Response to interpellation 2023/24:304 on aid to Palestine
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
The debate concerns the aid to Palestine and how Swedish tax money is used. M argues that the government must ensure efficiency and control so that the funds do not end up with actors who do not condemn Hamas 1 2. M emphasizes that Sweden is a major donor that has strengthened humanitarian support for food, water, and medicine 3 1 2. M believes that S focuses on payments without regard for quality 2. S argues that the withdrawn aid harms civil society, creates hopelessness, and leads to people dying 4 5 6. S argues that the review is too fast and that the government is counteracting a two-state solution 7. S also believes that it is problematic that Sweden has trade agreements and sells weapons to actors who carry out occupation and violations of international law 6.
Written by AI in advance and may contain errors. The numbers lead to the speech a statement builds on; check against the text below.
Statsrådet Johan Forssell (M)
Madam Speaker! Ola Möller has asked me what the government's plan for aid to Palestine looks like moving forward and how the government believes this plan leads towards peace, safety, and security and, in the long run, a two-state solution.
The civilian population is undergoing very severe suffering. The images from Gaza are appalling. All parties in the conflict have, according to international humanitarian law, a responsibility to ensure that the humanitarian needs of the civilian population are met. It is of utmost importance that swift, safe, full, and unimpeded humanitarian access is ensured and that humanitarian aid reaches people in need of it. Sweden and the EU emphasize the importance of humanitarian aid being able to enter Gaza, including through humanitarian corridors.
Sweden is a major core donor to several of the humanitarian actors on the ground. Additionally, since October 7, we have contributed 250 million kronor in further humanitarian aid to Gaza. The support goes to the most vulnerable groups, with the needs of women and children in focus, and contributes, among other things, to emergency healthcare, social protection, access to food, health, psychosocial support, maternal care, water and sanitation.
The Government supports a negotiated two-state solution where Israel and Palestine can live side by side in peace and security. Development aid shall contribute to promoting the conditions for a two-state solution.
After Hamas's horrific attacks against Israel on October 7, 2023, the government judged it necessary to pause development aid to Palestine. Sida was tasked with conducting an in-depth review in order to ensure that no Swedish aid funds go to actors who do not unreservedly condemn Hamas, which exercises violence, threatens or encourages violence against the State of Israel or its population, or which promotes an antisemitic agenda. No Swedish aid funds shall also go to actors who have dealings with such actors.
The review was received on 1 December, but the government needs a proper basis for decision-making and saw it as necessary for Sida to supplement its report, which was incomplete. The government therefore requested supplementary material on 7 December. The supplement is to be reported to UD on 15 February 2024. The government will return regarding the long-term direction of the aid to Palestine.
Ola Möller (S)
Madam Speaker! Swedish aid to Palestine has been reviewed extensively and thoroughly - not only through the review that the government initiated on 7 October but also previously. Time and again it is noted that Swedish aid, not only in Palestine, is effective and makes a great difference for people in their lives and for positive development in countries with weak or no systems. In the review that was conducted after 7 October, it was also noted, not surprisingly, that no aid goes to terrorism.
What does the Swedish aid to Palestine go towards? In addition to going to the UN and UNRWA, which provide education, healthcare and other necessities for Palestinian refugees in the region, the aid also goes to civil society.
The development aid that the government has now choked off goes to healthcare at the Augusta Victoria Hospital and to democracy and equality work with PWWSD, which strengthens women's economic empowerment, counters gender-based violence, and works for political participation. It goes to Israeli and Palestinian youth meeting within the framework of the Geneva Initiative. The justice system working against honor-related violence receives a share of the aid through work conducted by Kvinna till Kvinna. Food and agriculture receive support through We Effects' work, where women in particular can come together to buy land and learn to farm and build an economy. Schools receive support, such as the vocational school in Beit Hanina, where Act Svenska kyrkan helps young men and women get into work, especially young men and women in vulnerable situations. The ecumenical accompaniment program is widely known and appreciated for expanding the Palestinian room for maneuver in a situation where the oppression on the West Bank only increases and increases.
It is these organizations, programs, and initiatives that now no longer have any funding. For many organizations, the situation is put on pause, or they are down to and running on the bottom of their own capital. Salaries can soon not be paid out, and the offices cannot be utilized because the security situation is so acute.
Madam Speaker! The withdrawn development aid means that this work cannot be done. It can never be compensated for by tossing out a little humanitarian aid, which is also being taken from UNRWA. There is also no contradiction between development aid and humanitarian aid. One needs both a fire extinguisher here and now and a smoke detector for tomorrow. One needs both bandages and vaccines. If only the acute problems are handled, the other problems will become worse tomorrow.
What the government is actively doing now is contributing to creating hopelessness and erasing faith in the future, not only in Gaza but also on the West Bank. It is a recipe for more terror and more Hamas supporters tomorrow. As we know, Hamas is an organization that, unlike Prime Minister Netanyahu, opposes a two-state solution. That is also why Netanyahu de facto has promoted Hamas's work, something that Josep Borrell in the EU spoke about as recently as last week.
My question remains after Johan Forssell's opening statement: How does the Swedish government, with the current aid policy, support a two-state solution?
Denis Begic (S)
Madam Speaker! I have many times met people who have confirmed to me what Sweden's aid means. These testimonies have convinced me that one of the most powerful instruments for giving people hope in war-torn areas is precisely aid. I remember a woman who told me how in war-torn Bosnia, people looked for vehicles with a Swedish flag – there, one knew that help could be obtained.
Of course we can always question where the aid goes, but right now the Palestinian population, women and children, are suffering something terrible. How do we ensure that this pause does not harm the civilian population, who are already in desperate need of help? The Minister's emphasis on the review of the aid is important, but we need to ensure that the pause does not delay or prevent acute and necessary aid. It is necessary that we balance transparency against the immediate needs that people have right now in Gaza.
Today we had a debate with the Minister for Foreign Affairs where the mantra was a two-state solution. Certainly – we are surely in agreement on this in this chamber. But, Madam Speaker, what is said also needs to be followed by what is done. Right now, I do not see the government doing anything on the issue. I have not seen any initiatives from the government's side regarding this. A clear and powerful plan is needed for how our aid can contribute to promoting peace and security – and the two-state solution – in this region.
Finally, I want to say that we must always keep the human aspects of the aid in mind. Every decision we make has direct consequences for the lives of the people in these terrible wars. Ultimately, there is an immense risk that many children in Gaza will not get the future they deserve and that Ola Möller's children get here in Sweden.
Statsrådet Johan Forssell (M)
Madam Speaker! I want to start by correcting some factual errors presented in the interpellation. For example, it is an obvious factual error that Sweden would be one of the countries that contributes the least in humanitarian aid. That is easy to check. According to the EU's latest compilation from January 15, Sweden is the fifth largest donor in the entire EU of humanitarian aid to Palestine since October 7. We are simply a large donor.
There are more things to correct, but I also want to initially agree with Denis Begic on one point: what one says, one must also do – otherwise it doesn't matter. We said very early from the government's side that we will ensure that the Swedish aid is used effectively. The Swedish aid does not come from anyone else. It is not taken from UNRWA, as we could hear the interpellator say, but it is taken from Swedish taxpayers. It is teachers, nurses, and police officers who have worked for these funds. It is not that they come from somewhere else, but they come from Swedish taxpayers. We said early and clearly that we will ensure that their tax money is used effectively and does not go to incorrect actors and that the money never even comes near, Madam Speaker, organizations that in one way or another support the despicable terror sect Hamas.
There, Madam Speaker, there is a clear difference between the government and the Social Democrats. The Social Democrats already signaled on day one that they were opposed to such an audit. They did not want to ensure that Swedish tax money is used effectively and that it goes to the right actors and not to those who perhaps express themselves regarding terrorism in a way that we are not comfortable with. There, we differ very much.
We have thanked and reviewed the analysis that Sida conducted. But it is not what we asked for. Sida has a total of 42 partners in the bilateral development cooperation in Palestine. The government asked Sida to review all of them. Sida reviewed 5 of 42. It is quite bold, I think, Madam Speaker, of the interpellor to say so confidently that there are obviously no problems with any of these 42 partners. If one saw a review of 5 of 42 companies suspected of money laundering, could one then conclude that money laundering does not occur in any of the 42 companies? No, if one is to know that surely and clearly, one must review the whole.
One must also, Madam Speaker, for example, look at how these organizations express themselves communicatively. What do they write on their websites? How do they communicate? That is also a clear part of the government's mandate that Sida has not fulfilled.
When the analysis arrived, we therefore asked Sida to provide a new decision basis. When we have that in place, we will continue to prepare it here, and we will then also be able to make a decision.
Madam Speaker! I want to point out another thing. Much of this discussion is about Swedish taxpayers knowing that their money is used effectively and never comes anywhere near terrorist organizations. But there is also another side to the coin, namely that people in Palestine and Gaza should know that the aid money that Sweden sends there is used for the people's benefit and goes to them, and that the money does not end up with actors who use terrorism as a political method, cement the conflict, and create masses of misery, frustration, and suffering for both people in Israel and people in Gaza.
Madam Speaker! The Government will continue to work to ensure that Swedish aid funds are used effectively and do not go to actors who do not clearly distance themselves from terrorism.
Ola Möller (S)
Madam Speaker! One thing that puzzles me in this is that the Swedish government and Sweden, as the only EU country, are acting to reduce aid in this situation. No governments in other countries are doing what the Swedish government is doing. Other countries have also conducted reviews, and for example, the CIA has looked at it and concluded that no money is going to Hamas.
The Minister is so incredibly stressed in these matters because he wants to try to show some kind of political result that it is not quite comprehensible what it is about. That he gives Sida such a short time to conduct a larger review is the Minister's fault. It is because the Minister does not have the patience to act as he should in such a situation and increase the aid. He does not want to.
There are good reasons why aid organizations do not step out and condemn or take a stand in conflicts. One of the absolute oldest is the Red Cross. They have a unique position in the world's conflicts precisely because they do not take a stand other than to help. For as soon as an organization takes a stand for or against, forward or backward, it risks compromising the do no harm principle. This means that the aid must not cause harm to anyone at all. This is something that, for example, the OECD has as clear criteria for aid.
A speaking example is the aid workers who were hacked to death in Gaza with several knife wounds in the back because they had criticized just Hamas in their home countries. If one is to be able to work in conflict zones, war zones, and in the backyards of authoritarian regimes, one must be extremely careful. Aid workers, both foreign and domestic, do so with their lives at stake. Even before the government began to set completely unreasonable demands on the organizations, they were, in fact, killed. The government's witch hunt on civil society both here at home and in Palestine will lead to either making the aid impossible or to more aid workers losing their lives.
Madam Speaker! The reason I am raising this debate is because I want to know what the government envisions. What is a two-state solution supposed to look like? Who is it that is to take over the power and control in Gaza? Who is to constitute the party that is to administer the state of Palestine?
In my eyes, the only reasonable actor is the Palestinian Authority, PA. But for that to be possible, the PA must be strengthened. Right now, the government is counteracting this through its active policy to reduce aid. A weakened PA will mean that even though Foreign Minister Billström stands here and speaks in beautiful words about a two-state solution, it is impossible. Other EU countries realize this, and therefore they are acting to strengthen the aid. But the Swedish government is doing exactly the opposite.
So I must ask the minister again: How does the Swedish aid policy strengthen a two-state solution here and now? If the minister does not see the PA as the party that is to take over the administration but has some brilliant solution with another actor who is to solve this, he may then gladly share it, Madam Speaker.
Denis Begic (S)
Madam Speaker! I am trying to highlight the human element behind all the figures we are talking about. When we consider aid to war zones and to Palestine, we must also reflect on the real impact.
Aid for me is not just a figure. It is millions of people who need it for their survival. For a young girl in Gaza, it is the aid and the schooling that perhaps is the most important thing she can get to have a hope for life and the future. It is a step towards a brighter future. A family in a refugee camp is not a figure in an aid row. They are people who every day need it to survive. I know that, Madam Speaker. I have seen it with my own eyes. I know what aid and Swedish aid means.
As a reminder of our shared responsibility, I just want to tell you about a young boy in war-torn and also besieged Sarajevo. There, as in Gaza, aid was often the difference between life and death. That boy found hope in a can of Swedish kalops. He saw the Swedish flag and thought: One day I will hopefully see the world, and above all, I would like to see Sweden. That boy lives in Sweden today and contributes to our welfare. Even his tax money contributes to aid and to the children of Gaza.
Statsrådet Johan Forssell (M)
Madam Speaker! When we have this discussion, one wishes that the representatives for the Social Democrats were more interested in quality and efficiency or, in any case, could mention it in some subordinate clause at some point. The only focus here is to pay out even more money. It is important to pay out as much as possible and not that it goes to the right things. It is actually a very strange position in the aid policy. It is also that position that, unfortunately, has characterized this important area. It is perhaps also why the results over time have been so poor in several important areas.
We are changing this now. We set requirements, and we redo it. We change and ensure that Swedish taxpayers know that their money goes to the right things. We ensure that measurable goals are introduced. We ensure that quality is controlled. We have zero tolerance for corruption.
To be honest, Madam Speaker, it is what we are discussing here and what we have done that we have received criticism for from the Social Democrats from day one. Is it not quite obvious that Swedish aid should never ever come anywhere near actors who do not distance themselves from terrorism? How can one reach the conclusion that it is wrong to carry out these types of assessments?
I want to point out one thing to the interpellator. The review we are conducting is not about whether money has gone to Hamas. That is also a factual error. If one listens to my answer in the interpellation debate and reads the mandate we have given to Sida, one sees that the question we are asking is much broader than that.
It is about actors taking a stand against terrorism. That is the question we are asking, and it is important. It is important for the trust in the Swedish aid policy and, above all, it is important for people in Palestine and in Gaza.
Money that is to be used there should go to them. This applies especially after Denis Begic's very vivid description of the fact that there are people behind these crowns. I agree with that description to the letter. It is therefore all the more important to really ensure that the money reaches its destination, goes to what it is intended for, and does not end up with actors who rather want to cause division and fragmentation in society or perhaps even want to use terror as a political method. That was what happened during Hamas's horrific terror attacks on October 7 last year.
We will continue to make this type of demand. It is important to do so. At the same time as we do that, we have expanded the humanitarian support to people in Palestine and increased the efforts. Sweden is a major donor. We use that type of aid to ensure that food, medicine, and water reach. This applies in particular to the World Food Program. It is a major actor that we are in daily contact with.
We are also working relentlessly to increase humanitarian access into the area, for example with a maritime solution that we have been involved in. We will continue to do so. Fundamentally, it is a two-state solution that is the way forward. But it is not in anyone's interest in that part that aid money is used in an incorrect way.
We have also been deeply critical of the extensive corruption in the Palestinian Authority. Too much money has been used in an incorrect manner. That has also been evaluated. That is nothing new in that part.
When we receive the report that we have requested from Sida on February 15, we will analyze it. As for what will happen regarding the continuation of Swedish development aid, how it shall take place, to which actor it shall go and at what level, we will return to that. But first, we must have a solid analysis.
Ola Möller (S)
Madam Speaker! It is frightening to hear that money for women's health, for children's schooling, and for people receiving palliative care at a hospital at Västbanken should be affected by what is happening in Gaza. They have nothing to do with what is happening in Gaza. It is the Palestinians living there who are unintentionally affected by the withdrawn development aid.
The Minister knows that very little of the Swedish aid money goes directly to the Palestinian Authority. It is not large sums. Yes, there is a lot of corruption there, and we absolutely have nothing against trying to manage that. But what the Minister is doing now is withdrawing all the money, so that there is nothing at all. So the Minister stands and says: Show first that nothing ends up in the wrong place! Then we can pay.
This means that people actually die in the meantime because money does not arrive. Democracy is weakened and so on. This is what the minister is urging the aid organizations to do here. They are thus to break with century-old traditions regarding how aid organizations should act in order to be able to operate in conflict zones. There, Johan Forsell has come up with his own idea that no other EU country and not USA, CIA or OECD think is something that one needs to do. It is a bit frightening that we have landed there.
The big question is that if we are not to give money to those who practice terrorism as a political method, why should we then give money, have trade agreements with, or sell weapons to those who use occupation and commit crimes against international law in the form of blockade or carry out ethnic cleansing? Should they receive money from us and conduct trade with Sweden?
Statsrådet Johan Forssell (M)
Madam Speaker! Ola Möller says it is frightening. We probably have very different views on this.
I have accounted for the government's position. For us, it is important not only to pay out as much money as possible, in contrast to the previous Social Democratic aid policy with, in reality, very small requirements for quality, efficiency, and control. We shall ensure that money goes to the right things.
I am surprised that it can be so important for the Social Democrats to be against an investigation into whether Swedish aid money ends up in the hands of persons who use terror as a political method. How could the Social Democrats have ended up in that position? But perhaps it is more important to make poster politics out of this.
I also note the criticism I have received from the Social Democrats' foreign policy spokesperson, who described it as a slaughter of aid. But when the Social Democrats then get the opportunity in their own budgets, how do they act, after having criticized the government so much? Well, they follow suit and make almost exactly the same savings as the government does. It is a bit of a charade being played out here in the speaker's chair. We will surely have reason to return to this.
I just want to say again: The situation for the civilian population in Gaza is very serious. It is appalling in many ways. Therefore, we have increased the humanitarian support. It concerns food, water and medicines. We are a major donor - the fifth in the entire EU circle - but we will not back down when it comes to the important issue that the money must go to the right things and not end up near terrorists. It is an important principle issue.
It is about trust in the aid policy, but above all, it is about the people in Gaza. The money that we send there shall go to women, to children and to civil society - it shall not end up anywhere else. This government will, unlike the previous one, ensure that we also deliver in accordance with this.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.