Response to interpellation 2023/24:373 on import ban for Russian energy
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
M considers that the primary foreign policy goal is to provide strong and sustained support to Ukraine in order to limit Russia's options for action. M wants the European dependence on Russian fossil energy to cease as soon as possible 1 2. M wants to avoid abrupt interruptions of ongoing contracts 2 and is considering acting individually through a national import ban 2. 3 M considers that Sweden needs to take measures to cease the import of Russian energy where possible 3. MP considers it too weak that nothing has happened in two years. MP argues that it is counterproductive to buy fossil energy from Russia while simultaneously supporting Ukraine. 4 MP advocates for Sweden to act as an individual country as it is unlikely that countries like Hungary will agree to an EU-wide import ban 4. 4 MP argues that the company importing gas requests sanctions in order to be able to have the contracts reviewed and rescinded 4. 3 M argues that the government is working to fulfill the objective and that there is no difference between what the Riksdag and the government want 3. 3 M considers that the deepened cooperation with France in the field of nuclear power is an excellent practical expression of the policy to reduce dependence on Russia 3. 3 M wants to see a 13th sanctions package in place and is actively working to ensure that the measures against Russia are strengthened 3.
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 me if I intend to act for a national import ban of all fossil energy from Russia and when such a ban could be in place in that case.
Let me begin by saying that our military, political and economic support for Ukraine remains our primary foreign policy task. Strong, predictable and sustained support for Ukraine constitutes our primary opportunity to limit Russia's options for action.
According to the Riksdag's announcement, we shall "clearly and forcefully drive the line in the EU that the European dependence on Russian energy, not least fossil energy, shall cease as soon as practically possible".
The Committee on Industry also agreed that we need to take measures so that Sweden ceases the import of Russian energy, not least fossil fuels, when it is possible.
The government's position does not differ from the Riksdag's. The government's position is, as I stated here in the chamber last in October 2023, that the European dependence on Russian energy, not least fossil energy, should cease as soon as possible. Sweden's import of Russian energy should also cease as soon as it is possible. Against this background, the EU should adopt sanctions against both Russian fossil gas and Russian nuclear power. We are discussing the conditions for this with other member states. Concretely, this means that the government advocates that restrictive measures covering fossil gas and Russian nuclear power be included in upcoming sanction packages.
As the interpellator knows from previous debates, an abrupt, unilateral termination of ongoing contracts for the import of liquid Russian fossil gas would not be preferable. The Russian supplier could demand payment from the recipient and simultaneously resell the gas, thereby earning twice as much money. This is what we want to avoid.
Regarding a national import ban in the EU's new gas market regulation, implementation work of the entire regulation will commence at the Government Offices once it has been adopted. The Energy Markets Inspectorate has already been commissioned to begin looking into implementation and follow-up legislation. The question of a ban on imports of Russian fossil gas with reference to the gas market regulation will be analyzed in the Government Offices. We are also considering the possibilities of acting individually.
Regarding Finland, which the interpellor also refers to in the question, I have noted that representatives of the Finnish government have expressed intentions to investigate whether a national import ban can be implemented after the EU's new gas market regulation is adopted. It is, of course, very important for the government to follow the developments closely.
In conclusion, I want to repeat that we limit Russia's options primarily through strong, predictable and sustained support for Ukraine. Our military, political and economic support for Ukraine remains the primary foreign policy task for the coming years. Furthermore, the government prioritizes new sanctions against Russia as well as an effective implementation of already adopted sanctions.
Linus Lakso (MP)
Madam Speaker! I would like to begin by thanking the Minister for Foreign Affairs very much for the answer.
It is entirely correct that we have debated this before. Miljöpartiet has for decades warned about the risks of dependence on fossil energy from precisely those countries, for the sake of the climate but also for the sake of security of supply.
As was mentioned, it was actually a unanimous Riksdag that decided that the government should push for sanctions where we stop the import of Russian energy. Therefore, I think it is too weak that nothing has happened for nearly two years.
I completely agree with the Minister for Foreign Affairs regarding the urgent need to support Ukraine in every way. I think it is good that Sweden has stood strong there and been active in the support. But it becomes very counterproductive when we simultaneously purchase fossil energy from Russia. Even if the import is not extensive, it concerns several billion that we are putting into the Russian war chest.
As I have also mentioned earlier, there are already individual countries that have acted. Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania have stopped the import of Russian fossil energy, so the question remains why Sweden has not acted earlier.
The government has referred to wanting to do it jointly at the EU level, but I do not think that is an argument that holds. We know that countries such as Hungary recently, even after Russia's war of aggression, have signed new contracts with Russian fossil energy. That they would sign on to an EU-wide import ban, I find very unlikely. It remains for Sweden to step forward as an individual country and stop this import.
Now Finland has also acted, and it is the home of the company that primarily accounts for the import of precisely fossil gas. It would be strange if Sweden could not be a bit more proactive here and get moving and actually legislate a ban.
I also want to say that I have a slightly different picture of what the company in question says. They say that they cannot get out of these contracts precisely because there are no sanctions to refer to. They mean that, if there were sanctions, they could go to, for example, an arbitration court or similar and at least have the contracts tested for whether they can be rescinded. So, at least I interpret the statements that representatives for the company in question have made in the media as: that they are rather requesting sanctions in order to be able to get out of these agreements.
I still think it is a step forward that Tobias Billström says that the government is considering that Sweden should act as an individual country. I see that as an opening to move forward in this issue.
Utrikesministern Tobias Billström (M)
Madam Speaker! Let me begin by returning to the Committee on Enterprise's report in May 2022, which the interpellator has raised. According to the report, the government shall clearly and forcefully drive "the line in the EU that the European dependence on Russian energy, not least fossil energy, shall cease as soon as practically possible." The Committee on Enterprise also agreed that we need to take measures so that Sweden ceases the import of Russian energy, not least fossil fuels, when this is possible.
As I emphasized in my opening remarks, there are therefore no contradictions between the Riksdag's and the government's objectives in this regard. It is important that we do everything we can to limit Russia's ability to finance its war of aggression against Ukraine.
How are we then to achieve the objective that Sweden and the EU shall cease the import of Russian energy, not least fossil energy? Partly, it is about transition and phasing out the dependency. In the area of nuclear power, Sweden has taken a significant step forward. In connection with the French state visit, we have initiated an intensified cooperation with France on the nuclear power area. The objective is, among other things, to reduce the EU's dependence on Russian nuclear fuel and service for nuclear power plants.
It is also about introducing sanctions against Russia. The most powerful tool we have to limit Russia's revenues and war capacity is the EU's sanctions. And the sanctions work. The restrictive measures isolate and pressure the Russian economy. We see a volatile ruble, rapidly increasing inflation, and a strained labor market. There is a shortage of capital and technology in the Russian economy, which is a direct effect of the sanctions.
This shows that the EU's policy is working and that time is not on Russia's side - on the contrary. The longer time passes, the more difficult it becomes for Russia to maintain its warfare. We must also remember that the good effect of the sanctions is achieved precisely because there is a good international unity. The EU, G7 and other partners stand united behind the measures against Russia.
That is why the government, before, during, and after Sweden's presidency in the EU, has pushed to increase the pressure on Russia, among other things through further sanctions. We are now looking forward and pushing in the EU that we should adopt new sanctions. Concretely, this means, as I previously mentioned, that the government advocates that restrictive measures covering fossil gas and Russian nuclear power be included in upcoming sanction packages.
We will also continue to work on the second track, but there is no quick solution for a national import ban.
I have noted that the representatives of the Finnish government have expressed intentions to investigate whether a national import ban can be implemented after the EU's new gas market regulation has been adopted. The Swedish government's approach is the same. It is very important that we look at what opportunities the EU's new gas market regulation brings with it.
The timetable is the same for Sweden and Finland. We are members of the same union. The EU's new gas market regulation will come into force at the same time in both countries after it has been adopted. It would not be wise to anticipate what the analysis of the gas market regulation yields as results.
Finally: We limit Russia's options primarily through strong, predictable and sustained support for Ukraine. Our military, political and economic support for Ukraine remains the primary foreign policy task for the coming years.
Linus Lakso (MP)
Madam Speaker! Thank you very much, Tobias Billström, for the answer! I think it sounds somewhat better than before. Even though my criticism that it has gone very slowly remains, I still hear more positive tones than when we debated this issue in October. This I welcome, of course. We are in complete agreement that the long-term and strong support for Ukraine is very important. And we seem, in any case, to be in agreement on the substance that it is important to move forward even in the issue of stopping the import of Russian energy.
It is pleasing to hear that we are making some progress. My criticism that it has taken a long time remains, and I naturally wonder if the Foreign Minister has any approximate timeline for the work to move forward in this issue. It would be very interesting to know.
Utrikesministern Tobias Billström (M)
Madam Speaker! Thank you to the interpellator for the views and the support, as I perceive it, for the government's policy! We think alike: The European dependence on Russian energy and the Swedish import of Russian energy, above all fossil energy, should cease. There is no contradiction between the views and objectives of the Riksdag and the government in this regard.
I see three alternatives for achieving this. The first and foremost alternative to achieve a robust ban on the import of Russian energy is through EU sanctions. The Government prioritizes this issue. This means that we work to ensure that future sanction packages contain measures targeted at Russian fossil gas and Russian nuclear power. As the interpellor already knows, however, it does not automatically mean that other member states will take the proposals on board. It does not mean that we give up, but we continue, of course, to work to ensure that this becomes a reality.
The second option, which is most often raised, is a national, that is, unilateral, import ban. The interpellor has previously referred to the Finnish government's intentions. I have stated that the EU's new gas market regulation will come into force in both countries simultaneously after it has been adopted. We should not anticipate what the Government Offices' analysis work will result in. However, it is important to point out that we need to consider the possibility of acting individually based on the new regulation.
The last option is that the buyer cancels the contracts prematurely. This has unfortunate consequences. The sale and purchase of liquid fossil gas is something that is, unfortunately, designed for long-term conditions. The Russian supplier could demand payment from the recipient and simultaneously sell the gas again and in that way, as I said earlier, earn twice as much money. Those who want to stop Russia's aggression can have no interest in such a thing happening. It would be counterproductive in view of our objectives to limit Russia's ability to finance its war of aggression. It is therefore that we want to avoid this.
Linus Lakso (MP)
Madam Speaker! To say that I support the government's policy might be to stretch it a bit. But in substance we seem to be in agreement, and I look forward very much to the government coming to the point in this matter. Otherwise, perhaps we will be standing here again in a month or so debating the issue.
We will have to see how quickly this work can be moved forward in the Government Offices. I believe, however, that it is at the national level that we must act. We are in complete agreement that it would be good to act at the EU level, but as I have already mentioned, I believe it is unlikely that countries such as Hungary, for example, will agree to this. The Foreign Minister is welcome to reflect on the probability that Hungary will agree to such a ban at the EU level. I find it, as I said, unlikely.
As I mentioned, we naturally do not want a situation where the company pays but does not receive the gas – that serves no purpose. As I said: As I interpret their statement, they get greater opportunities to stop these contracts if we move forward with a national ban.
I therefore look forward to the government taking a stand on this issue and thank you very much for the answer from Tobias Billström.
Utrikesministern Tobias Billström (M)
Madam Speaker! Thank you, Member, for a good and important debate on a question and a subject that concerns us all! The question of Russia's aggression against Ukraine is the government's primary foreign policy priority, and I perceive that there is very strong support in the chamber for it to be so, given what this aggression means for our collective security - for our own country, our immediate neighborhood, Europe, and the world.
The reason I expressed myself as I did regarding the support is that the Committee on Industry's report is quite clear. It states that the government shall clearly and forcefully pursue the line in the EU that the European dependence on Russian energy, not least fossil energy, shall cease as soon as practically possible.
The Committee on Industry also agreed that we need to take measures so that Sweden ceases the import of Russian energy, not least fossil fuels, where it is possible. The Government is working to fulfill that objective. There is, as I see it, no difference between what the Riksdag wants and what the Government wants.
The deepened cooperation with France in the nuclear power area, which I mentioned earlier, including the objective of reducing dependence on Russia, is an excellent practical expression of the pursued policy. Regarding Russian fossil fuels, the government is working to ensure that future sanction packages include liquefied fossil gas. As I said, the sanctions are our most robust tool to prevent Russia from continuing to profit from energy exports.
Let me conclude by underlining that the government will not let the issue of sanctions against Russian fossil gas or nuclear energy remain unresolved. On the contrary, we are actively working to ensure that the sectoral measures against Russia are strengthened. The government wants to see a 13th sanctions package in place before the anniversary of Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine and welcomes that discussions on its content have commenced.
With that, Madam Speaker, I thank you very much for the debate.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.