, ICC, so that any war crimes committed by all parties can be investigated.

Mr. Speaker! War always involves a major environmental impact. It is shattered infrastructure, collapsed energy systems, destroyed agriculture, increased greenhouse gas emissions, contaminated soil, and contaminated water. The laws of war establish that only military targets may be attacked. Since the environment is counted as a civilian target, it must be protected. But FOI notes that Russia does not follow the laws of war. One example is the Russian destruction of the Kakhovka Dam in 2023. Tens of thousands of people had their homes flooded, and the drinking water supply collapsed. Fighting near Europe's largest nuclear power plant, Zaporizhzhia, has led to great concern not only in Ukraine but in all of Europe.

Environmental consideration and ecological sustainability must be a central part of the reconstruction of the country. Sweden should work together with Ukraine to document the environmental crimes that have been committed to ensure an ecologically sustainable reconstruction of the country and that Russia is held accountable for the environmental damages it has caused.

Mr. Speaker! The government's account clearly shows the extensive and long-lasting consequences that landmines cause. Mines continue to kill and injure people and hinder reconstruction for a long time. It underscores the need to not only support demining but also to clearly uphold and defend the international ban on landmines.

Mr. Speaker! The Government, with the support of the Sweden Democrats, has decided to abandon the one percent goal in aid, which has been fixed for decades. This has meant a drastic reduction of international aid at a time when the needs are greater than ever. That Sweden's government, with the support of the Sweden Democrats, has thrown the one percent goal overboard is a betrayal of the millions of people in the world who are in need of international aid.

The government has also chosen to concentrate Sweden's international aid on the EU's neighborhood and Europe, especially Ukraine. The government has, among other things, terminated aid to a number of the world's poorest countries in Africa and Asia. This will have catastrophic consequences for some of the world's most vulnerable people.

Mr. Speaker! The situation in Ukraine is acute. Russia's war of aggression has caused extensive devastation and torn families apart. Tens of thousands of civilians have been killed or injured. Children have been traumatized. That Ukraine needs international support is obvious. Sweden has every opportunity to play an important role both regarding humanitarian aid and for the reconstruction.

At the same time, a number of other crises, wars, and conflicts are ongoing around the world. When the government withdraws the rug for important aid projects in other countries, it is women, children, and vulnerable groups who are hit hardest. Vänsterpartiet believes, therefore, that the support to Ukraine must take the form of additional funds, that is, beyond the existing aid budget. We demand that the government shall return with a strategy for this.

In the Government's Strategy for Sweden's Reconstruction and Reform Cooperation with Ukraine 2023–2027, equality is included as one of the goals that Sida's activities shall contribute to. At the same time, Sweden's commitment to equality linked to aid is decreasing. This is noticeable both in the aid policy generally and in the support to Ukraine.

Ukraine is now the largest recipient country regarding Swedish aid. The Foundation Kvinna till Kvinnas upcoming audit in 2026 shows that the proportion of aid to Ukraine with equality as the main purpose for 2025 was only 1.7 percent. The proportion with equality as a main or partial purpose is a total of 32 percent. This is less than half of the aid in total.

UN Resolution 1325 on women, peace and security stipulates, among other things, that all peace efforts shall take into account the different security needs of women and men and that all reconstruction processes after wars and conflicts shall have a gender perspective. Equality is fundamental to building a stable and long-term sustainable peace. The Government should therefore return with a strategy for how UN Resolution 1325 on women, peace and security shall be implemented in Sweden's support for Ukraine.

The government's dismantling of the feminist foreign policy has had clear consequences. Sweden should aim for at least 50 percent of the aid to Ukraine to go to girls and women.

The government has allocated funds for activities that benefit women and girls in Ukraine. The support shall, among other things, contribute to psychosocial support, strengthened maternal healthcare, and protection for women's sexual and reproductive health and rights, SRHR. It is of course very good, but in relation to Sweden's total support to Ukraine, it constitutes a vanishingly small part. Vänsterpartiet wants the proportion of aid allocated for work with sexual and reproductive health and rights, SRHR, to constitute at least 10 percent of the total aid budget and that it should also increase in the humanitarian aid.

With this, I move for approval of reservation 3 and reservation 6, which is a joint reservation. We naturally stand behind all our reservations.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Rasmus Giertz (SD)

Mr. Speaker! I think it is worth reminding us of the history in this debate. Vänsterpartiet expresses in its reservation criticism that aid funds within the EU have been "opened up to finance military activities." Vänsterpartiet also raises the question of whether the support for Ukraine should be financed with extra funds and warns that an increased focus on Ukraine and Europe could push out other aid efforts.

It is naturally reasonable to discuss how the support is designed and monitored and how Swedish and European funds are used. But in Ukraine's case, it is not possible to pretend that humanitarian support, reform support, economic support, and military support would be completely decoupled from one another. Without military resilience, there will be no reconstruction to speak of. Then there are no reforms to implement and no functioning state to support.

When Ukraine at the beginning of the full-scale invasion needed weapons to defend itself against the Russian aggression, Vänsterpartiet was the only party in the Riksdag that said no to sending armored vehicles to Ukraine. It was only after extensive criticism that the party changed its position.

The Sweden Democrats had a different starting point. We argued early on that Ukraine should receive the support required to defend its freedom and sovereignty. Even before the full-scale invasion, the Sweden Democrats raised the issue of Swedish arms exports to Ukraine.

It is important that the aid is used effectively and transparently, but it is also important to understand the reality that Ukraine is in. Ukraine is fighting not only for its own survival but also for Europe's security. Therefore, I believe the Left Party's position becomes somewhat problematic. They say they want to support Ukraine but are repeatedly opposed to the tools that are actually required to be able to stand up to Russia.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Lotta Johnsson Fornarve (V)

Mr. Speaker! I thank Member Rasmus Giertz for the question. I want to be extremely clear that Vänsterpartiet stands behind the support for Ukraine in all ways: militarily, humanitarily, and economically. There should be no doubt whatsoever about where we stand on that issue. I am glad that there is unity in Sweden's Riksdag regarding the important support for Ukraine.

Of course, this support also has significance for us in Sweden. We are fully aware of that. We find ourselves in a new security policy situation, where the support for Ukraine is extremely important. Russia must absolutely not win this war. It would have a major impact on the security situation in our surroundings.

However, we believe that the international aid to Ukraine should be additional. We want Sweden to provide generous humanitarian aid to Ukraine. But just as we have borrowed money for the military support, we could perhaps also borrow money for the international aid to Ukraine or in other ways find additional funds that are not taken from the international aid.

To begin with, you could have refrained from cutting our international aid as dramatically as you have, because it has withdrawn funds. It is almost 20 billion that has disappeared from international aid. These funds would have done great good given how things look in the world today. The need for aid is greater than ever.

Now it is no secret that the Sweden Democrats would have gladly halved the international aid. We must be clear about that. The Left Party, instead, wants to stand up for generous international aid both to Ukraine and to the rest of the world. It is needed, and we have the opportunity. As a rich country, we can do both.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Rasmus Giertz (SD)

Mr. Speaker! It is good that the member now says that the Left Party supports even military support to Ukraine. Ukraine's defense against the Russian aggression depends on a number of different things, and the military resistance is a very important part. But then it is strange that the Left Party still opposes opening up EU aid funds to finance military activities, something that would have truly had an effect on the ground in Ukraine. I do not quite understand how the member reconciles this. On one hand, one says one supports this, and on the other hand, one is against it and even expresses reservations against it in the report.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Lotta Johnsson Fornarve (V)

Mr. Speaker! I thank Rasmus Giertz for further questions. We stand 100 percent behind the Swedish military support to Ukraine. We also believe that Europe can contribute significantly more to the military. It is naturally incredibly important that Ukraine is given the opportunity to defend itself.

But aid funds shall be used for aid and not for other things. It is very important to distinguish between that. We mean, as I have explained earlier, that we must find another way to aid Ukraine than by taking funds from international aid, because the need for aid is as great as it is today. We see how the USA and other countries have withdrawn their aid, which means that millions of people now risk being left without aid. Millions of people risk dying because of withdrawn international aid – this is for real. Then we, as a rich country, must be able to do more and do it better in order to aid the most vulnerable and poor people in the world. At the same time, we shall, of course, continue to support Ukraine with everything that is required and needed.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Magnus Berntsson (KD)

Mr. Speaker! Today we are debating the Committee on Foreign Affairs' report on the government's in-depth reporting of the international aid to Ukraine. It is an important document. It is not only about Sweden's support for a country fighting for its freedom and survival, but also about Sweden's and all of Europe's security.

When Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, Europe's security situation changed fundamentally. A European country was subjected to an unprovoked attack. Civilians were killed. Cities were bombed. Millions of people were forced to leave their homes. But Ukraine did not surrender. The Ukrainian people chose to defend their freedom, their democracy, and their right to decide for themselves over their country's future.

Since then, Sweden has stood by Ukraine's side. We have done so through military support, humanitarian support, economic support, and extensive aid efforts. The support is not just an expression of solidarity. It is an expression of responsibility. A free and independent Ukraine is crucial for Europe's security and thus also for Sweden's security.

Mr. Speaker! What makes this report particularly valuable is that it goes beyond the reporting of how much money has been paid out. The focus is instead on the results. In the political debate, we often speak of resources and appropriations, and that is natural, but citizens also have the right to know what their tax money leads to. Do the interventions yield results, and do they make a difference for the people? Do they contribute to the goals that have been set?

This in-depth reporting of results shows that the answer is yes. Swedish aid has contributed to the fact that society-critical infrastructure has been able to be restored after Russian attacks. People have gained access to electricity, heating, and water. Several of us here have visited attacked combined heat and power plants on-site in Ukraine. We have also seen how municipalities and local authorities have been able to continue to function and how schools, healthcare, and community services have been able to be maintained despite the pressures of the war.

Sweden has also contributed to strengthening Ukraine's institutions and reform work. This is of great importance, not least against the background of Ukraine's ambition to become a member of the European Union. The path to membership requires reforms within the area of the rule of law, strengthened administration, and measures against corruption. Here, Swedish support has played an important role.

The communication also shows that humanitarian efforts have reached people who are in very difficult situations. Internally displaced persons, children, the elderly, and persons with disabilities have received help when the needs were greatest. It is about concrete results. People have had their living conditions improved, community functions have been able to continue functioning, and a country has received better opportunities to withstand aggression and build its future.

Mr. Speaker! For several years, better reporting of results within aid has been requested. This communication is an important step in this direction. It contributes to increasing transparency and provides better opportunities to evaluate which interventions work well and which can be further developed. It strengthens confidence in the aid policy, and it strengthens the possibility of using the resources in the best way.

It is important to remember that the support for Ukraine is about more than just reconstruction and humanitarian efforts. It is ultimately about values. Russia's war is an attack on the rules-based world order. It is an attack on the principle that borders may not be moved by force, and it is an attack against democracy, human rights, and national self-determination. When Sweden supports Ukraine, we are therefore not just defending a single country. We are defending the principles upon which the European security order rests.

We also know that the reconstruction of Ukraine will become one of the greatest tasks of our time. When the war ends one day, housing, roads, energy systems, and social institutions will need to be rebuilt on a large scale. Reconstruction, however, is not just about buildings and infrastructure. It is also about strengthening democracy, the rule of law, and civil society, as well as creating the conditions for a free, democratic, and European Ukraine.

Mr. Speaker! The work on accountability must also continue. Russia's war crimes must not be forgotten, and those responsible must be held to account. Documentation of abuses, support for legal processes, and international cooperation for accountability are important parts of the long-term support for Ukraine. A peace without justice risks being short-lived, and therefore reconstruction and justice must go hand in hand.

In a time when the world is characterized by uncertainty, conflicts, and increased geopolitical tensions, Sweden needs to stand firm in its support for Ukraine. We must not grow weary or hesitate, and we must not also get used to the war.

The communication we are discussing today shows that Swedish efforts make a difference. It shows that solidarity and responsibility go hand in hand.

The Christian Democrats move for approval of the committee's proposal.

(Applause)

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Anna Lasses (C)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Magnus Berntsson, for an absolutely excellent speech!

We agree with each other, that's how it is, and I must say that the Center Party and the Christian Democrats have, for the most part during this parliamentary term, stood quite close to each other on aid issues.

Now we have heard from the Sweden Democrats that they will stand by the support for Ukraine, but in light of the statements that have been made by the Sweden Democrats over the past week, I must nevertheless ask if the Christian Democrats will agree that all aid shall go to Ukraine and that the rest of the aid shall disappear.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Magnus Berntsson (KD)

Mr. Speaker! I would first like to thank Member Lasses for the kind words. I agree that we have had common ground on many issues and respectful conversations on the issues where we have not been entirely in agreement.

For the Christian Democrats, aid policy is a very important issue, and as everyone knows, we have stood – and stand – behind the one percent goal and want us to return to it. We naturally had a major discussion before the government was formed, both regarding the levels of aid and, not least, the content of the aid.

These things must be discussed in the same breath, because the level of aid alone does not create the effects you want. The aid must also go to the right things, and I truly think we Christian Democrats have succeeded in getting many things in. We ensure that the aid has more effect by having a larger proportion go through civil society actors.

I do not need to mince words in that we have had different opinions than a number of the parties in the government coalition. The Christian Democrats, however, want long-term and clear assistance.

Naturally, the effects of us having a war in our vicinity must be reflected in the Swedish aid policy. This is tragic – especially since we have seen that other countries have made different assessments. It is not only the USA that has withdrawn aid to other parts of the world, but the United Kingdom and other countries have also done so. This is therefore an important measure to continue working with, but we must also build partnerships.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Anna Lasses (C)

Mr. Speaker! I thank the member for the answer. I am pleased to hear that the Christian Democrats, both in content and objective, stand by their principle regarding the aid. I can only hope that this also has a positive effect during and after the election campaign.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Magnus Berntsson (KD)

Mr. Speaker! I thank you for those words and look forward to our parties being able to continue to discuss and cooperate in the areas where it is possible, also in the future.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Anna Lasses (C)

Mr. Speaker! Ukraine's cause is ours. We all agree that Ukraine is Sweden's most important foreign policy issue. I would therefore like to begin by expressing my and the Center Party's wholehearted support for the government's work regarding supporting Ukraine in every way.

It is about support to stand up against Russia's unjust war, support to arm the Ukrainians in their everyday lives so that they can endure and to provide hope for the future, support so that the kidnapped children shall be returned as quickly as possible, and support so that Ukraine shall become a member of the EU as soon as possible.

It cannot be said often enough: The situation in Ukraine is about the security of all of Europe and about the democratic values that we all stand up for. I have therefore always been careful to emphasize that what the opposition parties do is not primarily to offer criticism against the government in this area, but to push and highlight such things as might be lacking and such things that one can do even more of – and a little better.

We know today that Russia will not give up until it has exhausted everything it has, and it also does not want to stop at just Ukraine. When the time comes and we have actually won, support will be needed to rebuild Ukraine. We need to find a method to provide Ukraine with long-term and, above all, predictable support both now and after the war.

We in the Center Party have therefore proposed that a loan-financed fund be established alongside the ordinary budget. The fund shall correspond to 1 percent of GDP and cover both military and civilian support to Ukraine. At least one third shall go to aid and other civilian support. In this way, we lift the aid to Ukraine out of the regular aid budget. In addition to the financing becoming long-term, clear, and predictable in this way, this means that the regular aid budget can be used for projects in the rest of the world.

Mr. Speaker! I now want to deviate from the topic, because it is important to see the whole picture and the consequences of Sweden now focusing an ever larger part of the aid to Ukraine. This is happening in a world where democracy is retreating, human rights are retreating, conflicts are long-lasting, and the climate is changing ever faster. In short: the needs for support are increasing while aid globally is decreasing.

One can of course think that this is not only Sweden's responsibility, and that is entirely true. But that thing with shifting the responsibility onto others does not work. One can only take responsibility for one's own actions, and Sweden is de facto a major aid donor, which implies a responsibility for how we act but also gives us influence in a world where all forms of power are becoming an increasingly important thing to hold.

Furthermore, I want to say to a government that emphasizes the link between migration and aid, for such a link truly exists: If aid decreases globally, it contributes to poorer living conditions and thus increased migration. We can already see this just one year after the US's aid slaughter and other countries' reduced aid, and we will see more of this the longer time passes, the more the climate changes strike, and the more the aid decreases.

So back to our one percent fund, which therefore both guarantees long-term and predictable support to Ukraine and ensures that Sweden will also continue to be a relevant actor globally. Long-term support is particularly important to ensure that Ukraine joins the EU as soon as possible, and I know that we all agree on how crucial it is for all our security but also because we need the strength and creativity that Ukraine shows despite its situation.

By following what is happening in Ukraine, I am convinced that a Ukrainian membership will become an injection into Europe when it comes to faith in the future and innovation, and there is truly a momentum right now to go as far as possible in that process. It shall, of course, occur on Ukraine's own merits, and we shall help as much as we can to make it possible. I am not worried, because it will happen. It must also be highlighted that in that process, the equally ambitious sister country Moldova will also, of course, be included.

Even though I think the government in general is doing a good job with Sweden's support to Ukraine, there are some question marks.

The first is the local work with sister cities, that is to say, Swedish municipalities and regions working with corresponding parties in Ukraine. It cannot be emphasized enough how important this exchange is. Our municipalities can provide support regarding how to work with democracy in everyday life, with structures and administration, and not least against corruption, and in this way contribute to the process for Ukraine to become a member of the EU moving faster. At the same time, the municipalities in Ukraine can give us invaluable knowledge on how to work with preparedness.

It seems, however, that the government is beginning to withdraw the funds that have been important for this form of aid work, not least through its decision which means that the International Centre for Local Democracy, ICLD, which has had this work as its main task, is being shut down.

The second question mark is equality. No matter how you turn it, one can observe that the support for projects that fully or partially work with equality in Ukraine has decreased. This happens despite the fact that we know how crucial it is to push for equality both while the war is ongoing and when society is to be rebuilt afterwards. The fighters, predominantly men, return home with severe traumas while the women have kept society running for many years so that it would function. We know that violence in close relationships increases then. We also know that women are exposed during the war itself.

It is also about women's participation in all sectors and all the way up to the negotiations that take place politically during and after wars.

The aid to Ukraine shows how important and decisive aid can be. It builds faith in the future and the strength to resist authoritarian forces. It builds security, hope, and safety locally and globally. Today it is Ukraine, but also many other places in the world that have difficult conflicts, and we must never set these against each other completely but must be able to think of both.

I have now highlighted some areas where I and the Center Party believe that the support for Ukraine can be improved.

Mr. Speaker! I conclude where I began. We all stand united for Ukraine's cause. Slava Ukraini!

I move for approval of reservation 4, regarding a one percent fund for Ukraine.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Fredrik Malm (L)

Mr. Speaker! Tonight, explosions occurred in a number of places in the Russian Federation with large fires resulting from these attacks. A military airfield in Voronezh, near Kharkiv, was attacked by Ukrainian rockets and missiles. An oil refinery in Tuapse on the coast of the Black Sea, near Krasnodar, was attacked. This refinery has already been attacked by Ukraine four times during the spring. A factory that repairs Russian military aircraft in Taganrog, Rostov oblast, was also attacked. Facilities in Crimea, including a factory in Sevastopol, were also attacked.

This shows that Russia is getting nowhere in this war and that Ukraine today has the capacity to strike across practically all of Russia, against logistics lines, support lines, Russian ports for the Russian terror army, refineries, depots and weapons factories – even against regiments where Russian FSB agents are located.

This is one of the results of the world supporting Ukraine, and it is absolutely necessary that we continue to do so.

This relationship was described at the beginning of the war as unequal because wealthier countries provide donations to Ukraine so that Ukraine can stand on its own feet. That is very much the case, and Ukraine is standing on its own feet. But today, the relationship is much more equal. What Ukraine has achieved thanks to the world's support and through innovation and development of its own production of drones, air defense, robot systems, and so on, will be absolutely decisive for security in all of Europe. Ukraine has a quarter as many inhabitants as Russia. Sweden has a quarter as many inhabitants as Ukraine. Finland has half as many inhabitants as Sweden, thus a one-eighth as many inhabitants as Ukraine. If the war moves further north in the future, Ukraine's development regarding precisely drones and warfare – that is, the ability to wage war, if I express myself a bit loosely, low-budget and asymmetrical with tremendous success – will be important.

This means, as said, that Russia is practically going nowhere in the war. Let me take the city of Kupiansk in eastern Ukraine as an example. In an attempt to infiltrate behind the Ukrainian front lines, Russia uses old oil pipelines, which are up to 15 kilometers long and 1–1.20 meters wide. For over a year, Russia has forced soldiers into these pipelines, and they have to crawl 15 kilometers to try to get out onto the Ukrainian side. But many die or commit suicide in there. The Ukrainian drone pilots say that the soldiers have ten minutes to act when they come out before they are shot down by Ukrainian drones around the city of Kupiansk. This shows how enormously desperate Russia is and that they have no respect whatsoever for human life.

Mr. Speaker! Sweden has so far provided approximately 130 billion Swedish kronor in support to Ukraine, of which 100 billion is military support and approximately 28 billion is civilian support, and it is absolutely crucial for Ukraine and for Europe that we maintain our support.

Mr. Speaker! Let me tell you briefly about Olena Jahupova. I know that Azra from the Socialdemokraterna also raised it earlier. Olena is Ukrainian. She worked at the regional government in Kamianka-Dniprovska in Ukraine. She was a completely ordinary civil servant, and she was arrested in October 2022 after Russia occupied her city.

She was placed with 14 other prisoners in a space intended for three people. She was tortured with electric shocks on all parts of her body. She was subjected to sexual violence by the Russian guards. She was tied to a chair and beaten on the head, back, and neck. She now has artificial parts in her spine after an operation because her entire back was destroyed by the Russian terrorists.

After that, Mr. Speaker, she was forced to make a confession on camera stating that she had helped the Ukrainian army. The so-called confession was broadcast via the state Russian news agency Ria Novosti. She was subsequently placed in a labor camp where she was made to dig trenches, build bunkers, and clear mines. She was released after five months and managed, via Estonia and Latvia, to get out of Russia and back to Ukraine.

How Russia acts towards the civilian population in Ukraine is something that many are not aware of, Mr. Speaker. Tens of thousands of Ukrainians – completely ordinary civilians who have lived in the occupied areas – have been arrested, imprisoned, tortured, and forced into confessions such as the one Olena made. After that, they have been forced into labor camps, similar to what was done during the Stalin era, in the steel industry, mines, and so on throughout Russia. That is how civilians are used today.

I saw a figure, Mr. Speaker: 16,000. Those are the persons who are known because relatives have reported to the Ukrainian authorities that they have been taken prisoner by Russia, but the dark figure is likely large. The relatives themselves may be in the occupied territories or be dead and so on, which means that there are likely significantly many more ordinary Ukrainian civilians who today are forced to dig trenches for Russian soldiers in pure concentration camps.

This also has to do with aid, Mr. Speaker, insofar as we internationally need to continue to push to get legal systems, mechanisms or collaborations – call it what you will – to be able to judge persons who are responsible for these war crimes.

We know that after the wars in the Balkans, many who were butchers in Bosnia and so on were convicted. We know that a number of people were convicted after the war in Rwanda in the 90s, but we know that very few have been convicted after the war in Syria. Bashar al-Assad is, for example, in Moscow or somewhere in Russia. We also see that after other wars, those who are responsible for horrific atrocities against the civilian population have not been convicted.

Finally, Mr. Speaker, I shall briefly state a few things. I regret that I have exceeded my speaking time slightly.

Something mentioned by previous speakers is that, within the framework of the extensive support for Ukraine, support the country in its process of becoming an EU member. Ukraine applied for EU membership very shortly after the full-scale invasion, just a few days later, and negotiations began in the summer of 2024, in the midst of a burning war. More support was needed there.

We do not know when Ukraine can become a member of the EU. For Sweden's part, it took four years, and for Croatia, it required ten years of negotiations before it became an EU member. We do not know, therefore, but it must be very clear from the Swedish side that it is only a full membership for Ukraine that counts.

Last but not least, Mr. Speaker, it is very good that there is a consensus in Sweden's Riksdag regarding the support for Ukraine. It has not always been so in decisive situations in our country historically. During the 20th century, there were three formative, decisive crossroads that our country was faced with.

The first was the democratization, when we introduced universal and equal suffrage. At that time, the Riksdag was not in agreement, but the right was opposed.

The second was World War II and our relationship to it. At that time, the Riksdag was also not in agreement, as the communists wanted to make Sweden a Soviet republic and stood behind Joseph Stalin, the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact, and the attack on Finland.

The third formative event, Mr. Speaker, was when Sweden became a member of the European Union. At that time, there were several parliamentary parties that were opposed.

Now, during this century, we have the first similar formative event – a crossroads for Sweden – where it is about standing on the right side of history, namely our relationship to the war in Ukraine and the Russian dictatorship. It is very good for Sweden that all eight parties in the Riksdag stand behind this. It is the first time during the last 150 years that Sweden's Riksdag is actually completely united on a truly decisive issue.

(Applause)

(ANDRE VICE TALMANNEN: I must remind the member that the reported speaking time was exceeded by more than 50 percent.)

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Jacob Risberg (MP)

Mr. Speaker! Ukraine is not only fighting for its own freedom. Ukraine is fighting for democracy, the principles of the rule of law, and for a free and secure Europe. In this, Sweden's support is crucial.

That is why it is both right and necessary that Sweden's support for Ukraine is strong and long-term. Miljöpartiet has stood behind all support packages. We do so out of solidarity but also because it is in our own interest to defend peace, justice, and freedom in Europe.

At the same time, it is not enough that the support is extensive. It must also be correctly designed. This is precisely what we have to discuss today, as we deal with the government's enhanced reporting of results.

Mr. Speaker! One of the strengths in the Swedish aid policy has been that we do not only look at volume but also at content and results. We do not only ask ourselves how much support is given, but what the support actually achieves and what values it is based on.

In the Miljöpartiet's follow-up motion, we highlight two areas where the government's reporting raises important questions: gender equality and women's rights, as well as mine clearance and respect for the Ottawa Treaty.

Let me begin with equality, Mr. Speaker. The Government emphasizes in its communication that Ukraine's path towards EU membership requires strong work for democracy, the rule of law, and fundamental rights. This is correct, but precisely because of that, it is worrying that the level of ambition regarding equality appears to have been lowered.

It appears from the communication that part of the funding has gone to democracy, human rights and equality. But at the same time, other analyses show that the proportion of aid with equality as a main or partial objective has decreased sharply.

This is not a matter of detail. It is about something fundamental. Equality is not an option. It is a basic prerequisite for a democratic and sustainable society. When women are excluded from decision-making, from economic empowerment, or from reconstruction, the capacity of the entire society is weakened. When gender-based violence is not met with targeted interventions, there is a risk that the abuses will continue in silence. And when women's organizations do not receive support, we lose carriers of change at the local level.

Mr. Speaker! In a previous interpellation debate on gender equality in aid, Minister for Development Cooperation Dousa argued that broad societal interventions, for example for infrastructure and energy supply, also benefit women. And yes, they naturally do. But it is a rather flippant view of what gender equality is.

Gender equality work is not about women indirectly receiving the same support as men. It is about making power structures visible and changing them. It is about ensuring that women can actually participate – on equal terms – in politics, in the economy, and in the reconstruction of their country. It is about targeted measures against gender-related violence. It is about support for women's organizing. It is about economic empowerment. It is about safety.

In other words: General measures and targeted equality measures are not in opposition to each other. They must go hand in hand. This becomes particularly important precisely in Ukraine, Mr. Speaker. The country is in the middle of a war but also in the middle of a reform process towards EU membership. And the EU is built on clear requirements for equality, human rights, and the rule of law.

If equality is deprioritized, it risks weakening Ukraine's reform capacity. It risks undermining the conditions for a long-term sustainable and democratic society. Therefore, Miljöpartiet argues that the government needs to re-establish a systematic gender equality perspective in the aid to Ukraine.

We want to see strengthened support for women's organizations, increased focus on women's political participation, powerful measures against sexual and gender-related violence, support for women's economic empowerment and, not least, an open and transparent reporting of how gender equality is actually prioritized in aid.

Mr. Speaker! Let me move on to the second part of our follow-up motion: mine clearance and respect for the Ottawa Treaty. The problem with mines in Ukraine is extensive, to say the least. The country is described as the most mined in the world.

Mines threaten people's lives every day. But they also do something more. They prevent people from returning home. They make agricultural land unusable. They strike at food security. They stop transport and economic activity. And they delay reconstruction, sometimes for decades.

Sweden's support for mine clearance is therefore both important and necessary. It saves lives here and now. It enables return. It makes it possible to cultivate land again and to restart the economy. Miljöpartiet clearly stands behind this support.

Mr. Speaker! Since the consequences of mines are so clear, we must also draw the political conclusions. Personnel mines are not just one weapon among others. They are weapons that continue to kill long after the war has moved on. They leave behind a legacy of suffering, injuries, and economic stagnation. They shift the costs onto future generations. And they create a long-term aid dependency in the form of clearance, care, and reconstruction. For this very reason, the international community has agreed on the Ottawa Treaty, a ban on personnel mines.

Mr. Speaker! The Ottawa Convention has been a success. It has contributed to stopping the production and use of mines in large parts of the world. It has led to millions of mines being destroyed, and it has saved lives.

International norms are not self-evident, however. They must be defended at all times. When respect for the prohibition is weakened, we risk moving backwards. And if more actors were to start using antipersonnel mines again, we will face even greater humanitarian catastrophes and even greater future aid needs.

Mr. Speaker! That is why Miljöpartiet believes that the support for mine clearance must be combined with a clear political stance: Respect for the Ottawa Treaty must be upheld.

Clearing mines saves lives today. Defending the ban saves lives tomorrow. It is a matter of both humanity and long-term responsibility.

Mr. Speaker! Sweden's support for Ukraine is crucial, and it must continue to be strong. But the strength of the support is not measured only in kronor and öre. It is also measured in which values we stand up for. When it comes to equality, we must not back down. When it comes to international humanitarian law, we must not waver. And when it comes to the reconstruction of Ukraine, we must ensure that it becomes sustainable, democratic, and inclusive for the entire population. That is what the Green Party's accompanying motion and reservations are about: to stand up for Ukraine fully.

With that, I would like to take the opportunity to move for approval of reservation 5.

The deliberation was hereby concluded.

(Decisions were made under § 14.)

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)