International relations etc.

John E Weinerhall (M)

Madam Speaker! Today we are to debate the Committee on Foreign Affairs' report International Relations etc. It is a broad report that covers large and important issues within foreign policy, and even though I do not have the opportunity due to time constraints to highlight every aspect of the report today, I shall attempt to do justice to it through some important points.

It is, after all, the case that the world finds itself in a more serious time than in very, very long time, Madam Speaker. We have war on our continent, and in many places, the rules-based world order that we have relied on for so long is now being challenged. Many of the motions addressed in this report concern precisely the rules-based world order and the importance of Swedish foreign policy defending and promoting liberal democracy. That is also our firm line.

Madam Speaker! In the latest government statement, the Prime Minister asserted that the basis for Swedish foreign and security policy is the rules-based international order, the defense of democracy and human rights, as well as respect for the UN Charter, and that Swedish foreign policy will be conducted on a European, Nordic-Baltic, and transatlantic basis.

Just the Nordic-Baltic cooperation and the transatlantic link have become even more important now that we are allied with our Nordic and Baltic friends, and also the United States, through the Atlantic Pact Nato.

It also appears from the government statement that Sweden shall continue to be a globally engaged country that stands up for human freedoms and rights, democracy and the principles of the rule of law. Sweden shall also continue to be a strong voice for equality both in Sweden and globally.

Madam Speaker! The report also raises another very important issue that I would like to go into a bit more. It concerns China. In light of all the other conflicts we have around the world right now, we sometimes forget China.

China is a large country and a country with great global influence that in all essential respects does not share our view on liberal democracy, civil liberties and rights, and the rules-based world order. Sweden received a China Strategy in 2019 which was based on the EU's common China Strategy. The starting point for these strategies was to adopt an approach that balances the mutual economic benefit we have from each other with taking China seriously and seeing the country for the long-term major security threat it actually poses.

The EU is Sweden's most important foreign policy arena, and therefore it is also important that it is within the union that Sweden anchors its position towards China. Just as the European Council stated last year, our goal must be to reduce the dependence on and vulnerability towards China while we do not turn inward. China is at the same time a partner as well as a competitor and a systemic rival.

Madam Speaker! China is also a country that threatens the stability of the entire region, as well as the world economy, through its actions in the South China Sea. China's illegal claims to virtually the entire South China Sea and its annexations of island groups, as well as China's actions in the Taiwan Strait, cause great concern. Beijing's nine-dash line lacks a legal basis and encroaches on the neighboring countries' territorial waters. In addition to this, there are also China's pressures and recurring threats against Taiwan.

The passages in the South China Sea are extremely important for world trade because half of the world's boat cargo passes right there. Furthermore, it is estimated that there are large natural resources in the form of oil and gas in the area, and I don't even need to mention the importance of access to semiconductors. We all remember the pandemic, when we got a hitch in the delivery of semiconductors. A full-scale invasion of Taiwan would completely stop the deliveries. Both the pandemic and the consequences of the invasion of Ukraine would feel like a summer breeze in comparison to the economic winter we would see if that happened.

There are, therefore, major both economic and security policy aspects that play a role in the region. But as regards China, it is also not possible to avoid speaking about the human rights violations that occur, Madam Speaker. It concerns, on one hand, minorities such as the Tibetans in non-autonomous Tibet and the Uyghurs in Xinjiang, where China is guilty of cultural genocide, environmental destruction, and violation of individual rights.

It is not only ethnic minorities who are severely affected by cultural and religious persecution, but it also applies largely in China. Political freedom is almost entirely curtailed, freedom of the press is abolished, and cultural censorship is very extensive. The imprisoned Swedish citizen, the author and publisher Gui Minhai, is just one example of this. I trust that the government is working hard so that he and other Swedes who are deprived of their freedom by foreign powers around the world will be released and able to come home.

Madam Speaker! Sweden has a long history as a free-trade-friendly country. It is through trade and cooperation that we create both prosperity and deeper relations with other countries. But Sweden also has a long tradition of working for and highlighting human rights. Here, it is important that Sweden continues to be a clear voice and that we collectively in the EU work to ensure that narratives from China and Russia do not gain a foothold.

In the consideration, the issue of Taiwan is raised, and I would like to go a little deeper into that as well. It is of course important that Sweden safeguards not only our relations with Taiwan but also Taiwan's opportunity to defend itself from the communist oppression from Mainland China.

Madam Speaker! In order to further deepen the cooperation with Taiwan, we want them to be given the opportunity to participate in more international organizations, as they already do in the World Trade Organization. This applies, for example, to the World Health Organization, where the government, together with like-minded parties on a number of occasions, has approached the Director-General about letting Taiwan participate as an observer. So far, we have not succeeded in reaching a consensus on this, but Taiwan would be a very welcome contribution. As a high-tech and medically outstanding country, Taiwan would have been an important addition, not least because it is also a democracy.

There has also been a notification from the Riksdag regarding opening a House of Sweden in Taipei. This could be achieved by broadening the activities currently conducted by Business Sweden, and it could house academy, cultural promotion, and other things. Already today, Swedish citizens can receive assistance with certain consular matters through Business Sweden's office, via the embassy in Bangkok. The work on how this could look is being prepared in the Government Offices, as it is called. It should also be pointed out that it is a budgetary issue, which we do not address in this report.

With that said, Madam Speaker, I would like to conclude by moving for the approval of the committee's proposal for a decision.

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

Morgan Johansson (S)

Madam Speaker! The report concerns the main direction of foreign policy, and even though – as it should be – there is a large consensus between the parties in the Riksdag in large parts of foreign policy, there are a number of issues where we disagree. I must also say that the number of points of contention has increased after the change of government, because the new government changed the policy in a number of respects directly after the election.

The first thing the government did was abandon the feminist foreign policy. The right-wing government took office on October 18, 2022, and already on the same day, the Foreign Minister announced that they intended to abolish the feminist foreign policy. Apparently, it was so important to get it out of the way – the Foreign Minister hardly had time to sit down in the chair at the UD before he wanted to say that it was the end of the feminist foreign policy.

The reason the Foreign Minister gave was that feminist foreign policy was nevertheless just a label. He also said that feminist foreign policy obscured the fact that Swedish foreign policy must be based on the question of what are Swedish values and Swedish interests. It was actually a staggering statement – as if women's and girls' equal right to resources, rights, and representation were not in line with Swedish values and Swedish interests! It is completely crazy, I would like to say.

It has always been exactly the opposite. Equal rights, equal resources and equal representation for women and men - as feminist foreign policy was defined - have at all times been fundamental Swedish values in foreign policy and completely in line with Swedish interests. How one can make it so that equal rights, equal resources and equal representation for women and men would stand in opposition to Swedish values is actually completely incomprehensible.

Furthermore, the policy was changed in this regard at a time when we could rather see a backlash for just women's and girls' rights in large parts of the world, for example in countries such as Afghanistan and Iran, where women and girls are killed or whipped in the square if they demand their rights. We have also been able to see it in the USA, where the American right now has removed the right to abortion as a fundamental American right. These were just a few examples.

We also mean that it is totally wrong to claim that the feminist foreign policy would only be a label without meaning. This has actually been evaluated by the government's own expert body, the Expert Group for Aid Analysis. In its evaluation, they conclude that the feminist foreign policy led to a clear increase in equality work within all three foreign policy areas, namely aid, trade, and security policy.

Now the right-wing parties have abolished this successful work. One often hears how they defend themselves by saying that they work on driving issues such as, for example, sexual and reproductive health. They may do that, but they have completely missed that equality is not just about this, even if it is quite important. Equality is also about representation, that is to say that in all international forums one must highlight that women should have equal representation at all decision-making tables. It is also about resources, that is to say women's right to their own income and their own work, and about equal pay for equal work.

It is about all rights. It is, of course, about sexual and reproductive rights, about the right to abortion and the right to contraceptives - a woman must be able to decide for herself if and when she should become pregnant. But it is also about other rights, for example, the right to education for girls, the right to healthcare and the right to safety. The government parties wave this away with the justification that it would obscure the view of what are Swedish values. It is, however, precisely the opposite, Madam Speaker: Women's and girls' rights are human rights, and these are certainly Swedish values.

This report also addresses how the government is withdrawing from the global stage and that foreign policy has become more passive and provincial. This is noticeable in the view on the UN. Major cuts have been made to Sweden's core support to UN organizations. Support to UN Women, which works for women's rights in the world, has been more than halved. The UN's green climate fund has been cut by more than 40 percent. Sweden's contribution to the World Food Programme, which is absolutely crucial for starving people to be able to get food in some parts of the world, has been cut by over 30 percent. These were just a few examples; there are many more.

One can say a lot about the UN – it is an organization with many problems. But these problems do not become any smaller because the member states withdraw when it comes to funding. It is rather the opposite.

The UN was formed after the Second World War to try at all costs to prevent something similar from happening again. 60 million people had been killed in the war that the Nazis had started, and in the final stages of the war, a new weapon, the atomic bomb, had made its entrance. Most concluded that a third world war - a nuclear war - could lead to the destruction of humanity. That was why the Council of Europe was formed. That was why the EU was formed. That was why a long series of other organizations were formed. It was also why the UN was formed - to preserve peace and to develop and protect fundamental human rights. In recent decades, the UN has additionally had to take on another existential threat to humanity, namely the climate issue.

At the same time, we see how democracy is in retreat in the world, how respect for human rights is undermined and threatened in more and more countries, how we now once again have a major war in Europe, how terrible wars have flared up again in the Middle East and in Africa, and how tensions in Southeast Asia are increasing. In this situation, the Swedish government is therefore cutting back on the UN. It is, in my opinion, actually not wise.

This is compounded by the fact that Sweden is now also withdrawing in Africa. Aid is being phased out in Mali, Burkina Faso, and South Sudan, which are some of the poorest and most vulnerable countries in the world, where Swedish aid has truly made a difference. This, of course, directly affects poor people, but it is also a very unfortunate political signal. If the Western world withdraws from Africa – if one leaves Africa – this vacuum will be filled by others. It will be filled by Russia or China, which have for a long time and systematically developed their contacts and ties with various African countries.

Instead of turning its back on Africa, Sweden and the EU should invest in Africa, which is Europe's neighboring continent. We should have a specific Africa strategy where we develop cooperation with a number of countries, naturally when it comes to aid - where it is needed - but also when it comes to trade, culture, politics and many other areas.

Africa should have the highest priority for both Sweden and the EU so that we can together create development and faith in the future for the millions of people who live there. It is also by tackling the root causes of why people flee - the wars, the poverty and the poor prospects for the future - that we can counteract the migration flows towards Europe. I am still optimistic regarding that part - Africa has all the prerequisites to turn that development around. Sweden and the EU must, however, be a part of this work.

Madam Speaker! We Social Democrats naturally stand behind all our reservations, but for the sake of time, I move for approval of only reservation 1.

(Applause)

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

Magnus Berntsson (KD)

Madam Speaker! Today's committee report is titled International Relations etc. Not least "etc." is important to note, given that this report covers many different issues that members have submitted motions on during the year. The issues concern values and priorities in Swedish foreign policy, Sweden's engagement in international organizations, the work with the agenda for women, peace and security, Sweden's diplomatic relations, the work with consular affairs and the policy towards China. I intend to comment on some of these topics.

I intend to spoil the suspense by announcing right now that we Christian Democrats support the proposal in the report in its entirety.

Madam Speaker! We live in a challenging time. Therefore, it is of utmost importance that Sweden pursues a foreign policy that protects the country's interests and that is based on the rules-based international order, democracy and human rights, as well as respect for the UN Charter and international law.

Sweden shall be a global and engaged country. We shall stand up for human freedoms and rights, democracy and the principles of the rule of law. Equality is a central value in our foreign policy. We shall clearly emphasize the importance of women's rights and their participation in society. We shall work so that all people can enjoy their rights, including sexual and reproductive health. At the same time, we shall strengthen the freedom, rights and empowerment of women and girls.

Sweden shall be a driving, constructive and engaged member of international organizations. This enables influence for our foreign and security policy and constitutes an effective platform for our political priorities.

We must highlight the UN's central role in handling global issues such as peace, security and stabilization in conflict countries as well as the implementation of Agenda 2030 and the Paris Agreement.

The EU is, however, our primary foreign policy platform. A strong and united EU can give our Swedish positions global impact in a way that would otherwise not be possible.

Our new membership in Nato shall continue to promote the fundamental values that are at the core of our foreign and security policy. There is a broad consensus on the fundamental values, and we must have a coherent and long-term policy, especially regarding our support for Ukraine, both in Sweden as well as in the EU and Nato.

Madam Speaker! China's rapid development and increasing influence are becoming increasingly important for Swedish foreign and security policy. A united, long-term and strategic EU policy towards China is therefore crucial to secure Swedish interests. Swedish security interests shall be guiding in all aspects of relations with China. The EU and like-minded countries must cooperate on the security and defense challenges that an increased Chinese global influence entails.

Sweden's interests towards China are best served through a common European strategy, and the government works in the EU for a powerful and clear China policy, in coordination with transatlantic partners. The relationship with China shall be clear also when it comes to China's violations of human rights, and Sweden needs to participate in collaborations to counter the challenges to regional security and the rules-based world order that arise through China's growing power ambitions and its attempts to influence both individual states and the global order through political, economic, and military means.

The developments in Hong Kong continue to cause concern, which has been expressed by the EU, particularly regarding the treatment of the democracy movement.

In this context, the situation of the Uyghurs can also be raised.

Both Sweden and the EU have an interest in that Taiwan can participate in the work of international organizations, even though the conditions for participation vary between different organizations. Taiwan's meaningful participation in international organizations contributes positively to international cooperation.

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

Morgan Johansson (S)

Madam Speaker! I had not actually intended to take a reply to Magnus Berntsson's speech, but then I heard him develop his view on the UN. He said that it is important for Sweden to highlight the UN's central role - I believe I quoted him correctly.

Then I just wonder how that adds up when you are simultaneously cutting back on the UN's organization. You are, therefore, cutting back on UN Women, which works for girls' and women's rights all over the world; you have more than halved the appropriation to UN Women during your government's time. You are cutting back on the World Food Programme, which is completely crucial so that starving people can get food in certain areas. We also see now that growing problems, not least in Africa, mean that it will become an even greater problem and an even greater pressure on precisely the World Food Programme, where you have cut Sweden's appropriation by 30 percent. On the green climate fund, which contributes to the transition, not least for the poorest countries, you have cut back by over 40 percent.

It is a situation where famine is increasing, wars are spreading, the security policy situation is deteriorating, and people are suffering in many parts of the world - perhaps in many respects more than in a very long time. In that case, my question to Magnus Berntsson is: If you now want to safeguard the UN, why are you then cutting Sweden's contribution specifically to the UN?

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

Magnus Berntsson (KD)

Madam Speaker! I raised the central role of the UN in the issue of handling global issues such as peace, security and stabilization in conflict countries as well as the implementation of Agenda 2030 and the Paris Agreement. The UN has an important role there.

Sweden is not, however, the only financier of the UN's various bodies; it would be very bad if it were that way. There are actually quite a few other actors who need to step up. We are a medium-sized country, but we are one of the world's largest financiers.

We see that it has not always been the most effective way for Swedish aid to go through UN channels, and therefore we are making a change in the reform agenda for aid that will ensure we use more civil society actors.

We also place demands on the UN's organs. Member Johansson herself mentioned that there are problems in the UN structure, and we must address them. Then we must set demands and see improvements. This can lead to changes in the future.

Funding needs to come more from other actors, but we also need to ensure that the right things are being done. There, Sweden actually needs to set requirements and not just give a check with money and lean back.

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

Morgan Johansson (S)

Madam Speaker! That has never been the case. We have not leaned back when we have financed the UN's organizations. On the contrary, Sweden has entered as a very active member to influence the UN and to be involved in steering how the UN's work is carried out.

It is clear that there are problems in the UN, just as there are in all organizations, but those problems do not exactly become smaller if the funders fail and if there are fewer countries that want to contribute to the UN's work.

What signal does Magnus Berntsson think it sends if Sweden reduces its support? Does Magnus Berntsson think that it then means that other countries are prepared to step in and fill the gap? It has turned out to be precisely the opposite, that is, that fewer countries are then also prepared to chip in money.

Eventually, we will end up with a UN that cannot even afford to perform the most basic tasks, and this in a security policy situation that may be more difficult than ever, where hunger and famine catastrophes risk spreading to an even greater extent and where the needs are increasing very much.

If one says in one breath that one intends to highlight the UN's central role, then one cannot in the next breath say that one will simultaneously cut back on UN Women, where the appropriation is more than halved. For the World Food Program it is reduced by 30 percent and for the green climate fund it is reduced by 40 percent. If one says this, one must actually also be prepared to allocate the resources that are needed.

The UN is not perfect and has never been, but the UN is the only global organization we have to be able to prevent, among other things, the major security policy threats that exist. It is the only global engine we have to be able to drive forward international conventions that can have significance. It is also, in purely practical terms, an organization that distributes food, clothes, and shelter for millions of people every year.

So the Christian Democrats are now contributing to weakening the UN, and I find that deeply regrettable.

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

Magnus Berntsson (KD)

Madam Speaker! When one listens to Member Morgan Johansson, it sounds as if Sweden has gone from being almost the only financier of the UN to now doing nothing. That is not how it looks.

Sweden is still one of the absolute largest contributors to the entire UN system, but we have restructured the aid policy. It is based on a number of evaluations, which were also taken up by Member Johansson here earlier, from for example various government audit reports that have come from both Riksrevisionen and Biståndsanalys. They point out that it was not possible to know if we reached our goals, because the goals were so scattered. There were over 120 different goals.

Now we have made a clearer prioritization of what we want to see as the result of our foreign policy and our aid policy. Consequently, there will be some changes. There will be changes in that we are reducing a part of the core support. Sometimes it concerns reductions in support to UN organizations.

It is used to set clear requirements for reforms. It is very important that we ensure that the resources going to the UN system are used in the best way. Sometimes it is the case that other organizations can achieve a better result in the end. We see that in the reform agenda for aid.

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

Markus Wiechel (SD)

Madam Speaker! I would first like to move for approval of reservation 13. We naturally support the other reservations as well, but we will content ourselves with moving for approval of one for the sake of time.

At this point, there is probably no one involved in foreign policy who has missed where the Sweden Democrats stand on the issue of Taiwan. We have repeatedly pushed to try to promote and strengthen Swedish-Taiwanese relations.

Furthermore, as we know, we have previously contributed to the Riksdag being able to issue a notice to the previous Social Democratic government to strengthen the Swedish presence in Taipei through a House of Sweden.

This is, of course, a task that must continue. In order to best utilize the potential in the connections between Sweden and Taiwan, we must address the fundamental deficiencies that we see in Sweden's representation in Taipei.

For far too long, one has allowed activities that in some cases are directly dysfunctional to continue. For those of us who have been there and seen this, it is quite obvious that it is not particularly difficult to implement major improvements.

Madam Speaker! What is it that we want to do? Well, first and foremost, the staffing must be increased, and the representation must be granted access to more suitable premises. In addition, the representation office needs to receive the tools it needs to be able to carry out its important mission, for example, the possibility to handle passport and visa matters in an adequate manner.

One does not need to be particularly knowledgeable to understand that several of the shortcomings we see in the Swedish representation are largely due to the fact that the representation office is not formally an authority.

We therefore consider that the government should take the measures necessary so that representative offices such as the one in Taipei can be counted as an authority.

Madam Speaker! It is not only the bilateral relations with Taiwan that are important, but also that it is allowed to participate on the same terms as other countries in various international organizations. This has been mentioned several times before.

We only have to gain from Taiwan, which in many ways stands very close to Sweden, being given the chance to contribute to the activities of international organizations in a positive and meaningful way.

From the Sverigedemokraterna side, we wish that Sweden does its utmost to work towards ensuring that Taiwan is offered the opportunity to participate in the UN General Assembly, but also in the various organizations within the UN system.

I am thinking, among other things, of the International Civil Aviation Organization, ICAO, and the World Health Organization, WHO, but also international police cooperation within Interpol.

It is simply necessary to have a clear strategy in order to generally be able to give Taiwan access to various international arenas.

Madam Speaker! We can temporarily leave Taiwan and instead speak about what we see on the other side of the Taiwan Strait. The authoritarian China's tendency to employ an increasingly aggressive policy towards the rest of the world is, in fact, one of our time's greatest foreign policy challenges.

China uses its economy, trade, foreign direct investment and other methods of influence, such as threats of blockades and military force demonstrations, in various ways to get its way.

Just recently, not so long ago, after the latest presidential inauguration in Taipei, we saw a clear example of exactly this when all of Taiwan was surrounded by Chinese military.

Against this background, it is relatively easy to understand that the same totalitarian views and methods will continue to be used if China is allowed to dominate the international economy.

In international work in various areas, such as for example research and new technology, there are already good reasons to be vigilant.

Madam Speaker! In 2019, the Riksdag addressed a new China Strategy which was also motivated by China's global ambitions. Since then, however, the Chinese threat to the rules-based world order has increased significantly.

In a short time, China has advanced its positions, not least on the African continent. It has threatened with military violence against Taiwan and in various ways provided Russia with support in the brutal invasion of Ukraine.

Sweden must, as part of the free democratic world, be prepared to handle a global development shaped by cooperating dictatorships and authoritarian states such as China and Russia.

The government should, against this background, develop a new China Strategy with an updated threat analysis and with effective measures to manage the threats and to work for a positive development globally. The transatlantic cooperation should also be a core part of the new China Strategy.

Madam Speaker! The world's largest democracy, India, is undeniably an interesting country to follow in these times, and it will also become more interesting in the future. India's positive development offers good opportunities for Sweden to increase its educational and trade relations. Here I argue that we from the Swedish side need to be active.

There is also reason for Sweden to review the possibilities of establishing new collaborations that can tie India closer to Europe, not least within areas such as the climate sector. The Government should, in view of this, review the possibility of strengthening diplomatic ties with India.

Madam Speaker! In this report, we also address the issue of the Eritrean so-called diaspora tax. It is a phenomenon that the Sweden Democrats view very seriously, which is why we also highlighted it in a parliamentary motion.

We have, however, received information that the collection of these unjust taxes has been discontinued, which we welcome. Against this background, we refrain from proceeding in this matter, but we naturally assume that the issue will be followed up.

If it should turn out that the diaspora tax continues anyway, we intend to come forward with a new proposal and work towards an announcement.

In conclusion, Madam Speaker, I intended to touch upon an area related to this committee report, namely the activities within the OSCE and another committee report, UU12. It is directly shameful that three parties choose, in a reservation, to assert outright lies about the delegation chair Björn Söder. To claim, based on completely groundless accusations, that Member Söder, who has acted irreproachably in his role as delegation leader, would be unsuitable is not worthy of members of the Swedish Riksdag.

In several of our international delegations, there is a tradition of acting collectively, so also in the OSCE delegation. It is sad that the left side of Swedish politics does not see the importance of this continuing. The members who stood behind the reservation in the matter should be ashamed.

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

Håkan Svenneling (V)

Madam Speaker! I would like to start by welcoming the fact that Joar Forssell is missing his speech. Given that I am late for a lunch, it fits my calendar perfectly.

I also want to comment on the last point regarding Markus Wiechel's attack concerning the OSCE report. It is a report that has been debated in the chamber and has already been passed. There was a reservation from Vänsterpartiet, Socialdemokraterna and, I believe, also Miljöpartiet, where we criticized Chairman Björn Söder for the statements he has made. He has made very sharp statements concerning minorities, whose right to be in Sweden he has questioned. He has also made a number of rather funny statements regarding pedophilia. There has also been a vote on whether Björn Söder should be Chairman of the OSCE.

I absolutely believe that we can return to those discussions in the Riksdag, but this is an issue that has been decided in another report. It is important to establish this at the beginning of the debate.

With that, Madam Speaker, I want to begin by talking about feminist foreign policy and truly regret what we see the Swedish right-wing government doing now when it has abandoned feminist foreign policy. Sweden has been a pioneer country that other countries have followed. But suddenly, the government has, in one stroke, changed direction towards the world's girls and women.

The Expert Group for Aid Analysis, EBA, has in a report investigated the effects of Sweden's feminist foreign policy. The report is titled More Than a Label, Less Than a Revolution: Sweden's Feminist Foreign Policy and was written last year. It is stated there that the feminist foreign policy led to an intensification of equality work and that the level of ambition was raised, as well as that it strengthened Sweden's international leadership in equality issues. It is a piece of work that the government and Sverigedemokraterna are now throwing overboard together.

Violations of women's rights are the most common and extensive crimes against human rights. All over the world, women's lives are restricted by discriminatory legislation and social norms. Gender discrimination is a common cause of poverty. Women, who most often have the actual responsibility for the family's livelihood, often lack the most basic rights.

In addition to this, there is the political development in large parts of the world where nationalist and fascist currents are on the offensive while democracy shrinks. It is a movement that not infrequently builds its political agenda on repression of and control over women and girls.

Women's rights are therefore a key to development. Increasing women's opportunities for education and livelihood contributes to improving the individual woman's position and promoting equality in general. It also contributes to the development of society as a whole.

At the same time, it is important to emphasize that women around the world are, to a very high degree, actors themselves. It is therefore crucial that it is women in poor countries who set the agenda for the work on equality in development policy and that Sweden works to ensure that women are represented and included in all forms of decision-making processes. Equality is not just a human right; it is a prerequisite for sustainable development.

Women's participation shall not be conditional or temporary. To build real and sustainable equality, it is required that women can actively participate at all levels of society. A gender perspective shall permeate all areas, whether it concerns infrastructure investments, trade agreements, or arms exports. The work shall be goal-oriented and possible to evaluate and follow up. Equality shall not be a separate strategy somewhere on a shelf, but it shall be a part of the entire Swedish development policy.

Both poverty and restrictions of human rights manifest in different ways for girls and women respectively as well as boys and men. To achieve success in these areas, a clear gender perspective needs to be included so that the differences in conditions that exist for women and girls versus men and boys are made visible. Policy needs to remove the discrimination that occurs because of gender.

This is how it could be with Sweden's feminist foreign policy. This is the policy we should pursue. When we in Vänsterpartiet, together with other parties, return to power in two years, it is also this feminist foreign policy that I envision us pursuing.

Peace processes and reconstruction after conflict are, like foreign and security policy in general, a traditionally male domain. Women are therefore often either completely absent or heavily underrepresented in these processes, despite the fact that their participation is crucial for creating sustainable peace and human security. The UN Development Fund for Women, Unifem, estimates that between 1992 and 2019, women in peace processes globally constituted 13 percent of the negotiators, 6 percent of the mediators, and 6 percent of the signatories. Approximately 70 percent of the peace processes during the same period contained no women as participants.

Increasing the proportion of women in all stages of peacebuilding work is an important goal in itself because representation is fundamental to democracy and justice. The UN's agenda for women, peace, and security aims to strengthen women's rights and participation in peace processes. It is based on UN resolution 1325 and a long series of subsequent resolutions.

It should be a self-evident matter that the representation and participation of women and men in peace processes are distributed equally. It is fundamental to emphasize women's crucial task and role in peace processes, peacekeeping troops, justice systems, electoral processes, the security sector, and reconstruction processes, as described in resolution 1325 and subsequent resolutions.

Since that is not the case in practice, the Riksdag should instruct the government to ensure that Sweden, within the UN, works to increase women's participation in peace processes and that the Security Council gives the agenda for women, peace, and security effect in all its resolutions.

Madam Speaker! I will now move on to some of the so-called consular affairs and the imprisonment of human rights activists around the world.

When the eyes of the whole world were turned towards the USA after the attack on September 11, Eritrea's dictator took the opportunity to arrest a group of leading politicians who wanted to lead the country in a democratic direction. One of those who were arrested was the journalist and author Dawit Isaak, who in his newly started newspaper had published a few politicians' outcry. Dawit had moved and become a citizen in Sweden but returned to Eritrea to contribute to a positive development in the country, where the political winds had turned. The arrests meant that the democratic development was interrupted, and Eritrea is still today a dictatorship, where the president and former guerrilla leader Isaias Afewerki always has the last word.

In Eritrean prisons, it is not only Dawit Isaak but hundreds of prisoners of conscience, journalists, and former politicians who are held without charges having been filed against them. They have no possibility of meeting a lawyer or their relatives. Sweden should therefore, both as an individual country and as a member of the UN and EU, work to ensure that all political prisoners in Eritrea are released.

Madam Speaker! After the massacre at Tiananmen Square in 1989, Gui Minhai became a Swedish citizen. He worked on various things and projects but eventually became a book publisher and author. He started a publishing house based in Hong Kong, where there was a market for political satire and realistic fiction about the luxurious lives of the Chinese political leaders, with texts that were forbidden on the other side of the strait, in China. Through Hong Kong's then-autonomy and democratic rights such as freedom of speech, Gui Minhai's publishing house could grow and increase its sales, primarily to Chinese tourists.

But democracy in Hong Kong shrank. The Umbrella Revolution was brutally suppressed, and those who stood up for free speech were increasingly persecuted. The Chinese regime got hold of Gui Minhai when he was kidnapped from his vacation home in Thailand in October 2015. He was taken out of the country and flown to China. There he has been prosecuted in a sham trial and released only to be arrested, convicted, and imprisoned again. Sweden's government must continue to fight for Gui Minhai's freedom.

Madam Speaker! Even in Turkey, democracy is shrinking, and people who stand up for democracy are imprisoned. The Kobanecases are about prosecuting people who called for peaceful protests against IS. The absurd thing, besides the charges themselves, is that the entire party leadership, 108 people, for the opposition party HDP are being prosecuted. It was therefore a way to attack and destroy the opposition to the Turkish regime.

The judgment was recently delivered. 24 people were sentenced to long prison terms. Two of them were Selahattin Demirtas and Figen Yüksekdag, party leaders for HDP, who were sentenced to 42 and 30 years of imprisonment respectively. Both in 2020 and 2022, the Council of Europe has demanded their immediate release.

Both the Kobane cases and the shrinking democracy in Turkey in general must have consequences. Turkey must be suspended from the Council of Europe. The Council of Europe must expand its reviews of Turkey, while their privileges must be withdrawn. Furthermore, the EU must act. Turkey's membership process to the EU must be completely terminated. All support and all privileges must be withdrawn, and sanctions must be established regarding democracy.

This is the only way forward to increase the pressure on Erdogan. We have for far too many years seen a coddling of Erdogan's Turkey, especially during the Swedish NATO process, and that must end now.

Madam Speaker! Sweden must stand up for those who fight for human rights, regardless of what citizenship they have and where in the world they are imprisoned. It is our responsibility as a democracy.

With that, I move for approval of the Left Party's reservation 8.

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

Kerstin Lundgren (C)

Madam Speaker! When listening to this debate, one can wonder what actually is the greatest challenge and what we need to work most on in international politics and our international relations.

What we see, Madam Speaker, are two things: Democracy is clearly moving backwards, and the autocratization continues to strike democracy in more and more countries. It often begins with the media and freedom of the press. Reporters Without Borders recently issued their report, and it is a frightening read. In only eight countries are the media free, and there live only 0.8 percent of the world's population.

One starts by pushing back against the media. One continues with women, LGBTQI people and moves on to academics and so on. The pattern is very clear.

If this can be read in the eminent report from V-Dem in Gothenburg, which does an incredibly important work for all of us by clarifying what is happening. Democracy globally is back to the situation in 1985. It is continued heavy losses.

The liberal democracies are not so many. It is not just about elections but also about functioning legislation that limits the scope of power. One protects the freedom of civilians, and there is equality before the law. It is only 13 percent of the world's population who have the privilege of living in countries that are liberal democracies, and the development is moving backwards.

We see a number of countries leading that development. It concerns Russia, China and Iran, but others are following and it is happening broadly. We are getting more and more so-called electoral autocracies and also completely closed autocracies - dictatorships, as we would say.

If one is to work for freedom globally and for women's rights to be universal human rights, it is extremely important to stand up and work to strengthen democracy globally. That is how one strengthens freedom for all.

If we are now only eight countries that have full freedom of the press and media, we need to strategically think through how we work so that, together with a number of countries, we can withstand the autocratic tidal wave sweeping across the world. For the Center Party, it is clear that the struggle for freedom and democracy needs strong voices, and Sweden must be one of the leading voices in the world.

It is good that the government has reinstated an MR ambassador, but it would be wise if we, from Sweden's side, made democracy and how we strengthen it in its various parts the central foreign policy issue. It is about forming coalitions and showing that another way is possible than to follow and take cover behind Russia, China, Iran and other autocratized countries.

China and its Communist Party have, under Xi Jinping's leadership, worked incredibly clearly to present their country as a model for the rest of the world. Far too many countries fall for this lure and do not see what is happening to the Uyghurs in China, they do not see what happens to those who dare to think differently and even say that Xi Jinping resembles Winnie the Pooh – what a terrifying accusation! They also do not see what is happening in Hong Kong and have no possibility of noticing what happened at Tiananmen Square. There were those who most recently tried to remind people of this in Hong Kong. They were arrested.

Hong Kong is today clearly a part of the Communist Party's China. I can note that the freedom and rule of law that underpinned our establishment of a legal assistance agreement with Hong Kong, despite the one-China policy, can no longer be asserted. It is therefore an agreement that today lacks a basis, because it is the Chinese Communist Party's law enforcement that is also used in Hong Kong. We also see that additional judges from Great Britain are leaving Hong Kong because it is no longer possible to assert the rule of law.

There are two announcements to the current and previous governments that one must terminate this legal assistance agreement with Hong Kong. Other countries have done it, but Sweden has not managed to do it yet. We think it is an important signal to stand up and show that Hong Kong is no longer a uniqueness in China. It is the CCP, the Chinese Communist Party, that rules and governs, which has been very clear in recent years when they so brutally crushed all opposition and all space for dissent to make their voices heard.

We therefore expect that this legal aid agreement is concluded by December 31, 2024, at the latest. It is entirely possible for the government to deliver on these announcements. I move for approval of reservation 14 under point 7.

There are also announcements here. Establishing a House of Sweden in Taipei, as we have proposed, is possible without recognizing Taiwan, which we have not said we want to do. However, within the framework of the Swedish interpretation of what is a one-China policy, we must be able to create our interpretation and also ensure that we can have more than just business with Taiwan. We can have political relations and relations in several areas as well as a broader presence in Taiwan.

When it comes to the budget issue, there are already premises. We are not talking about huge costs. It should be possible to expand within the framework of the one-China policy according to the Swedish interpretation, because it is we and not China who decide the interpretation. If it is now a budget issue, I expect that in the autumn budget an expansion of our presence in Taiwan will be found.

It naturally correlates with our broader picture, of trying to link Taiwan to many of the multilateral bodies. In several of them, Taiwan constitutes an asset for the entire world.

Madam Speaker! Finally, it is about the consular cases: Gui Minhai, Dawit Isaak, Ahmadreza Djalali and Johan Floderus. But it is also about what has been touched upon earlier, what is now happening with the imprisonments in Iran. But even in Turkey, which has also been raised, there are people who are political prisoners - it is political prisoners that we are talking about here. There, quiet diplomacy has worked, and it continues to work. But it has not reached through. One needs to consider a new strategy there as well.

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

Jacob Risberg (MP)

Madam Speaker! The world today is characterized by multifaceted crises that lead to regions and countries deprioritizing international cooperation in order to instead turn inward and focus on safeguarding domestic short-term interests. In many places, democracy is also under strong pressure. Taken together, this development means worsened conditions for consensus and understanding globally as well as increased risks for tensions and conflicts.

In this increasingly protectionist world, global forces are needed that, with a long-term perspective, protect and strengthen human rights, democracy, the principles of the rule of law, free media, and human development. Sweden has a long tradition of standing up for these principles, but now even we are beginning to steer policy in a protectionist direction.

When democracy is threatened around the world and many countries are becoming increasingly authoritarian, we must stand up for free media and actively contribute to strengthening civil societies, human rights, and democracy. We must not turn our backs on the rest of the world.

When conflicts arise in different places, we must contribute with diplomacy, mediation, and peaceful ways out of these conflicts. We shall not only invest in increased militarization and higher walls.

When people are forced to flee due to natural disasters and a changing climate, we must stand up for these people's rights while simultaneously contributing to reduced emissions and adaptation to a changing climate. We must not increase our own emissions and worsen fleeing people's opportunities for a dignified and sustainable life.

The government, however, does not seem to understand any of this.

We want Sweden, through a foreign policy based on respect for human rights and international law, to be a global voice for democracy, human rights and a rules-based world order.

Madam Speaker! A feminist foreign policy is about ensuring girls' and women's rights, political representation, economic empowerment, and freedom from violence in all areas of foreign policy. The concept of feminist has in itself led to new analyses and perspectives that have contributed to designing effective interventions. With a clear analysis and a gender perspective that permeates all parts of a goal-oriented and trackable foreign policy, conditions are created for equality and for improving the actual situation of girls and women.

It is deeply regrettable that the government has dismantled the Swedish feminist foreign policy, not least in light of the current of conservative right-wing forces globally that question and attack the rights of women and girls. Violations of women's rights through discriminatory legislation and social norms are the most common and extensive violations of human rights. It is a significant cause of poverty and thus a substantial obstacle to development.

Sweden needs to stand up for equality, equal rights - including sexual and reproductive health and sexual and reproductive rights - equal representation and equal access to resources for women and men. To give women and girls power over their own lives and to promote their civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights is the best way to fight poverty and to achieve economic growth and human development.

Miljöpartiet therefore considers that the government should reintroduce and develop the feminist foreign policy, where equality and the work for all girls' and women's rights - including SRHR and freedom from violence - access to resources and representation are prioritized.

Madam Speaker! In step with a world that is becoming increasingly protectionist, trust in the UN and other global organizations is also diminishing. In a world where conflicts are increasing and democracy is in retreat, we hear many world leaders, including the Swedish government, speak loudly about the importance of a rules-based world order. But in the same breath, the rug is pulled out from under the UN, which is the only organization that has the possibility to uphold and secure the rules-based world order, by reducing resources and imposing ever higher conditions on the scarce resources that are still contributed, even though these conditions reduce the efficiency of the UN.

Instead, Sweden should pursue a foreign policy that prioritizes strong international cooperation with the UN as a central actor with the capacity to fulfill its tasks: to promote international peace and human rights. For this, the UN system needs to be modernized. The dominance of the wealthy, resource-rich countries needs to be broken, and the economically weak countries must be given a stronger voice. Decision-making needs to be reformed and the composition of the Security Council changed so that the UN becomes more democratic and just.

It is also important to ensure that the UN has sufficient resources. Sweden should therefore continue to contribute to the funding of the UN bodies and work for a significantly increased funding for those bodies that have the task of reviewing the member states' work regarding human rights.

Madam Speaker! In order to prevent conflicts over resources such as energy, water, and food, climate change must be stopped. This requires concrete action. In foreign policy, the government should prioritize climate diplomacy.

Sweden should be a leader in the work to solve the global climate crisis and be a driving force in all international forums where climate issues are addressed. In order to be that with credibility and to be an example in the climate transition and the international climate work, Sweden must fulfill the requirements in the Paris Agreement to reduce its own emissions to a sustainable level and finance the climate work in poor countries.

For Sweden's credibility in international contexts, it is also important that Swedish representatives are representative. The government should therefore take measures to ensure that Sweden's diplomatic corps reflects the diversity that exists in Sweden and that it is equal and equitable. Among other things, the government should introduce processes for the appointment of positions in the Ministry for Foreign Affairs that promote diversity based on all grounds of discrimination.

Madam Speaker! I naturally stand behind all of the Environment Party's reservations, but for the sake of time, I move for the approval of only reservation 3.

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

Morgan Johansson (S)

Madam Speaker! I requested the floor again because Markus Wiechel attacked S, V and MP in his post. He accused us of behaving undignifiedly regarding the stance on Björn Söder as the leader of the OSCE delegation. I know that this actually belongs in the OSCE debate, which we have already had, but when this comes up in a debate, it must not go unchallenged. It must be addressed.

What did Björn Söder do? What was it that made us react? Well, it was that last summer he sent out a tweet, that is, made a post on social media, where he accused the Prime Minister, the Speaker of the House, and the Foreign Minister of promoting pedophilia. It was when the Foreign Minister, the Prime Minister, and the Speaker of the House had spoken positively about the Pride celebration. It was a clear-cut homophobic statement by Björn Söder, which drew a great deal of attention. It even went so far that the Foreign Minister demanded an apology from Björn Söder. He has not received that apology.

Our view, Markus Wiechel, is that when we reacted to this, it was in no way that we were unworthy. It is rather the opposite. The fundamental problem is that Björn Söder is unsuitable for the assignment he has in the OSCE delegation. One cannot behave in the way he did last summer and think that one will get away with it.

When we receive this accusation directed at us in the chamber, it must not go unanswered. That is that.

(Applause)

In this speech, Jacob Risberg (MP) agreed.

The deliberation was hereby concluded.

(Decisions were made under § 10.)

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