Response to interpellation 2023/24:12 on the halt of Russian fossil gas
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
1 M considers that the government is pursuing the line in the EU that the European dependence on Russian fossil energy should cease as soon as possible 1. 2 M argues that sanctions are most effective when they are decided jointly within the EU and that national measures would have a marginal effect on the Russian state's revenues 2. 2 M wants to avoid different countries doing different things as it increases the possibility for Russia to find loopholes 2. 3 4 M considers that new nuclear power creates conditions to reduce emissions and reduce dependence on Russian fossil energy 3 4. 4 M considers that the EU's role is central to maintaining the global level of ambition for the climate transition 4. 4 M prioritized continuing the negotiations on the parts of the Fit for 55 package that remain with a high level of ambition during the Swedish presidency, and this priority remains 4. 4 M would welcome sanctions against Russian gas, but the question has not been raised by other member states in the council 4. 4 M considers that there are other, more effective ways to support Ukraine than sanctions against Russian gas 4.
Written by AI in advance and may contain errors. The numbers lead to the speech a statement builds on; check against the text below.
Utrikesministern Tobias Billström (M)
Madam Speaker! Linus Lakso has asked Minister for Energy and Business Ebba Busch whether she and the government intend to carry out the Riksdag's decision to stop the import of Russian fossil gas. The interpellation has been handed over to me.
As the Prime Minister stated in the Government Bill, the defense of Ukraine's freedom and sovereignty is the primary foreign policy task of the coming years. The Government condemns yesterday's brutal attack against a Ukrainian grocery store in the Kharkiv region. According to information from Ukrainian authorities, about fifty people are said to have lost their lives.
This shows once again Russia's ruthlessness. Attacks against civilians constitute war crimes. We will continue to support Ukraine for as long as is required, and we will continue to increase the pressure on Russia.
That is also why the government is driving within the EU circles to achieve sanctions against Russia that are as robust and effective as possible, with the aim of strangling the Russian state's revenues and Russia's war-fighting capacity.
The import of Russian natural gas to the EU has decreased dramatically over the past year. The EU has not decided to introduce sanctions against Russian gas; however, the latest sanctions package contains a ban on providing gas storage facilities to Russian companies and individuals.
Rules on the certification of gas storage owners have been introduced to prevent the misuse of the European gas storages. Sweden has no national sanctions beyond the EU's sanctions. Sanctions are most effective when they are decided jointly within the EU. The next step is to raise the level of ambition further. The Government is clearly driving the line in the EU that the European dependence on Russian energy, not least fossil energy, should cease as soon as possible. This can, in turn, improve the conditions for sanctions even in this area.
In addition to this, the government considers that the EU should adopt sanctions against both Russian fossil gas and Russian nuclear power. We are discussing the conditions with other member states, and I have also communicated this during the discussions in the Council.
The sanctions are adopted by unanimity, and even though the government considers that the EU should adopt sanctions against Russian fossil gas, many other member states have a different energy mix and different trade flows in the energy sector compared to Sweden. We must be sensitive and have an understanding of other member states' situations.
The question has not been raised by other member states in connection with the sanctions discussions in the Council, but I have stated that Sweden would support such a proposal. It is important to safeguard the unity in the EU and the EU's adoption of powerful sanctions against Russia in other areas, not least because sanctions are often adopted in packages.
The government is thus clearly pursuing the line that the EU shall continuously increase the pressure on Russia. We focus on the areas where we believe we can achieve a concrete result through an adoption. We work continuously together with like-minded [countries] in the EU to explore how further sanction measures can be designed.
Linus Lakso (MP)
Madam Speaker! Thank you very much for the answer, Tobias Billström! I naturally welcome everything that is done to support Ukraine. But, Madam Speaker, simply referring to the EU when it comes to stopping Russian fossil gas is unfortunately not enough. A unanimous Riksdag has stood behind an appeal to the government to stop the import of Russian gas, and it is now over one and a half years since then.
Taking the lead as a country would increase the pressure on both other countries and on the EU to act. In fact, both Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania as individual countries have already taken the lead and stopped the import of Russian gas. The USA has also introduced an import ban.
What Sweden does as an individual country also plays a role in practice. During only the first nine months of the war, at least eight large LNG tankers have delivered Russian fossil gas to Sweden. These deliveries have a total value of over 1 billion kronor.
For 1 billion kronor, the Russian war machine can acquire the equivalent of several thousand of the so-called kamikaze drones from Iran or a hundred advanced missiles - missiles that Russia regularly uses to terrorize Ukraine's population. This happened as recently as yesterday, as the Foreign Minister just mentioned.
That such an attack can be financed with Swedish money through the purchase of Russian fossil gas, I think feels really, really bad. As recently as September 9 this year, the ship Coral Energy anchored again outside Nynäshamn, fueled with large amounts of Russian fossil gas. This means further financing to Russia's war chest.
I think it is remarkable that the Swedish government has acted so sluggishly and has not stopped the import of Russian fossil gas. Referring to the EU in this case, I think, as I said, is not sufficient. Just as the minister mentioned, there are countries that are holding back. What makes us believe that Hungary, which has just signed new agreements with Russia regarding the import of fossil energy, will agree to a ban at the EU level? No, in that case, it is better for individual countries like Sweden to take the initiative and stop the import.
Madam Speaker! I wonder how the Minister views the fact that Swedish imports of Russian fossil gas continue to finance Russia's brutal war of aggression against Ukraine. Would it not be reasonable, Foreign Minister, for Sweden, like the Baltic states, to take the lead and stop the import of Russian fossil gas?
Utrikesministern Tobias Billström (M)
Madam Speaker! During Sweden's presidency of the EU, the Government has pushed for the EU to increase the pressure on Russia, including through sanctions, while simultaneously safeguarding unity within the EU. During the Swedish presidency, two powerful sanction packages were adopted. Russia's most important source of income, crude oil and other petroleum products, are already subject to import bans. Import of Russian coal and solid fossil fuels was prohibited over a year ago.
The latest sanctions package contains an additional step to prevent Russia's access to the EU's energy market. The package contains a ban on the provision of gas storage capacity for Russian operators within the EU, and it also includes measures that limit Russia's access to European technology and also counteract the circumvention of sanctions via third countries. In this way, we have further strangled the Russian state's revenues and war capacity.
We now have the most powerful and far-reaching sanctions ever against Russia, which mean directly reduced revenues for the Russian state treasury. But more needs to be done. And there I believe that I and the interpellor agree. After the chairship, Sweden has continued to push for further sanctions against Russia. We assume that the commission will present a proposal on this during the autumn.
A fundamental principle of sanctions policy is, however, that sanctions are most effective when they achieve broad international support. National measures would have a marginal effect on the Russian state's revenues. This applies even more in the case of contracts for liquefied natural gas. They run over a long period, and there are often lacking conditions to terminate them.
From the Swedish side, we would, just as I said earlier in my opening speech, stand behind proposals that involve EU sanctions against Russian gas. I have also communicated this in the council. We have also examined the conditions for this with other member states. At the current moment, it does not appear to be feasible. The question therefore becomes how we can design the sanction legislation that has the greatest effect. The government's ambition and conviction is that the legislation is best developed together with the other member states of the European Union. The reason is simple, namely that this is a common problem for the entire EU. And a common problem also requires common answers.
We want to avoid something else, and Ukraine's government itself has been clear about this, namely that different countries in Europe are doing things in completely different ways. This is for the simple reason that everyone has their own legislation. In such a situation, the opportunities for Russia to find different loopholes in national legislations would increase, and that is why it is so important to stick together.
Linus Lakso (MP)
Madam Speaker! Thank you for the answer, Tobias Billström! I naturally welcome everything that is already being done, but I still mean that significantly more can be done from Sweden's side when it comes to the Russian fossil gas. Miljöpartiet has for decades warned about the risks of dependence on fossil energy, naturally from climate aspects but also from the perspective of security of supply.
The Riksdag's announcement was decided in the Committee on Industry, on the initiative of the Green Party, and was signed by Tobias Billström's party friend and now ministerial colleague Carl-Oskar Bohlin - however, after he initially refused to agree to the initiative, on the grounds of not wanting to legitimize Green Party-style politics. According to information, EU Minister Jessika Roswall has also stated that Sweden is not driving the issue in the EU because there is a lack of sufficient support.
I am, in any case, glad that the Foreign Minister informs that Sweden has pushed, but it still makes me wonder with what force the issue has been driven.
Today, the Prime Minister is at a meeting in Granada, Spain, to negotiate priorities for Spain's presidency. Therefore, I have a question for the Minister for Foreign Affairs and the government, namely whether the Prime Minister here will bring up the issue of stopping the import of fossil energy, specifically fossil gas from Russia, both in terms of security of supply in the EU and in terms of climate aspects, that is, emphasizing the importance of reducing the amount of fossil energy due to the climate issue.
Utrikesministern Tobias Billström (M)
Madam Speaker! I believe the interpellor and I agree on a few points. First and foremost, Europe must increase the pace of transition from fossil energy to fossil-free energy. Access to clean electricity is crucial for the climate transition, while it also reduces the dependence on Russian fossil energy. With new nuclear power, conditions are created to reduce emissions.
This applies primarily to Russian fossil energy, but in order to manage the climate transition and strengthen European competitiveness, the entire society must transition to fossil-free as soon as possible. Sweden has come relatively far in that work, and we are therefore not as directly affected by Russia's actions as others. But we too are affected both directly and indirectly by high energy prices.
A year ago, the USA and the European Commission launched a new partnership to rapidly reduce Europe's dependence on Russian fossil fuels and accelerate Europe's green transition. This partnership has exceeded our goals. It has delivered more than twice as much American liquefied natural gas to Europe compared to what we promised at the outset. In other words, it is a very great success. We have noted the significant European efforts to diversify the energy supply and accelerate the energy transition, which have contributed to limiting the effects of the global energy crisis in Europe.
The answer to the question from the interpellator is that we will continue to work together to promote energy security and sustainability in Europe by diversifying sources, lowering energy consumption, and reducing Europe's dependence on fossil fuels. This is the government's policy.
We will also continue our close coordination to support Ukraine's energy security through the country's further integration into the European energy market. We will further continue our cooperation for stable and balanced global markets and security of supply, and we will accelerate the transition to clean energy globally, including through efforts to reduce methane emissions within the energy sector.
Finally, Madam Speaker, I want to note that the origin of the LNG imports is difficult to determine. It is not possible to determine if the Russian share of the LNG imports to Swedish ports is significant. In cases where ships go directly from a Russian port to a Swedish port without reloading along the way, the gas's origin could potentially be traced to Russia. However, it is not certain that the gas is entirely Russian, even if it is shipped directly from a Russian port to a Swedish port.
LNG purchases, like regular fossil gas, are often through so-called take-or-pay contracts. What does this mean? Well, if the importer does not take the gas, it must still be paid for, and the Russian exporter can then sell the gas once more and thus receive payment once more. The new price will be higher than that specified in the take-or-pay contract. Even if the original importer refuses to pay, the Russian exporter will profit from this, and that is what we want to avoid.
Linus Lakso (MP)
Madam Speaker! I thank the Minister for Foreign Affairs for the answer.
When it comes to the contracts, it can naturally be a practical problem to get out of such traps. There, I want to advise the government to look at how Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania have done to get out of a dependency on Russian fossil gas. If there is anything we have learned after seven years in government, it is that problems can often be solved, if one really wants to. I still want to urge the government to increase the efforts to stop the import of Russian fossil gas.
I naturally welcome the Foreign Minister's ambitions to reduce dependence on fossil energy, not least from rogue states like Russia, but unfortunately there are other countries from which we import fossil energy that are also not on the democratic side. I am well aware that the government is in favor of building new nuclear power, but regardless, it takes a long time, and one has also significantly lowered the tax on fossil fuels.
How does the government intend to reduce the dependence on fossil energy over the next ten years, based on the ambitions mentioned by the Minister for Foreign Affairs?
Utrikesministern Tobias Billström (M)
Madam Speaker! The relationship between climate policy issues in a broad sense and security policy issues is becoming increasingly important.
Sweden will continue to push for an ambitious European climate policy, not least to reduce the dependence on Russian fossil fuels. With new nuclear power, conditions are created to reduce emissions while simultaneously increasing the availability of clean electricity and reducing the dependence on Russian fossil energy.
All of this combined is crucial for the climate transition, and the EU's role in maintaining the global level of ambition for the climate transition is central. It was precisely for that reason that the Swedish presidency prioritized, with a high level of ambition, to move forward with the negotiations on the parts of the Fit for 55 package that remain. That priority remains for us even after the concluded presidency.
In conclusion, I would like to point out that the government would welcome sanctions against Russian gas, which is what the interpellation is about. However, the question has not been raised by other member states in connection with the sanctions discussions in the Council, even though I have stated that Sweden would support such a proposal.
There are, of course, also other, more effective ways to support Ukraine. Sweden is among the ten largest donors to the country. We have so far contributed support worth over 25 billion kronor, and we have just launched an aid strategy that is the single most extensive ever, while we only a few hours ago launched another military package to Ukraine.
Ukraine is now becoming our largest aid recipient, and within the scope of our support, Ukraine has also received some of our most advanced weapons systems. We will continue to be a long-term partner to Ukraine and provide the humanitarian, civilian, and military support that the country needs both now and in the long term to be able to rebuild its country again.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.