Response to interpellation 2023/24:400 on assistance to interpreters and others who have worked for the Swedish military in Afghanistan

Försvarsministern Pål Jonson (M)

Mr. Speaker! have asked me

if I, within my area of responsibility, and the Swedish government intend to take measures so that the last local employees can have their grounds for protection reviewed in an equitable manner or at least on similar premises as their colleagues who today have received protection in Sweden

if I, within my area of responsibility, and the government intend to ensure that persons in this group who are judged to have grounds for protection receive the help they need to be able to travel to Sweden

if I, within my area of responsibility, and the government intend to take initiatives to ensure a permanent order that ensures local employees can rely on the fact that they do not risk their lives because they take employment for Sweden specifically.

Interpreters and other local staff have been very valuable and made important contributions in support of the Armed Forces' mission during the operation in Afghanistan. During 2013 and 2014, in connection with the conclusion of the NATO-led operation ISAF, the Armed Forces, together with the Swedish Migration Agency, carried out solid work to resettle interpreters and other local staff in need of protection. Since then, the Armed Forces have not had any of its own local staff in Afghanistan.

After the Taliban's takeover, a complex evacuation operation was carried out during the autumn of 2021. Within the framework of the rules for resettlement, interpreters and other local staff with protection needs could be granted residence permits in Sweden. The evacuation operation was concluded in December 2021.

The ambition remains that those who before December 2021 stated that they are in acute need of protection due to their work for the Swedish Armed Forces in Afghanistan shall be able to be investigated by the competent authorities.

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

Annika Hirvonen (MP)

Mr. Speaker! The situation in Afghanistan after the Taliban's takeover is very difficult - for women and girls who are denied the opportunity to continue their schooling or go to work, and for minorities who are persecuted by the Taliban. In a particularly acute situation are persons who have worked for the military forces that for many years fought the Taliban in Afghanistan. I have personally been contacted by former colleagues of the Swedish military who are now moving, hiding, or keeping away from the Taliban out of fear for their own and their families' lives.

This also applies, of course, to persons who have worked for other countries' defense forces. We have also heard and seen how many other countries, including Germany, the United Kingdom and the USA, after 2021 have continued to exclude persons who have worked for their defense force, even if it was for a short period.

Sweden has not continued. About fifty people who have worked for the Swedish military remain in Afghanistan and are now in life-threatening danger, as are their families. These people are no different at all from the people whom Sweden has helped out of Afghanistan during the two periods when Sweden's government has helped people who worked for the Swedish military to get out of there. It is chance that has decided that just these 50 have remained.

It is possible to help them out; it is shown by other countries' efforts. However, it requires will and decisiveness. I perceive that Pål Jonson is now saying that his ambition is that even these remaining persons shall be able to get out of Afghanistan. I hope that he also includes their families. In many cases, the families are equally at risk due to the family member's work.

A person who ended up in just such life-threatening danger told that when he signed the employment contract he thought: I hope I am not signing my death sentence now.

Then, of course, everyone hoped that the Taliban would be defeated once and for all and that Afghanistan would become a free democracy with human rights for both women and minorities. This has failed.

This can also happen in the future. Every country should take the responsibility that is morally incumbent upon it when hiring individuals so that they do not, because of their employment, end up in life-threatening danger if things do not turn out as hoped – that the oppressors lose power. Sweden has a moral responsibility towards other countries. I want to know more about how the Minister of Defence intends to act concretely for these individuals but also for a permanent order, so that this is not repeated.

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

Stefan Olsson (M)

Mr. Speaker! I would like to start by thanking Member Hirvonen for the commitment to this issue. Thanks to the interpellation, the Riksdag is given an opportunity to receive a status report from the government. I would therefore also, in the same way, like to extend a warm thanks to the Minister for Defence for his commitment to the matter and for the information that is now being provided.

The question of what responsibility Sweden has for former local employees who have worked for the Swedish Armed Forces in military operations and thereby ended up in a situation where others see them as traitors who have collaborated with the enemy has been an unusually protracted sequel. The issue was highlighted for the first time in the summer of 2012 – yes, it has actually been that long. It all started with that those who served for the Swedish ISAF mission in Mazar-e Sharif wrote a letter in which they asked if Sweden could help them when the mission was to be phased out. The Government did not know what to do at the time and unfortunately answered that it could not make exceptions specifically for local employees from Afghanistan.

After that, a popular debate followed, and the government quickly changed its mind. The authorities were tasked with channeling those with protection needs into Sweden via the quota refugee program in the smoothest way possible. But even though the intention was good, the implementation became all the worse. A number of interpreters, all of whom could show that they had served in the Swedish Armed Forces, remained.

This group then lived for many years in great uncertainty. When the USA withdrew in the summer of 2021, the situation became panicked. A new decision on evacuation was made in great haste, but neither this one was complete. The evacuation had an end date, December 31, 2021. The consequence was that people who had worked for Sweden were left behind this time as well.

Mr. Speaker! It appears from the Minister for Defence's opening remarks that the government is now working on the issue again. Since I personally have been involved in this matter for a very long time, I would therefore like to send a few words in support of the upcoming work.

First and foremost, there is no reason to be discouraged and think that the task is altogether too large and too difficult to solve. Other countries that also had troops in Afghanistan are struggling with the same problems. We can learn from them and help each other.

Furthermore, there is also no reason to believe that the legal aspects would be particularly complicated. Sweden has already carried out two previous evacuations. The legal tools already exist. They are in a cabinet somewhere in the Government Offices, and it is only a matter of taking them out.

Finally, I want to remind that the issue can only be solved if it is solved properly, fundamentally. That we are now in the twelfth year of debate regarding the Afghan interpreters is due to the fact that previous governments have preferably wanted the issue to disappear by itself, that it should evaporate and wither away. This has turned out to be a mistaken belief. This can admittedly be explained by the fact that I myself have been involved in keeping it alive as an activist, but I have really not been alone. The issue has lived its own life and will continue to do so until the day the authorities take hold of the issue properly. It is no stranger than that.

Mr. Speaker! I look forward to following the government's work on this issue and stand, as always, at your service with knowledge of what has happened previously in the matter, should this be needed.

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

Försvarsministern Pål Jonson (M)

Mr. Speaker! I thank Annika Hirvonen for the interpellation and Stefan Olsson for a long-standing commitment to an important issue.

To begin with the principle, I do not believe there are any areas of conflict in that it is reasonable for people who take great risks for Sweden abroad, whether they are soldiers, local staff, or interpreters, to have a special status. They have made great sacrifices and taken risks for Sweden. This is very reasonable and something that I believe we all fundamentally agree on completely.

Measures have also been taken, and I have mentioned what happened in 2014 and 2021. During primarily the summer and the beginning of the autumn of 2021, when I was in opposition, I expressed concern that it was moving slowly with decisions linked to evacuation plans for the Swedish embassy in Kabul but also for local staff and military interpreters. At that time, it was Annika Hirvonen's party that sat in government.

I remember, Annika Hirvonen, that you in Miljöpartiet, when we in the Social Insurance Committee threatened to propose a committee initiative to get the process started, actually opened up to support the opposition. Now there was no committee initiative, but the previous government finally got started with the evacuation of the Afghan interpreters and a large evacuation of those in need of protection in Afghanistan in connection with the Taliban's takeover. You handled it well once you got started, but you were slow to initiate the evacuation effort that was absolutely necessary to carry out.

The message I have today is that we are working on this issue. We also have contacts with authorities on the matter. I would, however, like to emphasize something. I believe, Stefan Olsson, that there is a modus operandi. We have worked with it before, and we naturally have the possibility of resettlement and the 900 places that are allocated.

What is really difficult with this is the situation on the ground in Afghanistan, that the security situation there is very serious, that we do not have any embassy in Kabul and that it is very difficult to operate in Afghanistan. This is a reality that we must contend with and which increases the complexity of the work.

Annika Hirvonen made a comparison, and it is partly true that Germany, the United Kingdom and the USA have continued the work after December 2021. Just to put it into proportion: They have had many more local employees than Sweden has had.

This is fundamentally about local employees who worked as interpreters or otherwise for the Armed Forces ten years ago or further back in history. It is these persons for whom we have an employer responsibility. From 2015 onwards, we have not had employer responsibility for the interpreters, but they have been employed by Germany and have a different status.

I do not rule out that both the interpreters and their relatives can have their grounds for protection examined. I think this is reasonable, and we will continue to work on the issue.

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

Annika Hirvonen (MP)

Mr. Speaker! I am very pleased that Pål Jonson expresses that we see this matter in the same way and that we have a responsibility for those who have risked their lives in Afghanistan by helping the Swedish troops in various ways, as interpreters or local staff. This is important, and it is a statement that commits us.

I am also very pleased with Stefan Olsson's long-standing commitment and that we can discuss this important issue in such a consensus. For us in Miljöpartiet, this has been an issue where we have been prepared to act regardless of the party affiliation of the minister we currently have, when we have experienced that this has not been taken seriously.

When we talk about helping vulnerable people in Afghanistan, I believe it has sometimes been a challenge that, in parallel, a migration debate has been ongoing where people from just Afghanistan have often been viewed with suspicion in various ways. I believe that not least the statements by the former minister Morgan Johansson should be seen in that light.

It truly makes me happy that we, in this political context, have a united view that we have a responsibility for these people. It is not easy, but it can be done. Just as Stefan Olsson highlighted, there are other countries that continue to get personnel out who have worked for them from Afghanistan. There is a cooperation with the UN's refugee organization IOM, which can help in, for example, the neighboring country Pakistan. There are also conditions for a good number of people to succeed in getting out of the country with some support.

When it comes to the long-term issue of a permanent regulatory framework so that we do not have to find an emergency solution the next time a military intervention abroad ends in this unfortunate way – that people living in the country who have worked for foreign troops risk being persecuted – I think it would be good if one could find such a regulatory framework together with other countries.

In the international frameworks that exist, the starting point is that it is the local country that is responsible for local employees. This becomes problematic in situations where the country so to speak falls into the hands of forces that, just like the Taliban in Afghanistan, rather see these people as traitors and enemies.

For the approximately 50 people who are currently hiding around Afghanistan and who are moving with their families, the situation is acute. Children testify that they cannot go to school because they are constantly being pulled from their homes. The most important thing is to stay hidden. The more the Taliban gain a grip and can begin to control things such as where people live and establish some kind of population registry, the tougher and more difficult it will become to continue staying hidden.

I hope for action in the near future.

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

Stefan Olsson (M)

Mr. Speaker! I have full confidence that the government is now tackling the matter properly. I fully and completely share the Minister for Defence's view that the conditions for getting people out of Afghanistan have now changed radically for the worse. For my part, I have unfortunately scaled down expectations of what we will ultimately be able to achieve. I am fully aware that it is that way.

As a conclusion to this debate, I would like to take the opportunity to look forward. What do we do the next time we need to wind down a military operation and there is a risk that we leave local interpreters and other personnel in a dangerous situation?

Sweden still has no specific legislation for that. Should we need to carry out a similar evacuation again, we would therefore end up in the same legally unclear situation as now. In this way, we have not yet done our homework. But it should be said in the name of justice that Sweden is not alone in this problem.

How to handle foreign citizens who have worked with the own troops as interpreters or who are otherwise locally employed is an issue that several European countries are grappling with. Perhaps the government should appoint an inquiry to create an order for the future. Perhaps the government should raise the issue within the EU to see if we can have a common European order. Here I share Member Hirvonen's view.

I thank you for the commitment in the debate.

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

Försvarsministern Pål Jonson (M)

Mr. Speaker! I view, as I have said, seriously the tasks regarding interpreters and other local staff who remain in Afghanistan and who are in need of protection as a result of their previous work for the Swedish Armed Forces. I cannot promise anything here and now regarding how it goes. I think it is wise, as Stefan Olsson expresses, that one must have reasonable expectations of success precisely because of the complexity. I do not want to build up false perceptions in any way that this is simple. What I can say is that we are working on this in the government and that we have contacts with the authorities. That is the commitment that I can make here today.

Annika Hirvonen and Stefan Olsson raised how we can learn from this effort and the complexity when it comes, in particular, to the employer responsibility we had for these individuals until 2014 and how we ensure that we do not end up in similar situations.

I have also tried to follow up on this in connection with other efforts we have made, including in Mali and in the Balkans, including in Kosovo and in Bosnia, where we have had the arrangement that we have sent out personnel from Sweden who have been there as interpreters. Then they have come back with us again. We also did not have any of our own employed interpreters in Mali. I therefore believe that at least at the authority level, one has tried to handle it in such a way that one avoids similar risks arising in the future.

Regarding legislation in this matter, I have no knowledge. But I know that a parliamentary inquiry is now being conducted regarding the measures carried out in Afghanistan, including the evacuation procedure itself. As far as I understand, this inquiry will be completed in June 2024. It may possibly provide some guidance on what measures need to be taken moving forward based on the experiences from the evacuation, not least from Kabul.

I want to say again that the efforts made, even though they started late in the autumn of 2021, by the Armed Forces but also by Swedish diplomats and other civil servants on the ground were almost heroic. It was a very difficult and demanding effort.

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

Annika Hirvonen (MP)

Mr. Speaker! I would like to thank both the Minister for Defence and Stefan Olsson for a very constructive debate where we clearly have a consensus on several fundamentally central issues regarding Sweden's responsibility for persons who have worked for Swedish troops abroad and, because of that, now concretely in Afghanistan risk that the Taliban take their lives and kill their families.

This is not an easy question. Several governments have, as Stefan Olsson pointed out, not done the job fully. That does not mean, and there I agree with Pål Jonsson, that the effort that was actually carried out to evacuate not only our own citizens but also persons who have worked for Sweden – vulnerable persons who risked persecution from the Taliban – was not very well executed under difficult circumstances. But politically, there has been more to wish for. And sometimes we have ended up in a situation where even our authorities have felt that it has been difficult to step forward and shoulder a responsibility fully. Here, I truly believe that a clear political direction and political decisions were needed.

For the 50 people, some of whom I have been contacted by, who are now in life-threatening danger due to persecution from the Taliban, this is a matter of life and death. It is a principled and a moral issue, and I hope that the issue finds a conclusion by Sweden taking its responsibility fully and helping these people.

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

Försvarsministern Pål Jonson (M)

Mr. Speaker! I thank Annika Hirvonen and Stefan Olsson for this debate.

As I said, we are working on this issue. But I cannot verify whether it concerns 50 people or how many it concerns. If one were to proceed, Annika Hirvonen and Stefan Olsson would know that it is the authorities that take over, and then it becomes a question of security screening, the Swedish Migration Agency, and so on. I can therefore neither dismiss nor confirm this figure, but I have noted it in open sources. But it will, again, always be subject to individual assessments.

The question that is raised is naturally fundamentally important from a moral perspective if it is people who have taken great risks in Sweden's name to safeguard Swedish interests. That is what the Swedish soldiers did in Afghanistan, while they worked to maintain peace and security there. In that case, we have a special responsibility for these people. I think that is important.

Should similar situations arise again, if we have employer responsibility for individuals and then leave them, it could complicate the conditions for recruiting staff. Now we have the arrangement that the Armed Forces often do not rely on locally employed interpreters, but one has that ability with them when traveling abroad. But I still want to highlight this.

In conclusion, I think it is good that there is now a parliamentary inquiry looking at the nearly 20 years that Sweden was in Afghanistan and also what lessons can be drawn from the evacuation effort.

The interpellations debate was hereby concluded.

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