International cooperation

Mattias Karlsson (SD)

Madam Speaker! Let me begin by moving to approve the committee's proposal in the report.

We have gathered to discuss the Committee on Foreign Affairs' report UU1, which concerns expenditure area 5 International cooperation. The overall and, in my opinion, heart-felt goal of this expenditure area in the budget is to secure Sweden's interests in relation to other countries. It is a task that in recent years has unfortunately become increasingly complicated to fulfill as the rules-based world order, which was established following the Western powers' victories in World War II and the Cold War, has increasingly been openly challenged and replaced by an increasingly multipolar and amoral order.

We simply unfortunately live in a much more unpredictable world, where the threat situation against Sweden and our country's interests is more complex and multifaceted than before. A more multifaceted threat situation must, naturally, also be met with a number of different tools, in a number of different ways.

One of the most fundamental measures is to ensure that powers that wish us harm are not allowed to infiltrate our country. In this regard, the Inspectorate for Strategic Products, ISP, plays an important role. The agency's task, which includes among other things the review of potentially harmful foreign direct investments and the maintenance of targeted international sanctions against destabilizing forces in the world, is central to the country's security. I am pleased that the Sverigedemokraterna and the government share a common view regarding the need to increase support for this activity. At the same time, I am surprised and concerned that parts of the left-wing opposition want to reduce this support.

Madam Speaker! Good relations and, in particular, very good neighbors are another important component in strengthening Sweden's safety and security. The Sweden Democrats' view is that when we are forced to look outward for support in a restless time, we should primarily turn inward toward our Nordic friends.

We are pleased that the Nordic cooperation during the past parliamentary term has taken new important steps forward. We are proud but not satisfied. We want to see more steps towards deepened Nordic cooperation. Therefore, we take, among other things, the initiative for the establishment of a new Nordic foreign and security commission – a proposal that, gladly, won the Riksdag's approval earlier this year.

Just as important as strengthening ties with our closest allies is maintaining the resistance against those who threaten Swedish core values and Swedish interests and who undermine security, freedom, equality, and democracy in the world. Violent Islamism is and remains, alongside Russian imperialism, one of the primary threats to peace and security in the world. The Iran-supported terror sectors Ansar Allah, Hamas, and Hezbollah have created serious conflicts and destruction around them in the Middle East in recent years.

The growth and emergence of the violence-seeking Islamist groups in the Sahel region, Nigeria, and Somalia is deeply worrying. Recently, the number of fatalities from Islamist violence in Africa over the last decade exceeded 150,000 human lives. We know from bitter experience that the Islamist violence will sooner or later also find its way to Sweden and Europe.

The Sweden Democrats will unswervingly work to ensure that the fight against violent Islamism is maintained high on the agenda within all the multilateral organizations in which Sweden is a member, some of which are addressed in this report.

Madam Speaker! A completely decisive prerequisite for Sweden to be able to optimize the promotion of our interests in the world is that we are perceived as a stable and reliable partner. Unfortunately, there is a risk of deterioration in this regard if the red-green parties were to replace the Tidö parties at next year's election.

The proposal for the state budget that we are currently processing in parts will most likely be adopted by a majority in this chamber. That is how it has been with every proposal for the state budget since the Tidö parties took over. It is a result of compromises and negotiating skills, a sense of responsibility for the country, and a high degree of consensus on central issues.

It is worth contrasting this with how it looked during the previous mandate period when the red-green parties had a majority. The lack of ability to negotiate and reach consensus that was displayed then resulted in that they repeatedly failed to achieve the Riksdag's approval for their budget proposals, that the Prime Minister had to resign a few hours after she took office and then took office again, that the government had to be reshuffled and that the Social Democrats had to go to the Middle East and negotiate Sweden's state budget with Kurdish separatists to get support from a Left Party wild card in the Riksdag. This naturally damaged Sweden's reputation in the world. The latter action likely also contributed to complicating Sweden's Nato process.

If one is to judge by what has happened since then, by the budget process we are currently in the middle of, or by the specific statement in the report, very little has changed on the red-green side. Despite claiming to govern the country within less than a year, they have not succeeded in presenting the slightest semblance of a common budget proposal. The differences are greater than ever. Between the Centerpartiet and Vänsterpartiet budget proposals, there is now a difference of over 100 billion kronor. In this report, they have not succeeded in agreeing on a common figure in a single appropriation.

Even more serious than the economic differences, Madam Speaker, is the fact that the red-green parties do not even agree on the most important fundamentals of Swedish security policy.

In 2024, Sweden became a member of Nato. Given the fundamentally changed security situation, Russia's aggression, and Finland's choice, it was entirely correct and an entirely necessary step. Nato membership is and should for a very long time to come remain one of the most central cornerstones in Sweden's foreign and security policy. If this is what all the Tidö parties agree on. But that is not how it looks on the red-green side, Madam Speaker. In fact, half of the red-green parties that aspire to join the next left-wing government voted no to Swedish Nato membership and continue to be against it.

The security policy contradictions on the left side are so great that they even split the largest party on the left side. As recently as August this year, the Social Democratic Youth League took a position on a Swedish NATO membership at its congress. Against this background, it must be judged as highly uncertain what the foundations of Swedish security policy will look like after the next generational shift on the red-green side. This does not contribute to strengthening the image of Sweden as a stable, reliable, and long-term partner to our allies.

Madam Speaker! Since it is almost time for Christmas, I thought I would conclude in a somewhat brighter and more conciliatory tone. The report contains an account from the government on how it handled a notification from 2022 regarding fundamentally changing Sweden's foreign policy line towards Russia in the context of the illegal full-scale invasion of Ukraine. Had this whole matter not been so indescribably sad and tragic, one would almost have been tempted to crack a smile at the government's account. It feels so incredibly self-evident for all of us to be moved to agreement on the uncompromising condemnation of Russia's actions and the unreserved support for Ukraine. Of course, we fundamentally changed our line towards Russia collectively after their heinous behavior.

But when one takes a look out into the world and Europe, one unfortunately realizes that the unity we have here in this chamber is not at all completely self-evident. I therefore want to thank from the bottom of my heart all Swedish parties and all members of the Committee on Foreign Affairs for the conviction, perseverance, willpower, and passion that you all have demonstrated and continue to demonstrate every day in the Swedish support for Ukraine.

As long as the Ukrainian people want to continue fighting, they can count on continued unanimous Swedish support. When they one day achieve a hopefully dignified peace, they can count on unanimous Swedish support in the reconstruction of what the Russian dictator and his despicable allies have devastated.

I also want to take the opportunity to thank the Swedish people for the continued solidarity and willingness to provide assistance that they show towards Ukraine every day. Most of all, I naturally want to thank the Ukrainian people: Your courage and your longing for freedom are unparalleled. Your actions and your resistance will echo into eternity.

In this speech, Chris Dahlqvist (SD) agreed.

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

Morgan Johansson (S)

Madam Speaker! We shall return to the major issues regarding Ukraine, the USA, the Middle East and so on. But in my reply, I intended to focus on another issue. This report is about international cooperation. I intended to ask questions regarding cooperation with Somalia, which the government indeed has had.

It has been revealed that millions of Swedish tax kronor have gone straight into the Somali Prime Minister's office. This person – the Prime Minister – is both a Hamas supporter and an Islamist, and for that reason alone, this is extremely questionable. Furthermore, Somalia is one of the world's most corrupt countries.

The money was supposed to have gone towards employing people in Somalia with salaries of up to 100,000 kronor per month. When we ask questions about it, no one can answer who has been employed, what they are working on, and where the money has gone. When we have asked questions to the Foreign Minister, to Development Minister Benjamin Dousa, and to Sida's Director-General Jakob Granit, we have received no answers at all.

Today, Dagens Nyheter reveals that it has been discovered what the money has been used for. They have gone to what is called ghost services, which is apparently a method used in Somalia to pass money under the table to people who are not actually supposed to receive them. It concerns three individuals who are already employed at Somalia's Prime Minister's office and who are now said to have shared the millions from Sweden. It concerns cousins of the Prime Minister, one friend of the Prime Minister, and a senior advisor.

On Thursday, we requested that the committee summon IOM, UNDP, and the World Bank so that we could ask questions about this. This was voted down by the committee majority. I would therefore like to ask a question to Mattias Karlsson: Is he prepared to reconsider the decision and contribute to us being able to get to the bottom of where the money has gone now that he sees what has emerged in this affair?

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

Mattias Karlsson (SD)

Madam Speaker! To begin with, it is very pleasing that the Social Democrats and Member of Parliament Johansson now truly seem to be taking the links to Hamas and antisemitism seriously. It has not always been obvious. There was a time, not so long ago, when the Social Democrats were involved in inviting Hamas to the Swedish Riksdag. And the Social Democrats have, via the Palm Centre for years, poured money over the Fatah movement, which strikingly often engages in antisemitic outbursts and which aligns itself with its own antisemitic terrorist movement in the form of the al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades.

It is very good that Morgan Johansson now wants to draw a red line against all forms of links to Hamas and antisemitism. I welcome that.

I also welcome that Morgan Johansson and the Socialdemokrater want a stringent aid policy. It has not been entirely obvious over the years either. I read an article some time ago about how the Socialdemokrater, during their time in power, gave Zimbabwe's dictator Robert Mugabe almost 5 billion kronor straight into the state treasury.

Fundamentally, I am proud and happy that we have succeeded in reforming the Swedish aid policy and that Swedish taxpayers are now finally getting something out of Swedish aid. The Social Democrats and other left-wing parties have for years – for decades – spent Swedish taxpayers' money on more or less successful projects, but Swedish taxpayers have received nothing in return for it.

What has happened now is that one is trying to ensure that countries receiving Swedish aid will at least take back their rapists, their own citizens who have raped little girls in Sweden. That is what the project is about. I think that is completely obvious and reasonable.

Exactly what the details of that project have looked like, Morgan Johansson may ask the government about. I am not in the government. Morgan Johansson may perhaps get back to me on this in a year, when we hopefully are in government.

Regarding the question of an invitation to the committee, Morgan Johansson also knows that the Committee on Foreign Affairs does not deal with the type of in-depth investigation that was wanted to be pursued after already having had a number of hearings. The KU does, and that is where the question lies now.

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

Morgan Johansson (S)

Madam Speaker! Mattias Karlsson does not need to teach me how the Committee on the Constitution works. I have sat in KU. I know perfectly well what that review looks like. That review will come in the spring.

I also know that the members of KU welcome all information that comes to light ahead of the review that they are to conduct. The more we can do in the committee to really find out where these funds have gone, the better it naturally is for KU's review which is to be done in the spring, as said.

Mattias Karlsson talks about everything except exactly what this is actually about. If Mattias Karlsson is so eager that we should really get to the bottom of this and find out if aid money and other money have been spent correctly – it wasn't just about aid money but actually also about money directly from the Government Offices to the Somali Prime Minister's office – I wonder: Why is he not upset about reports that money has gone to these ghost services, individuals close to the Somali Prime Minister, who have received a share of millions of kronor of Swedish tax money. Why is he not eager to find out what is really hidden behind this?

We have, as members of Parliament, a mandate to follow up on where Swedish tax money is going. It is not about whether or not to sit in the government, but it is about our responsibility to monitor the government to ensure that Swedish taxpayers' money is used in a reasonable way.

Then I can also state that these bribe payments, as I assert they are, were well intended to try to get Somalia to accept its own citizens. But, Madam Speaker, that is no longer being done. They have stopped accepting their own citizens. On the other hand, they keep the money, over 100 million kronor that have been redirected from Swedish aid to Somalia, of which a good deal has ended up close to the Somali prime minister. They keep that money even though they no longer accept their own citizens. Sweden has simply been swindled out of that money. We should get to the bottom of that, Madam Speaker.

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

Mattias Karlsson (SD)

Madam Speaker! I find this somewhat remarkable given how many counterproductive aid projects Sweden has engaged in over the last decades, under, among other things, Social Democratic leadership. Then there is the one that upsets Member Johansson. When we received a briefing from the Director-General of Sida showing that Sweden has paid out money to Hamas's police force in Gaza for workshops, seminars, and training, I noted no upset from Member Johansson. The only time Member Johansson is truly upset over a Swedish aid project is when the project has been about deporting criminal violent offenders and rapists, who were actually, in some cases, admitted under Morgan Johansson's supervision as minister. Then Morgan Johansson is very upset.

This does not upset me very much. I think it is a good use of aid funds to try to get criminal thugs and rapists out of Sweden. I hope that we continue with that. If any inaccuracies have been made in any specific detail, then this can be corrected. But those questions should be asked of the government and not of me.

As Chairman, I am not prepared to change a long-standing practice regarding how the Committee on Foreign Affairs operates. It was, as Morgan Johansson knows very well, an assessment from the Chancellery and the administration that this type of invitations and in-depth reviews do not lie on the Committee on Foreign Affairs' table to be handled.

Since then, Morgan Johansson is free to ask whatever questions he wants. He can, if he wishes, hire a private detective and proceed as far as he wants with these investigations, based on anonymous sources in DN. He is welcome to do that.

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

Håkan Svenneling (V)

Madam Speaker! Mattias Karlsson is going on a bit like a steamroller regarding how united the government is and how divided we in the opposition seem to be. I sense a certain, slight historical revisionism that I also thought appeared in the SVT documentary about the Sverigedemokraterna, where the member and even Madam Speaker participated. One thing that has happened in Sweden since the Sverigedemokraterna's entry into politics is that previous rules for which budgets one votes on and how one acts in the Swedish Riksdag have been broken. It has led to the somewhat chaotic situation we had last parliamentary term and have continued to have in Swedish politics – things are not quite getting in order. I think that both the media and the Sverigedemokraterna themselves should perhaps take out the mirror and look at what actually happened.

But I wanted to ask about something else. It concerns international law and the statement that Jimmie Åkesson made in November last year, when the International Criminal Court, ICC, issued an arrest warrant regarding Benjamin Netanyahu and former defense minister Yoav Gallant in Israel. Åkesson said then that Sweden should not stand behind the arrest warrant and that Netanyahu should not be arrested if he came to visit Sweden.

Seven of the eight parties here are very much in agreement that we stand up for international law, that courts are independent, and that Sweden, as a signatory of the Rome Statute, which forms the basis for the ICC's work, is responsible for ensuring that persons covered by arrest warrants issued by the court are arrested, regardless of whether it concerns former dictators in Sudan, Putin from Russia, or Israeli representatives. I wonder how Mattias Karlsson, as chairman of the committee, views the statement from his party leader and whether the Sverigedemokraterna stand behind international law and the independence of the courts.

(Applause)

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

Mattias Karlsson (SD)

Madam Speaker! I believe one can question the image that Vänsterpartiet, unlike Sverigedemokraterna, would be a party that safeguards all previous practice in the Riksdag. I would, for example, like to recall speaker elections held where certain parties have completely gone against practice. It is certainly possible to list various examples of such.

I would say something similar even when it comes to the approach to international law. I mean that Vänsterpartiet and several other parties on the left side also use international law a bit like a buffet. One example is the recognition of Palestine, which I know Håkan Svenneling is very happy about, as are the other parties. It is completely obvious that it contradicted international law. Palestine, for example, does not have control over its own territory and therefore should not be recognized as a sovereign state. But they didn't mind that at all.

I also know that Svenne's party has had strong views on, for example, terror listings that they do not want to accept. They want to remove various terrorist organizations. They show open sympathies for, for example, the PKK, for instance in Almedalen.

I mean that international law is important. I think the ICC's work regarding handling different types of war crimes and holding those responsible accountable is important. What possibly makes this specific case questionable is that Israel is not a participating party in the ICC. Israel has also appealed the decision; it is argued that the court does not have jurisdiction and therefore does not have the right to issue this ruling. Before this is settled, I think perhaps one should be a bit cautious with promises about what Sweden shall do and not do.

Even this, how to act in this type of case, lies with the government. As I told Member Johansson, Svenneling may perhaps return to me with this type of question in a year.

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

Håkan Svenneling (V)

Madam Speaker! Just as Member Karlsson is pointing out, it is precisely the fact that Palestine is a party to the ICC's statutes, the Rome Statute, that is why the ICC has had an ongoing investigation since Palestine joined in 2015 – I believe the investigation started in 2019. At that point, action could also be taken regarding the things that occurred from and onwards from October 7.

I think this is an incredibly fine thing with international law. Hamas terrorists, who attacked civilians and military personnel in Israel, can be investigated for crimes because they are Palestinian citizens – and thus also Palestine as a state. And the crimes that Israel has committed on Palestinian territory, in Gaza and also on the West Bank, for that part, can be investigated through Palestine's participation.

I do not agree with the description of a buffet – there is a clear difference. If one looks at the issue of recognition historically, one sees, for example, the recognition of Kosovo, which took place during Carl Bildt's time as Foreign Minister; I do not have the exact year in my head. At that time, the Swedish bourgeois government – it may even have been a minority government – stepped forward and recognized Kosovo as a state. The Left Party did not think it was the right time to recognize Kosovo as a state then, but we have never criticized it since. A recognition is a recognition. It is a decision that Sweden has stood by, and we stand by it then.

We do not see this from the right side. Instead, we see that Palestine is being attacked time and again.

What we need to do in this situation, if we are to stand up for international law and if we are to safeguard the small, fragile peace agreement that exists and to some extent is an illusion, is to actually stand up for the state of Palestine, so that Israel and Palestine become more equal parties in this situation and so that we can eventually reach peace and freedom for all people in the region. It is clear that it is a long way there, but I believe it is better if we in Sweden maintain the recognitions we have actually made.

(Applause)

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

Mattias Karlsson (SD)

Madam Speaker! I agree with much of what Member Svenneling presented. International law is important. That war criminals can be held accountable is also important.

When it comes to individual cases and the specific case that Svenneling raises, I think one should first clarify what the legal situation looks like and what weight and legitimacy there is in the decision from the ICC before Sweden makes far-reaching commitments that risk damaging our relations with other states with whom we have cooperation in various ways.

I then welcome Svenneling's support for international law. I hope that this also applies when it comes to combating terrorist organizations that stand close to Svenneling's party and others.

(Applause)

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

Morgan Johansson (S)

Madam Speaker! Just this year, exactly 80 years after the formation of the United Nations, the world finds itself in a more uncertain and dangerous situation than it has been in for a very long time. In the east, we have a Russia that nearly four years ago attacked and invaded its neighboring country, the democratic Ukraine, and which with this not only caused indescribable suffering and tens of thousands of fatalities both in Ukraine and in Russia but also undermined the entire European security order.

All of Europe is now rearming to be able to defend itself against that threat. We are forced to spend billion after billion on combat boats, tanks, combat aircraft, air defense systems, attack robots, and ammunition to build up a defense that is so strong on land, at sea, and in the air that no one should even dare think of attacking us. We do this within the framework of the defense alliance Nato together with our neighboring countries in the Nordics and around the Baltic Sea.

This is nothing that we have desired but something that we have been forced into by Russia's aggressiveness. It is an aggressiveness that did not start in 2022 with Ukraine, nor in 2014 with Crimea, nor in 2008 with Georgia, but goes far back in time. We have lived with it for a long time and will unfortunately have to live with it for the foreseeable future.

The combined costs for defense and the society's crisis preparedness are increasing by over 100 billion kronor per year between 2024 and 2027. It is an increase of over 80 percent. It is clear that these are funds that we would much rather have spent on school, healthcare, elderly care, roads, railways, crime fighting, and social security. But we have no choice. We must take on these costs due to the new security policy situation, because our democracy rests on our national independence. If we cannot defend our national independence when it is threatened, we will soon have no democracy left.

We know that we will need to have these defense expenditures and expenditures in other areas in the new security policy situation we find ourselves in. There is no party-political conflict there. The conflict lies in how the whole thing is to be financed.

When one asks the government how it is to be financed, the answer is: not at all. All of it, and more, is to be borrowed. When one reads the government's tables in the budget proposals, one sees how the government is now planning for a skyrocketing budget deficit in the coming years.

In 2024, the deficit was 104 billion kronor. This year it will be 111 billion kronor. Next year it will be 167 billion kronor. In 2027, the deficit will be 181 billion kronor. It is therefore increasing by 75 percent over four years, according to the government's own calculations. Every year, this growing deficit is added to an ever-increasing national debt. This is not sustainable in the long run.

We see a government that has lost control over the economy and which continues to lower taxes, especially for the very wealthiest, despite having these enormous expenditures ahead. Then one takes out a bill, borrows the money from foreign banks and pushes the payment into the future. It simply does not add up!

It all starts to resemble how the bourgeois government in the early 90s lost control of the public finances and we got a budget morass that Göran Persson later had to sort out. We do not want to go there again, but unfortunately, that is where we are headed with this government and the budget proposal that lies on the Riksdag's table.

Madam Speaker! The developments in the east with Russia's attack on Ukraine have thus, as I said, shaken the rules-based world order. We all see that. But also the developments in the west, in the USA, are deeply worrying.

It started with Trump, before he had even managed to take office, demanding that the USA should have Greenland and that one should then seize the Panama Canal. He said that one should turn Gaza into some kind of vacation paradise. Then he focused on trying to seize Ukraine's natural resources.

Just today we see a USA that is not participating in NATO's foreign ministers' meeting. It is the first time in 25 years. It naturally spreads further uncertainty within the NATO circle.

If we look at how people are behaving in the Caribbean Sea right now, we can say nothing other than that it is unacceptable. Over 80 people have been killed by shooting boats alleged to be smuggling drugs. Let me just make one thing clear: it doesn't matter if you suspect drug smuggling – you do not have the right to kill for it. You have the right to board the boats, and you have the right to arrest the suspects. But you do not have the right to kill them in cold blood.

Now there is even an example where they first shot a boat to pieces, and when they then saw that there were survivors trying to save themselves up on the wreck, they fired another volley, so that they would really kill them. That case now raises strong criticism from both Democrats and Republicans in the USA, which despite everything is a sign of freshness.

This is not about crime fighting. These are not acts of war. These are extrajudicial executions or, in everyday language, murders.

It becomes no less offensive when Trump simultaneously pardons a real drug smuggler. Honduras' former president had been sentenced to 45 years in prison in the USA for conspiring to smuggle in tons of cocaine. But just this drug smuggler seems to be Trump's personal friend, and he is now a free man, released from prison in the USA.

Overall, this behavior in Latin America causes great concern. It is as if we are back in a situation where the USA views Latin America as its backyard, just as was done during the days of the Monroe Doctrine in the 1800s. It is very worrying. It will not be accepted in Latin America. It will lead to increased tensions.

The same applies to the approach in the ongoing Ukraine negotiations. There is also much there that is deeply worrying. Here it appears that the USA has to a large extent adopted the Russian worldview and is now pressing Ukraine into a harsh and unjust peace.

It is, Madam Speaker, extremely important that the EU now continues to support Ukraine, both politically in the negotiations and continued economically and militarily. The support is beginning to crack in places – the right in Hungary has for a long time acted as Putin's support point in the EU, and now we also hear that one of the right-wing parties in Italy, Lega Nord, is beginning to waver. When one sees such things, it is heartening that here in Sweden there is continued strong and unanimous support for Ukraine. It is needed more than ever.

Madam Speaker! I mentioned earlier the USA's attacks on boats in the Caribbean and how they violate both the laws of war and all other international law.

The same thing we have seen in Gaza over the recent years, from Hamas's side with attacks on civilians, hostage-taking and horrific abuses, not least during the terror attack on October 7, 2023. But we also see it from Israel's side.

At the beginning of September, we, a delegation of members of parliament, traveled to Israel and Palestine to see with our own eyes what is happening. The trip was organized by the Church of Sweden and Diakonia, and representatives from five of the Riksdag's eight parties participated in the trip.

In Sderot, an Israeli city just outside Gaza, we met Israelis who had experienced Hamas's terror attack in October 2023. It was shocking stories that we were then made aware of. But we also went up to a viewpoint where we could see Gaza against the horizon. I was in the same place 13 years ago on a corresponding trip. Then we could see Gaza City's skyline with its tall buildings silhouetted against the Mediterranean. But now, in September 2025, almost everything was gone and leveled to the ground. Only smoking ruins remained.

The images from Gaza show a moonscape. 70,000 are dead, and a completely traumatized population is now to live in the ruins after the massive bombings. Children have been mutilated and had to undergo amputations without anesthesia. Many more children will be killed and injured for many years in the future by the duds, i.e., unexploded grenades, which lie hidden in the rubble.

Later in the week we traveled up to Västbanken, and then we visited the Palestinian villages. They are now being subjected to increasingly aggressive attacks from extreme Israeli settlers who smash the Palestinians' solar panels and water pipes, which they depend on to get electricity and water, and who break into the Palestinians' homes, assault and threaten them and sometimes, as we saw examples of, even kill them. Settlers attack Palestinians when they harvest their olives and Palestinian children when they go to school. They have now also been armed with automatic weapons directly from the hands of the extreme ministers in Israel's government.

As late as today, I received new reports that Israel is demolishing Palestinian houses in the very area we visited, Masafer Yatta. We also hear that Israel is preparing new settlements in the West Bank, despite the International Court of Justice having clearly established that it violates international law.

Madam Speaker! The international community must react against this. We cannot have double standards. Just as Russia must be held accountable for its war crimes in Ukraine, Israel must be held accountable for its crimes in Gaza.

The International Criminal Court, ICC, has made the assessment that Israel has committed war crimes and crimes against humanity. Therefore, an arrest warrant has been issued for Benjamin Netanyahu. For this, the ICC has now been subjected to extensive sanctions by the USA, directed specifically against the ICC's prosecutor and judges. They have, among other things, frozen their assets in the USA and shut them out of the American financial system, which has had extensive consequences for individual judges and prosecutors. This, too, is a flagrant violation of international law. It cannot be accepted. The rest of the world must react with force against the USA's attempts to paralyze the International Criminal Court.

We Social Democrats propose in our budget proposal that an additional 10 million kronor should be allocated to support the ICC in the work regarding war crimes committed by both Israel and Hamas in connection with the Gaza war. Now, that budget proposal has fallen, and we regret that. We cannot demand it, but it certainly would have been needed in a situation like this to show continued strong support for international law.

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

Mattias Karlsson (SD)

Madam Speaker! I had not actually intended to request the floor again in this debate, but when Morgan Johansson speaks passionately about the situation in the Israel-Palestine area and mentions double standards and responsibility, I cannot help but follow up on the thread we touched upon in our previous exchange.

How does Morgan Johansson view the moral responsibility of the Social Democrats and Sweden's other left-wing parties for the conflict situation in the Israel-Palestine area? The question may seem very strange to those who have not followed this more closely. But the fact is that the left-wing parties in Sweden have, in both words and actions for quite a long time, shown support for antisemitic and violence-promoting organizations in Palestine.

The Social Democrats assess Fatah as their dear sister party. Fatah has its own terrorist organization; it is proven: the Al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades, which have broken into Jewish Bar Mitzvahs and slaughtered teenagers.

As late as last year, I believe it was, it turned out that Vänsterpartiet has used Swedish tax money via the party subsidy to finance DFLP, one of the organizations that participated in and carried out the massacre on civilian Jews on October 7.

As I mentioned earlier: Not so very many years ago – I believe it was 2007 – both Miljöpartiet, Vänsterpartiet and Socialdemokraterna invited Hamas to the Swedish Riksdag and had a meeting with Hamas representatives. It must nevertheless be seen as a legitimization of a party that has been involved in driving this conflict forward.

Conflicts do not arise out of thin air. They are often supported by various forces from the outside, and I actually assess that the Swedish left has been a destructive force in this conflict and fueled that development. How does Morgan Johansson view that from the reasoning regarding responsibility and double standards?

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

Morgan Johansson (S)

Madam Speaker! Mattias Karlsson should probably update his information somewhat. Fatah laid down his weapons in the 90s in connection with the Oslo Accords. Fatah has no terrorist organizations.

If they were to have it, it is very strange that Mahmud Abbas, the Palestinians' president, was invited just last week by Macron, the French president. Does Mattias Karlsson think that France also supports terrorism by inviting Mahmud Abbas and cooperating with the Palestinians' president? Does he think that? These are claims that are completely pulled out of thin air. Fatah has no terrorist organization.

However, Hamas is a terrorist organization. It has been at all times. Hamas kills social democrats. When Hamas took power in Gaza about 20 years ago, fighting broke out between Fatah and Hamas. It ended with Fatah supporters being shot in the streets and thrown from rooftops by Hamas supporters. We have nothing to offer Hamas. Hamas is an Islamist terrorist organization that no one should have any dealings with and which should also not be a part of the building of a future Palestine, in my opinion. Do not smear us with anything of this with any such connections, because they do not exist! It is rather the opposite – the social democrats we cooperate with are just as vulnerable to this type of terrorist acts as Israel has been, unfortunately.

We are not actually on any side. We stand up for international law. We stand up for the UN resolutions, that is to say the resolutions that have said that just as Israel has a right to security and safety within its borders, the Palestinians must have a right to their own state within their borders – internationally recognized borders. The Palestinians also have a right to self-determination.

I can turn the question back to Mattias Karlsson: What does he actually think – do the Palestinians have a right to their own state, or what is his actual position on that issue?

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

Mattias Karlsson (SD)

Madam Speaker! It is true, as Morgan Johansson says, that there has been a conflict between the Social Democrats' sister party Fatah and Hamas. But during the period when they approached each other and initiated a cooperation, the Social Democrats in Sweden acted actively to also legitimize Hamas in Sweden. Your former party leader Mona Sahlin, among others, did this, and you had representatives who invited Hamas to the Swedish Riksdag.

As for whether there are links between Fatah and the Al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades, I can only urge everyone watching this debate to do a proper Google search. Der Spiegel has shown, for example, payroll lists from Fatah that have been paid out directly to terrorists in the Al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades. It has repeatedly occurred that Fatah, primarily on its local and regional websites, has praised the Al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades' actions and highlighted their martyrs. The links are completely obvious; one only has to Google it. That link, therefore, exists.

This means that the Social Democrats have used Swedish tax money to finance an organization which in turn is involved in financing a terrorist organization. This has also been done by the Social Democrats' sister party. I assume that Morgan Johansson does not even deny that Vänsterpartiet has used Swedish tax money via the party subsidy to finance DFLP – one of the organizations that was involved in carrying out the massacre on October 7.

What is Morgan Johansson's view on potentially joining a future government with a party that, as recently as last year, was involved in financing a terrorist organization that slaughtered civilian Jews in Israel?

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

Morgan Johansson (S)

Madam Speaker! The Left Party will naturally have to answer for themselves, but I am quite certain about what will be said – that is to say that no contacts with Hamas or that type of organization are acceptable. That is obvious.

Regarding the other claims, Mattias Karlsson is talking nonsense. It is not the case that Fatah has any terrorist organization or any military organization. The weapons were laid down. If that had been the case, there would have been war on the West Bank, and that is not the case.

We do not have a situation where the Palestinian Authority is waging war against Israel. The only ones who are now armed in the West Bank, which the Palestinian Authority governs, are the Israeli army and the extreme settlers who have now also been armed with tens of thousands of automatic weapons directly from the hands of these extreme ministers. They are the only ones who are armed. When you walk around in the cities, you can see these settlers walking with sneakers, T-shirts, and heavy automatic weapons on their backs. That is how it looks.

Now, Mattias Karlsson did not answer my question about whether he stands for a two-state solution, i.e., that the Palestinians also have a right to their own state. But I assume that he will have to return to that in later debates. On the other hand, I note that the times the Sweden Democrats have tried to cooperate with Israeli politicians, one has met the most extreme right-wing nationalist politicians that exist. They stand very close to precisely those settlers whom I actually consider to be terrorist organizations and who almost daily and every week engage in harassment, killing, and taking the Palestinians' property.

I believe it would be good if Mattias Karlsson also broke the connections and meetings that he has had.

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

Margareta Cederfelt (M)

Madam Speaker! The matter we are now debating is, as previously mentioned, the Committee on Foreign Affairs' report 2025/26:UU1 Expenditure Area 5 International Cooperation. The matter concerns the government's proposal for appropriations for 2026 within expenditure area 5. The appropriation proposed by the government amounts to approximately 2.5 billion kronor.

The committee approves the government's budget proposal, including the government's proposal on certain authorizations regarding economic assumptions. Accordingly, the committee rejects the alternative budget proposals presented in motions. The report also contains four specific statements from the opposition.

The objective of the expenditure area International Cooperation is to ensure Sweden's interests in relation to other countries. That Swedish participation in international relations should be aimed at Swedish interests is a self-evident matter. Swedish interests can be viewed from a broad perspective and include several dimensions such as peace, stability, economic development, the principles of the rule of law, and human rights.

We live in a time of unrest. According to the Inter-Parliamentary Union, armed conflicts are occurring in 120 different regions around the world. In our part of the world – Europe – a full-scale war of invasion is taking place. In 2014, Russia annexed Crimea. In 2022, Russia started its aggressive and unprovoked war of attack against Ukraine – a violation of international conventions, the UN Charter, and the European security order.

Russia has since continued to threaten Europe. In recent months, we can note how drones fly in airspace belonging to Denmark, Norway, the Baltics, Poland, and the Netherlands. We can also note cyberattacks against Europe in an ever-increasing extent. The uncertainty in Europe is, in other words, high.

Madam Speaker! Sweden is a member of a large number of international organizations, for example the Council of Europe, the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe, the Nordic Council, the UN, Nato, the International Criminal Court and the OECD. Of course, Sweden works to have responsibility, commitment and influence. This is done through a breadth of societal contacts and relationship-building in various forums with diplomatic, political and economic means. Sweden contributes through its commitment to a safer world, increased democracy and respect for human rights and the principles of the rule of law. This is important, Madam Speaker.

Accountability in conflicts is a particularly important part of international law. Sweden is a party to the Rome Statute and is therefore a member of the ICC. Swedish ministers, for example the Minister for Foreign Affairs and the Minister for Justice, have during their visits to the ICC expressed Sweden's support for the court's work and discussed how the international community can ensure the ICC's continued operations. This is important, and it shows that Sweden's government stands up for international law and for the court's independence.

Sweden actively supports the court and contributes both financially, with secondment to the court, and with cooperation regarding witness protection and the execution of sentences.

Accountability for the war crimes committed in Ukraine is a high priority for the Swedish government. Russia's unprovoked and illegal war of aggression against Ukraine is a gross violation of international law, and therefore Russia must be held accountable.

I would like to continue by saying that Sweden's support for the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe, OSCE, and for ODIHR is extremely important. The organization documents violations of human rights. Sweden was one of the countries that founded the Council of Europe's damage register, which records claims for damages and evidence linked to damages caused as a result of Russia's aggression against Ukraine. The damage register is important. It means that there is a step forward to ensure that Russia compensates Ukraine when the war is over.

Madam Speaker! The world is changing at an ever-increasing pace, but international law does not change because it is challenged. International law stands firm. There are more and stronger voices standing up for international law than there are those who oppose it and want to break it. The UN Charter is based on all states' sovereignty, territorial integrity, and political independence. These three fundamental principles are of crucial importance.

Support for Ukraine is, as I mentioned, Sweden's primary foreign policy task. When we support Ukraine, it is about more than investing in our Swedish security. It is about Ukraine's freedom and right to exist. This is an issue that concerns us all.

I also want to mention that Sweden supports the ceasefire in the conflict concerning Israel and Gaza. It is, however, important to remember that it was Hamas that started the war through its attack against Israel. Hamas took 156 people hostage, and these have only recently been returned to Israel.

The government has been clear that Gaza's territory must not be changed, reduced, or annexed, as this would contravene international law. The government has, however, clearly stated that the hostages must be returned. This has now been done, thank goodness.

The UN is a unique organization. The UN works, as has been said here earlier, to maintain peace and security, protect human rights and so on. The UN as an organization must take responsibility for reforming itself and obtaining a budget that holds. It is not smaller savings, such as closing certain entrances for passage or reducing the indoor temperature, that determine whether we get a sustainable UN. It is about priorities.

I want to say that I am extremely pleased that the government has nominated Jesper Brodin, former CEO of Ikea, as head of the UN refugee agency UNHCR. This is a sign of new thinking and priorities. More people from the business sector were needed within the UN. With Jesper Brodin, the business sector's representatives would be well represented within the UN.

Madam Speaker! International law cannot alone prevent conflicts, but it provides a framework for peaceful conflict resolution, accountability, and reparations. Sweden continues to stand up for common interests, rules, and values, and ultimately for the protection of democracy, freedom, independence, and freedom of action.

Within expenditure area 5, two agencies operate: the Inspectorate for Strategic Products, ISP, and the Swedish Institute. I mention ISP because it is an important agency that aims to ensure that strategic products and the export of war materiel comply with the laws and international agreements that Sweden has signed. I find this extremely important, especially as we find ourselves in a time of war.

Madam Speaker! There is much more that I would like to say, but I conclude my speech here out of respect for the allotted time.

(Applause)

(cont. § 17)

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